From juli17 at aol.com Sun Aug 1 00:22:05 2004 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 20:22:05 EDT Subject: Death and the Bad Boys. Message-ID: <155.3afcb6a3.2e3d91ad@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108322 Mandy wrote: > You're not alone in loving the character of Severus Snape. I adore > Snape. Every inch of his nasty self (and way before Rickman's > delightful contamination too) but I do believe he's going to die. He > has to; it's the only way for him to find redemption. I do agree with > you on the way Snape will die, it will be protecting Harry in some > way. > Cheers Mandy Julie sez: I too love the character of Severus Snape. Unpleasant as he can be, he's complex and often inscrutable. In a word, he's fascinating! But he's not one who we can hope will find a happy existence in the end. That hope is for Harry (at least for me it is). I'm not really sure Snape *can* be happy or fulfilled in life. He's been too damaged by events in his past, and by his deeds and the deeds of others. And what could JKR even do with him if he lived through to the end of book Seven? He's not satisfied as a teacher, no one loves him (which I think is sad, especially when I picture Alan Rickman as Snape ;-), and once Voldemort is vanquished what purpose would he have left to pursue? I think redeeming himself by dying while protecting/saving Harry is the way for Snape to achieve, if not happiness, at least satisfaction with his life and his choices. His existence will have meant something, and will have had a noble purpose, after all. Still, I'd hate to see Snape gone forever from the WW world. I hope he will live on in some way, as a portrait perhaps. Or maybe he'll leave behind a diary ;-) Just not as a ghost, because that's for someone who didn't conclude his/her life satisfactorily, and I want Snape to do so. Julie (sad that Snape must die, but reconciled to it) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 00:44:21 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 17:44:21 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Flitwick for HBP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040801004421.81720.qmail@web50109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108323 I would be very disappointed in JKR's storytelling ability is the HBP turns out to be a living human being, either a recurring character or a brand-new one. And it's too late in the series to spring a wizarding royal family on us, even one that might have been de-throned earlier (Princess Leia, anyone?). I suspect that the HBP will turn out to be a legend or a legacy about Godric Gryffindor or a work of art like a painting or a book or SOMETHING inanimate that Harry encounters. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 01:04:30 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 01:04:30 -0000 Subject: Flitwick for HBP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108324 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kirsten" wrote: > At risk of dragging up an old discussion/theory (but I couldn't find one when I searched former posts) I'm going to throw out a new > candidate for half-blood prince: Professor Flitwick. [snip] dcgmck: Your reasons are thought-provoking. Are we all convinced that the four founders were indeed all human? Is there actually canonical evidence to that effect, or is that an assumption under which we have all been operating because of contemporary biases? From vmonte at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 01:14:02 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 01:14:02 -0000 Subject: Harry's dream about the Turban (was Re: Re: Neville and the Prophecy - VERY LONG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108325 Snow wrote: Tom is therefore half (blood wise) of what Harry is at their births. Tom's relationship to Slytherin is from his mother and Tom is made up of only half of her. Tom is magical but to what degree of magical ability was he actually born with? Dumbledore states about Tom in COS "Of course, he was probably the most brilliant student Hogwarts has ever seen." Brilliance doesn't necessarily mean in regards to his magical ability being brilliant. Hermione who also, like Tom, having direct muggle parentage, is book learned brilliant. Yes, Hermione has magical ability, which she enhances greatly through her self-taught knowledge. I believe Tom Riddle entered Hogwarts in much the same manner (remember he lived in a muggle orphanage) as Hermione did. Tom was self-educated through books in which he found information about the Chamber. Tom's dark behavior is not mentioned until after he found the Chamber, where in he found an unexpected discovery, Salazar Slytherin. Tom was educated well by his ancestor and with Salazar's "help" continued his noble work. Tom was not born a great wizard; he was made into a greatly feared wizard by Salazar's presence. vmonte responds: Good comments Snow. I'm familiar with the theory that Tom Riddle's soul is trapped inside Harry and that it happened at Godric's Hollow. (I've mentioned this possiblity a few months ago and someone else wrote about this over a year ago.) I thought that Kneasy's theory was that an entity possessed Grindewald (I think this is the name of the wizard DD defeated in 1945) until he was defeated by DD. Then when it became vaporwald it possessed Tom Riddle in the chamber (I may have the facts wrong, or Kneasy's theory may have evolved). Anyway, are you both now saying that this entity (is it Salazar?) is now in Harry because of the GH attack? I was thinking that perhaps, due to Lily, the entity became vapormort and that Tom Riddle was blasted into baby Harry. Didn't Harry see Tom Riddle's name on the diary in CoS and feel like Tom was a childhood friend that was long forgotten? What if BABY Harry was aware of Tom's presence while he was a child but as time went on the two personalities fused together. (I wonder if baby Harry had an imaginary friend that drove Petunia mad?!) Also, what if Snape knows that Tom is inside Harry and is protecting Harry only until he can figure out a way to recover TR. This would explain why Snape told Draco to use Serpentsorcia, and then looked shrewdly at Harry after he spoke in parseltongue. It may also mean that Snape was at Godrics Hollow and that he realized that Tom was blasted into Harry. Maybe DD placed Harry at the Dursley's home not only for the blood protection but maybe because he also suspected what the scar meant, and realized that keeping Harry away from the WW would also mean that none of the DEs would be able to find out about the "merging of souls." I also have a comment about the "in essence divided remark." Is it possible that JKR added the bit about Ron's brain attack to get Harry to start thinking about his past? What I mean is what if Ron has some residual problems due to the attack in book 5. He may have memories that he never had before, or he may behave strangely as though he had a split personality. Could Ron's residual problem be what makes Harry start to remember his own strange behavior as a child? What if Ron states that he hears another voice inside of his head and Harry acknowledges that he also hears a voice inside his head at times. Hermione may ask some pointed questions that might reveal that this voice is not Harry's conscious but something separate. Just a thought. Anyway, who do you think the half-blood prince is if it's not Tom, Voldemort, or Harry? Is it GG who is now inside of Ron? vivian From davidagabbard at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 00:00:22 2004 From: davidagabbard at yahoo.com (David Gabbard) Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 17:00:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Will Harry learn? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040801000022.74175.qmail@web90008.mail.scd.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108331 In the grand finale at the MOM in OOP, Dumbledore and Voldemort are dueling for their lives. Dumbledore opens with an un-said spell that causes the fountain of magical brethren to spring to life and multi-task with assorted purposes for each race. Dumbledore and Voldemort are hurling spells at each with such force that the usually-silent-when-he?s-performing-magic Dumbledore produces a spell which packs such force it produces ?a deep, gong-like note? that is ?oddly chilling? when it collides with Voldemort?s rapidly-formed shield. (?Phoenix? Am. Ed. P 814) They are dueling with such mastery and intensity that they don?t display a need to mutter an incantation. We learned in Year One that the correct pronunciation of a spell is important: ?You?re saying it wrong, Harry heard Hermione snap. It?s Wing-GAR-dium Levi-O-sa, make the ?gar? nice and long.? (?Stone? Am. Ed. P 170) Year Five teaches the reader: ?The curse Dolohov had used on her, though less effective than it would have been had he been able to say the incantation aloud, had nevertheless caused?quite enough damage?? (?Phoenix? Am. Ed. P 847) Since his arrival at the MOM, Dumbledore doesn?t verbalize a spell until he sends Harry to Hogwarts via portkey. JKR committed quite a few words to each of these scenes ? there is obviously a difference among these situations. I don?t think they?re flints or overstatements. There is a disparity between common spells that require exact pronunciation and the ability to conjure fatal spells which need not be spoken, but appear to only need to be thought of by the conjurer. Will Harry learn this subtle distinction and proficiency in front of the reader? If he does, who will teach him? Upon my first read, I was happy with the pace and progress of the Fifth Years? efforts at dueling against the Death Eaters in the MOM sequence of OOP. I accepted their ?Reducto!?, ?Stupefy!?, ?Expelliarmus!? and ?Colloportus!? spells as above-average talent for their age group and attributed their success at avoiding death to Harry?s prowess as DA instructor. However, as I read the brawl between Dumbledore and Voldemort, I see how pedestrian Harry?s skills are if he is ??the person who has the only chance of conquering Lord Voldemort for good?? (?Phoenix Am. Ed. P 841) I know this next bit will be an unpopular opinion, but I hope Umbridge?s punishment is somehow magically binding and Harry is banned from Quidditch Robes in Year Six. I want to see some dogged DADA training if he is ?The One.? Also, he better show more effort than he did at Occlumency ? I?d like to see him succeed because of practice, confidence and skill. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From starsspinning at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 01:29:42 2004 From: starsspinning at yahoo.com (star fall) Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 18:29:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Harry's discoveries Message-ID: <20040801012942.43464.qmail@web21201.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108332 JKR posted on her site that something Harry disovers in CoS foreshadows something in HBP, but that HBP has nothing to do with Tom Riddle's Diary or the Basilick. Now here are a few of Harry's discoveries, if anyone know more please add them to the list. Harry discovers House Elves (Dobby) and their magic Harry discovers that Knockturn Alley is not a nice place Harry discovers that Lucius Malfoy has many Dark Art things hidden in his house Harry discovers that Ginny Weasley has a major crush on him Harry (and Ron) discover that the Whomping Willow hits back, HARD Harry (and Ron) discovers what can happen with a broken wand (LOL) Harry discovers that the Sorting Hat can do more then just sort kids into houses Harry discovers (learns about) Phoenixes (from Dumbledore) Harry discovers that he is a 'true Gryffindor' and that the choices we make in life are what matter Mary, aka star --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From meidbh at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 01:35:47 2004 From: meidbh at yahoo.com (meidbh) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 01:35:47 -0000 Subject: Harry must be The One In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108333 Inkling writes: "Harry lifted it [the prophecy] off the shelf and did not go mad. There is only one child referred to in the prophecy. Therefore, Harry must be the one. I don't see any wiggle room here, guys. Kneasy writes: "Sorry, but there's plenty...It's the Ministry that englobes them, puts them on the shelf and sets the protective spell. And it's the Ministry that decides who the spell is about." Meidbh responds: Kneasy you may have a point here but even so I do believe that there is no wiggle room (love that expression!)regarding the identity of The One. Why? The One with the power to vanquish VM is either Harry or Neville. (This from Sybill's prophecy, Hogwarts detection system for the birth of wizard children and Dumbledore's knowledge of who in the WW had defied VM three times). VM will mark The One as his equal. MHO: So far Harry appears quite convincingly to have been marked and to be equal to the worst VM can hurl at him. Other than having VM write "equal" across Neville's forehead, I just don't see how Neville can compete with Harry on this one. The One will have power the Dark Lord knows not. MHO: Harry has demonstrated this repeatedly - most compellingly when he resisted VMs attempt to possess him. So far we haven't seen Neville demonstrate anything out of the ordinary for a WW boy. *Maybe* there was another family in the WW who had defied VM thrice and produced a wizarding child that fateful summer. *Maybe* Harry's scar is a red herring and The One has not yet been marked. *Maybe* Neville (or another mystery child) has a power above and beyond that demonstrated by Harry But if I had to put my galleons on it I'd back Harry all the way because all the evidence points to him. Meidbh :-) From HxM_fan at hotmail.com Sun Aug 1 01:37:40 2004 From: HxM_fan at hotmail.com (Valy) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 03:37:40 +0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry's dream about the Turban (was Re: Re: Neville and the Prophecy - VERY LONG) References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108334 Hi, I'm de-lurking to reply to this. :) (English is not my first language, so please, be nice. :) Well. I have a theory about this: Voldemort was hidden by Quirrel's turban, everyone knows this. So, since both of them are "linked", Voldemort may have communiqued with Harry in this dream, by the turban, and maybe he was "mad" at Harry because he was sorted into Griffindor instead of Slytherin. Slytherin maybe could have made Harry evil if he was sorted into this house, and Voldemort would have used him to rise his powers. See what I mean? I hope this doesn't sound too stupid, lol. :) Valy. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From meidbh at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 01:45:29 2004 From: meidbh at yahoo.com (meidbh) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 01:45:29 -0000 Subject: The Prophecy -- "Marking" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108335 Angie writes: "The only way LV could have marked Harry (or whomever) as his equal would be if LV's AK curse failed." And I think it is significant that although it failed they both survived. Harry was strong enough to deflect it but not strong enough to utterly destroy VM. A case of the unstoppable force meeting the immoveable object. A case of equal power. If they are equals in power then I expect the only way one can defeat the other is by lucky chance or mustering up the greater number of supporters. M :-) From inkling108 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 02:00:33 2004 From: inkling108 at yahoo.com (inkling108) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 02:00:33 -0000 Subject: Harry must be the one WAS Re: Neville and the Prophecy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108336 Kneasy wrote: > Sorry, but there's plenty. > > Prophecies don't come wrapped in a glass orb. > Prophecies don't come with protective spells. > Prophecies don't care who hears them. > But the Ministry obviously does. > It's the Ministry that englobes them, puts them on the shelf and sets the > protective spell. And it's the Ministry that decides who the spell is about. Inkling now: You're making a leap here. You're assuming that it is the ministry's decisions about the prophecy that trigger the protective spells. But there's nothing to back that up in the text. Dumbledore says, "to whom they refer" not to whom the ministry believes they refer, or to whom the label refers. Sealing it in an orb and labelling it does not affect the content, and it is the content that triggers protective spells when the wrong person touches it. That much is clear from what Dumbledore says. > Harry's name wasn't on the label originally, it was added later when > somebody decided Harry was the one Sybil had been burbling about, > probably though not certainly with DD's input. So the protective spells > have been changed at least once already. They could be changed again > if fresh information came to light. Again, there's no indication that what's on the label is what triggers the spell. It would seem to be just that, a label, corrected as more information comes in. Otherwise Voldemort would not have to go through all this to get at the prophecy. He could simply have one of his ministry insiders re-label it. Inkling From meidbh at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 02:06:56 2004 From: meidbh at yahoo.com (meidbh) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 02:06:56 -0000 Subject: Death and the Bad Boys. In-Reply-To: <155.3afcb6a3.2e3d91ad@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108337 > Mandy wrote: "I do agree with you on the way Snape will die, it will be protecting Harry in some way." > Julie sez: "I'm not really sure Snape *can* be happy or fulfilled in life. And what could JKR even do with him if he lived through to the end of book Seven?" Meidbh: Snape dying to protect Harry is just waaay to nice and neat. Remember JKR is the woman who brought you the death of Sirius. The end will not be neat and simple and lets hope it won't be predictable. Because Snape may never be happy doesn't mean he won't live (most schools have at least one ageing teacher who hates their job!). I have an image of the final scene of the final book where many of the good and well loved characters have been lost in the battle to defeat the Dark Lord. Snape however is one of the ones left to rebuild and with an inscrutable glance at the camera turns around to teach a new class of first years "There will be no foolish wandwaving here..." Gosh - he could even be headmaster of Hogwarts? ! Meidbh :-) From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 02:17:16 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 02:17:16 -0000 Subject: Just another wacko HBP theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108338 > Celestina wrote: > > Thats a very clever idea. The only thing that I wonder about is the > time turner issue. Okay, from PoA, we know that they have the > ability to go back thru time. That is a given. But don't they have to > live out that time they went back through? We don't know, as of yet, > if one can travel forward through time as well. But anything is > possible in the Wizarding World. > Neri: A good point. If it is impossible to travel to the future, then Ron's and Hermione's son can still return back in time to help Harry, but he is then stranded in the present, and has to keep on living in it (and watch himself born. Did I mention the word wacko already?). I'm sure, however, that it won't be a problem for JKR to supply him with transportation back to the future. Actually, the really difficult part in this theory is making the WW a monarchy and crowning Ron and Hermione in few years. It was already suggested that the Weasleys are decedents from King Arthur, but even so you'd expect the firstborn Bill to inherit the title. Hmmm. Perhaps Ron will have to draw a sword from a stone to prove he is the rightful King? Neri From aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 02:32:13 2004 From: aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com (aboutthe1910s) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 02:32:13 -0000 Subject: Harry's dream about the Turban (was Re: Re: Neville and the Prophecy - VERY LONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108339 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > How many clues do you need? Harry and Slytherin are key to the whole > series. And it probably isn't just Slytherin House we're talking about > here, but the concept of Salazar Slytherin as the embodiment of evil. Me (aboutthe1910s): I strongly disagree with the idea of Salazar Slytherin as the embodiment of evil. ...I could be misremembering this, but I believe that somewhere in one of the books it says that Godric Gryffindor and Salazar Slytherin were best friends before the falling out--not just friends, but specifically best friends. This may not seem very important, but I think that it is--I think that it says a lot about the fact that there was an actual person behind this idea that has been handed down for hundreds of years, that he did at some point have redeeming qualities. I also think one thing that has repeatedly proven itself in Jo's writing is that people are not *absolutely* good or evil--they are all simply people who have made decisions, sometimes good ones made courageously, sometimes very bad ones driven by fear. When all is said and done, I believe that courage and fear will be proven far more central to the story than good and evil--in fact, I believe they already are. aboutthe1910s From gelite67 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 02:57:32 2004 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 02:57:32 -0000 Subject: The Prophecy -- "Marking" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108340 --- > Angie writes: > "The only way LV could have marked Harry (or whomever) as his equal > would be if LV's AK curse failed." > > > meidbh replied: > If they are equals in power then I expect the only way one can > defeat the other is by lucky chance or mustering up the greater > number of supporters. > Angie replies: Interesting observation. I don't see how they can truly be equal in power if Harry has a power that LV doesn't know about. Seems like that would give Harry "the edge." From vmonte at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 03:14:48 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 03:14:48 -0000 Subject: Contacting Sirius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108341 Mike wrote: Does anyone think it's possible that when James and Sirius were in detentions, that the mirror was bewitched to recognize their Marauder's nicknames and not their proper names? My thoughts are that if they were going to be whispering into a mirror, they wouldn't want the teachers overseeing their detentions to know whom they were talking to - saying a nickname into a mirror might cause a lot less inquiries than sitting in a room and saying "James Potter!" into a mirror. Plus, James and Sirius seemed very attached to calling each other by nicknames (James more so than Sirius), why would James be calling Sirius' proper name into the mirror? Maybe Harry has to realize this and call out for "Padfoot" in the mirror - not Sirius Black. My apologies if this has been brought up before; if it has, can someone please point me towards posts that may have addressed it before? I tried searching and was unsuccessful. vmonte responds: Interesting thought! Could he reach the present day Sirius who is dead? Or what if he does reach Sirius but he reaches the Sirius of the past? Who is to say that the mirror has any sense of time? If a spell was cast to cause it to respond to Snuffles and Prongs, maybe it will locate the Snuffles of the past? He calls out Snuffles and reaches 16/17 year old Sirius...what do you think? vivian From starsspinning at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 01:00:20 2004 From: starsspinning at yahoo.com (starsspinning) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 01:00:20 -0000 Subject: Flitwick for HBP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108342 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kirsten" wrote: > At risk of dragging up an old discussion/theory (but I couldn't find > one when I searched former posts) I'm going to throw out a new > candidate for half-blood prince: Professor Flitwick. Why? > > 2) Flitwick's diminutive size is brought up everytime he's mentioned. > Why is he so small? Could he be part house elf? Just one BIG problem with this --- Elves are not allowed to carry or use wands. And Flitwick definitely uses a wand. Mary, aka star From stargaz77 at aol.com Sun Aug 1 02:08:09 2004 From: stargaz77 at aol.com (celestina707) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 02:08:09 -0000 Subject: Harry's discoveries In-Reply-To: <20040801012942.43464.qmail@web21201.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108343 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, star fall wrote: > JKR posted on her site that something Harry disovers in CoS foreshadows something in HBP, but that HBP has nothing to do with Tom Riddle's Diary or the Basilick. Now here are a few of Harry's discoveries, if anyone know more please add them to the list. Just 3 other things: 1. Harry learns he is a parselmouth. (You left this off your list, maybe because he already talked to the snake in SS?) 2. Harry learns Filch is a squib. 3. Harry learns there is a GRIFFIN on Dumbledore's office DOOR that is a lion. (could be insignificant but thought I throw that one in) Celestina From gopotter2004 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 03:29:22 2004 From: gopotter2004 at yahoo.com (gopotter2004) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 03:29:22 -0000 Subject: Contacting Sirius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108344 While I love the idea that Harry could speak to Sirius again, I'm of the opinion that he can't. Because JK can't talk to her mother. And while I'm sure she wishes every day that she could, we know she can't, with or without a magic mirror, and I feel strongly that this is one thing she wants Harry (ahem, *us*) to learn. As cold as it sounds. However, I have NO doubt that Harry will find the other half of the mirror and use it during WW2 (wizard war 2) when lines of communication (such as heads in fireplaces) are no longer safe. But that's just IMHO. Becky From inkling108 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 02:26:10 2004 From: inkling108 at yahoo.com (inkling108) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 02:26:10 -0000 Subject: Harry must be The One In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108345 Meidbh > The One with the power to vanquish VM is either Harry or Neville. > (This from Sybill's prophecy, Hogwarts detection system for the > birth of wizard children and Dumbledore's knowledge of who in the WW > had defied VM three times). > > But if I had to put my galleons on it I'd back Harry all the way > because all the evidence points to him. Inkling now: Add to all that how strange it would be indeed to have a seven book series focused on Harry Potter in which it turns out that someone else is the hero. That would be the Matrix ending with the revelation that it's really Tank who was the One. Anything's possible, of course, but this just seems so unlikely. Having said that, I do think it's significant that the prophecy could have referred to either Harry or Neville. It points to links in their destiny, and a major role for Neville in the final outcome. But as to who is "the One" referred to in the prophecy, I'll say again I don't see how it could be anyone but Harry. From meidbh at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 03:17:43 2004 From: meidbh at yahoo.com (meidbh) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 03:17:43 -0000 Subject: The Prophecy -- "Equals" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108346 > meidbh replied: > > If they are equals in power then I expect the only way one can > > defeat the other is by lucky chance or mustering up the greater > > number of supporters. > Angie replies: > Interesting observation. I don't see how they can truly be equal in power if Harry has a power that LV doesn't know about. Seems like that would give Harry "the edge." Meidbh speculates: But maybe balanced out by VMs own hidden powers. Even if they had an equal amount of power the 'currency' of their powers could be different. And then again - they only had to have equal power at the time of marking...what happens after that could be up to them. A sort of magical power arms race! (Isn't it amazing how easy it is to be drawn into HP dissections?! I only ever intended to lurk!!) Meidbh :-) From vmonte at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 03:31:56 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 03:31:56 -0000 Subject: Remember when Harry claimed he was Neville Longbottom on the Knight Bus? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108347 vmonte: Remember when Harry announced himself as Neville Longbottom on the Knight Bus and we later find out that the prophecy could have been about Neville? Voldemort chose Harry (whether by accident, fate, or on purpose). But JKR foreshadowed the idea of interchangeability with the bus incident. I have a feeling the same kind of thing is going to happen with Ron. If he gets blasted in the past and somehow gets stuck there (yes the Ron=DD theory) I could see him jokingly calling himself Dumbledore without realizing that he in fact will turn out to be this very person. vivian From gopotter2004 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 03:33:08 2004 From: gopotter2004 at yahoo.com (gopotter2004) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 03:33:08 -0000 Subject: Flitwick for HBP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108348 > Just one BIG problem with this --- Elves are not allowed to carry or > use wands. And Flitwick definitely uses a wand. > > Mary, aka star Nor are werewolves, generally, allowed to teach. Doesn't stop Dumbledore. And I think, if I'm following correctly, but I guess I just added my idea to this one, that Flitwick would only be Half-(elf)-blood, thus making it "acceptable" for him to have a wand. Becky From vmonte at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 03:35:24 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 03:35:24 -0000 Subject: Contacting Sirius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108349 Becky wrote: However, I have NO doubt that Harry will find the other half of the mirror and use it during WW2 (wizard war 2) when lines of communication (such as heads in fireplaces) are no longer safe. vmonte responds: I think you are right. I think that Harry will use it to communicate with Ron. vivian From snow15145 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 03:46:38 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 03:46:38 -0000 Subject: Harry's dream about the Turban (was Re: Re: Neville and the Prophecy - VERY LONG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108350 Vivian replying to my previous post: >snipped< I also have a comment about the "in essence divided remark." Is it possible that JKR added the bit about Ron's brain attack to get Harry to start thinking about his past? What I mean is what if Ron has some residual problems due to the attack in book 5. He may have memories that he never had before, or he may behave strangely as though he had a split personality. Could Ron's residual problem be what makes Harry start to remember his own strange behavior as a child? What if Ron states that he hears another voice inside of his head and Harry acknowledges that he also hears a voice inside his head at times. Snow: Really good point! How will Harry be introduced to the fact that there is definatly someone or something inside of him that he needs to recognize? I really like your explanation to this! Vivian: Hermione may ask some pointed questions that might reveal that this voice is not Harry's conscious but something separate. Just a thought. Anyway, who do you think the half-blood prince is if it's not Tom, Voldemort, or Harry? Is it GG who is now inside of Ron? Snow: I personally feel that Harry's ongoing conflict that lies within him is that of which was born in him as opposed to that of which was unwilling thrust upon him. I feel that Harry was born a true Gryffindor but the attack on him left some of Slytherin in him. Harry has a battle that exists and has existed within him self. Harry has a choice. To quote Dumbledore GOF " Remember, if the time should come when you have to make a choice between what is right and what is easy " Harry, IMO, will choose what is right over what is easy because he always has, usually for someone else's safety. Harry is a true Gryffindor. From snow15145 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 03:55:00 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 03:55:00 -0000 Subject: Harry's dream about the Turban (was Re: Re: Neville and the Prophecy - VERY LONG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108351 Hi, I'm de-lurking to reply to this. :) (English is not my first language, so please, be nice. :) Well. I have a theory about this: Voldemort was hidden by Quirrel's turban, everyone knows this. So, since both of them are "linked", Voldemort may have communiqued with Harry in this dream, by the turban, and maybe he was "mad" at Harry because he was sorted into Griffindor instead of Slytherin. Slytherin maybe could have made Harry evil if he was sorted into this house, and Voldemort would have used him to rise his powers. See what I mean? I hope this doesn't sound too stupid, lol. :) Valy. Snow: Thanks Valy for the reply! You don't sound any more stupid to me as I may sound to you given the translation of language. As in Dumbledore's own words in GOF chap. The Beginning " Differences of habit and language are nothing at all if our aims are identical and our hearts are open." If I understand you correctly, you have made a very good point! The entity in Voldemort was upset with Harry not being in Slytherin house and conveyed his message in a dream state (not unlike the dreams that Harry recently has had which appear to be a direct connection with Voldemort's feelings). The Voldemort part that lies inside Harry, at the point of the turban dream, is actually prompting Harry to the evil side that is Slytherin. I apologize if I am wrong in my observation of what you actually meant. From snow15145 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 04:10:43 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 04:10:43 -0000 Subject: A New Prophecy Angle Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108352 The Prophecy Lets see a show of hands of how many of us have been totally obsessed with the prophecy's true meaning, me at the very least. I may not, may not, have the answer but I do have a different approach to solving this unnerving puzzle. How many of us have said maybe the prophecy doesn't actually refer to Harry but to Neville? But what if we change the Dark Lord part of the prophecy instead of the Harry part? Different idea, the Dark Lord part of the prophecy does not directly imply that Voldemort is the Dark Lord. Yes, Voldemort is referred to as "a" Dark Lord. But if the Dark Lord in the prophecy is actually a different entity (Salazar Slytherin) than Voldemort but also a manifestation of Voldemort, we are left with the possession theory again and not a clean cut and dry Voldemort as the one who is seemingly referred to as the Dark Lord stated in the prophecy. It isn't just the bodily form of Voldemort that needs to be vanquished but the Dark Lord (possession) part of Voldemort. Why does the prophecy refer to the Dark Lord instead of Voldemort? Answer, because they are not one in the same but at the same time they appear to be because of perfect wording. It is not the bodily Voldemort that Harry, Yes! Harry has to vanquish, but the Dark Lord (possession) part of Voldemort. JKR is very good at the deceptive train of thought angle. She lays out a scenario in which we do not question it until we become so obsessed that we comb it with a fine-tooth comb to find the significant assumption (to assume-makes an ass out of u and me) that we, as readers, readily excepted the first read through, and with this topic many thorough readings, but still no substantial answers to suffice in this particular case. If this were not a true statement why would so many of us be attempting to replace Harry with Neville in the prophecy? Answer, because we have been led to think in this manner. Either Neville or Harry could have been the one but in the end no matter who the "one" is doesn't appear to give us a satisfactory answer. We still feel very uneasy about substituting either Harry or Neville because it still remains the same puzzlement. Why would that be? Answer, because that isn't, as it turns out, the most significant part of the prophecy puzzle. This is why neither Harry nor Neville makes a difference to our satisfied answer. The real answer that will satisfy us is in the end is, who is the Dark Lord? Then, and only then will the puzzle of the prophecy make absolute sense. Snow-who is obsessed with finding the end to a book that feels like the last pages have been ripped out. From SnapesSlytherin at aol.com Sun Aug 1 04:28:58 2004 From: SnapesSlytherin at aol.com (SnapesSlytherin at aol.com) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 00:28:58 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Flitwick for HBP Message-ID: <31A0DB4F.4321C48D.4B073798@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108353 Becky said: >And I think, if I'm following correctly, but I guess I >just added my idea to this one, that Flitwick would only be >Half-(elf)-blood, thus making it "acceptable" for him to have a wand. Oryomai: Non-humans (such as house elves) are not allowed to have wands. We assume that all non-humans are prohibited by the MoM from having wands. Veela are not human. But we see that half-Veela Fleur is allowed to have a wand. Giants are not allowed to do magic (they actually hate it), but Hagrid was allowed to have one when he attended school. It seems that the MoM rules let a person have a wand as long as he is at least part human. Oryomai --Who had a Harry Potter Birthday Party today with her friends, and we all sang to Harry! From gelite67 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 04:29:31 2004 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 04:29:31 -0000 Subject: Snape's Attitude towards the Students In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108354 --- Unless Severus is using a > Time Turner, there is simply NO WAY for him to teach every potions > section at Hogwarts. > Angie wonders: Why is this again? Wouldn't there only be one or two sections for each level? Fourteen max? Wouldn't two or three sections a day cover it? From gelite67 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 04:32:56 2004 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 04:32:56 -0000 Subject: HBP Clues In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108355 ---If there is "nothing hidden in your head the Sorting Hat can't see" > > (SS) then it should know that Harry's "true" character would not > > allow him to do well in Slytherin. > > David replied: > > I don't remember the sorting hat wanting to put Harry in Slytherin. > Harry kept thinking 'not Slytherin', and it seems the hat debated > with him. I don't believe the hat is fooled at all. It seems the hat > can look into a person and see the potential (Neville) and then sort > them to the house to best develop that potential. Angie responds: When Harry told the Sorting Hat he didn't want to be in Slytherin, the Hat told him he would do well in Slytherin and then reiterated that in the COS. So, if Harry is the true heir of Gryffindor, I don't see how the Sorting Hat could reasonably say he would have done well in Slytherin. From shrtbusryder2002 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 04:39:58 2004 From: shrtbusryder2002 at yahoo.com (Jason) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 04:39:58 -0000 Subject: Contacting Sirius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108356 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > Becky wrote: > > However, I have NO doubt that Harry will find the other half of the > mirror and use it during WW2 (wizard war 2) when lines of > communication (such as heads in fireplaces) are no longer safe. > > > vmonte responds: > > I think you are right. I think that Harry will use it to communicate > with Ron. > > vivian Jason now.. The mirror Harry had was thrown down and broken... Perhaps those peices will be given to his inner circle as a sort of walkie talkie. Hermione, Ron, Neville, Ginny, Luna and whoever else he chooses. Jason From kkearney at students.miami.edu Sun Aug 1 05:11:56 2004 From: kkearney at students.miami.edu (corinthum) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 05:11:56 -0000 Subject: Harry's dream about the Turban (was Re: Re: Neville and the Prophecy - VERY LONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108357 vmonte wrote: > I was thinking that perhaps, due to Lily, the entity became vapormort > and that Tom Riddle was blasted into baby Harry. Didn't Harry see Tom > Riddle's name on the diary in CoS and feel like Tom was a childhood > friend that was long forgotten? What if BABY Harry was aware of Tom's > presence while he was a child but as time went on the two > personalities fused together. (I wonder if baby Harry had an > imaginary friend that drove Petunia mad?!) Having been absent from the list for two months, I'm not quite up to date on Kneasy's possession theory, so I won't comment much. But I was intrigued by your mentioning Harry's first impression of Tom Riddle, that he was an almost-forgotten childhood friend. The line reads, "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." When I first reread this (after having discovered the truth about Tom Riddle and Harry's connection to him), I assumed the "half-forgotten" aspect was due to the fact that only a small part of Voldemort was in Harry. But now it occurrs to me that this is probably exactly how Voldemort himself feels about Tom Riddle. The current Voldemort has, according to Dumbledore, "[undergone] so many dangerous, magical transformations that when he surfaced as Lord Voldemort, he was barely recognizable." At the current time, Voldemort doesn't consider himself Tom Riddle anymore; that's just a childhood friend, long-ingnored and half-forgotten. So let's see, whar point am I trying to make? First, I feel that if Tom Riddle was possessed by some long-lived entity, I think it more likely that it occurred during one of these magical transformations, rather than at the time he opened the Chamber of Secrets. I think his tough childhood, discovery of his personal ancestry, and hatred of muggles as a result of both were plenty of incentive for his actions before this point (including opening the Chamber). I'd say the possession only gives him power, not motive. Also, it makes me wonder WHAT is actually in Harry, if he is experiencing the full entent of some of Voldemort's thoughts, rather than just snatches as I originally thought. You suggested that perhaps the Tom Riddle part of Voldemort was sent into Harry. I think that the childhood friend thought indicates that it is the current, transformed Voldemort in him instead. of course, what this indicates, I don't know; it's late, and I still have jet lag. Anyone? -Corinth From snow15145 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 05:29:58 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 05:29:58 -0000 Subject: Harry's Discovery in CoS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108358 RS snipped: > I don't think either Filch or Dumbledore are likely to be the HBP, > at the minute I'm leaning towards whole new character. I thought it > might be Gryffindor but she said shed written the entire HBP story > out of CoS, and the thing that now linked the two books had nothing > to do with the HBP. Snow: Actually, JKR said that the "storyline" of HBP was no longer present in Chamber but that there was a discovery made by Harry in Chamber, that can be detected in the other books, that Harry will find out about in HBP. http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/faq_view.cfm?id=56 From snow15145 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 05:42:49 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 05:42:49 -0000 Subject: Just another wacko HBP theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108359 Neri: -------------------------------- OotP, Ch. 10: Harry had a troubled nights sleep. His parents wove in and out of his dreams, never speaking; Mrs Weasley sobbed over Kreacher's dead body, watched by Ron and Hermione who were wearing crowns -------------------------------- Ron and Hermione as King and Queen? Hmm. Ron is pureblood and Hermione is muggle-born. So their son would be... yep, a half-blood prince. But how would Ron and Hermione's son come to Harry's aid in Book 6? This is not a problem either. We have time travel. (And while the prince from the future is helping Harry, I really hope he'll also tell his royal parents to quit the shy bantering and get going with things) Hey, I warned you it's wacko... Neri Snow: I don't think it's wacko at all but then again I am starting to doubt my own sanity with so much theorizing. No, really I think it is a great twisted idea, just the type of twist that will get us in the end after all our hard work at attempting to beat JKR to the punch. I truly believe it will be such a twist, much like your own idea, Neri, that will be our revelation. We are always warned by foreshadowing, like this puzzling example, of what could possibly happen. I see all of JKR's series as one enormous puzzle with one huge twist. It is only a thought provoking person such as your self who could possibly spar with JKR. As for the time issues that have been, and most likely will be, a part of the series, I have a difficult time rationalizing. In retrospect it makes sense but to theorize about them is way out of my league. Hats off to you Neri! From hedwigstalons at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 05:53:36 2004 From: hedwigstalons at yahoo.com (hedwigstalons) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 05:53:36 -0000 Subject: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108360 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Miranda" wrote: > For a > long moment they stared at each other, Harry convinced he had gone > too far. But 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, if > you are ready, we will start again. HedwigsTalons: They STARED at each other??? Was Snape using legilimency to see what Harry knew about what Snape was doing? And he was satisfied because Harry DOESN'T know what Snape is really doing, perhaps. But why would Snape look curious? Can Snape see what Voldemort is thinking through Harry?? And why would Snape tell Harry "that is my Job", in effect telling Voldemort that he's a spy, if Voldemort finds that it Harry's head? This is a tangled web indeed! > Why would Snape be satisfied if Harry guessed right and he is a spy? > I have always assumed that this reaction means Harry is wrong, but > what else could Snape be doing for the Order? Any ideas? Or is this > satisfaction because Harry has figured things out? I've heard some > theories that perhaps Snape is satisfied to gloat over Harry how > much he risks for the Order, and that he knows more than Harry > does. I like the idea, but is it too obvious? Any suggestions or > directions to an earlier discussion on this topic would be > appreciated. > > Miranda HedwigsTalons: I don't think Snape CARES what Harry thinks about what Snape does, but he DOES care about Harry having the information that he needs in order for Snape to do his job, whatever it may be. From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Aug 1 06:57:20 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 06:57:20 -0000 Subject: Harry's dream about the Turban (was Re: Re: Neville and the Prophecy - VERY LONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108361 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "aboutthe1910s" wrote: aboutthe1910s: > I strongly disagree with the idea of Salazar Slytherin as the > embodiment of evil. ...I could be misremembering this, but I believe > that somewhere in one of the books it says that Godric Gryffindor and > Salazar Slytherin were best friends before the falling out--not just > friends, but specifically best friends. This may not seem very > important, but I think that it is--I think that it says a lot about > the fact that there was an actual person behind this idea that has > been handed down for hundreds of years, that he did at some point have > redeeming qualities. Geoff: "The four good friends decided And never did they dream that they Might some day be divided, For were there such friends anywhere As Slytherin and Gryffindor? Unless it was the second pair Of Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw? So how could it have gone so wrong? How could such friendships fail? Why, I was there and so can tell The whole sad, sorry tale. ....... So Hogwarts worked in harmony For several happy years, But then discord crept among us Feeding on our faults and fears. The houses that, like pillars four, Had once held up our school Now turned upon each other, and, Divided, sought to rule...." (OOTP "The Sorting Hat's New Song" pp.185-186 UK edition) On pondering about this, my mind was drawn to "The Lord of the Rings" and Saruman, who started out as a force for good and who, in his search initially for the good of Middle-Earth and later for the pursuit of power, fell under the spell of Sauron. In the film version of "The Two Towers", one of the most telling moments for me personally is when Theoden is being helped into his armour by Gamling and he, thinking aloud, puts the rhetorical "How did it come to this?" Perhaps something similar occurred in the mind of Slytherin. From lavaluvn at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 07:15:49 2004 From: lavaluvn at yahoo.com (lavaluvn) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 07:15:49 -0000 Subject: Harry's discoveries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108362 >Mary/Star wrote: > > JKR posted on her site that something Harry disovers in CoS > foreshadows something in HBP, but that HBP has nothing to do with Tom > Riddle's Diary or the Basilick. Now here are a few of Harry's > discoveries, if anyone know more please add them to the list. > > Harry discovers House Elves (Dobby) and their magic Harry discovers that Knockturn Alley is not a nice place Harry discovers that Lucius Malfoy has many Dark Art things hidden in his house. Harry discovers that Ginny Weasley has a major crush on him Harry (and Ron) discover that the Whomping Willow hits back, HARD Harry (and Ron) discovers what can happen with a broken wand (LOL) Harry discovers that the Sorting Hat can do more then just sort kids into houses Harry discovers (learns about) Phoenixes (from Dumbledore) Harry discovers that he is a 'true Gryffindor' and that the choices we make in life are what matter Celestina added: > > Just 3 other things: > > 1. Harry learns he is a parselmouth. (You left this off your list, > maybe because he already talked to the snake in SS?) > > 2. Harry learns Filch is a squib. > > 3. Harry learns there is a GRIFFIN on Dumbledore's office DOOR that is a lion. (could be insignificant but thought I throw that one in) > I would add: 4. Harry discovers that there are a lot of similarities between himself and Riddle/Voldemort. Andromeda From lavaluvn at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 07:40:58 2004 From: lavaluvn at yahoo.com (lavaluvn) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 07:40:58 -0000 Subject: Who knows about the Prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108363 I have a sort of general question.... do we have any idea which characters know about the Prophecy (in its entirety)? Dumbledore, Harry, for sure. Trelawny may not, she didn't remember making the second prophecy. The Order members must have known that there was a prophecy to guard, but did they know its contents? Does Snape? I always wonder, when rereading the books and seeing his frequent attempts to get Harry expelled, whether he knows. Doesn't seem like a good way to prepare "the one" for his final battle. That's one amazing grudge. Did the books mention anybody else? I guess the Order folks must have at least suspected something, since they were sometimes sent to guard Harry. I'm just wondering if there are clues I've missed. -Andromeda From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 1 08:33:42 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 04:33:42 -0400 Subject: prophecies and choice Message-ID: <001601c477a2$40fbaf20$0ec2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108364 Shannon said: >>>By the same token, I have a very hard time swallowing all this prophecy stuff. Just as you say that if no one had heard the prophecy and it had not been acted on by Voldemort nothing would have happened, I have to wonder what will happen if Harry chooses _not_ to accept the terms of the prophecy. Normally this wouldn't seem like an option (because to paraphrase Cpt Jack Sparrow, prophecy!), but one of the major themes of this series so far has been the notion that everyone has power over their own fate. Choice is stressed, over and over and over, as being the most important thing. So it seems fishy to me that suddenly this prophecy pops up that locks Harry into one path..."kill Voldemort or be killed by him," which is what the prophecy is saying, on the surface. Especially given that the prophecy tells us something that we as readers (at least I assume I can speak for all or most readers) have assumed from the start: that it will come down to Harry and Voldemort at the end. When I read that chapter in OoP, I remember thinking, "Am I supposed to be surprised by this?" Harry certainly is, but I as a reader wasn't, after five books in which Voldemort is built up as Harry's arch enemy."<<< DuffyPoo now: What a great thought! I wasn't surprised by the prophecy either. I just thought, well, there it is now in black and white, but I, and probably most of the readers, had known it all along. Shannon: "Granted, I have no interesting theories on what exactly will happen. But I do think that some miracle will occur to make Harry look past the end of his nose (quite a feat as he has seemed mostly incapable of that thus far) and see another choice somewhere. " DuffyPoo again: Maybe Harry needs to take off his glasses in order to 'see.' Just joking. He does need to get past the end of his nose, however. I know, they'll find out Neville is the one the prophecy referes to (sticking my theory in here again) and they all have to work together to figure out how to get Neville out of it. They all realize they have the choice to say no, to refuse to comply with the prophecy, and POOF LV's gone! Well, guess it won't be that easy. ;) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 1 09:03:57 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 05:03:57 -0400 Subject: Neville and the Prophecy Message-ID: <001f01c477a6$7ad34880$0ec2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108365 charme: said: "Remember, if LV were focused on killing Neville he'd be after him now as well, and we'd see more about that in canon, wouldn't we?" DuffyPoo: I think LV *was* focused on killing both kids, but at the time, he only knew where the Potters were, thanks to Wormtail. He'd worry about the Longbottom kid later. Once he was turned into vapour at the Potters, via Lily's sacrifice, LV, knowing only the first part of the prophecy 'the one with the power to vanquish the DL approaches...blah blah blah' is wrongly convinced, that Harry Potter is the one the prophecy refers to. LV, like some of us, equates vapourness with vanquishment. Oh, if that kid did that to me, then he must be the one. Neville is now totally off his radar. But LV says himself, in GoF, that he had overlooked the power of Lily's sacrificing herself for Harry. "His mother died in the attempt to save him -- and *unwittingly provided him with a protection* I admit I had not forseen...I could not touch the boy.....His mother left upon him the traces of *her sacrifice*...this is old magic, I should have remembered it, I was foolish to overlook it.....I miscalculated, my friends, I admit it. My *curse was deflected by the woman's foolish sacrifice,* and it rebounded upon me." LV, at the time of GH, has fogotten all this stuff, but, at some point, it is recalled to him. Some point, probably while he was coming up with this rebirthing potion. He used Harry's blood so he would be able to 'touch the boy.' And it worked - that part of HP's protection is gone. LV hasn't yet figured out that if it was Lily's sacrifice that saved HP, not anything special or 'powerful' about him, that HP may not be the one in the prophecy at all. It may be the Longbottom kid. but right now, Neville, as I said above, is totally off LV's radar, because he still believes HP to be 'the one.' charme said: "Instead, LV consistently and reliably chooses to focus his killing efforts on Harry." DuffyPoo: PS - LV was trying to get the stone, that and that alone, until HP got in the way. He only said 'Kill him!' after Quirrill said he couldn't touch HP to get the stone and HP wasn't giving it up freely. 'KILL HIM!' - and then we can take the stone from him you dork, Quirrell, I should never have trusted you! CoS - Until Ginny told TR about HP, he was none the wiser. The point of the diary was to re-open the CoS not kill HP (that may not have been the motive of LM in givng the diary to Ginny, however.) That came after, only after Ginny had told TR everything she knew about HP. Still, if HP had used his brain and actually told the teachers what he knew, as was his plan when he and Ron went into the staff room, he need never have been involved in meeting Diary!Tom. GoF - Yup, LV wanted HP and HP alone....because he is wrongly convinced, through circumstantial evidence, that HP is the kid from the prophecy. OotP - LV was after the prophecy more than he was after HP. After LV found out he was working with dunderheads who kept saying they 'could' get the orb when they really couldn't, he had to lure HP to the DoM to get the orb for him. If HP had handed the prophecy to LM (funny I always type LV when I mean LM, then have to change it...) he may never have met up with LV that night. It truly wouldn't have mattered if he had given the prophecy to the DEs. DD told HP what was in the prophecy anyway, via the pensieve, and now that the prophecy is in HP's mind, LV can access it there, or Snape can do it for him. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Sun Aug 1 09:03:57 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 09:03:57 -0000 Subject: The Prophecy -- "Marking" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108366 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gelite67" wrote: > I'm hung up on the "and the Dark Lord will mark him as his > equal . . ." language. Was Harry marked (scarred) because LV's AK > curse failed? Is the "marking" the literal scarring or just the > choosing of Harry? Was the marking language an implicit prediction > that LV would be unsuccessful or are we to assume that Harry would > have received the same scar had he died? Valky: I have finally decided to sit with the interpretation that the 'marking' of Harry by Lv in the attack was not the scar or any other literal sense of the word. for a start the scar says very little about an equality of the two wizards. It denotes a connection which is not the same thing. I see Harry *is* marked by Voldemort as an equal in a completely different way, NOTORIETY. Their respective names have an *equal* level of consequence when spoken in the wizard world. Voldemorts inspires great fear and Harrys inspires great hope. The way this translates is that LV did not *mark Harry equal* as result of throwing the killing curse at him, but by the act of *trying to kill him*. Thereby they share equal notoriety, you can't kill Voldemort and you can't kill Harry. Make sense to everyone? I haven't found any other > reference to scars on the other victims of the AK curse, Valky: Excellent point! In fact othermentioned apparent victims of the killing curse are described as being completely unmarked! hmmmmmm that *really* says something about the prophecy, but what? but, of > course no one else lived. To me, if Harry had died, he wouldn't have been LV's equal, so the only way LV could have marked Harry (or > whomever) as his equal would be if LV's AK curse failed. > > Angie Valky: As you have already seen, I agree completely with this statement. Best to You all. From patientx3 at aol.com Sun Aug 1 09:10:42 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 09:10:42 -0000 Subject: Snape's Attitude towards the Students In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108367 Dzeytoun wrote: >> As I have said before, the biggest problem with Severus is that he is the ONLY option, and the best way to deal with him would be to hire another potion teacher, or two. << HunterGreen: Maybe there aren't any other potions teachers out there. I can't imagine there are a lot of people studying/training or planning for a teaching profession at all, since there are perhaps 12 positions at Hogwarts (just a guess, I haven't stopped to count them...I think its a little high). DADA may be easier to find since its a more high profile sort of job, knowing a lot of hexes and counter curses and dark creatures may be an easier thing to be an expert on than potions. (and remember, Snape is *really* an expert, he can tell what's missing from a potion based on its color). Snape doesn't seem to be in love with teaching, he may have started because Dumbledore asked him to, not because he *wanted* to. >> However, the REAL problem it brings up is yet another slip of the numbers. Unless Severus is using a Time Turner, there is simply NO WAY for him to teach every potions section at Hogwarts.<< I'm not so sure about that. There could only be two newt level potions classes (one for 6th year and one for 7th), which would mean he teaches a total of 12 classes. If he teaches the Newt classes once a week and the others twice a week, that's 22 periods a week. I can't remember how many periods a day Hogwarts has a day. If they have 4, you're correct, that doesn't work (unless the newt classes are taught in the evening or on Saturdays), but if they have five or six that's a possible 25 or 30 class periods a week. 25 would work, because that would mean either the Newt classes are taught twice a week (or he teaches two per year), and he wold have either one or three free periods a week (less than normal teachers, who I believe have one free period a day). HunterGreen previously: >>I just don't think he's done anything that violates the rules of his society<< Dzeytoun >> Yes, but he HAS done lots of things that violate the values Dumbledore professes, which makes his tolerance of Snape puzzling at best and reprehensible at worst. And I don't buy the whole Dumbledore bound by the rules of his society explanation. << HunterGreen: Dumbledore is not the type to impose his will on other people. Snape is sctrict, yes, but (as its usually brought up on Snape threads) potions is a severe discipline. If Dumbledore were to tell Snape to teach a certain way, that might undermine his confidence. Snape doesn't know how to be cuddly and sweet and non-"abusive", if he tried he would fail. I think Dumbledore understands that and monitors the situation to make sure Snape doesn't get out of hand, and I don't think he ever has. Dumbledore is a naturally tolerent person. He also tolerates Binns and Trelawnley, even though they probably don't live up to his values either (and to top it off, they're bad teachers! at least Snape is getting the point across). Dumbledore has his own beliefs and values, but isn't arrogant enough to think that his way is the best and only way to get the point across. Dzeytoun: >>Besides this brings up another HUGE problem (not with your argument, necessarily, but with the logic of canon). Hogwarts has a large number of muggleborns and half-bloods who are members of a society with VERY different rules. Why aren't they screaming to high-heaven about Snape?<< HunterGreen: It could be that Snape is not that nasty to them like he is to Harry. I think we've all (in our muggle lives) have had nasty teachers. Teachers aren't always nice, and they aren't always patient or agreeable or 100% fair. And they do pick favorites. I've been on both ends of that. There isn't an uproar unless the teacher crosses the line in some way. IMO, when it doesn't come to Harry, Snape is just 'regular' nasty, as opposed to Super!nasty. Don't get me wrong, if Snape treated *every* student like he does Harry I would agree that teaching and him should probably part ways. Snape, by nature of being the only potions teacher at the school, is *forced* to teach Harry. He's human, he's faillable, in this case he cannot keep his emotions (and feelings about the student's father who was his *worst* enemy as a teenager and the student happening to look *just* like said enemy) to himself. I think if he had a choice he would tell Dumbledore to put Harry in a different class, and if Dumbledore had a choice he would. Like in the case of the Occulmency lessons, he is the one person who can teach Harry. Its a bad situation. One that probably wouldn't be able to go on in a regular school (or maybe it would, since Harry isn't a complainer, and a regular headmaster or principal wouldn't be omnipitent like Dumbledore is). From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 1 09:11:42 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 05:11:42 -0400 Subject: The Prophecy's half fulfilled Message-ID: <002c01c477a7$900bc230$0ec2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108368 Meidbh: "So you're saying that VM has not yet marked his equal? VM certainly marked Harry. Lightning shaped scar. As for "marking as his equal"- by repelling VMs spell Harry demonstrated that he was more than a match for VM. Not only did he deflect the spell but he sent it back so fast that VM couldn't dodge it. Pretty impressive for an infant. " DuffyPoo: That's exactly what I'm saying. He was marked - scar - by the curse rebounding off Lily's sacrifice - and possibly the transfer of powers (but as we have only seen one power that could possibly have been transferred, I'm holding back judgement on that). HP didn't deflect the spell, even LV knows that now, "My *curse was deflected by the woman's foolish sacrifice,* and it rebounded upon me." [emphasize mine, of course]. It had nothing to do with HP's powers. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From strawberry at jamm.com Sun Aug 1 09:26:00 2004 From: strawberry at jamm.com (Jenni A.M. Merrifield) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 09:26:00 -0000 Subject: SHIP:Hermione's feelings for Ron in OotP (Was: Re: Harry's first Kiss) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108369 Jim Ferer wrote: > If I gave a lady perfume and she termed it "unusual," I'd be bummed > out. You have to add something to it to get anything better out > of it. Jenni replies: Well, just goes to show what I know. I've always preferred more unusual perfumes - the typical cloying flowery stuff is just so boring. I guess I must have bummed out more than my fair share of past boyfriends. :-P > Jenni: "Who really doesn't understand the constant fascination of > the SHIPers, but figures "to each his (or her) own" > > It's a great insight into the characters, and a measure of how > great a job JKR does with them that we actually care about the > love lives of fictional teenagers. Otherwise, SHIPing is > completely indefensible. Okay, I'll fess up and at least admit that I have personal opinions as to whom likes who and why, so I have to agree with your comment on JKR's skill at her art. I guess I just don't have the patience to do the depth of research necessary to really do SHIPing the justice it deserves. For the record, and (quite seriously) without any deep analysis beyond what my brain subconsiously decided after the first one or two times I read through the series, I've just always felt that, as it stands at the end of OoP: * Ron definitely likes Herminone; * Herminoe thinks of Harry as her best friend, thinks she likes Krum, and really actually likes Ron; * Harry was physically attracted to Cho, has never really thought about Hermione "that way", thinks of Ginny almost as if she were his own kid sister, and is, for lack of a better phrase, a free agent. * Ginny grew out of her early crush on Harry and moved on (and though I think Ron would like to see her move back, I doubt that's even occured to her); > Jim Ferer, who would have to be tortured to admit his interest in > SHIPping. Except on HP4GU, of course. ;-) Jenni From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Sun Aug 1 09:42:51 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 09:42:51 -0000 Subject: The Prophecy's half fulfilled In-Reply-To: <002c01c477a7$900bc230$0ec2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108370 > > DuffyPoo: > > That's exactly what I'm saying. He was marked - scar - by the curse rebounding off Lily's sacrifice - and possibly the transfer of powers (but as we have only seen one power that could possibly have been transferred, I'm holding back judgement on that). HP didn't deflect the spell, even LV knows that now, "My *curse was deflected by the woman's foolish sacrifice,* and it rebounded upon me." [emphasize mine, of course]. It had nothing to do with HP's powers. > Valky: On the contrary Duffy, this has *everything* to do with Harry's powers. Harry was saved by the selfless sacrifice of another wizrd, if I am not mistaken this tends to create a *bond* between the wizards that in turn imposes a life debt on the saved. But it is the *bond* that I would like to focus on. Just how much of Lily is now gilded in Harry, I wonder. He is already her son and thus genetically inherited of her magical abilities. But what more from the sacrifice? What manifests of a life debt? We have seen how the blood of the sacrifice continued to give protection to Harry throughout his childhood, but DD still had that darned gleam, didn't he. There is no question ther's a "more" there somewhere, if only Snape and Peter would reveal themselves further to us so we'd have a better idea what this *else* might or might not be. Best to You All From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 1 11:19:30 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 07:19:30 -0400 Subject: Harry must be the one Message-ID: <006d01c477b9$6ac420f0$0ec2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108371 Inkling "At the end of OOtP Dumbledore also states very clearly, when it comes to prophecies,"*only* (my emphasis) the people to whom they refer can lift them off the shelf without suffering madness." US version, p.829. Harry lifted it off the shelf and did not go mad. There is only one child referred to in the prophecy. Therefore, Harry must be the one. I don't see any wiggle room here, guys." DuffyPoo: HP can lift the orb off the shelf because it was determined, by the Keeper of the Hall of Prophecy, that HP is the one. Changed the label and probably changed the protection spell on the orb, as well. Unfortunately, this was done after the events of GH, where HP *appears* to be the one. DD jumped to the wrong conclusion and so did the Keeper of the HoP. Initially the label was Dark Lord and (?). For that first 15 months or so the prophecy could have been lifted down by LV, HP or NL. Only now that 'it seemed plain to the keeper of the HoP that LV could only have tried to kill you because he knew you to be the one' has the label been changed. Everyone is underestimating LV (and I can't, for the life of me, figure out why. LV is not opposed to killing innocents). He wouldn't possibly have only tried to kill the one he figured was his biggest danger - just in case he made the wrong decision...he would have killed both kids and maybe more 'who might possibly work into the prophecy someday' as well. They all assume that LV went after HP because LV thought HP to be the most danger to him. Hooey. He was going after every kid the prophecy could possibly refer to. He just didn't get there - thanks to Lily. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ryokas at hotmail.com Sun Aug 1 11:37:01 2004 From: ryokas at hotmail.com (kizor0) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 11:37:01 -0000 Subject: Contacting Sirius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108372 > The mirror Harry had was thrown down and broken... Perhaps those > peices will be given to his inner circle as a sort of walkie talkie. > Hermione, Ron, Neville, Ginny, Luna and whoever else he chooses. > > Jason I was about to point out that the mirror could most likely be repaired by a simple spell - by Hermione once school starts again, or during summer vacation by a competent adult speller. But it turns out that I like your version more. - Kizor From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 1 11:39:21 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 07:39:21 -0400 Subject: Neville and the Prophecy Message-ID: <007601c477bc$319100c0$0ec2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108373 DuffyPoo: "My theory is that LV did not *choose* HP at this moment at all. He was going to kill both kids. LV didn't make the choice not to attack Neville he didn't have the chance to attack him. Lily's sacrifice for Harry *vanquished* LV. It really had nothing to do with Harry Potter whatever." Marte "This is all very well, but LV still marked HP when he attacked him first. It might have been NL if VL had done him first, *but he didn't!* It just a waiste of time writitng a series of seven books about our hero, just to find out that he's not! I don't think JKR would do that to us. I'm that naive..." DuffyPoo: LV may have 'marked' HP but not 'as his equal.' (my theory) I don't have a problem at all with fnding out Harry Potter isn't the one and Neville is. (or anyone else is for that matter). It wouldn't change my opinion of Harry one single bit. He still saved the stone, still finished off the basilisk/Diary!Tom, still rescued Sirius and Buckbeak (with Hermione's help), still force the Priori Incantatem thing work in his favour and escape LV, still fought, bravely though foolishly, the DEs in the DoM, still, through his love of Sirius, escaped possession by LV. He's still survived all those years with the Dursleys which may be worse than anything else he's ever faced or will face. ;-) IMO, this is just a nice little plot twist. JKR is writing this from HP's point of view, almost as though she is transcribing his journal (yes, I know there are places in the books where it is not HP's POV, bear with me here). JKR really has nothing to do with it, as far as who is right or wrong, she is only putting into book form what HP has in his journals: that HP is convinced he is the one because DD is *wrongly* convinced HP is the one. JKR doesn't even know DD is wrong yet, until she gets to the end of Harry's journal and finds out it has been Neville all along (and yes, I know people have worked out the timeline and there is no 'time' for JKR to have found HP's journal and started writing the books in time for the first book to be published. What if she found HP's journal, partly finished, HP gets another journal, which through magic, adds his next year's adventure to the journal JKR found? This is a story about magic, after all.). ;-) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 1 11:48:55 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 07:48:55 -0400 Subject: Just another wacko HBP theory Message-ID: <008e01c477bd$869d3330$0ec2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108374 Neri "Actually, the really difficult part in this theory is making the WW a monarchy and crowning Ron and Hermione in few years. It was already suggested that the Weasleys are decedents from King Arthur, but even so you'd expect the firstborn Bill to inherit the title. Hmmm. Perhaps Ron will have to draw a sword from a stone to prove he is the rightful King?" DuffyPoo: What if it is Bill who inherits the title, marries Fleur and has a child? It could be that child that helps Harry in some way? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 1 11:53:51 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 07:53:51 -0400 Subject: Remember when Harry claimed he was Neville Longbottom on the Knight Bus? Message-ID: <009701c477be$3702d2c0$0ec2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108375 vmonte: "Remember when Harry announced himself as Neville Longbottom on the Knight Bus and we later find out that the prophecy could have been about Neville? Voldemort chose Harry (whether by accident, fate, or on purpose). But JKR foreshadowed the idea of interchangeability with the bus incident." DuffyPoo: I know I post too much, but I had this very thought yesterday. I've just started re-reading PoA and this hit me like a bolt of lightning (well, maybe not quite that hard). Just another little addition to my theory that the one in the prophecy is going to be Neville. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 1 12:02:32 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 08:02:32 -0400 Subject: Werewovles as teachers (was Re: Flitwick for HBP) Message-ID: <00a001c477bf$6d9c5f80$0ec2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108376 Becky said: "Nor are werewolves, generally, allowed to teach. Doesn't stop Dumbledore." DuffyPoo now: But Lupin had to have been teaching somewhere else: 'It's on his case,' replied Hermione, pointing at the luggage rack over the man's head, where there was a small, battered case held together with a large quantity of neatly knotted string. The name 'Professor R.J. Lupin' was stamped across one corner *in peeling letters*. He was obviously a Professor somewhere else before coming to Hogwarts, at least at some point since he graduated in 1978, or the letters wouldn't be peeling off his case. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Aug 1 12:07:00 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 12:07:00 -0000 Subject: Harry's discoveries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108377 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lavaluvn" wrote: Celestina: > > > > Just 3 other things: > > > > 1. Harry learns he is a parselmouth. (You left this off your list, > > maybe because he already talked to the snake in SS?) > > > > 2. Harry learns Filch is a squib. > > > > 3. Harry learns there is a GRIFFIN on Dumbledore's office DOOR > that is a lion. (could be insignificant but thought I throw that one > in) > > > Andromeda: > I would add: > > 4. Harry discovers that there are a lot of similarities between > himself and Riddle/Voldemort. Geoff: And of course... 5. Tom Riddle is Voldemort. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Sun Aug 1 12:18:19 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 12:18:19 -0000 Subject: Neville and the Prophecy - VERY LONG In-Reply-To: <001e01c476da$9c16bb20$1fc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108378 DuffyPoo said: >>>"There was nothing special about HP, there was something very special about Lily's sacrifice (whether or not it was simply her sacrificing herself for Harry or she had cast a counter spell. It is still Lily that protected HP, not anything about HP himself that saved him)." <<< SSSusan replied: >> It seems to me that this a BIG leap to make. Just as we don't KNOW whether Neville has powers we haven't seen, how can you argue that there *is* nothing special about Harry? << DuffyPoo now: > This is the conversation: "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. 'She stopped you killing me.' 'So. Your mother died to save you. Yes, that's a *powerful counter- charm.* I can see now - *there is nothing special about you after all*. < SSSusan: Oh, yes, I understand where you got this, but I have to say that I always took that as simply arrogant Tom yet again underestimating Harry. I think Voldy underestimated Harry in the graveyard in GoF, and I think Tom underestimates him here. Voldy/Tom [whichever "incarnation" he is] seems to make a habit of this. I just think he's WRONG when he says, "There is nothing special about you." I know I could be wrong in seeing it this way, but it's TOM talking, and I don't take him as a source of truth about Harry. Just my two knuts. Siriusly Snapey Susan From vmonte at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 12:24:09 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 12:24:09 -0000 Subject: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108379 Miranda wrote: "That is just as well, Potter," Snape said coldly, "because you are neither special nor important, and 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. He had not meant to say it; it had burst out of him in temper. For a long moment they stared at each other, Harry convinced he had gone too far. But 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, if you are ready, we will start again. vmonte responds: This scene has always bothered me. It is interesting that Snape tells Harry that he is "neither special nor important." I mean what a drag it must be for Snape to have to work with Harry if he really feels that he is a nobody and not important. Why is Snape working for the order anyway? Is it possible that the only reason Snape is at the school is to protect Tom Riddle who is trapped inside Harry? I wonder if Snape's loathing for Harry started on the first day of school when he realized that Harry's will was stronger than Tom's. Harry stands up to Snape in his very first potions class. He also does not allow the hat to sort him into Slytherin. Why does Snape tell Draco to use Serpentsorcia during the duel? And why does he have a calculating, almost satisfied look on his face when he sees that Harry has this power? I'm thinking that Snape knows something about what happened at Godric's Hollow. What if Snape really put a stopper on death at GH, by saving Riddlemort who vaporized and went into Harry. Maybe Snape's comment in potions class about putting a stopper in death was really directed to Tom. He let the Tom in Harry's head know that he saved his life. (So in essence he tells Tom: 'I saved you, and I'm at this school to protect you...' So, maybe Snape's satisfied expression in OOTP is because Harry has no idea how right he is. Snape's job is to find out what the Dark Lord is saying to his Death Eater, via Tom in Harry's head. So, Snape hasn't really been saving Harry all of these years, he's been saving his master. And according to Snape Harry is neither important or special it's what is inside of him that is important. vivian From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 1 12:33:16 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 08:33:16 -0400 Subject: A New Prophecy Angle Message-ID: <00c501c477c3$b8b404b0$0ec2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108380 Snow said: "Different idea, the Dark Lord part of the prophecy does not directly imply that Voldemort is the Dark Lord. Yes, Voldemort is referred to as "a" Dark Lord" DuffyPoo: Don't the DE's refer to Voldy as "the" Dark Lord? Snape does for sure. "The Dark Lord, for instance,....The Dark Lord is at a considerable distance....He wishes me to teach you how to close your mind to the Dark Lord....powerful incursion on the Dark Lord's thoughts." "How come I saw through the snake's eyes if it's Voldemort's thoughts I'm sharing?" [HP speaking] "Do not say the Dark Lord's name!" spat Snape. My take on this is that DD, Snape and HP all believe LV and the DL are one and the same, Dark Lord just being another title, one used by the DEs, like "You-Know-Who" or "He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named" are other titles used by the WW because they are too afraid to speak the name and wouldn't say Dark Lord because that is what the DEs call him...the WW at large may not even know the DEs use that term. Bellatrix refers to him as "the" Dark Lord as well in OotP. "I was and am the Dark Lord's most loyal servant." "The Dark Lord, walk into the Ministry of Magic....The Dark Lord, reveal himself to the Aurors...." "How come Voldemort wants it?" [HP] Several of the DEs let out low hisses. 'You dare speak his name?' whispered Bellatrix. "Yeah,' said Harry, ' Yeah, I've got no problemwith sayig Vol---' "Shut your mouth!; Bellatrix shrieked, 'You dare speak his name with your unworthy lips, you dare besmirch it with your half-blood's tongue you dare ----" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 1 12:45:38 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 08:45:38 -0400 Subject: Who knows about the Prophecy? Message-ID: <00dc01c477c5$73212070$0ec2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108381 -Andromeda "I have a sort of general question.... do we have any idea which characters know about the Prophecy (in its entirety)? Dumbledore, Harry, for sure. Trelawny may not, she didn't remember making the second prophecy. The Order members must have known that there was a prophecy to guard, but did they know its contents? Does Snape? I always wonder, when rereading the books and seeing his frequent attempts to get Harry expelled, whether he knows. Doesn't seem like a good way to prepare "the one" for his final battle. That's one amazing grudge. Did the books mention anybody else? I guess the Order folks must have at least suspected something, since they were sometimes sent to guard Harry. I'm just wondering if there are clues I've missed." DuffyPoo: I think, right now, the only two people who know the prophecy in its entirety (if we did get the whole prophecy in OotP, some have suggested we may not have), are DD and HP. LV knows the first couple of lines. I think there are others who know that a prophecy exists, but not the actual content. They would include Lily & James, Alice & Frank (what if Bella was torturing them for the wording of the prophecy? the books indicate they were tortured for info about where LV was but I've never understood why...apart from my theorizing), maybe Sirius, Remus and Peter, those of the old Order who needed to know and those from the new Order who needed to know what they were guarding and why. Snape may know of the prophecy but I don't think, I guess I don't 'feel', DD would tell the exact wording to too many people because it puts them at risk. He's had Trelawney housed at the school virtually since she made the prediction. Although she may not 'remember' the words, I have no doubt LV would try to dig it out of her memory given half a chance to get at her. If McGonagall, say, knows the exact wording then she is at risk of being attacked by LV or DEs who want to know what it says. This is just a feeling I have that DD is keeping this close to his chest. I also wondered at the wisdom of telling HP the whole prophecy given the events of OotP and knowing LV can tap into his mind. Might as well have just written it down and sent it by owl to LV. Maybe DD doesn't think LV knowing the exact wording matters anymore. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From vmonte at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 12:49:17 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 12:49:17 -0000 Subject: Harry's discoveries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108382 Andromeda: I would add: 4. Harry discovers that there are a lot of similarities between himself and Riddle/Voldemort. Geoff: And of course... 5. Tom Riddle is Voldemort. vmonte: 6. He also learns what "mudbloods" are and that certain pure blood families feel they are superior to them. Ron also explains that wizards would have died out if they had not intermarried. (This is similar to Sirius comment in OOTP that purebloods were forced to intermarry in order to continue their purity-lines. Which probably means that all pureblood Slytherins, Gryffindors, Hufflepuffs, and Ravenclaws, contain blood ties from all four founders.) Could this mixing have actually weakend their blood? You know when cousins, etc, intermarry you often get genetic problems. Aren't there royal bloodlines in history that carried Hemophilia and other maladies down through generations? (Heck maybe the halfblood prince is Snape?) vivian From drliss at comcast.net Sun Aug 1 12:51:31 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (Lissa Hess) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 08:51:31 -0400 Subject: Contacting Sirius In-Reply-To: <1091334783.5363.28437.m23@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.2.20040801084620.017409f8@mail.comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 108383 Mike: >Does anyone think it's possible that when James and Sirius were in >detentions, that the mirror was bewitched to recognize their >Marauder's nicknames and not their proper names? My thoughts are that >if they were going to be whispering into a mirror, they wouldn't want >the teachers overseeing their detentions to know whom they were >talking to - saying a nickname into a mirror might cause a lot less >inquiries than sitting in a room and saying "James Potter!" into a >mirror. Plus, James and Sirius seemed very attached to calling each >other by nicknames (James more so than Sirius), why would James be >calling Sirius' proper name into the mirror? > >Maybe Harry has to realize this and call out for "Padfoot" in the >mirror - not Sirius Black. Lissa: I think that's an interesting (and very likely) concept. However, I still wonder if he can contact Sirius from beyond the veil. It sounds like Sirius really is dead to me. But that DOES have to be the most ambiguous death scene of all time. But if James and Sirius had mirrors, wouldn't it make sense that Lupin and Peter had them too? Maybe the use of the mirror won't be for Harry to contact Sirius, but to contact Lupin, especially if our favorite werewolf isn't returning to Hogwarts to teach. (It would be nice if he got a bit more screen time.) I don't really like the idea of him contacting Peter ;) But I did get wondering from something JKR said (about there being inadvertent foreshadowing in the you-know-whats) if Sirius won't show up in a crystal ball. (I can also see him rearranging Harry's tea leaves. Of course, they'd probably spell out rude words or "Snape is a slimy git" or something, but...) Liss From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 12:53:46 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 05:53:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Contacting Sirius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040801125346.13598.qmail@web50110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108384 > Interesting thought! Could he reach the present day Sirius who is > dead? Or what if he does reach Sirius but he reaches the Sirius of > the past? Who is to say that the mirror has any sense of time? If a > spell was cast to cause it to respond to Snuffles and Prongs, maybe > it will locate the Snuffles of the past? > He calls out Snuffles and reaches 16/17 year old Sirius...what do > you think? > > vivian The point of the mirror was to provide simultaneaous communication in the present between two people - usually, but not always, in detention settings. It was a walkie-talkie, a cell phone, a pager - pick your muggle technology but it wasn't designed for anything else. There was a need - getting around the restraints of seperate detentions - and there was a solution - the two-way mirror. That's all. I think the broken mirror at the end of OOTP is yet another JKR indication that Sirius is dead and gone and that there's no use crying over wasted opportunities that won't come again. If we "see" Sirius again, it will be as a pensieve memory or some other glimpse of an earlier period but I strongly doubt that Harry will be able to interact with him as he does with portraits. Sirius is gone and that's that. And frankly, I doubt very much that a 16-year-old Sirius would provide the kind of advice that Harry needs. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From vmonte at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 13:08:08 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 13:08:08 -0000 Subject: Just another wacko HBP theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108385 Neri: -------------------------------- OotP, Ch. 10: Harry had a troubled nights sleep. His parents wove in and out of his dreams, never speaking; Mrs Weasley sobbed over Kreacher's dead body, watched by Ron and Hermione who were wearing crowns -------------------------------- Ron and Hermione as King and Queen? Hmm. Ron is pureblood and Hermione is muggle-born. So their son would be... yep, a half-blood prince. But how would Ron and Hermione's son come to Harry's aid in Book 6? This is not a problem either. We have time travel. (And while the prince from the future is helping Harry, I really hope he'll also tell his royal parents to quit the shy bantering and get going with things) Hey, I warned you it's wacko... vmonte responds: I'm going to go along with your train of thought. It's very clever by the way and something that never occured to anyone before I bet. There is one strange child that has appeared in the series and become part of the team. What if Luna is Ron & Hermione's daughter? Wouldn't it just be like fate to give Hermione a daughter that is her exact opposite?! Anyway, is it possible that she has waited to insert herself at a time where she would be most needed. Her reaction to Ron is more like that of someone she is in awe of. (I have to admit that I would love to go back in time to see what my father was like as a child. He was a great man and I also would have been his biggest cheerleader at school.) One problem with this is that if this scenario is true her mother is apparently dead. (What kind of wand does Hermione have?) What kind of experiment was she doing that got her killed? Was she trying to protect her daughter in some way? There is also the fact that Luna has a father, which means that an adult Ron is also present in the WW at this time. Is he responsible for the clues that have been inserted into the quibbler? I'm just going along with this train of thought. Unfortunately, I'm just as wacko as Luna. vivian From vmonte at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 13:12:09 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 13:12:09 -0000 Subject: Contacting Sirius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108386 Jason wrote: The mirror Harry had was thrown down and broken... Perhaps those peices will be given to his inner circle as a sort of walkie talkie. Hermione, Ron, Neville, Ginny, Luna and whoever else he chooses. vmonte responds: I agree. I said the same exact thing before. I bet that the Order communicates with each other in the same way too. vivian From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk Sun Aug 1 13:12:22 2004 From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Hans=20Andr=E9a?=) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 14:12:22 +0100 (BST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] My own favor to ask, re christian allegory, alchemy, and Stoned!Harry In-Reply-To: <009f01c476b0$eee197a0$d558aacf@texas.net> Message-ID: <20040801131222.62255.qmail@web25102.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108387 --- Amanda Geist wrote about Hans' post No. 108067: I would really have liked to see some phrases like "in my opinion" or "it is my belief". What you have posted is an interpretation, a faith statement, and should be qualified as such. and: Again, could you please qualify? *You* may be talking about the purpose of life. I'm not. In actual fact, I happen to consider Harry Potter to be literature and entertainment. It provokes good discussion and offers valuable insights, but I am not yet ready, even if you are, to embrace the Harry Potter religion. Hold forth about your beliefs all you like, but please identify them as your beliefs, and *not* as statements of fact. The assumptions you are bringing to this discussion are not shared by everyone. Hans: Thank you for pointing this out, Amanada. You're quite right. I should have stated it was only my opinion or belief. I used to start my posts off with, "This is my theory". As the months flew by I unconsciously began to think it was getting boring repeating this, and it was obvious anyway it was only my own thoughts, etc. However you're quite right! These things should be observed. I shall watch take your point very seriously. May I appoint you as my watch-dog? If I do it again just send me a howler to remind me! I hope I may be permitted to explain to you all that my enthusiasm for Harry Potter sometimes races ahead of me. As I explained in post 107405 my experience of Harry Potter is recognition. Every time I read or think about HP I experience this tingling sensation that I'm recognising an unfathomably deep truth, which resonates to the very essence of my own being. Recognising (as I perceive it) the liberating power of HP has filled me with a great joy and energy which only seems to increase as I discover more and more. In my excitement and exhilaration I forget other people are not sharing this discovery and perceive Harry Potter in quite a different way. Thank you for pointing this out to me. And thanks for taking the trouble to read my posts. I feel flattered! Warm regards to you all, Hans ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 13:12:28 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 06:12:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Who knows about the Prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040801131228.76889.qmail@web50108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108388 > I have a sort of general question.... do we have any idea which > characters know about the Prophecy (in its entirety)? Dumbledore, > Harry, for sure. Trelawny may not, she didn't remember making the > second prophecy. The Order members must have known that there was > a prophecy to guard, but did they know its contents? Does Snape? > > -Andromeda Dumbledore and Harry - definitely, as you say. Trelawney - no, not consciously but presumably she might retain it in her subconscious and Voldemort wouldn't care if he destroyed her in the process of - shall we say - DIGGING it out of her. (Pause for collective shudder at the image that invokes.) The Order knows there's a prophecy and I think that's all they need to know. If they knew the contents then it would be too easy to kidnap one of them and get the info through DE torture. (I'm assuming that there's already a spy in the Order ranks somewhere - NOT Snape - who will become an issue in the next book.) I think Snape knows the first half - the same half that Voldemort knows and that he heard it from the DE side rather than from Voldemort. As for Snape's efforts to get Harry expelled, I do think that Snape uses that more as the ultimate threat (which he seems to see as some kind of exile to Siberia; remember Hermione's "we could have been killed or worse - EXPELLED!") than something that he expects to see happen. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Sun Aug 1 13:13:37 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 13:13:37 -0000 Subject: Harry's Discovery in CoS In-Reply-To: <20040731201333.5468.qmail@web12108.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108389 Marita Jan wrote: > I'm going to throw out another theory and see what ya'll think > about it. > > When Harry is in the Chamber, Fawkes flyes to him and brings him -- > the Sorting Hat. And the Sorting Hat knew what Harry needed to > kill the basilisk - the sword. > > What if the Sorting Hat has a more important role than just > putting kids in the right Houses? > > We know the hat originally belonged to Gryff but that all 4 > founders put something of themselves in the Hat. What if the key > to defeating Voldy is in the hat, especially if a battle takes > place at Hogwarts (and I'm in the camp that believes it will > happen)? > > All Harry had to was ask for help and he got the Sorting Hat. > > An important discovery? SSSusan: It definitely *could* be this. Let me tell you my reasoning for its possibly *not* being this, though. On JKR's website, one of the scrapbook items you earn for finding clues is a page of doodlings. On this page of doodlings is a list of the possibilities JKR considered for sorting the students into their houses. Here's the list: (Ghost) court hat arbitrary list gateway statues selection committee (prefects/Hs of H) Now, she DID choose the hat in the end, but I have a feeling if the hat itself were *the* discovery of CoS, there wouldn't have been such a wide variety of possibilities for the sorting process in the beginning. That is, if the hat were to play such a key role, then I think she would've had the hat in her plan from the beginning--or that the list would've included a bunch of *objects* from which to choose--and wouldn't have "had" to write out all these varied possible methods of sorting students. Does that make any sense? Siriusly Snapey Susan From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 13:26:11 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 06:26:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] SHIP:Hermione's feelings for Ron in OotP (Was: Re: Harry's first Kiss) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040801132611.50115.qmail@web50102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108390 > For the record, and (quite seriously) without any deep analysis > beyond what my brain subconsiously decided after the first one or > two times I read through the series, I've just always felt that, as > > it stands at the end of OoP: > > * Ron definitely likes Herminone; > * Herminoe thinks of Harry as her best friend, thinks she likes > Krum, and really actually likes Ron; > * Harry was physically attracted to Cho, has never really thought > about Hermione "that way", thinks of Ginny almost as if she were > his own kid sister, and is, for lack of a better phrase, a free > agent. > * Ginny grew out of her early crush on Harry and moved on (and > though I think Ron would like to see her move back, I doubt that's > even occured to her); > > Jenni I don't really ship either but I agree with the above. I would also add that McGonagall has a crush on Dumbledore (which he doesn't reciprocate but finds rather touching)and that Sybil Trelawney's offer to Lupin to gaze into the crystal ball for him (and from which he fled) and to show up for Christmas dinner in her finery has more to do with romantic feelings than collegial courtesy. I don't believe there's a Tonks/Lupin ship either. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Aug 1 13:59:14 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 13:59:14 -0000 Subject: Who knows about the Prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108391 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lavaluvn" wrote: Andromeda: > I have a sort of general question.... do we have any idea which > characters know about the Prophecy (in its entirety)? Dumbledore, > Harry, for sure. Trelawny may not, she didn't remember making the > second prophecy. The Order members must have known that there was a > prophecy to guard, but did they know its contents? Does Snape? Geoff: What about the keeper of the Hall of Prophecy? He must have had some idea of what was in it in order to re-label it. From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun Aug 1 14:16:34 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 14:16:34 -0000 Subject: Snape's Attitude towards the Students In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108392 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gelite67" wrote: > --- Unless Severus is using a > > Time Turner, there is simply NO WAY for him to teach every potions > > section at Hogwarts. > > > Angie wonders: > Why is this again? Wouldn't there only be one or two sections for > each level? Fourteen max? Wouldn't two or three sections a day > cover it? Potioncat: As it appears in the books, Potions is taught to 2 Houses at once. So that would be 10 sessions (yrs 1-5) twice a week IIRC for 20 classes a week. 30 hours.(1 1/2 hr) And then should we assume 1 class of 6th years and 1 class of 7th years which gives us 36 hours of teaching time a week. But what about DADA and Transfigurations which appear to be taught to one House at a time. Now we have 66 hours for each of those classes. No wonder McGonagall doesn't spend more time with her House! IMHO it just is. It may not make sense, but it just is. Potioncat From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun Aug 1 14:23:50 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 14:23:50 -0000 Subject: Werewovles as teachers (was Re: Flitwick for HBP) In-Reply-To: <00a001c477bf$6d9c5f80$0ec2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108393 > > > DuffyPoo now: snip The name 'Professor R.J. Lupin' was stamped across one corner *in peeling letters*. He was obviously a Professor somewhere else before coming to Hogwarts, at least at some point since he graduated in 1978, or the letters wouldn't be peeling off his case. > Potioncat: Yes, that could be. Or the case could belong to someone in his family who taught. Perhaps the person McGonagall replaced mid-year. (Rowena Jane? for example?) From vmonte at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 14:36:12 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 14:36:12 -0000 Subject: Snape's Attitude towards the Students In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108394 Dzeytoun wrote: Yes, but he HAS done lots of things that violate the values Dumbledore professes, which makes his tolerance of Snape puzzling at best and reprehensible at worst. And I don't buy the whole Dumbledore bound by the rules of his society explanation. The rules of wizarding society have never seemed particularly constricting on Dumbledore in other cases, why should they be in this case? Besides this brings up another HUGE problem (not with your argument, necessarily, but with the logic of canon). Hogwarts has a large number of muggleborns and half-bloods who are members of a society with VERY different rules. Why aren't they screaming to high-heaven about Snape? vmonte responds: I agree with you Dzeytoun. It seems to me that part of Dumbledore's personality requires that he give people a second chance. I believe that he is giving Snape a second chance to redeem himself. I think that the reason that Dumbledore (and Molly for that matter) correct Harry when he doesn't speak of Snape in a respectful way is more about DD realizing that Snape needs to feel respected, he corrects Harry out of respect for Snape. I also think though that Dumbledore might also have Snape at the school so that he can keep an eye on him, and because he believes that the children will learn a valuable lesson from Snape either indirectly or on purpose. Snape doesn't seem like the kind of person who really wants to help people or really cares about teaching children. I previously mentioned that perhaps Dumbledore has Snape at the school to show the children what the DE mentality is all about. Like the 2500 year old treatise THE ART OF WAR: "Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer." I don't think that Dumbledore is using Snape, but I think that his failsafe (if Snape turns out to be unloyal) is that he can keep and eye on Snape, while the children learn about DE weaknesses. If the war is going to seriously begin in book 6, perhaps Harry will be forced to control his emotions, or rather get a grip (I'm not saying anything bad about Harry. I believe he has appropriately responded to all the garbage that's been thrown on him--but I do feel that he will have to control his emotions for the safety of himself and all around). If so, he may start to distance himself from Snape's rants/comments and begin to realize that it's really a sign of weakness on Snape's part. (Snape is very much like Petunia in that way--they cannot for the life of them let go of the past. Even if it's in their best interest to do so.) vivian From vmonte at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 14:47:27 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 14:47:27 -0000 Subject: prophecies and choice In-Reply-To: <001601c477a2$40fbaf20$0ec2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108395 DuffyPoo again: Maybe Harry needs to take off his glasses in order to 'see.' Just joking. He does need to get past the end of his nose, however. I know, they'll find out Neville is the one the prophecy referes to (sticking my theory in here again) and they all have to work together to figure out how to get Neville out of it. They all realize they have the choice to say no, to refuse to comply with the prophecy, and POOF LV's gone! Well, guess it won't be that easy. ;) vmonte responds: I hate the prophecy as well. I've mentioned several times that it takes away from JKR's highlight of the importance of free will (that runs throughout the books). I even put forth the theory that the prophecy was a hoax. That it was developed by somebody who was trying to distract the Order and the DEs. If Voldemort had ignored the prophecy in the first place he would have conquered the WW by now. Maybe Trelawny is a fraud who is being controlled and is channeling the intentions of some traitor within. Who ever it is they know Voldemort very well. They have played up to his ego by calling him the Dark Lord in the prophecy, while also playing to his greatest fear: his fear of death. vivian From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 1 14:50:11 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 10:50:11 -0400 Subject: The Prophecy -- "Marking" Message-ID: <001001c477d6$d95b9120$26c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108396 Valky said: "I see Harry *is* marked by Voldemort as an equal in a completely different way, NOTORIETY. Their respective names have an *equal* level of consequence when spoken in the wizard world. Voldemorts inspires great fear and Harrys inspires great hope. DuffyPoo: Notoriety: the quality or state of being notorious, a notorious person Notorious: widely know, a notoroius criminal, a place notorious for pickpockets LV is notorious - or to use a synonym for that word - infamous HP is famous - the opposite of notorious LV is infamous for killing, causing to have killed, torturing, causing to have tortured hundreds (maybe more) of innocent people and for trying to kill HP (but not that as much as the rest) HP is famous for not being killed by LV They are not equals, not by this standard. HP has done nothing to gain notoriety (infamy, dishonour, disrepute, unsavoury reputation, bad name, ill repute) - except maybe in Snape or Vernon Dursley's eyes - but not to the WW at large. Valky again: "The way this translates is that LV did not *mark Harry equal* as result of throwing the killing curse at him, but by the act of *trying to kill him*. Thereby they share equal notoriety, you can't kill Voldemort and you can't kill Harry." DuffyPoo: I don't see any reference in canon that HP cannot be killed. Certainly the prophecy doesn't say so. He was very nearly killed in PS, thought he was dying - would have probably if Fawkes hadn't shown up - in CoS, very nearly died in PoA when he fell off his broom from 50 feet up, nearly had his soul sucked out in PoA, as well, could easily have been killed by LV in GoF but those Seeker reflexes kicked in, thought he was dying, hoped, in fact to die, during the few short moments he was possessed by LV in the Atrium. "The effort involved nearly killed you. For one terrible moment there, I was afraid it had." (PS) DD has no thought that HP can't be killed, neither do I (which doesn't make it so, I just don't have any proof). One of them, LV or HP, has got to be killed in the end "for either must *die* at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives." Actually, I guess this says that both of them can die, are able to die. LV is now mortal again. He says so himself in GoF, "I was willing to embrace *mortal* life again, before chasing immortal. I set my sights lower...I would settle for my old body back again, and my old strength." Since HP's escape from him in GoF he's been ceaselessly, endlessly, trying to get hold of that prophecy. Even killing HP is off his radar at the moment. Someone posted today/yesterday (not a direct quote, sorry) that because LV has been thwarted so many times by HP (to the end of GoF) that he is not making another move until he finds out the rest of that prophecy. He doesn't have time or inclination to work on immortality. After the mess with Avery and Rookwood, Bode, Podmore, etc., he knows he needs HP alive to get the prophecy. LV and HP may be equal in that they can both die, but Neville and Ron and DD (I presume), Hermione and the rest all can die as well so they are also, therefore, LV's equals. DD seems to understand LV is mortal again, or at least has made another crucial mistake in using HP's blood for his rebirthing potion. That unexplainable 'gleam' in DD's eye? "LV has overcome that particular barrier." DD said, ah, but set up a new one perhaps, making himself even more vulnerable? I really thought you had me with this, Valky. I was willing to give up my theory entirely. Try as you might it didn't work. :-) I'm hanging on to my theory. HP hasn't been marked as LV's equal. HP may well be the one, but as long as NL is alive and untested against LV, the possibility exists that it still can be him. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Aug 1 15:02:13 2004 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 1 Aug 2004 15:02:13 -0000 Subject: Reminder - Weekly Chat Message-ID: <1091372533.25.69666.m13@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108397 We would like to remind you of this upcoming event. Weekly Chat Date: Sunday, August 1, 2004 Time: 11:00AM CDT (GMT-05:00) Don't forget, chat happens today, 11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern, 7 pm UK time. Chat times do not change 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 Hope to see you there! From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sun Aug 1 15:27:44 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 15:27:44 -0000 Subject: Werewovles as teachers (was Re: Flitwick for HBP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108398 DuffyPoo now: > snip > The name 'Professor R.J. Lupin' was stamped across one corner *in > peeling letters*. He was obviously a Professor somewhere else > before coming to Hogwarts, at least at some point since he graduated > in 1978, or the letters wouldn't be peeling off his case. > > > Potioncat: > Yes, that could be. Or the case could belong to someone in his > family who taught. Perhaps the person McGonagall replaced mid- year. > (Rowena Jane? for example?) Jen: Lol, that's some good Sherlock Holmes detective work there Potioncat--never thought about McGonagall coming on mid-year and what that might mean. I think Lupin was a teacher before Hogwarts, in a relatively obscure wizard school, where he learned a tremendous amount about DADA and dark creatures. Some place below the radar, where being a werewolf wouldn't garner so much attention (the school equivalent of the Hog's Head in other words!). Sirius did say in OOTP that Umbridge's anti-werewolf legislation made it 'almost impossible for him {Lupin} to get a job" (US, chap. 14, p. 302) indicating he was able to get work a *little* more easily before the legislation, if still not as easily as other people. Entropy suggested Lupin might be from Eastern Europe, perhaps even royalty, and that's where the HBP comes in. So maybe the school he taught in was back home. Who knows? Just having fun! Jen Reese From tookishgirl_111 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 15:30:43 2004 From: tookishgirl_111 at yahoo.com (tookishgirl_111) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 15:30:43 -0000 Subject: Contacting Sirius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108399 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > Jason wrote: > > The mirror Harry had was thrown down and broken... Perhaps those > peices will be given to his inner circle as a sort of walkie talkie. > Hermione, Ron, Neville, Ginny, Luna and whoever else he chooses. > > vmonte responds: > > I agree. I said the same exact thing before. I bet that the Order > communicates with each other in the same way too. > > vivian JKR had always that wizards have something better than the internet, maybe this is it? Faster, less obvious (both to Muggles and other wizards), and - hopefully - less able to be penetrated be others. From tookishgirl_111 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 15:33:23 2004 From: tookishgirl_111 at yahoo.com (tookishgirl_111) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 15:33:23 -0000 Subject: Contacting Sirius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108400 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > Jason wrote: > > The mirror Harry had was thrown down and broken... Perhaps those > peices will be given to his inner circle as a sort of walkie talkie. > Hermione, Ron, Neville, Ginny, Luna and whoever else he chooses. > > vmonte responds: > > I agree. I said the same exact thing before. I bet that the Order > communicates with each other in the same way too. > > vivian JKR said that wizards have something better than the internet, maybe this is it? It's faster, less obvious (to Muggles and other wizards), more easily portable, and - hopefully - less likely to be penetrated by others. Tooks - who apologizes for not signing this the first time (am stupid) From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sun Aug 1 15:45:55 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 15:45:55 -0000 Subject: prophecies and choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108401 > vmonte responds: > > I hate the prophecy as well. I've mentioned several times that it > takes away from JKR's highlight of the importance of free will (that > runs throughout the books). Jen: I felt that way too, my first read-through of OOTP. And for that reason I agree even more with Dumbledore's decision not to tell Harry about the Prophecy before OOTP. Instead, Harry made a choice to defeat Voldemort without even knowing about the Prophecy. Even as early as age 11, Harry felt a tremendous need to blook LV's attempt to return to full power, whatever the personal cost. Maybe he didn't know *everything*, but the truth he did know was enough for him to make that decision. As for whether the Prophecy negates choice, it does to a certain extent, but no more than how each of us is limited by the combination of genetics/environment/fate etc., all the factors that contribute to our choices. Personally, I often wished to have some kind of artistic gift like music or art, something I pursued passionately, but it wasn't meant to be (and I found HP instead ). So to me, Harry's choice is only limited by his particular circumstance, which is unique for sure, but not predestined by any means. vivian: > I even put forth the theory that the prophecy was a hoax. That it was > developed by somebody who was trying to distract the Order and the > DEs. If Voldemort had ignored the prophecy in the first place he > would have conquered the WW by now. > > Maybe Trelawny is a fraud who is being controlled and is channeling > the intentions of some traitor within. Who ever it is they know > Voldemort very well. They have played up to his ego by calling him > the Dark Lord in the prophecy, while also playing to his greatest > fear: his fear of death. Jen: That could be true; JKR did say in an interview she doesn't believe in prophecies. Don't know if that means anything, but it came to mind reading your theory. I hope this isn't the case, just for personal preference, but well...I'm getting used to the idea certain parts of the ending may not be *my* perfect ending! From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 15:57:55 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 15:57:55 -0000 Subject: Harry must be the one In-Reply-To: <006d01c477b9$6ac420f0$0ec2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108402 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > Inkling > "At the end of OOtP Dumbledore also states very clearly, when it > comes to prophecies,"*only* (my emphasis) the people to whom they > refer can lift them off the shelf without suffering madness." US > version, p.829. > > Harry lifted it off the shelf and did not go mad. There is only > one child referred to in the prophecy. Therefore, Harry must be the > one. > > I don't see any wiggle room here, guys." > > Inkling > DuffyPoo: > > HP can lift the orb off the shelf because it was determined, by the Keeper of the Hall of Prophecy, that HP is the one. Changed the label and probably changed the protection spell on the orb, as well. ... > > ... Everyone is underestimating LV (... can't, ..., figure out why. LV is not opposed to killing innocents). He wouldn't possibly have only tried to kill the one he figured was his biggest danger - just in case he made the wrong decision...he would have killed both kids ... > >DuffyPoo Asian_lovr2: On the original point; I agree with DuffyPoo to some extent. Someone somewhere determined that Harry was the 'ONE' spoken of in the Prophecy, and I all likelihood the Prophecy does relate to him. But... There are those who believe that the Prophecy speaks of three people; Harry, Neville, and Voldemort. Some people are coming up with various interpretations of the Prophecy that go like this... " Either (Harry or Neville) must die at the hand of the other (Voldemort) for neither (Harry or Neville) can live while the other (Voldemort) survives." Like I said, there are various, but this illustrates the point well enough. As to DuffyPoo's second point about Voldemort intending to kill every kid even remotely related to the Prophecy, I agree. Although we will have to wait until the end of the series to know for sure, I think Voldemort attacked Harry first because Harry was the first one he had the opportunity to attack. If someone had come to him with information about Neville then he would have gone after Neville first. As it was, Wormtail became the Secret Keeper for the Potters, and was able to reveal their location to Voldemort. So that's where he went first. Now, Dumbledore may have guessed right, that Voldemort preceived more danger in Harry, but overal, I personally feel it was more opportunity, rather than a grand plan, that lead him to the Potters first. Being a big Neville fan, I am somewhat bias. I really believe that Neville is going to play an imensely big role in the final resolution. So big that perhaps after seven books, we will discover that the series really was about Neville. If it is truly Neville who finally vanguishes Voldemort that doesn't erase any of the grand and heroic things Harry has done. He still saved the Stone, he still rescued Ginny from the Basilisk and destroyed the memory of Tom Riddle, he still proved Sirius innocent, he still won the Tri-Wiz Tournement and dueled with Voldy, he still managed to fight off a pack of Death Eaters and escape Voldemort again, and he, Harry, will still play a significant and equally heroic part in the last book. Just a few thoughts. Steve/asian_lovr2 From caseys_mom at comcast.net Sun Aug 1 03:34:09 2004 From: caseys_mom at comcast.net (yukonpup) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 03:34:09 -0000 Subject: another wacho theory Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108403 But haven't we already seen a possible instance of time travel to the future? How did Greg and Feorge know that Ireland would win but Bulgaria would get the snitch? (GOF) Could have been a lucky guess or *yup* you got it - travel to the future. I like the idea even though its a little far out! Laurie From stargaz77 at aol.com Sun Aug 1 05:44:31 2004 From: stargaz77 at aol.com (celestina707) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 05:44:31 -0000 Subject: Either must die at the HAND of the other Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108404 Someone posted their theory about this hand reference (I'm sorry but I don't remember exactly who it was, which I think is a bloody brilliant theory!) being that the HAND of Harry or Voldemort is the ultimate weapon that would destroy either. So please allow me to indulge once more on support of this theory. 1. In GoF, we saw the effects of Priori Incantatem, so Harry's and Voldemort's wands could never really work properly against each other. So I assume any future wand duels would not be taking place between the two. 2. In Gof, ch 1 The Riddle House, Voldemort makes a comment to Wormtail that says "I will allow you to perform an essential task for me, one that many of my followers would give their right hand to perform...". Here is a literal reference to hands once more. Celestina (who appologizes to anyone who has seen this theory time and again) From ssgtkaras at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 05:49:07 2004 From: ssgtkaras at yahoo.com (ssgtkaras) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 05:49:07 -0000 Subject: wizards and warlocks Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108405 Hello- I'm probably overlooking this in the books. However, I am new to the series and was wondering if anyone could tell me the difference between a wizard and a warlock. Thanks -K From meidbh at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 10:36:42 2004 From: meidbh at yahoo.com (meidbh) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 10:36:42 -0000 Subject: The Prophecy's half fulfilled In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108406 > > DuffyPoo: "HP didn't deflect the spell, even LV knows that now, "My *curse was deflected by the woman's foolish sacrifice,* and it rebounded upon me." [emphasize mine, of course]. It had nothing to do with HP's powers." Meidbh again: Good point - I like it but I'm not convinced yet. Bear with me here I don't have the books to hand... If Lily dies before VM attacks Harry (did it happen this way?) Then - at the time Harry is attacked it is he and he alone deflecting the curse, whether through some innate power of his own OR (as VM says above) through the protection conferred on him by Lily's sacrifice. She made the sacrifice, she cast the spell, but Harry received the power to deflect VMs attack (albeit unwittingly). Harry had the power. What do you think? Meidbh :-) From meidbh at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 10:16:49 2004 From: meidbh at yahoo.com (meidbh) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 10:16:49 -0000 Subject: Snape and expulsion (Re: Who knows about the Prophecy?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108407 andromeda writes: "Does Snape? I always wonder, when rereading the books and seeing his frequent attempts to get Harry expelled, whether he knows. Doesn't seem like a good way to prepare "the one" for his final battle." Meidbh here: If VM returns to power Snape is at high risk. He defected to the other side. (Though compared to the other DEs, eg Karkaroff, he doesn't appear to be that all that scared...) Perhaps Snape hoped initially that he could get Harry expelled from Hogwarts back to anonymity. Then VM might not have found Harry to perform the magic that finally enabled him to regain his bodily form. Maybe Snape was in his own inimitable way trying to prevent to return of VM - and save his own skin. Then again, JKR did tell us not to get too fond of Snape (Book Day talk with Stephen Fry). Much as I hate the thought I think he may turn out to be a baddie after all... I wonder if Snape would have hated Harry as much if he had chosen Slytherin, they needed a decent seeker. Meidbh :-) From georgewgriffith at hotmail.com Sun Aug 1 12:02:19 2004 From: georgewgriffith at hotmail.com (George) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 12:02:19 -0000 Subject: Percy Weasley Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108408 What does everyone think of the possibility of Percy Weasley becoming Minister of Magic? As stated in the Lexicon (http://www.hp- lexicon.org/about/books/book_hbp.html), there will be a new minister and assuming that Fudge and his cronies will have some influence at the Ministry, Percy may be a likely candidate. Judging by the his character in Book Five, his devotion to Fudge and Ministry would prove advantagous. Fudge may not be the Minister anymore, but he could certainly exercise control of Percy. From RowanGF at aol.com Sun Aug 1 13:26:23 2004 From: RowanGF at aol.com (Kirsten) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 13:26:23 -0000 Subject: Werewolves as teachers In-Reply-To: <00a001c477bf$6d9c5f80$0ec2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108409 > DuffyPoo sez: > > But Lupin had to have been teaching somewhere else: 'It's on his case,' replied Hermione, pointing at the luggage rack over the man's head, where there was a small, battered case held together with a large quantity of neatly knotted string. The name 'Professor R.J. Lupin' was stamped across one corner *in peeling letters*. He was obviously a Professor somewhere else before coming to Hogwarts, at least at some point since he graduated in 1978, or the letters wouldn't be peeling off his case. < This is one of those inconsistencies that has always niggled at me. It suggests that there are other wizarding schools yet JKR has said that Hogwarts is the only U.K. school. So does that mean that Lupin was teaching at Beauxbatons? Durmstrang? A Muggle school??? (I get the impression that teaching is Lupin's (perhaps ill-chosen) *career*, or *calling* would be a better word. That he's not just popped into Hogwarts for a change of pace.) Or is there a WW university we have yet to hear about? That might provide the opportunity to teach without exposing inexperienced and vulnerable children to a werewolf. But it would also risk greater chance of his condition being discovered by his students since presumably university level DADA classes would be full of students who have been successful with NEWTS in that subject and could spot a werewolf a mile off. -RowanGF From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 16:33:16 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 16:33:16 -0000 Subject: Harry's dream about the Turban - Slytherin Evil or Not? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108410 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "aboutthe1910s" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" > wrote: > > > How many clues do you need? Harry and Slytherin are key to the whole > > series. And it probably isn't just Slytherin House we're talking about > > here, but the concept of Salazar Slytherin as the embodiment of evil. > > > > Me (aboutthe1910s): > > I strongly disagree with the idea of Salazar Slytherin as the > embodiment of evil. ...Isomewhere in one of the books it says that > Godric Gryffindor and Salazar Slytherin were best friends before the > falling out--... specifically best friends. > > ...edited... > > aboutthe1910s Asian_lovr2: I've brought up the same point before, although I didn't emphasize the point of Gryffindor & Slytherin being best friends. However, I do think that is a very important clue. Logically, why would Gryffindor be friends with someone who was the embodiment of evil? Another set of clues is the history lesson Prof. Binns gave on the Chamber of Secrets, something he claims is verifiable fact. Slytherin lived in a time of great persecution of witches and wizards, consequently, he didn't trust muggles, and very rightly so. He wanted to keep magical education in magical families. That doesn't mean he wouldn't take a mixed blood. Just that it would have to be a mixed blood who had, as much as possible, cut off all ties to the muggle world. The closer the association between a student and a student's family, and the muggle world, the great danger to the security and safety of the school. I'm sure during that period in history, ALL wizards hated muggles as a broad general non-descript group because of their merciless and cruel persecution of magical people. But just because you hate (insert ethnic identity of choice), doesn't mean you don't like some (insert ethnic identity of choice). Gryffindor, we may assume, took the position that muggles with magic members in their immediate family were secure because they would not betray their own son or daughter. A nice sentiment, but in reality, a bit naive. I think Slytherin original beliefs have been twisted to suit the personal agendas of subsequent men who needed a platform to seek personal power. This was done in much the same way that Christian doctrine throughout history has been twisted and distorted in cruel ways by power hungry men. And, much the same way the Islamic doctrine is being twisted and perverted today. Just a thought. Steve/asian_lovr2 From nakedkali at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 17:11:43 2004 From: nakedkali at yahoo.com (Keith Handly) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 10:11:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] ADMIN: Rudeness and Insults In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040801171143.64904.qmail@web50405.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108411 Dear Kelley, I've been gone for awhile, real life has intervened. Is this a general commentary reinforcing the rules, or is there something I said? Yours Truly Sea Change --- Kelley wrote: > Hello, everyone. > > From the HBF: > "We welcome debate, but do not attack or insult > other list members." [snip] > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From tookishgirl_111 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 17:37:11 2004 From: tookishgirl_111 at yahoo.com (tookishgirl_111) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 17:37:11 -0000 Subject: Werewolves as teachers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108412 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kirsten" wrote: > > > DuffyPoo sez: > > > > But Lupin had to have been teaching somewhere else: > (I get the impression that teaching is Lupin's (perhaps ill-chosen) > *career*, or *calling* would be a better word. That he's not just > popped into Hogwarts for a change of pace.) > > Or is there a WW university we have yet to hear about? But it would also risk greater chance of his condition being discovered by his students since presumably university level DADA classes would be full of students who have been successful with NEWTS in that subject and could spot a werewolf a mile off. > > -RowanGF I always agreed that Lupin was most likely a teacher before entering Hogwarts, but continued to wonder where. I've had a theory only recently that, perhaps, Lupin didn't nessarily teach at a school. He could always have been a tutor to those who wish to improve their grades (makes scheduling around the full moon a lot easier) or specialize in something specific (:cough:lycanthropy:cough:). Lupin could also have actually taught part-time or just given lectures on lycanthropy (or some other speciality he my have - DADA) at some wizard university - should there be one. This way he can be open about his "condition" and it can used to his advantage, for once. And, again, a part-time or lecturing position would allow him to work around the full moon. Tooks - Wow, I've been thinking about this way too much ;o) From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 18:23:18 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 11:23:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Werewolves as teachers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040801182318.51229.qmail@web50101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108413 > "'It's on his case,' replied Hermione, pointing at the luggage rack > over the man's > head, where there was a small, battered case held together with a > large quantity of neatly knotted string. The name 'Professor R.J. > Lupin' was stamped across one corner *in peeling letters*." He was > obviously a Professor somewhere else before coming to Hogwarts, at > least at some point since he graduated in 1978, or the letters > wouldn't be peeling off his case. < Perhaps the suitcase (and the peeling letters on it) belonged to Lupin's father or uncle, who used to be a professor somewhere? Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sun Aug 1 19:07:53 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 19:07:53 -0000 Subject: Harry's dream about the Turban (was Re: Re: Neville and the Prophecy - VERY LONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108414 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "corinthum" wrote: > > Having been absent from the list for two months, I'm not quite up to > date on Kneasy's possession theory, so I won't comment much. But I > was intrigued by your mentioning Harry's first impression of Tom > Riddle, that he was an almost-forgotten childhood friend. > > When I first reread this (after having discovered the truth about Tom > Riddle and Harry's connection to him), I assumed the "half-forgotten" > aspect was due to the fact that only a small part of Voldemort was in > Harry. But now it occurrs to me that this is probably exactly how > Voldemort himself feels about Tom Riddle. The current Voldemort has, > according to Dumbledore, "[undergone] so many dangerous, magical > transformations that when he surfaced as Lord Voldemort, he was barely > recognizable." At the current time, Voldemort doesn't consider > himself Tom Riddle anymore; that's just a childhood friend, > long-ingnored and half-forgotten. Kneasy: Welcome back. Hope the rest has given you plenty of new insights. you may bbe right - but I read "half-forgotten" as distant memories rather tthan (possibly) fractional personalties. The sort of memories one vaguely remembers from one's early childhood. The transformations that Voldy has undergone are mostly physical, I think. If he had undergone equivalent personality alterations he might no longer be Voldemort. No, I'm tending to stick with the possession theory that I posted in February, namely Voldy = Tom + Sally essence and it happened in the Chamber. Where I am modifying things slightly is what happened between Voldy and Harry - which is much more relevant to the story. > Corinth: > So let's see, whar point am I trying to make? First, I feel that if > Tom Riddle was possessed by some long-lived entity, I think it more > likely that it occurred during one of these magical transformations, > rather than at the time he opened the Chamber of Secrets. I think his > tough childhood, discovery of his personal ancestry, and hatred of > muggles as a result of both were plenty of incentive for his actions > before this point (including opening the Chamber). I'd say the > possession only gives him power, not motive. Kneasy: Here we diverge. I think that not only powers but also 'personality' has been transferred. In Harry DD surmises that a merger has not yet taken place - "in essence divided", though powers, such as Parselmouth have leaked across. His fear is that if there is a merger Voldy will become dominant and Harry will essentially no longer be Harry. Obviously this transformation has gone much further with Tom; he is now almost totally absorbed by the Sally entity, though vestiges remain; enough for example, for him to recognise something of himself in Harry. And this is possibly DD's hope - to split Tom from the whole. > Corinth: > Also, it makes me wonder WHAT is actually in Harry, if he is > experiencing the full entent of some of Voldemort's thoughts, rather > than just snatches as I originally thought. You suggested that > perhaps the Tom Riddle part of Voldemort was sent into Harry. I think > that the childhood friend thought indicates that it is the current, > transformed Voldemort in him instead. of course, what this indicates, > I don't know; it's late, and I still have jet lag. Anyone? > Kneasy: Not just Tom IMO. It's an intermingling of whatever it is that comprises the Voldy entity. Harry is in grave danger of being subverted from within and without realising that it's happening. Personality and thoughts are not necessarily the same thing; thoughts can be projected when Harry's guard is down, but a personality is more a predeliction for a different belief and behavioural system. Thoughts are derived from this, they do not ante-date it. Hopefully I'll have time to post a more considered and detailed exposition in a day or so when things aren't as hectic as they are at the moment. From kcawte at ntlworld.com Sun Aug 1 19:15:55 2004 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 20:15:55 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Werewolves as teachers References: Message-ID: <009801c477fb$f8841980$bcde6251@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 108415 RowanGF > > This is one of those inconsistencies that has always niggled at me. > It suggests that there are other wizarding schools yet JKR has said > that Hogwarts is the only U.K. school. So does that mean that Lupin > was teaching at Beauxbatons? Durmstrang? A Muggle school??? > K I admit I quite like the idea that the case belongs to a relative (especially the mention that someone made that it wasn't necessarily a man), but I don't see this as an inconsistency at all - so we know (or do we actually?) that he hasn't taught before at Hogwarts, but he could easily have been teaching in another country. K From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Sun Aug 1 19:29:02 2004 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 19:29:02 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Flitwick for HBP Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108416 Brian speculated: >This is an interesting idea. Sure enough, Flitwick's diminutive >size is always mentioned. Another interesting point is that in PoA, >when McGonagall, Hagrid, Fudge, and Flitwick order drinks, only >Flitwick's drink is undeniably non-alcoholic. Could this be a hint >at his elfish genes? After all, house elves can become drunk on >butterbeer, which is not intoxicating to humans. I like this idea, but I suspect the reason Flitwick doesn't drink is because his small stature and low body weight mean that an alcoholic beverage suitable for a normal-sized human *would* make him drunk, whether he's part house-elf or not. In fact, that may be the reason why butterbeer affects house-elves and not humans, even teenagers. Janet Anderson _________________________________________________________________ Planning a family vacation? Check out the MSN Family Travel guide! http://dollar.msn.com From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Sun Aug 1 19:37:43 2004 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 19:37:43 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Flitwick for HBP Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108417 "dcgmck" asked: >Your reasons are thought-provoking. Are we all convinced that the >four founders were indeed all human? Is there actually canonical >evidence to that effect, or is that an assumption under which we have >all been operating because of contemporary biases? > As far as I know, all we have is the four names. Are there portraits (magical or otherwise) of any of the founders anywhere in Hogwarts? The names sound human to me; the house-elves we've met don't have last names, nor do the centaurs or (pureblooded) giants. On the other hand, the people of mixed ancestry we've met have human-sounding names because they are part of human families -- Rubeus Hagrid, Olympe Maxime, Fleur and Gabrielle Delacour. I think that's just the kind of thing JKR might do -- let us assume the Founders were all human, even though she never actually *said* so. And the lack of portraits is suspicious. Janet Anderson _________________________________________________________________ Discover the best of the best at MSN Luxury Living. http://lexus.msn.com/ From colleengordon1 at msn.com Sun Aug 1 09:27:00 2004 From: colleengordon1 at msn.com (starlandcolleen) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 09:27:00 -0000 Subject: Wizarding Professions (Re: Theory on James and Lilly Potters occupations) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108418 Carol wrote: > If we take as canon that Harry heard James' voice in the > Boggart!Dementor scene with Lupin, then both Lily and James were > at home in Godric's Hollow with baby Harry on Halloween--which > they would not have been if one or both were teaching at Hogwarts. > > Whatever they were doing, I don't think it involved teaching--or > being an auror. Colleen: I have been thinking alot on this subject. What were their occupations? And a larger question; what kinds of occupations do wizards have if they don't work for Gringotts or the MoM or teach at Hogwarts, etc... In the mentions of career counselling, it is all magical work. Where do wizards buy their groceries? Are there butchers, grocers, or farmers among them? Or do they trade with muggles? If so, it must be through Gringott's. But what good would wizard gold be to muggles? The only place I've ever heard of wizards shopping is Diagon Alley. Where do they got their "regular" clothes i.e. jeans. Just wondering. From griffin782002 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 12:22:10 2004 From: griffin782002 at yahoo.com (sp. sot.) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 05:22:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Remember when Harry claimed he was Neville Longbottom on the Knight Bus? In-Reply-To: <009701c477be$3702d2c0$0ec2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: <20040801122210.71420.qmail@web90001.mail.scd.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108419 Cathy Drolet wrote: DuffyPoo: I know I post too much, but I had this very thought yesterday. I've just started re-reading PoA and this hit me like a bolt of lightning (well, maybe not quite that hard). Just another little addition to my theory that the one in the prophecy is going to be Neville. Griffin782002 now: I really do not understand why Neville should be the one in the phophecy. What is Dumbledore say to Harry in the end? "I am sorry Harry but the prophecy wasn't for you but for Neville. And I am sorry for losing your parents because of a mistake." And it feels to me like discrediting the whole thing that it does not matter the origin of your bloodline, but what decisions you make (Harry is half blood, Neville is a pure blood). But I can't deny that Neville might play a much bigger role in future books. And of course, I don't want to say that what happened to Neville's parents was better than what happened to Harry's. Griffin782002 From plinker at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 13:02:25 2004 From: plinker at yahoo.com (Bill) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 06:02:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Will Harry learn? In-Reply-To: <20040801000022.74175.qmail@web90008.mail.scd.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040801130225.1827.qmail@web41202.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108420 David Gabbard wrote: In the grand finale at the MOM in OOP, Dumbledore and Voldemort are dueling for their lives. They are dueling with such mastery and intensity that they don?t display a need to mutter an incantation. We learned in Year One that the correct pronunciation of a spell is important... Since his arrival at the MOM, Dumbledore doesn?t verbalize a spell until he sends Harry to Hogwarts via portkey. There is a disparity between common spells that require exact pronunciation and the ability to conjure fatal spells which need not be spoken, but appear to only need to be thought of by the conjurer. Will Harry learn this subtle distinction and proficiency in front of the reader? If he does, who will teach him? I want to see some dogged DADA training if he is ?The One.? Bill: Remember when Dudley fell into the snake room and Harry spoke no words. Maybe the very experienced person doesn't need to speak for a spell to work. Also, look for a Auror to take up Harry's DADA lessons. DD is going to be too busy to help much. Harry has to learn fast. Look for Tonks or someone at that level or above to tutor Harry, or perhaps Lupin will be required to return. JMHO. "Bill" From witchypooh67 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 14:14:53 2004 From: witchypooh67 at yahoo.com (Kelly Duhon) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 07:14:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Contacting Sirius In-Reply-To: <20040801125346.13598.qmail@web50110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040801141453.25282.qmail@web52205.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108421 Magda Grantwich wrote: I think the broken mirror at the end of OOTP is yet another JKR indication that Sirius is dead and gone and that there's no use crying over wasted opportunities that won't come again. If we "see" Sirius again, it will be as a pensieve memory or some other glimpse of an earlier period but I strongly doubt that Harry will be able to interact with him as he does with portraits. Sirius is gone and that's that. Kelly: I hope Sirius becomes a ghost (as it seems many unhappy wizard souls do) and continues to be a guiding force in Harry's life. I think having a ghost in the Order could prove very useful. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From vmonte at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 20:00:49 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 20:00:49 -0000 Subject: Just a comment about Lupin's malady. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108422 vmonte: It seems hard to believe that Lupin hasn't at least bit/killed one person in all his life. Who was making the potion for him before he began working at Hogwarts? Or did he just make sure that he was locked up somewhere while he was sick? Is there a hospital or clinic these people can go to when they need help? What happened to his parents? Why did Sirius feel that Lupin could not be trusted (before the Godric's Hollow attack)? Did Lupin ever wake up with blood on his face/hands? Or worse, will Lupin attack or kill someone in the next 2 books? Will one of the children become a great potions master (better than Snape) and find a cure for Lupin's illness? How about Neville? Who bit Lupin as a child anyway? I'm very curious about his family. Is he the half-blood prince as some suggest? (JKR better not do some weird time-travel thing where some of the Order go back in time to fix something, and Lupin ends up being the werewolf that bites baby Lupin as a child.) Sorry I'm on a role, vivian From dzeytoun at cox.net Sun Aug 1 15:00:02 2004 From: dzeytoun at cox.net (dzeytoun) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 15:00:02 -0000 Subject: Snape's Attitude towards the Students In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108423 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" > > Don't get me wrong, if Snape treated *every* student like he does > Harry I would agree that teaching and him should probably part > ways. > Snape, by nature of being the only potions teacher at the school, > is *forced* to teach Harry. He's human, he's fallible, in this case > he cannot keep his emotions (and feelings about the student's father > who was his *worst* enemy as a teenager and the student happening to > look *just* like said enemy) to himself. I think if he had a choice he > would tell Dumbledore to put Harry in a different class, and if > Dumbledore had a choice he would. Like in the case of the > Occulmency lessons, he is the one person who can teach Harry. It's a > bad situation. One that probably wouldn't be able to go on in a regular > school (or maybe it would, since Harry isn't a complainer, and a > regular headmaster or principal wouldn't be omnipotent like > Dumbledore is. This raises a very interesting question as to how (i.e. in what official capacity) Snape and Harry will interact in the Sixth and Seventh books. Dumbledore now has ample evidence of how much these two in fact *despise* each other. Will Harry continue Occlumency with Snape? That would seem odd as Dumbledore himself admits it was a severe mistake. Will Harry take advanced potions? Once again, one wonders how. I really don't see Harry getting an "O" on his OWL (an "E" I could believe). If Harry doesn't get a potions NEWT it would be difficult to continue toward a career as an auror, and I don't think Dumbledore would want Harry not to have that option, considering the *special circumstances* surrounding his education in potions - and considering that, after fifth year, he will probably be very anxious not to heap more disappointment on the boy. Besides, it may be knowledge he needs to fight Voldemort. However, forcing Snape to change his policy or make an exception would send the potions master through the roof (although Dumbledore might not be all that tolerant of Snape's preferences given the disaster of Occlumency). So what? If JKR gives Harry an "O" in potions that will seem, to me anyway, as kind of a cop out. I suppose Harry could study independently for his NEWT (I could see Dumbledore approving that option if a suitable tutor could be found), but then will we be left with no Harry/Snape regular interaction in Book 6? It's a possibility, as JKR might not be as fascinated by that dynamic as many fans are. Or will Harry take Occlumency with Snape again? Once again, that seems forced and even a little outrageous. An interesting puzzle. Dzeytoun From HxM_fan at hotmail.com Sun Aug 1 16:07:11 2004 From: HxM_fan at hotmail.com (Valy) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 18:07:11 +0200 Subject: Harry's dream about the Turban (was Re: Re: Neville and the Prophecy - VERY LONG) References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108424 Snow: If I understand you correctly, you have made a very good point! The entity in Voldemort was upset with Harry not being in Slytherin house and conveyed his message in a dream state (not unlike the dreams that Harry recently has had which appear to be a direct connection with Voldemort's feelings). The Voldemort part that lies inside Harry, at the point of the turban dream, is actually prompting Harry to the evil side that is Slytherin. I apologize if I am wrong in my observation of what you actually meant. Yes, this is what I was meaning. ^____^ If Harry would have been sorted into Slytherin, it would have made the.... infamous duo... Voldy and Harry Potter.... I let you imagine. But there's something that just came into my mind: Harry begged the sorting hat not to put him into Slytherin... Since Voldy is "communicating" with Harry, maybe Lily, who was killed by Voldemort just in front of Harry.... may also be doing the same with Harry! By making him tell/think "NOT SLYTHERIN!!!" Because her love for him, and her will to don't let evil win.... And an another crazy idea... The scar may be on his middle forhead, between his GREEN EYES!!! That would make some weird/surprising sence... What do you think about this? O_o I often come with crazy theories... lol. Valy. From meidbh at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 16:19:09 2004 From: meidbh at yahoo.com (meidbh) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 16:19:09 -0000 Subject: Contacting Sirius In-Reply-To: <20040801125346.13598.qmail@web50110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108425 Magda wrote: "The point of the mirror was to provide simultaneaous communication in the present between two people I strongly doubt that Harry will be able to interact with him as he does with portraits. Sirius is gone and that's that. And frankly, I doubt very much that a 16-year-old Sirius would provide the kind of advice that Harry needs." Meidbh: I agree on both counts. If there were a way to communicate from beyond the grave surely Harry's parents (knowing that they were in danger) would have set it up so they could communicate with Harry if they should die. I think the most likely way for Sirius to continue to play a part is through a "recorded" message (pensieve, Riddle style diary, letter etc...) JKR said that Sirius's death was suddden and unexpected (see below) because that is so often how it is in real life. She knows that many of her audience are children who have lost someone close. I don't think she is going to introduce voices from beyond the grave. That would be far too Trelawneyesque. Meidbh :-) Royal Albert hall - JKR to Stephen Fry "I think what I was trying to do with the death in this book was show how very arbitrary and sudden death is. This is a death where you didn't have a big death bed scene. It happened almost accidentally and that is one of the very cruel things about death and they're now in a war situation where that really does happen, where one minute you're talking to your friend and the next minute he's gone. It's so shocking and so inexplicable 'Where did they go?' " From meidbh at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 16:26:34 2004 From: meidbh at yahoo.com (meidbh) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 16:26:34 -0000 Subject: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108426 Canon (World Book Day chat) Why did Voldemort pick Harry and not Neville? JK Rowling replies -> Dumbledore explains this in 'Order of the Phoenix'. Voldemort identified more with the half-blood boy and therefore decided he must be the greater risk. Meidbh :-) From witchypooh67 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 16:59:28 2004 From: witchypooh67 at yahoo.com (Kelly Duhon) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 09:59:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: another wacho theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040801165928.22420.qmail@web52203.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108427 Laurie wrote: But haven't we already seen a possible instance of time travel to the future? How did Gred and Feorge know that Ireland would win but Bulgaria would get the snitch? (GOF) Could have been a lucky guess or *yup* you got it - travel to the future. Kelly: I hadn't thought of that! Very interesting! My favorite idea for the time travel theory is to have Harry ( and friends?) go back in time and prevent LV from setting the (self-fulfilling?) prophecy in motion. The sentimentalist part of me must be showing :) From stargaz77 at aol.com Sun Aug 1 16:59:42 2004 From: stargaz77 at aol.com (celestina707) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 16:59:42 -0000 Subject: prophecies and choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108428 > snip > > Jen: That could be true; JKR did say in an interview she doesn't > believe in prophecies. Don't know if that means anything, but it > came to mind reading your theory. I hope this isn't the case, just > for personal preference, but well...I'm getting used to the idea > certain parts of the ending may not be *my* perfect ending Celestina: Lets also keep in mind that the pensieve is a physical "thought pool". Thoughts are the perceptions of the beholder, which must pass through the unconscious and superconscious mind, and therefore are influenced by that particular person. Dumbledore's is the only version we have to go on, so it is canon. However, this prophecy comes through Dumbledore's mind, so there is some chance he may have gotten some of it wrong. Although up until this point, I have taken everything Dumbledore says as gospel. Nevertheless, we have seen in OotP that Dumbledore is capable of making mistakes. Prophecies are nothing more than announcing a "likely outcome based on a current situation". Therefore free will can change the outcome of any prophecy. I have always felt there was soemthing missing from this prophecy anyway, something didn't quite fit. Just my opinion anyway. From cyclone_61032 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 17:29:00 2004 From: cyclone_61032 at yahoo.com (David & Laura) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 17:29:00 -0000 Subject: Flitwick for HBP In-Reply-To: <20040801004421.81720.qmail@web50109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108429 Magda wrote: > I would be very disappointed in JKR's storytelling ability is the > HBP turns out to be a living human being, either a recurring > character or a brand-new one. And it's too late in the series to > spring a wizarding royal family on us, even one that might have > been de-throned earlier (Princess Leia, anyone?). > > I suspect that the HBP will turn out to be a legend or a legacy > about Godric Gryffindor or a work of art like a painting or a book > or SOMETHING inanimate that Harry encounters. David here: I agree. I see a lot of theories for the HBP involving living characters. The only canon evidence we have after 5 books is that there is no royalty in the 'modern' wizarding world. From stargaz77 at aol.com Sun Aug 1 18:02:00 2004 From: stargaz77 at aol.com (celestina707) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 18:02:00 -0000 Subject: another wacho theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108430 Laurie "yukonpup" wrote: > But haven't we already seen a possible instance of time travel to > the future? How did Gred and Feorge know that Ireland would win > but Bulgaria would get the snitch? (GOF) Could have been a lucky > guess or *yup* you got it - travel to the future. Excellent point Laurie. I had forgotten all about that incident at the Quiddich World Cup. That is very typical of JKR to innocently insert a clue and then hide it behind the Bagman story. F & G are very clever, and I wouldn't put it past them to devise a scheme to be V's undoing. After all, they are a bit indebted to Harry for the money that he gave them to get them started (final chapter of Gof). I bet they get into the Order in book 6. Hope so. Celestina (who is very glad she just started re-reading GoF in the search for clues once more) From katiebug1233 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 18:53:22 2004 From: katiebug1233 at yahoo.com (Kate) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 18:53:22 -0000 Subject: Just another wacko HBP theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108431 > Vivian (vmonte) wrote: > There is one strange child that has appeared in the series and > become part of the team. What if Luna is Ron & Hermione's daughter? I would have a really hard time believing any child born from Ron and Hermione isn't in Gryffindor. "Kate" From dontask2much at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 12:38:20 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 08:38:20 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Neville and the Prophecy References: <001f01c477a6$7ad34880$0ec2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: <02e301c477c4$6e55d230$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 108432 From: (Cathy Drolet) DuffyPoo: > I think LV *was* focused on killing both kids, but at the time, he only knew where the Potters were, thanks to Wormtail. He'd worry about the Longbottom kid later. Once he was turned into vapour at the Potters, via Lily's sacrifice, LV, knowing only the first part of the prophecy 'the one with the power to vanquish the DL approaches...blah blah blah' is wrongly convinced, that Harry Potter is the one the prophecy refers to. LV, like some of us, equates vapourness with vanquishment. Oh, if that kid did that to me, then he must be the one. Neville is now totally off his radar. LV hasn't yet figured out that if it was Lily's sacrifice that saved HP, not anything special or 'powerful' about him, that HP may not be the one in the prophecy at all. It may be the Longbottom kid. but right now, Neville, as I said above, is totally off LV's radar, because he still believes HP to be 'the one.' < charme: I'm sorry, but I can't figure out what you're trying to say here, other than LV may have been focused on killing both kids initially. Ok, I buy that. The context in which you're framing your argument for Neville "being the one" I don't buy at all, since I believe LV made his choice initially - I believe that JKR promotes the concept that you have to live with the decision throughout the septology. I also think that Neville is a red herring of sorts; I think he's important to the main plot, but vague enough to generate this type of theory you're trying to promote. > DuffyPoo: > PS - LV was trying to get the stone, that and that alone, until HP got in the way. He only said 'Kill him!' after Quirrill said he couldn't touch HP to get the stone and HP wasn't giving it up freely. > CoS - Until Ginny told TR about HP, he was none the wiser. The point of the diary was to re-open the CoS not kill HP (that may not have been the motive of LM in givng the diary to Ginny, however.) That came after, only after Ginny had told TR everything she knew about HP. > GoF - Yup, LV wanted HP and HP alone....because he is wrongly convinced, through circumstantial evidence, that HP is the kid from the prophecy. > OotP - LV was after the prophecy more than he was after HP. After LV found out he was working with dunderheads who kept saying they 'could' get the orb when they really couldn't, he had to lure HP to the DoM to get the orb for him. > charme: I believe that, regardless of the circumstances and actions surrounding it, each and every instance you pointed out above LV tried to kill Harry at the end. Hence my comment about consistency and reliability. I also disagree with your COS point - I believe that that is taken out of context in your view, but you're entitled to it just the same. I'm not convinced it's canon that Ginny told TR *everything* about Harry in the diary. If TR didn't have any memories of what he became (LV), he wouldn't know what he was capable of, would he? That's a very complex twist that has no tangible reliabe basis in canon (we didn't see what she wrote or what TR wrote back to her.) From ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 20:45:37 2004 From: ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com (A.J.) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 20:45:37 -0000 Subject: Remember when Harry claimed he was Neville Longbottom on the Knight Bus? In-Reply-To: <20040801122210.71420.qmail@web90001.mail.scd.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108433 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sp. sot." wrote: > > Cathy Drolet wrote: > > DuffyPoo: > > I know I post too much, but I had this very thought yesterday. I nearly posted it too. Surely Harry's calling himself Neville Longbottom on the Knight Bus as the first name that popped into his mind, and Stan's repeated calling him that, is no random clue. I was actually surprised they left it out of the ... oops! I didn't say that! >;) Certainly, there is some underscoring of a link between them. A.J. polyjuice potion? http://www.angelfire.com/cantina/ajl/hp.html From patientx3 at aol.com Sun Aug 1 21:02:05 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 21:02:05 -0000 Subject: Just a comment about Lupin's malady. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108434 vmonte: >> It seems hard to believe that Lupin hasn't at least bit/killed one person in all his life. << HunterGreen: It does seem hard to believe. Sadly, we don't really have any strong evidence either way (except that Lupin wasn't the best at remembering to take his potion in PoA). Perhaps its not as easy to bite or kill someone as you might think. In PoA (although he had Sirius holding him back) he doesn't hurt Hermione, Ron Harry or Snape even though they were all right there. >> Who was making the potion for him before he began working at Hogwarts? Or did he just make sure that he was locked up somewhere while he was sick? Is there a hospital or clinic these people can go to when they need help? << IMO he didn't have anyone to make the potion for him before. Its very difficult to make and according to Lupin 'not many wizards are up to making it', which could be something about either anti-werewolf feelings or just the difficulty of the potion. Perhaps there are people that think the potion allows the werewolf to hide their condition, and that they shouldn't be allowed to do that. The potion might even be outlawed as a part of the anti-werewolf leglistation that makes it 'nearly impossible' for Lupin to get a job, perhaps a part of that is a requirement that werewolves check into St. Mungos (or a 'werewolf clinic') on the full moon to be locked in a room or something. If there are easy places to get a hold of the potion, it could just be too expensive for Lupin to purchase. I'm sure its a specialty item. Lupin would never be able to afford it when he wasn't working (and when he was working Snape was brewing it for free...no wonder he was being so polite to Snape). >> What happened to his parents? << His parents could still be alive. That might be where he lives when he's not working. They could have been one of the people Hagrid wrote to when he was getting pictures for the album he gave Harry at the end of SS/PS (maybe that's why Lupin isn't in the wedding picture, he was *taking* it). >> Why did Sirius feel that Lupin could not be trusted (before the Godric's Hollow attack)? Did Lupin ever wake up with blood on his face/hands? << I think even if Lupin had a 'mistake' as a werewolf then that wouldn't be enough to make Sirius and James mistrust him. They did have 'close calls' during their Hogwarts days, and they 'laughed about them afterwards'. No, the reason Sirius trusted Peter more than Lupin would have to be stronger than that. >>Who bit Lupin as a child anyway?<< Lupin sort of alluded that there was something more to that story, or maybe that's just me. His comment 'and if I wasn't being so foolish...' is a little odd, isn't it? (and its interesting that its an unfinished thought, when they were being anything but succinct that night). >> (JKR better not do some weird time-travel thing where some of the Order go back in time to fix something, and Lupin ends up being the werewolf that bites baby Lupin as a child.) << I'll second that. I've had enough time-travel to last me the series. From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 21:24:22 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 21:24:22 -0000 Subject: Flitwick for HBP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108435 > "dcgmck" asked: > > Are we all convinced that the four founders were indeed all human? Janet Anderson replied: > As far as I know, all we have is the four names. Are there portraits (magical or otherwise) of any of the founders anywhere in Hogwarts? The names sound human to me; the house-elves we've met don't have last names, nor do the centaurs or (pureblooded) giants. On the other hand, the people of mixed ancestry we've met have human- sounding names because they are part of human families -- Rubeus Hagrid, Olympe Maxime, Fleur and Gabrielle Delacour. > > I think that's just the kind of thing JKR might do -- let us assume the Founders were all human, even though she never actually *said* so. And the lack of portraits is suspicious. dcgmck again: Someone else has pointed out that house elves are not allowed to use wands, but I would like to highlight the adjective "house" because it implies to me that there may be other kinds of elves. If, in fact, there are, then those elves need not be bound be the same restraints of servitude laid upon the house elves with which we are familiar. If, in fact, one of the founders was an elf, that would make the statues in the Ministry of Magic more understandable. It's a pity so many students sleep through Binns' lectures or we might know more about the history of magical creatures in general... From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 21:33:03 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 21:33:03 -0000 Subject: Flitwick for HBP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108436 > Magda wrote: > > I would be very disappointed in JKR's storytelling ability is the > > HBP turns out to be a living human being, either a recurring > > character or a brand-new one. [snip] > > I suspect that the HBP will turn out to be a legend or a legacy > > about Godric Gryffindor or a work of art like a painting or a book or SOMETHING inanimate that Harry encounters. > > David here: > > I agree. I see a lot of theories for the HBP involving living > characters. The only canon evidence we have after 5 books is that > there is no royalty in the 'modern' wizarding world. dcgmck: If one seeks canonical confirmation, doesn't it make more sense to look at the previous five titles than within the texts themselves? Thus far each title has been a reference to something or someone with legendary roots such as an alchemical stone, a secret chamber, an escapee from an inescapable prison (a la Monte Cristo and Alcatraz), a magical goblet, and a group bearing the name of one of the most legendary creatures of all: a phoenix. Granted, each legend proved to have a contemporary manifestation, but in each case the facts diverged from the legend in significant ways. That makes Magda's hypothesis seem quite reasonable. From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 21:40:36 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 21:40:36 -0000 Subject: The Randomized Prophesy Decoder is here! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108437 Neri's Randomized Prophesy Decoder (written as a service for the public of HPfGU members) ____ with the power to vanquish ____ approaches... born to ____(and)_____ who thrice defied _____, born as the seventh month dies... And _____ will mark _____ as his equal, but _____ will have a power ______ knows not... And ___ (and/or)____ must die by the ____ of _____ for (neither)____(nor)____ can live while _____ survives. Fill in the blanks above, in completely random order, with any of the names: 1. Harry 2. Voldemort 3. Neville 4. Pettigrew 5. Tom 6. Salazar Slytherin 7. James 8. Lily 9. Frank 10. Alice 11. Dumbledore 12. Snape and post your theory in HPfGU. (note: work on the Randomized HBP Identifier is still in progress) Neri From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Sun Aug 1 21:46:42 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 21:46:42 -0000 Subject: Just another wacko HBP theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108438 Neri: > -------------------------------- > OotP, Ch. 10: > Harry had a troubled nights sleep. His parents wove in and out of > his dreams, never speaking; Mrs Weasley sobbed over Kreacher's > dead body, watched by Ron and Hermione who were wearing crowns > -------------------------------- > Ron and Hermione as King and Queen? Hmm. Ron is pureblood and > Hermione is muggle-born. So their son would be... yep, a half-blood > prince. > > But how would Ron and Hermione's son come to Harry's aid in Book 6? > This is not a problem either. We have time travel. > > Hey, I warned you it's wacko... vmonte responded: > I'm going to go along with your train of thought. It's very clever > by the way and something that never occured to anyone before I bet. SSSusan: Well...actually.... I wrote this on a different HP list on July 1: "I'm not buying it [someone else's theory that the HBP is Ron], but it does add interest to the 'Weasley is our KING' song and Harry's dream in OoP wherein Hermione & Ron were wearing crowns! Hmmmm-- wait a minute.... This could become R-rated. What if Ron & Hermione conceive a child.... Couldn't their child be a half-blood prince if it turns out the Weasleys are royalty?" Admittedly, I was saying this somewhat tongue-in-cheek and hadn't thought it out far enough to add the time-turning, but.... So if you're wacko, Neri, I guess I am, too. Siriusly Snapey Susan > > There is one strange child that has appeared in the series and become > part of the team. What if Luna is Ron & Hermione's daughter? > Wouldn't it just be like fate to give Hermione a daughter that is her > exact opposite?! Anyway, is it possible that she has waited to > insert herself at a time where she would be most needed. Her reaction > to Ron is more like that of someone she is in awe of. (I have to > admit that I would love to go back in time to see what my father was > like as a child. He was a great man and I also would have been his > biggest cheerleader at school.) > > One problem with this is that if this scenario is true her mother is > apparently dead. (What kind of wand does Hermione have?) What kind of > experiment was she doing that got her killed? Was she trying to > protect her daughter in some way? There is also the fact that Luna > has a father, which means that an adult Ron is also present in the WW > at this time. Is he responsible for the clues that have been inserted > into the quibbler? > > I'm just going along with this train of thought. Unfortunately, I'm > just as wacko as Luna. > > vivian From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk Sun Aug 1 21:48:34 2004 From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 22:48:34 +0100 (BST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] SHIP:Hermione's feelings for Ron in OotP (Was: Re: Harry's first Kiss) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040801214834.83365.qmail@web25306.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108439 Jenni Wrote * Ron definitely likes Herminone; * Herminoe thinks of Harry as her best friend, thinks she likes Krum, and really actually likes Ron; * Harry was physically attracted to Cho, has never really thought about Hermione "that way", thinks of Ginny almost as if she were his own kid sister, and is, for lack of a better phrase, a free agent. * Ginny grew out of her early crush on Harry and moved on (and though I think Ron would like to see her move back, I doubt that's even occured to her); Now UdderPD * Ron definitely likes Herminone; Yes I agree, he also likes Harry the three of them are best friends. Hermione is the only girl Ron ever talks socialy with. Even when Harry fixed Ron up with Padma P he never talked to her or Luna on the train even. * Herminoe thinks of Harry as her best friend, thinks she likes Krum, and really actually likes Ron; Lets start with Krum, Hermione likes him and that is all, she spent all her time with him talking about Harry. Next Harry, Ron and Harry are her best friends, you like your best friends. IMO Hermione almost worships Harry and tries to mother him, Romance she's not letting on if she did I think that Harry at this time would run. Now Ron, I have agreed that Hermione and Ron are friends and I will say that they are no more than that. Going to the Yule Ball he tries to treat her the same way as he tries to treat Ginny and niether of them are having any, Ron treats Hermione like a sister he knows no different, he doesn't talk socialy to other girls. (sorry to repeat myself) Explain this to me someone please: Harry has just come back from the last DA meeting before Christmas and told Ron and Hermione that he and Cho kissed. Ron asked him, 'How was it?' Harry answered "Wet!" Ron makes some childish noise, so Harry adds "Because she was crying." Then Ron says, "Oh, Are you that bad at kissing?" (at this time Hermione is writing a letter to Viktor and only half with it) Harry says "Dunno, Maybe I am." "Of course your not," said Hermione absently, still scribbling away at her letter. "How do you know?" Said Ron very sharply. (He is treating her like his sister again, it is none of his business. Then Hermione covers up by saying that Cho is always crying everywhere. Hermione is not a gossipy girl how does she know this or is it just an excuse?) Then after another of Rons crass remarks she says, "Ron, you are the most insensitive wart I have ever had the misfortune to meet." Then a few lines later after another Ron special she says to him nastily. "Just because you have the emotional range of a teaspoon doesn't mean we all have." The above is a summary of part of OotP UK paperback Pages 406/407 towards the end of the Chapter The Eye of the Snake. Now my comment: Hermione is a very bright girl and she knows that subtle and Ron W are a no, no. So what does this mean besides Ron you are my friend but that is all and possibly Harry I wont cry if you kiss me? BTW Your last two points I agree with. Udder PenDragon (I still think that its H / H if they live that long, ) ________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! Yahoo! Groups Links --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Sun Aug 1 21:53:32 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (aggiepaddy) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 21:53:32 -0000 Subject: Werewolves as teachers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108440 DuffyPoo: >>>> The name 'Professor R.J.Lupin' was stamped across one corner *in peeling letters*. He was obviously a Professor somewhere else before coming to Hogwarts, at least at some point since he graduated in 1978, or the letters wouldn't be peeling off his case. <<<<<<< Aggie: Bit of a twee theory but perhaps he wanted to be a teacher when he was at school, so when he finished he was bought the brief case as a graduation present. This was the first time he'd been able to use it!!! Did you mean 1978? He would only have been about 11!!! LOL! (Sorry, i'm nit picking!) From aphrodeia at gmail.com Sun Aug 1 21:59:06 2004 From: aphrodeia at gmail.com (aphrodeia) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 17:59:06 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Werewolves as teachers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108441 Aggie: <> Per Lexicon, he was at Hogwarts from 1971-1978. (I love this thing.) Lisa the geek From patientx3 at aol.com Sun Aug 1 22:01:08 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 22:01:08 -0000 Subject: Snape's Attitude towards the Students In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108442 Dzeytoun wrote: >> If JKR gives Harry an "O" in potions that will seem, to me anyway, as kind of a cop out. I suppose Harry could study independently for his NEWT (I could see Dumbledore approving that option if a suitable tutor could be found) << HunterGreen: I think a private tutor would be the best choice (although, at this point, I think Harry might be too exhausted at the end of his school years to run around fighting MORE dark wizards...that is if he's alive at all). I was wondering about that in OotP, do you have to take the class in order to take the OWL or NEWT test? Could a muggleborn, for example, not take the Muggle Studies class, and just go take the OWL test? >> but then will we be left with no Harry/Snape regular interaction in Book 6? It's a possibility, as JKR might not be as fascinated by that dynamic as many fans are. Or will Harry take Occlumency with Snape again? Once again, that seems forced and even a little outrageous. An interesting puzzle. << Maybe, as others have guessed, Snape will finally get that promotion to DADA like he always dreamed of. Harry, on his first day of school, happy that the NEWT potions class now takes people that got an 'E', walks into his first DADA class and sees Snape sitting there. It could be the way Snape and Harry finally start seeing eye-to-eye, if Snape is teaching a class Harry has a natural aptitude in, especially if its a class they don't share with Slytherins. However, I don't think Snape would be a very DADA teacher. Potions requires a strict teacher, but DADA works better with a more indulgent teacher. Snape might be alright with a NEWT level class, but I can't see him being able to teach first or second year DADA. This, though, brings up the issue of who is going to be teaching DADA in book six. From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Sun Aug 1 22:14:03 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (aggiepaddy) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 22:14:03 -0000 Subject: Werewolves as teachers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108443 Aggie: > <> >Lisa the Geek: > Per Lexicon, he was at Hogwarts from 1971-1978. (I love this thing.) Aggie again: Oops! My bad!! I think of the Marauders as being only 5 or so yrs older than me (I'm 31 and born in 1973!) I was forgetting that the books aren't in real time, but roughly 10 years behind!! D'oh!! From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Sun Aug 1 22:21:21 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 22:21:21 -0000 Subject: prophecies and choice..was Re: Neville and the Prophecy - VERY LONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108444 Shannon: >> By the same token, I have a very hard time swallowing all this prophecy stuff. Especially given that the prophecy tells us something that we as readers (at least I assume I can speak for all or most readers) have assumed from the start: that it will come down to Harry and Voldemort at the end. When I read that chapter in OoP, I remember thinking, "Am I supposed to be surprised by this?" Harry certainly is, but I as a reader wasn't, after five books in which Voldemort is built up as Harry's arch enemy.<< Kneasy: > One thing JKR is good at is getting fans to chase their own tails. > Harry trips over Voldy or his avatar in every book but one - > which makes me very suspicious of some of the events in PoA, but > more on that later - yet somehow he doesn't seem to have grasped > the fact that Voldy has decided that Harry's the prime candidate > for winning the Black Spot raffle and together with his dastardly > crew he spends an inordinate amount of time drawing up > ridiculously complicated plots, (worthy of Baldrick at his best) - > and they never work. Harry *always* gets away. Sometimes I can't > help but think of Sylvester and Tweety Pie. > > You've got to admit, it is getting a bit much. Consider: > PS/SS. Harry and chums decide that it is their duty to prevent > Snape from having it away with the Stone. Naturally they've got > it all wrong. Good job too - if it had been ESE!Snape down there, > Harry would be dead. His protection wouldn't work against ole > Sevvy. Not that he understands about his protection yet, in his > wide-eyed innocence he just assumes that 3 eleven years old > untrained students can somehow circumvent the cunning protections > supposedly emplaced by the best in the business and then overcome > a mature wizard full of evil intent. > > Instead he finds out there was a basic error in his calculations. > Oops! he's up against the No. 1 baddy, foaming at the mouth and > drooling down Quirrell's collar. He should by rights end up as a > small grease spot on the floor - except. Except Quirrell forgets > that he's a wizard. > Note that during his excursion through the trapdoor Harry does not > cast a single spell. > > CoS. Tom has him on toast. but he gets away - again. > > PoA. The odd one out. Why no Voldy? Why no plan to lure Harry to > his doom? Well, there might be one in there somewhere, especially > if you happen to be leery of Fudge and wonder exactly what > instructions had been given to the Dementors. They seem awfully > interested in Harry and Sirius doesn't seem to be their favourite > flavour. I wonder why? > > GoF. Well, this one's got everything - from dirty work at the > cross-roads to a wooden leg. To be fair most of what happens isn't > down to Harry - it's DD this time. > So Harry goes on his own sweet way, eventually coming face-to-face > with the biggest, grossest, most bumbling incompetent in the > books. Voldy - our friendly neighbourhood mass-murderer. > Typically, he's too busy preening to get down to business as any > self-respecting supreme ruler should, and when he does get round > to squelching this little scrote things don't go according to > plan. Oh dear. Will he never learn? Not when the author's against > him, he won't. > > A careful reading gives one the impression that there were a lot > of DEs in that graveyard - a lot; many more than were named. Yet > with one bound our hero is free... One unaimed Impedimenta! spell > thrown over his shoulder and all are confounded. Come now! > > OoP. Here we go again. A clutch of killer desperados ambush 6 > school kids and come off worst. Only one fatality (adult) and it's > not certain that that was the result of enemy action. Just how far > can belief be suspended? > It's not just suspended - it's fitted with anti-gravity. > > Fortunately I don't read the books for their verisimilitude; it's > the character studies and puzzles that grab my attention. Good job > too, otherwise I might be getting a bit restive. A supposed super- > wizard who uses hardly any spells against the enemy and a bunch of > fearsome killers that fall over their own feet. > > Huh! It's fortunate that I'm not the type to complain. SSSusan: What? NO responses to this? How the hell can there be NO responses to this?!? I'm assuming that people are merely stunned by your candor, Kneasy. I shall, therefore, respond. Ahem. Well done. Seriously, as much as I love these books--and I do!--and as much as I love Harry's story and think he *is* really special, there is a certain amount of suspending disbelief that has to be done...and I *don't* mean just to enjoy the magic. If we're supposed to believe Voldy is the Biggest Baddy in generations, or that all of the WW was terrorized by his DEs, then JKR's not done a very good job so far of showing us why/how. *I* think Harry's much "specialer" than many other listers do, but even *I* don't think he should've been able to take on these Baddies in all these situations with these odds and have come out smelling so rosy. And I'm not buying the "But they're children's books!" rationale. Because, first, we've been over that one time & time again, and there's nothing conclusive. She has stated flat-out that she *didn't* set out to write a children's story. Even if, in her mind, they are children's stories, she has also said that "DEATH is an extremely important theme throughout the seven books--I would say possibly *the* most important theme" [A&E Biography]. She's dealing with some BIG stuff in these books--death, loss, horrible burdens, betrayal, Dementors, lack of a loving home--so I'd think she should be able to expect her readers to handle something *convincing* about Voldy & the DEs. As an aside, I will also note that, while Kneasy wasn't offering his comments up necessarily in this manner, I can take the ones about PS/SS to fit nicely with my theory that DD set the obstacle course as a test of sorts for Harry, and the ones about PoA to fit nicely with the idea of a possibly ESE!Fudge. So, thanks. :-) Siriusly Snapey Susan (Man, it was hard to snip anything--sorry, list elves!) From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Sun Aug 1 22:27:02 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (aggiepaddy) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 22:27:02 -0000 Subject: Occulmency Lessons WAS Re: Snape's Attitude towards the Students In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108445 Dzeytoun: > Will Harry continue Occlumency > with Snape? That would seem odd as Dumbledore himself admits it >was a severe mistake. >>>>>>>>>snip>>>>>>>>>>> Aggie: Do you not think that now Harry knows the truth that DD would be able to teach him it? If not then perhaps now Harry will be more willing to learn and therefore Snape *would* be able to teach him. That is if Harry calms down re his perception of Snape's part in Sirius' death. Another part of your post that I've snipped is about Harry's NEWT potions. (And this is really an I agree paragraph!) If he doesn't get in, which he shouldn't do really, when *are* we going to see the Snape/Harry conflict? Do you think it's likely that Snape would give private/out of hours lessons to Harry? (Tee hee- could you imagine it?!?) From vmonte at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 22:33:19 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 22:33:19 -0000 Subject: prophecies and choice..was Re: Neville and the Prophecy - VERY LONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108446 SSSusan wrote: As an aside, I will also note that, while Kneasy wasn't offering his comments up necessarily in this manner, I can take the ones about PS/SS to fit nicely with my theory that DD set the obstacle course as a test of sorts for Harry, and the ones about PoA to fit nicely with the idea of a possibly ESE!Fudge. So, thanks. :-) vmonte wrote: Ha, I knew you were going to sneak in the SS/PS theory SSSusan after I read Kneasy's post. I agree with you. DD is definitely helping Harry and Gang out. I believe he is training them for a future role. vivian From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Sun Aug 1 22:33:52 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (aggiepaddy) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 22:33:52 -0000 Subject: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108447 "meidbh" wrote: > Why did Voldemort pick Harry and not Neville? > > JK Rowling replies -> Dumbledore explains this in 'Order of the > Phoenix'. Voldemort identified more with the half-blood boy and > therefore decided he must be the greater risk. Aggie: (With evil grin - playing devil's advocate!) That doesn't prove anything one way or the other! That's not JKR saying that Harry's 'The One' - just reiterating *Dumbledore's* belief! Knowing how 'cunning' she can be, this could still be a trick answer! Thought I'd save your fingers DuffyPoo! From witchypooh67 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 22:03:53 2004 From: witchypooh67 at yahoo.com (Kelly Duhon) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 15:03:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: SHIP:Hermione's feelings for Ron in OotP (Was: Re: Harry's first Kiss) In-Reply-To: <20040801214834.83365.qmail@web25306.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040801220354.41062.qmail@web52208.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108448 In message #108439, udder_pen_dragon wrote: The above is a summary of part of OotP UK paperback Pages 406/407 towards the end of the Chapter The Eye of the Snake. Now my comment: Hermione is a very bright girl and she knows that subtle and Ron W are a no, no. So what does this mean besides Ron you are my friend but that is all and possibly Harry I wont cry if you kiss me? Kelly replies: I always thought Ron's very sharp reply was jealousy. Maybe I am misreading, but it seems to me that RW and HG both have feelings for one another but are not ready to admit it, maybe even to themselves. From LilDancinQT86 at aol.com Sun Aug 1 22:04:17 2004 From: LilDancinQT86 at aol.com (theredshoes86) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 22:04:17 -0000 Subject: Harry's discoveries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108449 > Andromeda: > 4. Harry discovers that there are a lot of similarities between > himself and Riddle/Voldemort. Geoff: > 5. Tom Riddle is Voldemort. Vivian wrote: > 6. He also learns what "mudbloods" are and that certain pure blood > families feel they are superior to them. Ron also explains that > wizards would have died out if they had not intermarried. ALSO!!!! Harry learns that Voldemort feels that muggle-borns don't matter anymore, rather, Voldemort is now after Harry. I feel that whatever is special about Harry that the Dark Lord 'knows not' is what Harry will find out in book six. Although didn't Dumbledore say something like 'it's the same power which brought you to Siris to try to rescue him' or something? So, doesn't that imply love? Could, perhaps the whole Harry Potter Series focus on love? Just a thought! ~Laura From poonymelone at yahoo.de Sun Aug 1 22:58:08 2004 From: poonymelone at yahoo.de (poonymelone) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 22:58:08 -0000 Subject: The Randomized Prophecy Decoder is here! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108450 In message #108437, Neri wrote: > Neri's Randomized Prophecy Decoder > > (written as a service for the public of HPfGU members) > > > Fill in the blanks above, in completely random order, with any of > the names: > > > and post your theory in HPfGU. LOL ! Well I?ll try it ... __Harry__ with the power to vanquish __Voldemort_ approaches... born to _James___(and)__Lily___ who thrice defied __Voldemort___, born as the seventh month dies... And ____Voldemort_ will mark __Harry___ as his equal, but ____Harry_ will have a power ____Voldemort__ knows not... And __Tom Riddle_ (and/or)_Voldemort___ must die by the ___Power_ of ____Harry_ for (neither)__Tom __(nor)___Voldemort_ can live while ___Harry__ survives. This is the best way I can think of it ... Poony (This is my first post - English is not my first language so I?m a bit shy - I hope you are nice with me :-)) From lorelei3dg at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 23:15:11 2004 From: lorelei3dg at yahoo.com (lorelei3dg) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 23:15:11 -0000 Subject: another wacko theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108451 Laurie wrote: > But haven't we already seen a possible instance of time travel to > the future? How did Gred and Feorge know that Ireland would win > but Bulgaria would get the snitch? (GOF) Could have been a lucky > guess or *yup* you got it - travel to the future. Wow, what a coincidence! I do wonder, myself - I've been discussing this in a different forum, and will quote from there: Do Fred and George have a time-turner? How did they know the outcome of the World Cup ahead of time? I just reread that chapter last night! In the past I'd always assumed that it was a very lucky guess, but their demeanor in the chapter implies otherwise. It appears that they had planned to gamble all along: they know exactly how much money they have to wager; they give their prediction for the outcome of the game without any hesitation as if they'd previously determined what they would say; and at the end of the game immediately approach Bagman with the demeanor of people confidently claiming what is theirs: "For Fred and George had just scrambled over the backs of their seats and were standing in front of Ludo Bagman with broad grins on their faces, their hands outstretched." The "broad grins" made me think something's up. They are too cocky about this. The MoM regulates the whole Time thing way too closely, so I doubt it's a time-turner per se, but maybe they've invented something else? Lorel From gopotter2004 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 23:36:37 2004 From: gopotter2004 at yahoo.com (gopotter2004) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 23:36:37 -0000 Subject: The Randomized Prophesy Decoder is here! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108452 > Neri's Randomized Prophesy Decoder > post your theory in HPfGU. Ahem. I'm taking it Very randomly. :-) Dumbledore with the power to vanquish Snape approaches... born to Harry (and) Voldemort who thrice defied Tom, born as the seventh month dies... And Salazar Slytherin will mark Frank as his equal, but Lily will have a power Neville knows not... And James (and/or) Pettigrew must die by the hand of Alice for (neither) Dumbledore (nor)Snape can live while Harry survives. AHA! SO! Either Harry or Voldemort is a female! What a plot twist! (my bet is on Voldemort.) Frank Longbottom is marked as equal to SS, so he MUST be Godric Gryffindor! Also, Lily's power that Neville knows not is the power to make him clean his room... because she's his real mother! Which makes Neville the Half-Blood Prince! Aha! And James must die by the hand of alice for his betrayal of her with Lily (for which she marries Frank, see entanglement of plot above). Alice then kills Pettigrew for giving up James' secret, because she never really stopped loving him and is SURE that he would have come back to her. Of course, we all know that neither Dumbledore nor Snape will survive the series. DD is just old and sacrificable (it will make plot fireworks suitable for fourth of july enjoyment) and Snape's a no good backstabbing git (if not to the order, then to Voldemort himself!) So maybe there's hope for Harry after all... And after all this time, he DOES have family after all: Neville, his half brother! From ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 00:52:47 2004 From: ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com (A.J.) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 00:52:47 -0000 Subject: another wacko theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108453 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lorelei3dg" wrote: > Laurie wrote: > > But haven't we already seen a possible instance of time travel to > > the future? How did Gred and Feorge know that Ireland would win > > but Bulgaria would get the snitch? (GOF) Could have been a lucky > > guess or *yup* you got it - travel to the future. > > > Wow, what a coincidence! I do wonder, myself - I read about a year ago a HP companion in a bookstore that was certain that the twins used a time-turner or something. Was it Galadriel Waters first book? Probably. More interestingly, as you mention, perhaps it was not a time-TURNER per se. Perhaps they just had a means or device to peek a little ahead. (Perhaps they heard their little brother Seer!Ron mumbling in his sleep... just kidding...) aj From pegruppel at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 01:01:18 2004 From: pegruppel at yahoo.com (Peggy) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 01:01:18 -0000 Subject: another wacko theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108454 Lorel wrote" > " . . . I doubt it's a time-turner per se, but maybe they've invented something else?" > Now Peg: Lorel, I like your idea a lot! I've seen others comment on how F&G might have known the outcome of the Cup match before it happened (that *is* an odd sort of bet), but I wasn't really convinced that a time turner was the answer. That's because the terrible two were supposed to be with Arthur, getting firewood, while the others were getting water. I always thought that escaping from their Dad, using the time-turner to go to the future to see the end of the match, and then calculating their re-entry into the timestream before the match without Arthur noticing anything would be pretty tricky. Not that they aren't tricky, but I don't see them as taking unnecessary risks. I like the idea that they've invented something that's a little better--something that allows them to peek ahead without actually violating wizarding law or risking themselves unnecessarily. They strike me as the types to take very calculated risks. They aren't reckless, they're not stupid, and, as we saw in OOTP, they are very skilled wizards. If they have a new toy that let's them see into the future by even a few hours it may turn out to be a vital part of the defense in the war against LV. Peg From lorelei3dg at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 23:33:12 2004 From: lorelei3dg at yahoo.com (lorelei3dg) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 23:33:12 -0000 Subject: Contacting Sirius In-Reply-To: <20040801141453.25282.qmail@web52205.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108455 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kelly Duhon wrote: > > Kelly: > > I hope Sirius becomes a ghost (as it seems many unhappy wizard > souls do) and continues to be a guiding force in Harry's life. > I think having a ghost in the Order could prove very useful. I wish there were a way for Sirius to return as well, but I doubt he will do so as a ghost. Harry's discussion with Nearly Headless Nick at the end of OOTP (page 861, American hardcover) closes that door: "Nick turned away from the window and looked mournfully at Harry. 'He won't come back.' 'Who?' 'Sirius Black,' said Nick. 'But you did!' said Harry angrily. 'You came back - you're dead and you didn't disappear -' 'Wizards can leave an imprint of themselves upon the earth...' 'But very few wizards choose that path.' 'He will not come back,' repeated Nick quietly. 'He will have ... gone on.'" Then after Harry tries to argue some more, Nick makes an excuse about getting to the feast and leaves. (Sniff) Reading the passage made me feel so bad for Harry all over again. At any rate, it looks pretty certain that Sirius won't reappear as a ghost. Lorel From lorelei3dg at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 23:46:30 2004 From: lorelei3dg at yahoo.com (lorelei3dg) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 23:46:30 -0000 Subject: Just a comment about Lupin's malady. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108456 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" > > > I've had enough time-travel to last me the series. Me, too. However, I get the sense that the theme or device of Time isn't played out yet. The rescue in PoA provided the setup, and the clock in the DoM was a reminder as well as (IMO) a hint of more to come. I just *really* hope there's more to it than a cheesy "out." Lorel From drliss at comcast.net Mon Aug 2 03:00:19 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (Lissa Hess) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 23:00:19 -0400 Subject: [Just a comment about Lupin's malady. In-Reply-To: <1091397231.16442.25532.m3@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.2.20040801223500.016e8ca8@mail.comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 108457 vmorte: >It seems hard to believe that Lupin hasn't at least bit/killed one >person in all his life. Who was making the potion for him before he >began working at Hogwarts? Or did he just make sure that he was >locked up somewhere while he was sick? Is there a hospital or clinic >these people can go to when they need help? > >What happened to his parents? Why did Sirius feel that Lupin could >not be trusted (before the Godric's Hollow attack)? Did Lupin ever >wake up with blood on his face/hands? > >Or worse, will Lupin attack or kill someone in the next 2 books? Will >one of the children become a great potions master (better than Snape) >and find a cure for Lupin's illness? How about Neville? > >Who bit Lupin as a child anyway? I'm very curious about his family. >Is he the half-blood prince as some suggest? Lissa: I don't know that he's ever bitten anyone, but hundreds of fanfics out there have him locking himself up in his apartment or some such scenario before the transformation. Now I -know- fanfics are ever-so-reliable barometers of canon, but I think that one is probably dead on. The kind of person Lupin is (defends her werewolf to the end) is not going to let himself go wreaking havoc on the countryside if he can help it. He's way too conscientious. As far as his parents go, I've kind of assumed they're dead- or not terribly wealthy. I assume that just because of his rather tattered state. Either that or they aren't that important in Lupin's life as relates to the wizarding wars. I have a theory that Lupin will never be cured. Of course, part of this is because I think the poor guy is going to DIE, but more because of what Lupin is meant to represent. The lycanthropy (do you have any idea how annoying that word is to spell) has been likened to a disease/handicap so many times, and by JKR herself, and JKR likes a certain amount of realism. Sure, he's a werewolf, and sure there's magic, but I think that there are some things that just can't be cured, and the people who must cope with them have to accept that and make a life. Besides, who has time to research curing werewolfs when Voldie's on the loose? Of course, since I've already accepted that Wormtail's gonna kill off my beloved werewolf anyway, I do tend to be fatalistic about this. Unless the werewolf that bit Lupin as a child is going to make a reappearance, we may have already heard everything we're going to hear about his bite. He mentions he was careless, but to me that more sets the stage for him falling in with the likes of James, Sirius, and Peter than anything else (pointing out that Lupin DOES have a lighter, more mischievous and daring side). We're getting down to the wire, and unless that werewolf is coming back to us, I can't see wasting print on that mystery when there's so many others to be solved. The trust thing... oh, I have TONS of ideas about that. 1.) How long did Sirius actually suspect Lupin? That would be my first question. They'd known there was a spy in the Order, and it was someone close to James and Lily. But coming to the conclusion that it was Lupin had to have been very painful for Sirius. He also may have had a wider circle of suspects that kept getting killed off until he was forced in the last week or so to narrow it down to Peter or Lupin. ("Fabian Prewett is the spy, I know it. SHOOT! He just killed, and Voldie's still following the Potters. Guess it wasn't him.") 2.) Did Sirius actually say anything? I'm inclined to think no. In the Shrieking Shack scene in PoA, Lupin has to confirm that Sirius thought he was the spy. He also brushes it off pretty quickly. Now, I know Lupin is overly forgiving, but if he's been nursing a grudge about Sirius thinking he was the spy for 12 years, he's not going to be so quick to forgive. But when the real spy is standing right there, and Sirius says "yeah I did think it was you", that's a little easier to cope with. 3.) Is it reasonable for Sirius to suspect Lupin as the spy? TOTALLY. One of Voldie's strategies that we keep hearing about is to recruit creatures that the WW denies rights to. (Goblins, giants, etc.) You have narrowed it down to two people: Peter, a full blood (I assume, if he was a DE), rather talentless, unexceptional wizard, and Lupin, a werewolf who is extremely talented an unable to get work no matter how hard he tries because the WW is so dead set against him. You only have a few days to figure it out. And Lupin is acting odd. (More on that in idea 4.) Eenie, meenie, miney... yeah. Lupin makes more sense. 4.) WAS Lupin acting odd? Now, me, I believe Lupin and Sirius totally had something going on, which actually makes it much easier for Sirius to suspect Lupin, especially if they were having trouble in their relationship for any reason at all. But let's go beyond that. Hogwarts was an unusual time in Lupin's life, and wonderful, but Dumbledore did something extremely cruel: he gave Lupin hope. Lupin got an education, Dumbledore treated him like he had a chance, and he made three wonderful friends. Then he went out into the world and discovered that despite his talent, Dumbledore and his friends really WERE the exceptions, not the rule. Then there's James marrying Lily and starting a family- something I don't see Lupin ever doing even if he and Sirius weren't together, because I can't see himself "burdening" a wife and child with that sort of stigma. (Yeah, I don't think he and Sirius were being overly open about their relationship, either. Add into that whole friction in the relationship sort of thing.) But anyway, as he was coming out of school, the poor guy had to have been had to be dealing with crushed hopes, and that had to have been really hard. I can see where he'd start getting moody and acting oddly, causing Sirius to suspect him of being the spy, because Sirius DOESN'T really understand what Lupin's going through. Add in that Peter's probably sowing some seeds of mistrust there.... I also love the suggestion that Lupin's the one who took the picture of Lily, James, and Sirius. That just made me smile. I admit I'm totally biased, but I think a lot of it does make sense. And I agree. No time turners! Liss From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Sun Aug 1 23:20:31 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 23:20:31 -0000 Subject: The Prophecy -- "Marking" In-Reply-To: <001001c477d6$d95b9120$26c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108458 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > Valky said: > > "I see Harry *is* marked by Voldemort as an equal in a completely > different way, NOTORIETY. > Their respective names have an *equal* level of consequence when > spoken in the wizard world. Voldemorts inspires great fear and > Harrys inspires great hope. > > > DuffyPoo: > > Notoriety: the quality or state of being notorious, a notorious person > Notorious: widely know, a notoroius criminal, a place notorious for pickpockets > > LV is notorious - or to use a synonym for that word - infamous > HP is famous - the opposite of notorious > > They are not equals, not by this standard. HP has done nothing to gain notoriety (infamy, dishonour, disrepute, unsavoury reputation, bad name, ill repute) - except maybe in Snape or Vernon Dursley's eyes - but not to the WW at large. > Valkys reply: Source: Merriam-Webster Dictionary of Law, ? 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc. ; notorious \No*to"ri*ous\, a. [L. notorius pointing out, making known, fr. noscere, notum, to known: cf. F. notoire. See Know.] Generally known and talked of by the public; universally believed to be true; manifest to the world; evident; -- usually in an unfavorable sense; as, a notorious thief; a notorious crime or vice. Syn: Distinguished; remarkable; conspicuous; celebrated; noted; famous; renowned. I did use the word notoriety loosely in its basic meaning. I am aware that it is *usually* used only in a sense of ill fame, but technically it only means "Generally known and talked of by the public; universally believed to be true; manifest to the world; evident;" To this end Harry and Voldemort are exactly equal. I have not a lot of time so I will reply to the rest of your post at another time. Best to you Valky From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 04:37:45 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 04:37:45 -0000 Subject: Just a comment about Lupin's malady. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108459 Lorel wrote: Me, too. However, I get the sense that the theme or device of Time isn't played out yet. The rescue in PoA provided the setup, and the clock in the DoM was a reminder as well as (IMO) a hint of more to come. I just *really* hope there's more to it than a cheesy "out." vmonte: Yeah, I agree with you, it's definitely going to return. Be warned though, some HPFGU's get really upset when you start talking about time-travel. For some reason it's ok to have theories that are not based on canon as long as they are not about time-travel. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Mon Aug 2 05:17:13 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 05:17:13 -0000 Subject: Just a comment about Lupin's malady. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108460 vmonte: > >> (JKR better not do some weird time-travel thing where some of the Order go back in time to fix something, and Lupin ends up being the werewolf that bites baby Lupin as a child.) << > huntergreen: > I'll second that. I've had enough time-travel to last me the series. Valky: I mean no offense by this as you are generally one of my favourite posters Hunter, but isn't that statement an exaggeration? Just *how much* timetravel have we actually had in the series. Ok I start the count at one chapter then two chapters then....... thats it! TWO CHAPTERS in um..... over a hundred! It's barely a full percentage of the entire series and yet there is *already* too much? Please, I have absolutely no idea where anyone gets the notion that time travel has been overextended in the story. It sounds to me like personal bias. Now don't get me wrong, I *am* biased in favour of more timeturning because I have a scientific and adventurous mind. I don't mind a challenging paradox myself, its good exercise for me. Frankly, the excellence that JKR put into creating the timeturned paradox sequence *did* leave me thirsting for more. But I am not posting on behalf of that at all, I promise. I just want to know how so little can be too much all of a sudden? Best to You All >From Valky From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 2 06:17:06 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 06:17:06 -0000 Subject: Harry's dream about the Turban (was Re: Re: Neville and the Prophecy - VERY LONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108461 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Valy" wrote: > > Yes, this is what I was meaning. ^____^ > If Harry would have been sorted into Slytherin, it would have made the.... infamous duo... Voldy and Harry Potter.... I let you imagine. > But there's something that just came into my mind: > Harry begged the sorting hat not to put him into Slytherin... > Since Voldy is "communicating" with Harry, maybe Lily, who was killed by Voldemort just in front of Harry.... may also be doing the same with Harry! By making him tell/think "NOT SLYTHERIN!!!" Because her love for him, and her will to don't let evil win.... > And an another crazy idea... The scar may be on his middle forhead, between his GREEN EYES!!! > That would make some weird/surprising sence... > > What do you think about this? O_o > Valy. imamommy: I think it would greatly undermine Harry's free agency, and therefore greatly weaken his character. If something like this were true, it would mean that Harry *didn't* make that choice for himself, and then all that DD says about our choices revealing who we really are wouldn't apply. Harry has already met Draco and heard enough from his new friend, Ron, to have a bad feeling about Slytherin. Maybe he has an "intuition" or some "guiding light" or "conscience" to guide him, but please not his mother controlling his freedom of choice. As for the eyes, to you think Harry's vision problems (glasses) are connected with his scar? imamommy From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Aug 2 06:49:23 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 06:49:23 -0000 Subject: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108462 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "aggiepaddy" wrote: > "meidbh" wrote: > > > Why did Voldemort pick Harry and not Neville? > > > > JK Rowling replies -> Dumbledore explains this in 'Order of the > > Phoenix'. Voldemort identified more with the half-blood boy and > > therefore decided he must be the greater risk. > > > Aggie: (With evil grin - playing devil's advocate!) > That doesn't prove anything one way or the other! That's not JKR > saying that Harry's 'The One' - just reiterating *Dumbledore's* > belief! Knowing how 'cunning' she can be, this could still be a trick > answer! > > Thought I'd save your fingers DuffyPoo! Geoff: I haven't immersed myself in the conspiracy theories covered in this and similar threads so I am venturing into uncharted territory. If this thought has been floated previously, then my apologies. There seems to be a question "What if Neville was the guy in the prophecy and it was only the fact that Voldemort attacked Harry first which forestalled that?" Let's suppose. If Voldemort had attacked Neville first, would Neville have survived? Was he with his parents at the time of the attack on Harry? Or were they away and he was with Grandma Longbottom? Would any of these three have had any way of blocking an Avada Kedavra spell? If he had atacked and killed Neville first and gone on to Godric's Hollow, then the same scenario might well have played out and we would have a similar setup to the current one but minus Neville. Whichever way, he might still have finished up on a hiding to nothing.... Thoughts? From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Aug 2 06:59:59 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 06:59:59 -0000 Subject: Harry's dream about the Turban (was Re: Re: Neville and the Prophecy - VERY LONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108463 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, imamommy at s... wrote: imamommy: > As for the eyes, to you think Harry's vision problems (glasses) are > connected with his scar? Geoff: I've always assumed that it was something he inherited from James who wore glasses; he appears to have many of James' physical characteristics - people keep reminding him that he looks very much like his father and he makes the selfsame mistake in POA. From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 07:08:15 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 07:08:15 -0000 Subject: Wizarding Professions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108464 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "starlandcolleen" wrote: > Carol wrote: > > > If we take as canon that Harry heard James' voice in the > > Boggart!Dementor scene with Lupin, then both Lily and James were > > at home in Godric's Hollow with baby Harry on Halloween--which > > they would not have been if one or both were teaching at Hogwarts. > > > > Whatever they were doing, I don't think it involved teaching--or > > being an auror. > Colleen: > I have been thinking alot on this subject. What were their > occupations? And a larger question; what kinds of occupations do > wizards have if they don't work for Gringotts or the MoM or teach at > Hogwarts, etc... In the mentions of career counselling, it is all > magical work. Where do wizards buy their groceries? Are there > butchers, grocers, or farmers among them? Or do they trade with > muggles? If so, it must be through Gringott's. But what good would > wizard gold be to muggles? The only place I've ever heard of wizards > shopping is Diagon Alley. Where do they got their "regular" clothes > i.e. jeans. Just wondering. Asian_lovr2: To Carol's point, JKR has already said that James inherited enough money that he didn't need a regular job. Once you have a pile of money usually what you become is a 'businessman'; you invest in opportunities as they come up. Example; you might help a merchant, say the potions supply shop, purchase a large shipment. In return, for using your money, the mechant would return your money plus give you a percent of the profit. Typically, rich people like James or Lucius make money off of 'investments', rather than a specific occupation or paid labor. You know the old saying, it takes money to make money. To Colleen's point, yes, indeed I think there is a full range of businesses and occupations in the wizard world that parallel the muggle world. There are wizard farmers, but they use spells and charms instead of tractors and plows. There are magical butcher shops, and bakeries, just as there are wizard ice cream shops, sidewalk cafes, inns, pubs, clothing stores, joke shops, etc.... I believe that there are businesses that funnel goods and produce into the wizard world from the muggle world. If I were a wizard who married a muggle whose father happen to be a fresh produce broker, I would be foolish if I didn't start a small neighborhood produce shop that was actually a front business for diverting goods into the wizard world. I don't see why there can't be muggle/magic owned businesses just as I describe in a variety of product areas. However, I'm not saying it's one or the other, magical farmer OR muggle/magic 'front' businesses. I don't see any reason why their can't be both. As far as the money, we already know the Gringott's exchanges currency just like any other bank. We know that the silver goblets that Sirius has in his house were the finest Goblin wrought silver; common goods made by magical beings. So, reasonable there must be common goods crafted by other magical people using magical methods. On the surface, we see what appears to be a limited number of jobs. But, if we look below the surface, we see that for every surface job, there are hundreds of job backing it up. Consider everything that necessary to run Fortescue's ice cream parlor. First, he needs a building, which in turn, needs things like floor tile, kitchen fixtures, counter tops, paint, etc.... Once he has the store front, he need to fill it with counters, tables, chairs, cold storage cupboards, etc... Then he neeeds mixing bowls, spoons, forks, cups, bowls, cones, fruit, fruit flavored and other flavoring syrups, chocolate, nuts, cherries, cookies, etc.... All that has to come from somewhere and there is no reason why it can't be made or sold by wizards. Another good example, Fred and George's Joke shop; let's look down the road several years and assume the business is very successfull. Fred and George aren't going to have time to make everything themselves. So, the will have a whole factory full of people; probably several factories. One that specializes in fireworks. In that factory, one person will work on rockets, another on Cathrine wheels, another on firecrackers, another on complex airborne displays. Just the fireworks factory alone will probably have many many emplyoyees. Then the joke part of the business. Some guy will sit on an assembly line all day long enchanting trick wands, another guy will form the wands from sticks of wood, etc... etc.... In another department, a whole crew of people will make trick sweets. We already know there are Importers and Exporters, Ali Basheer wants to start importing flying carpets. And, we can safely assume that a full range of magical goods travel into and out of the country. When you look deeper than the surface, you must see that there are hundreds and hundreds of different jobs available in the wizard world. Just a thought. Steve/asian_lovr2 From sad1199 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 07:23:13 2004 From: sad1199 at yahoo.com (sad1199) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 07:23:13 -0000 Subject: Lily WAS muggle-born and what happened in CoS. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108465 sad1199 here: I've been reading through 1-5 again and found some answers and some questions. I'm reading the U.S. Scholastic version Chamber of Secrets-1999. In regards to Lily's family. Page 316 "No one knows why you lost your powers when you attacked me," Harry said abruptly. "I don't know myself. But I know why you couldn't kill(italicized) me. Because my mother died to save me. My common Muggle-born(italicized) mother," he added shaking with suppressed rage. So, reading this, I believe we know that Lily's parents were muggles. If she had some wizard (or Elvin! I really like this!) blood somewhere in her ancestry, it was NOT her parents. As for what Harry learns in CoS. Page 333 (Dumbledore speaking)- snip-"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(italicized)" said Dumbledore, beaming once more. "Which makes you very different(italicized) from Tom Riddle. It's our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." So, reading this, I believe that what Harry is beginning to learn in CoS is that because of who he is, he is already stronger than Voldemort. Remember what his boggart is in PoA? Fear. Not Voldemort. In GoF, even after facing him 3 times before, Harry is not as afraid of Voldemort as he should be, I think he is more angry because of the death of Cedric than anything. And at the end of OotP Harry's heart and his LOVE for Sirius is what stops Voldemort from overtaking him again. I don't have 3-5 in front of me so can't give the exact words. Now, a question. I have read these books through at least 5 times and I am an intelligent person but! I still don't understand WHY Dobby tried to prevent Harry from returning to Hogwarts. I mean, obviously, Dobby overheard his master talking about the diary and knew(?) he was going to give it to Ginny(or was that just luck that she got it?) and Dobby knew(?) who Tom Riddle was when most of the wizards in WW don't even know. Does this tell us that Lucius Malfoy is MUCH closer to Voldemort than JKR has let on so far? Someone posted about a passage from Lucius' house to Hogwarts, is there direct canon on this or speculation? AND house elves are obviously more intelligent than given credit for if Dobby knew who Harry even was. Wait, it says that house elves are intelligent, right? I am just very confused about the whole Dobby thing, any help would be appreciated. Have a Happy Love Filled day sad1199 From patientx3 at aol.com Mon Aug 2 07:51:32 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 07:51:32 -0000 Subject: Just a comment about Lupin's malady. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108466 Lorel wrote: >> I get the sense that the theme or device of Time isn't played out yet. The rescue in PoA provided the setup, and the clock in the DoM was a reminder as well as (IMO) a hint of more to come. I just *really* hope there's more to it than a cheesy "out." << vmonte: >> Yeah, I agree with you, it's definitely going to return. Be warned though, some HPFGU's get really upset when you start talking about time-travel. For some reason it's ok to have theories that are not based on canon as long as they are not about time-travel. << HunterGreen: I don't know about them returning, personally I think the whole thing in PoA with Harry saving himself from the dementors and rescuing Sirius and Buckbeak and all that was enough. Sort of like the huge polyjuice plot in GoF being enough use of polyjuice as a narrative device. Time-travel *theories* I don't mind though (as long as it doesn't involve one character growing into another character like the Ron/Dumbledore thing). The theory (put forth in the craziness following the OotP release last summer by a poster I don't remember the name of) involving Harry being Voldemort's father, thus explaining the physical similarities between them was at the very least an interesting read. (btw, please no one ask me questions about the theory, its not mine, so I wouldn't know how to defend it) From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 2 07:54:01 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 03:54:01 -0400 Subject: another wacho theory Message-ID: <001501c47865$e17333b0$9cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108467 Laurie "But haven't we already seen a possible instance of time travel to the future? How did Greg and Feorge know that Ireland would win but Bulgaria would get the snitch? (GOF) Could have been a lucky guess or *yup* you got it - travel to the future. I like the idea even though its a little far out!" DuffyPoo: Another perfect example of how some people here read far more into the books that I do. I thought F&G were making a bet on the most obvious 'odds against' to get the most bang for their buck if they won. They were talking the game over with Charlie the night before at dinner. "It's got to be Ireland,' said Charlie thickly, through a mouthful of potato. "They flattened Peru in the semi-finals." "Bulgaria have got Viktor Krum, though,' said Fred. "Krum's one decent player, Ireland have got seven." I can just hear F&G having this conversation on their way up to bed: F: 'what's the weirdest thing that can happen as the outcome of this game?' G: 'Ireland win but Krum get the snitch.' F: 'we'll bet on that then if we get the chance, we can make loads of money. That joke shop's as good as ours!' [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sad1199 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 07:56:28 2004 From: sad1199 at yahoo.com (sad1199) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 07:56:28 -0000 Subject: SHIP:Hermione's feelings for Ron in OotP (Was: Re: Harry's first Kiss) In-Reply-To: <20040801220354.41062.qmail@web52208.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108468 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kelly Duhon wrote: > > In message #108439, udder_pen_dragon wrote: > > > The above is a summary of part of OotP UK paperback Pages 406/407 towards the end of the Chapter The Eye of the Snake. > > Now my comment: Hermione is a very bright girl and she knows that subtle and Ron W are a no, no. So what does this mean besides Ron you are my friend but that is all and possibly Harry I wont cry if you kiss me? > > > > Kelly replies: > > I always thought Ron's very sharp reply was jealousy. Maybe I am misreading, but it seems to me that RW and HG both have feelings for one another but are not ready to admit it, maybe even to themselves. sad1199replies: I think we as adults are putting too many adult emotions into the H/R/H relationship. My daughter who is fourteen and can identify with Hermione says it's Ron that has Hermione's affection. My daughter also has two close friends who are boys. The boys are not best friends but they all hang out in the same group. My daughter has known one of the boys since 4 th grade and thinks of him as a brother (H/H). The other boy she has known since 6 th grade and just at the end of their 9 th grade year at an assembly she said to me "There's Aaron. He's is so cute but, I could never tell him I like him." Now, it happens that I work with Aaron's mother (weird, huh?) and she says to me "Aaron always thought that Desiree was out of his league and was afraid to tell her that he liked her." Over the summer they have been talking on the phone (for hours! Thank God for second phone lines!) but they still don't tell each other how they feel because they are only 14 and 15 years old (R/H). We as adults are much more aware of our feelings and know how to handle and go forth on them. Most teenagers are just as confused about how they feel as we are about the relationship between H/R/H. So, I am agreeing with this post, I guess that it will Hermione and Ron together and Harry, either alone like Sirius or with some one else. And as I hope for my daughter also, wa-a-a-a-ay in the future. Have a Happy Loved Filled Day sad1199 From patientx3 at aol.com Mon Aug 2 08:09:41 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 08:09:41 -0000 Subject: [Just a comment about Lupin's malady. In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.2.20040801223500.016e8ca8@mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108469 Lissa wrote: >>The trust thing... oh, I have TONS of ideas about that. 1.) How long did Sirius actually suspect Lupin? That would be my first question. They'd known there was a spy in the Order, and it was someone close to James and Lily. But coming to the conclusion that it was Lupin had to have been very painful for Sirius. He also may have had a wider circle of suspects that kept getting killed off until he was forced in the last week or so to narrow it down to Peter or Lupin.<< HunterGreen: I never really thought about it that way...I suppose it could have just been that Lupin was really close to the Potters, and hadn't been killed by Voldemort yet, so *perhaps* that's enough to suspect him. However, I do think it was rather dense of Sirius to not suspect Peter at all (from all indications in PoA, Peter being the spy came right out of the clear blue sky to him). His animagus form is a *rat* for goodness sakes! >> 2.) Did Sirius actually say anything? I'm inclined to think no. In the Shrieking Shack scene in PoA, Lupin has to confirm that Sirius thought he was the spy. He also brushes it off pretty quickly. Now, I know Lupin is overly forgiving, but if he's been nursing a grudge about Sirius thinking he was the spy for 12 years, he's not going to be so quick to forgive. << Well, he comes up with that explanation so quickly that I assume the thought had occured to him before. If you thought someone was a spy, I can't imagine it would be wise to *tell* them they're under suspicion. However, you bring up a good point here, Lupin comes to grips with Sirius, James and Lily keeping something rather big from him because they thought he was a spy really fast, doesn't he? If ESE! Lupin is true, that's exactly how he'd react (how can he be offended about being thought a spy if he is one?). I think there had to be more than just 'narrowing down' that went into Sirius' choice to urge James and Lily to use Peter as the secret- keeper versis Lupin (of course, as a theory suggests, they *did* use Lupin, they just didn't tell Sirius in case *he* was the spy and figured it would be easy for Voldemort to break Peter, and it would be a good cover for him...but perhaps its better not to get into *that* here). Lupin would be the clear choice here, I just can't see Sirius sitting down and trying to decide between Lupin and Peter being the spy. Lupin was almost as close to him as James was, there had to be a reason he suspected him (if ESE!Lupin was acting odd, for example...). >>I also love the suggestion that Lupin's the one who took the picture of Lily, James, and Sirius. That just made me smile. << Thank you (o; For some reason I see Lupin as the type who would rather *take* a picture than be in one. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 2 08:08:59 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 04:08:59 -0400 Subject: The Prophecy's half fulfilled Message-ID: <002301c47867$f747a9d0$9cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108470 Meidbh "Good point - I like it but I'm not convinced yet. Bear with me here I don't have the books to hand... If Lily dies before VM attacks Harry (did it happen this way?) Then - at the time Harry is attacked it is he and he alone deflecting the curse, whether through some innate power of his own OR (as VM says above) through the protection conferred on him by Lily's sacrifice. She made the sacrifice, she cast the spell, but Harry received the power to deflect VMs attack (albeit unwittingly). Harry had the power. What do you think?" DuffyPoo: I'm not trying to convince anybody except perhaps maybe myself. Oh, and shame on you for not having the books handy. ;-) However, I think it is still Lily's *sacrifice* that deflected the curse. I'm not in the camp that believes there was a spell cast here by Lily. It is the mere fact, the 'old magic,' of her dying to save her son. It put a protection on and around him like a bubble. The effect of that sacrifice was still in HP, still viable, until LV removed 'that obstacle' in GoF when he used HP's blood for the rebirthing potion, but it is totally Lily's sacrifice that saved baby Harry. As an aside, which I probably shouldn't do, if LV went after James first, which he apparently did (or so the books say), why on earth didn't James AK LV? LV was trying to get his son. Whether James had any idea LV was going to kill him, or merely take him to use in some other way (train up to be the next generation LV?), I just don't understand why James didn't AK the big guy. He fought, and he fought bravely, the AK, since the prophecy, may not have 'killed' LV (the reason I think DD didn't AK LV in the Atrium, or part of the reason) but it certainly would have slowed him down enough that they could have escaped with baby Harry and found another place to hide, using a more...um....reliable secret keeper. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 2 08:19:07 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 04:19:07 -0400 Subject: Werewovles as teachers (was Re: Flitwick for HBP) Message-ID: <002c01c47869$61e1be60$9cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108471 -RowanGF "Or is there a WW university we have yet to hear about? That might provide the opportunity to teach without exposing inexperienced and vulnerable children to a werewolf. But it would also risk greater chance of his condition being discovered by his students since presumably university level DADA classes would be full of students who have been successful with NEWTS in that subject and could spot a werewolf a mile off. " DuffyPoo: Hasn't JKR said there are no wizard universities? I think someone asked in hopes that there would be more than 7 books and we'd get to see the trio off to further their education. We also have no evidence of it from the books. Aurors go straight to Auror training for three years. The kids, in their 5th year, are only looking at career brochures not university stuff. Jen said: "I think Lupin was a teacher before Hogwarts, in a relatively obscure wizard school, where he learned a tremendous amount about DADA and dark creatures. Some place below the radar, where being a werewolf wouldn't garner so much attention (the school equivalent of the Hog's Head in other words!).>snip>Entropy suggested Lupin might be from Eastern Europe, perhaps even royalty, and that's where the HBP comes in. So maybe the school he taught in was back home." DuffyPoo again: I also, for some reason, don't think he'd have the same difficulty teaching somewhere like Durmstrang. They teach the Dark Arts, according to Malfoy, not just this 'defence rubbish.' Lupin may not have been a Dark Arts teacher in his previous position, but may have learned a lot about defending the Dark Arts while he was there. It must be a lot different school than Hogwarts, Malfoy Sr wanted to send Draco there....but then, that was partly because Dumbledore has such a different position on blood status than Malfoy Sr. Would Durmstrang take a half-blood teacher like Remus? Do you have to put your blood-status on your application for employment? Remus is a pretty good liar by this point I'm not sure he wouldn't put down pure-blood just to get a job. ;-) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From patientx3 at aol.com Mon Aug 2 08:22:04 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 08:22:04 -0000 Subject: The Prophecy's half fulfilled In-Reply-To: <002301c47867$f747a9d0$9cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108472 DuffyPoo wrote: >> As an aside, which I probably shouldn't do, if LV went after James first, which he apparently did (or so the books say), why on earth didn't James AK LV? << HunterGreen: Perhaps for the same reason that the DEs didn't use AK on any of the kids in the DoM (when they knew who it was that had the prophecy). It must just take more energy to summon an AK than a simple stunning or disarming spell. Voldemort perhaps didn't intend on killing James at all, and only did so because James engaged him in battle (which is why the protection didn't come from James). Any of of the other less high-profile spells used in battle probably are easier to aim, and take less energy to use. After Voldemort had been knocked out then James would have had a chance to AK him...alas Voldemort was too quick for him, and it didn't happen that way (we don't know that Voldemort wasn't using the same tactic, though I think he wasn't). LV was trying to get his son. Whether James had any idea LV was going to kill him, or merely take him to use in some other way (train up to be the next generation LV?), I just don't understand why James didn't AK the big guy. He fought, and he fought bravely, the AK, since the prophecy, may not have 'killed' LV (the reason I think DD didn't AK LV in the Atrium, or part of the reason) but it certainly would have slowed him down enough that they could have escaped with baby Harry and found another place to hide, using a more...um....reliable secret keeper. From patientx3 at aol.com Mon Aug 2 08:26:05 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 08:26:05 -0000 Subject: Werewovles as teachers (was Re: Flitwick for HBP) In-Reply-To: <002c01c47869$61e1be60$9cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108473 DuffyPoo wrote: >>Would Durmstrang take a half-blood teacher like Remus? Do you have to put your blood-status on your application for employment? Remus is a pretty good liar by this point I'm not sure he wouldn't put down pure-blood just to get a job. ;-) << HunterGreen: Perhaps it only mattered that he was a pure-blood wizard underneath the werewolf-ness. Certainly being a 'half-blood' because of being bitten by a werewolf is not as bad as being *born* one (at least in the eyes of those who care about things like that). Now if Lupin *lied*, then it doesn't matter if Durmstrang cares about werewolves-as-teachers or not, because they wouldn't know about it, now would they? (of course, I wonder how on earth he would hide it) From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 2 08:52:52 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 04:52:52 -0400 Subject: Remember when Harry claimed he was Neville Longbottom on the Knight Bus? Message-ID: <003901c4786e$18e39440$9cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108474 Griffin782002 said: >>>I really do not understand why Neville should be the one in the phophecy. What is Dumbledore say to Harry in the end? "I am sorry Harry but the prophecy wasn't for you but for Neville. And I am sorry for losing your parents because of a mistake." <<< DuffyPoo: Exactly! Dumbledore has made a huge whopping mistake by reading the circumstantial evidence as 'fact'. HP didn't lose his parents because of a mistake. HP lost his parents because LV was going to kill every child that could possibly fulfill the part of the prophecy he knew "born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies". HP and NL fulfilled that part of the prophecy when they were both born at the end of July, 1980. LV started with HP, because, thanks to Wormtail, he knew where to find HP and the Longbottoms were still hidden from him. He was thwarted there by Lily's sacrifice. The 'prophecy' itself wasn't 'for' anyone. It was for a child (male) born to parents who thrice defied LV, born as the seventh month dies...etc. It could very well have been, that when the prophecy was made, there was no one who had thrice defied LV and that part only came into play when L&J and F&A did so. It 'became' about HP when LV was flattened by Lily's sacrificing herself to save her son. DD, one of the few people, I think, who knew the full prophecy, immediately jumped to the conclusion that HP now fulfilled it. The Keeper of the HoP jumped to the same conclusion because HP lived and LV apparently did not and re-labelled the orb (did he know the full prophecy or only that it was about a baby about to be born with the power to vanquish LV? We don't know.). All the WW at large knows is that HP survived and LV is apparently gone, they don't know HP has 'fulfilled' any prophecy because they don't know there 'is' a prophecy. I've said before that I find it strange that people like DD have so badly underestimated LV that they think he 'chose' one of the two kids who fulfilled the first part of the prophecy, and went specifically to kill that child. I don't believe that for a second. LV knows, or is probably pretty sure, that he didn't hear all of the prophecy. His spy was chucked out while Trelawney was still speaking after all. He knows cannot risk 'choosing' the wrong child. He would have gone to kill both kids, at the very least (I think he would have killed more to be on the 'safe side' in case the parents of some other kid, born at the end of July, ended up defying him three times. My DH said in LV's shoes, he would have killed every kid born between mid-Jul and mid-Aug just to be sure he got the right one) Thwarted by Lily's sacrifice, LV didn't get the chance to try to kill Neville. He only started at the Potters because, thanks to Wormtail, he knew where the Potters lived. I'm not saying the prophecy IS about Neville. All I'm saying is that as long as Neville remains alive and untested there is still the possibility that he can be the one to fulfill the prophecy. It can still be Harry. All the 'facts' DD has right now to support his belief that it IS Harry, are circumstantial evidence. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk Mon Aug 2 09:10:26 2004 From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 10:10:26 +0100 (BST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: SHIP:Hermione's feelings for Ron in OotP (Was: Re: Harry's first Kiss) In-Reply-To: <20040801220354.41062.qmail@web52208.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040802091026.80133.qmail@web25308.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108475 Kelly Duhon wrote: In message #108439, udder_pen_dragon wrote: The above is a summary of part of OotP UK paperback Pages 406/407 towards the end of the Chapter The Eye of the Snake. Now my comment: Hermione is a very bright girl and she knows that subtle and Ron W are a no, no. So what does this mean besides Ron you are my friend but that is all and possibly Harry I wont cry if you kiss me? Kelly replies: I always thought Ron's very sharp reply was jealousy. Maybe I am misreading, but it seems to me that RW and HG both have feelings for one another but are not ready to admit it, maybe even to themselves. Udderpd again Hi Kelly. Of course I must agree with you that Ron is jelous of Harry. His fame aquired when Voldemort tried to kill him. His fortune aquired when the same Dark Lord killed his parents. His being entered in the TriWizard Tournement where once again Lord V first used his blood to reserect himself then guess what, he tried to kill him again. Do I need to go on? Now, surprise surprise, he's jelous that Harry and Hermione may have kissed, he has no regard for what he has that Harry would willingly give his all for, I think that Ron needs to get out more and grow up. Any way you ducked answering my question. BTW I am a 63year old man (Obselete Old Dingbat) TTFN Udder Pen Dragon ________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! Yahoo! Groups Links --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From strawberry at jamm.com Mon Aug 2 09:25:00 2004 From: strawberry at jamm.com (Jenni A.M. Merrifield) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 09:25:00 -0000 Subject: SHIP:Hermione's feelings for Ron in OotP (Was: Re: Harry's first Kiss) In-Reply-To: <20040801214834.83365.qmail@web25306.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108476 Gahhhh!!!! >Sploosh!< Help me! {splash, glub, gurrgle} I'm being *gASp* {glub} sucked into a {gurggle, blub} SHIPping thread! {gurggle, blub, glub} {blub} {glub} {gurgle...} [It's too late! I'm lost!] Jenni wrote: > * Ron definitely likes Hermione > * Herminoe thinks of Harry as her best friend, thinks she likes > Krum, and really actually likes Ron; udder_pen_dragon said: Lets start with Krum, Hermione likes him and that is all, she spent all her time with him talking about Harry. Jenni replies: When I said "thinks she likes Krum" I really meant she "thinks she *likes* Krum" (As an aside, I wish there was a word in English that fell between "like" and "love". It would be nice not to have to emphasize or qualify "Like" to get the point across.) Here's my basic take on that relationship: First, Krum asked her to the Yull Ball showing that he, at least, noticed that she was a girl and I know that, when was a 14 year old, if an older boy had "noticed" me in that way I would have almost instantly decided I "liked" him simply because he "liked" me, unless I already knew he was a complete skank. Over the rest of the year she continued to associate with him and he continued to favour her (hence her appearance in task II). Since GoF she has continued to write to him and possibly even visited him over the summer. Again, when I was in my mid-teens, there were a few "long distance" boys I met (usualy over summer holidays) and then continued to write to and, always, this was for teen-romance related reasons. I just wouldn't have bothered if I hadn't had a romantic interest in the fellow. So, Hermione thinks she *likes* Krum because he *liked* her during GoF and has since maintained the relationship long-distance. But, he is long distance, and while absence may make the heart grow fonder in many cases, it can also grant perspective and thereby allow one or both parties the opportunity to recognize how much or how little there really is to the relationship. udder_pen_dragon said: Next Harry, Ron and Harry are her best friends, you like your best friends. IMO Hermione almost worships Harry and tries to mother him, Romance she's not letting on if she did I think that Harry at this time would run. Jenni replies: Exactly my point. Harry is one of her two best friends, and so she worries about his welfare. If she has any romantic feelings for him I haven't seen that in anything she's done or said. All my life I always had far more male than female friends, even in early highschool. I always worried about them and their lives - how things were going at home, at school and in their relationships. My reading of why Hermione always filled Harry in on "Cho details" (like the fact that Cho is always crying or why she behaved the way she did in the tea house) was because she wanted him to have all the facts so he could make the best of his relationship. udder_pen_dragon said: Yes I agree [that Ron likes Hermione], [Ron] also likes Harry the three of them are best friends. Hermione is the only girl Ron ever talks socialy with. Even when Harry fixed Ron up with Padma P he never talked to her or Luna on the train even. udder_pen_dragon also said: Now Ron, I have agreed that Hermione and Ron are friends and I will say that they are no more than that. Going to the Yule Ball he tries to treat her the same way as he tries to treat Ginny and niether of them are having any, Ron treats Hermione like a sister he knows no different, he doesn't talk socialy to other girls. (sorry to repeat myself) Jenni replies: Well, I also meant that I think Ron definitely *likes* Hermione, (i.e., more than as a sister), only he hasn't really accepted it himself. Just the fact that he went out and bought her perfume for Christmas is a good sign that he has started thinking of her as a girl and there are definitely examples throughout GoF and OoP where Ron exhibits the signs of a boy who is jealous about the actual or percieved romantic behaviour of a girl he isn't actually dating. One example is in the passage you summarized and that I've quoted below. --=+=-- 'Oh,' said Ron, his smile fading slightly. 'Are you that bad at kissing?' 'Dunno,' said Harry, who hadn't considered this, and immediately felt rather worried. 'Maybe I am.' 'Of course you're not,' said Hermione absently, still scribbling away at her letter. 'How do you know?" said Ron very sharply. 'Because Cho spends half her time cying these days,' said Hermione vaguely. 'She does it at mealtimes, in the loos, all over the place.' --=+=-- (OoP, Canadian Edition, p405 in chapter "The Eye of the Snake") That sharp "How do you know?" is exactly the type of interrogation a jealous guy makes when he suddenly thinks that the girl he's jealous about has dated or kissed someone. In other words, he's suddenly worried that the reason Hermione knows that Harry isn't a bad kisser is because she's actually kissed him at some point. As for Hermione's initial response, JKR's use of the term "absently" to describe how Hermione replies indicated to me that she was just saying something to help her friend feel better by assuring him there was nothing for him to worry about in the kissing department. She is really more focused on the letter that she's writing, but worries enough about how her friend feels that she's says something On the other hand, when it comes to how Hermione feels about Ron... Well, as you point out she often says things that sound nasty or mean on the surface, but there are other things said or done in passing that suggest that there is probably more than meets the eye to her words. Let me quote some more from after the above passage in Oop: --=+=-- 'You'd think a bit of kissling would cheer her [Cho] up,' said Ron, grinning. 'Ron,' said Hermione in a dignified voice, dipping the point of her quill into her inkpot, 'you are the most insensitive wart I have ever had the misfortune to meet.' 'What's that supposed to mean?' said Ron indignantly, 'What sort of person cries while someone's kissing them?' [... Hermione explains how Cho feels to Harry and Ron...] A slightly stunned silence greeted the end of this speech, then Ron said, 'One person can't feel all that at once, the'd explode. 'Just because you've got the emotional range of a teaspoon doesn't mean we all have,' said Hermione nastily, picking up her quill again. --=+=-- (OoP, Canadian Edition, p405,406, in chapter "The Eye of the Snake") Even after only one reading through the series my brain recognized Hermione's various sniping and put-downs as one of the traditional signs of a girl who likes a boy but either doesn't want to admit it to herself or the boy just doesn't seem to "get it." Hermione's first comment, in response to Ron saying that a bit of kissing ought to cheer Cho up, wasn't actually nasty so much as a general purpose put down. Note how JKR uses the phrase "in a dignified voice" to describe Hermione's response. It's exactly the kind of tone I'd take with some guy who said something that clearly showed he was thinking with a lower part of his anatomy rather than his brain. I mean really -- Hermione is absolutely correct that Ron's comment is rather insensitive (and also rather typical of a 14 year old boy, as was the "pumping fist" action he made after Harry admitted to kissing Cho). The second response was obviously intended to be nasty, but the question is what would make Hermione want to be deliberately nasty to Ron? He is, after all, one of her two best friends -- most people aren't nasty to their best friends for no obvious reason. It really doesn't make a lot of sense does it? On the other hand, when a boy you kind of *like* has just said something that confirms he has a miniscule emotional range, a girl can't be blamed for getting a little bit frustrated and lashing out with a nasty comment or two. And in that context it makes perfect sense for Hermione to say something nasty to Ron. Finally, another quote from a bit later in the book: --=+=-- 'Well, you see,' said Hermione, with the patient air of someone explaining that one plus one equals two to an over-emotional toddler, 'you shouldn't have tolder her that you wanted to meet me halfway through your date.' 'But, but,' spluttered Harry, 'but -- you told me to meet you at twelve and to bring her along, how was I supposed to do that without telling her?' 'You should have told her differntly,' said Hermione, still with that maddeningly patient air. 'You should have said it was really annoying, but I'd /made/ you promise to come along to the Three Broomsticks, and 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,' Hermione added as an afterthought. 'But I don't think you're ugly,' said Harry, bemused. Hermione laughed 'Harry, you're worse than Ron ... well, no, you're not,' she sighed, as Ron himself came stumping into the Hall splatterd with mud and looking grumpy. --=+=-- (OoP, Canadian Edition, p504-5, in chapter "Seen and Unforseen") For me, the key is that after laughing and saying Harry is worse than ron, she pauses, says no he isn't really and sighs. I mean, why does she sigh? She's just spent a lot of breath explaining to Harry exactly what he should have done to make his date with Cho run smoother (another example of her being a friend to him - here's how you should have handled that, now remember it for next time), so she's probably not sighing for Harry. (If you've got romantic designs on a boy you don't tell them how they can work out this type of thing with another girl.) To me, I see the sigh reflecting the fact that she does have "more than friend" feelings for Ron and the fact the he just doesn't "understand" how girls feel and act, and probably wouldn't recognize that a girl *likes* him if she came up to him and said so. udder_pen_dragon also said: Now my comment: Hermione is a very bright girl and she knows that subtle and Ron W are a no, no. So what does this mean besides Ron you are my friend but that is all and possibly Harry I wont cry if you kiss me? Jenni again I hope my comments above help explain why I, at least, think that the passage you quote means exactly the opposite of what you've suggested. So, while she may know that subtle and Ron W don't go together, since she really hasn't fully admitted how much she feels for him to herself, she isn't really trying to be subtle. In this particular passage it she's really more frustrated with him than anything else. And the "absently" and "vaguely" descriptors on her comments to Harry about him not kissing badly, is nothing more than an attempt to making him feel better by giving him some more information about Cho and not any indication that she thinks about him kissing her. Jenni Who really can't believe she let herself get sucked into this enough to actually do the research necessary to analyse exactly why she feels the way she feels about who is romantically inclined towards who... ;-) From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 2 09:20:16 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 05:20:16 -0400 Subject: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry Message-ID: <004201c47871$ed001660$9cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108477 Meidbh: "Why did Voldemort pick Harry and not Neville? JK Rowling replies -> Dumbledore explains this in 'Order of the Phoenix'. Voldemort identified more with the half-blood boy and therefore decided he must be the greater risk." DuffyPoo: But Dumbledore is explaining only what he believes to be the answer (and so is JKR. She's not about to give away the Neville connection if there is one and it's going to be the 'gotcha' at the end of book 7. Notice she didn't say "I" explained this in OotP...she said DD explained it. It opens the door for DD being wrong in his explanation.). Dumbledore has jumped to the wrong conclusion based on the circumstantial evidence at the moment. (I really do need to post all my answers in one long e-mail). It simply doesn't make sense that someone as vile, as evil as LV would choose one kid over the other and risk making the wrong choice. Even if LV did think HP was the greater risk, he was still going to kill both kids, at least (no doubt in my mind) but was thwarted by Lily's sacrifice. He was only at the Potters first because he knew where to find them, thanks to their poor choice in selecting a Secret-Keeper. It looks like LV chose HP (circumstantial evidence) to DD because LV was thwarted at the Potter home. Harry lived, LV 'did not' Harry is the one and was chosen because he is a half blood. It's all circumstantial evidence. Especially since Neville is still alive. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 2 09:52:28 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 05:52:28 -0400 Subject: Neville and the Prophecy Message-ID: <004f01c47876$6d7f9b90$9cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108478 From: (Cathy Drolet) DuffyPoo: > I think LV *was* focused on killing both kids, but at the time, he only knew where the Potters were, thanks to Wormtail. He'd worry about the Longbottom kid later. Once he was turned into vapour at the Potters, via Lily's sacrifice, LV, knowing only the first part of the prophecy 'the one with the power to vanquish the DL approaches...blah blah blah' is wrongly convinced, that Harry Potter is the one the prophecy refers to. LV, like some of us, equates vapourness with vanquishment. Oh, if that kid did that to me, then he must be the one. Neville is now totally off his radar. LV hasn't yet figured out that if it was Lily's sacrifice that saved HP, not anything special or 'powerful' about him, that HP may not be the one in the prophecy at all. It may be the Longbottom kid. but right now, Neville, as I said above, is totally off LV's radar, because he still believes HP to be 'the one.' < >>charme: I'm sorry, but I can't figure out what you're trying to say here, other than LV may have been focused on killing both kids initially. Ok, I buy that. The context in which you're framing your argument for Neville "being the one" I don't buy at all, since I believe LV made his choice initially - I believe that JKR promotes the concept that you have to live with the decision throughout the septology. I also think that Neville is a red herring of sorts; I think he's important to the main plot, but vague enough to generate this type of theory you're trying to promote.<< DuffyPoo now: I don't believe LV made a 'choice' initially. Even IF he thought that HP was the greater risk, he was going to kill at least two kids, HP and NL. Because LV was vapourized at GH, LV, mistakenly, believes HP alone fulfills the prophecy "the one with the power to vanquish". But LV admits, later, that he forgot the power of the 'woman's foolish sacrifice.' He knew then, at the Graveyard, that it was Lily not Harry that thwarted him, it was the sacrifice, not HP's power that saved him...and just to prove it he's going to kill Harry then and there, but then we get the Priori Incantatem thing, a quick duck around a grave stone, grab the cup and gone. NOW more than ever, LV is going to kill Harry Potter. Just because he's been made a fool of in front of his DEs. NL is now totally out of LV's mind. He's never going to consider that kid again, or the possibility that he could also fulfill the prophecy, and did, in fact, fulfill the first part of the prophecy...the only part LV yet knows. I'm not 'trying to promote' any theory. I've said often enough that I'm not even sure I believe that Neville is going to end up being 'the one' at the end of book 7. All I'm saying is that Neville already fulfills the first part of the prophecy, and as long as he is alive (and untested) there is still the possibility that the prophecy does refer to him and not Harry Potter. > DuffyPoo: > PS - LV was trying to get the stone, that and that alone, until HP got in the way. He only said 'Kill him!' after Quirrill said he couldn't touch HP to get the stone and HP wasn't giving it up freely. > CoS - Until Ginny told TR about HP, he was none the wiser. The point of the diary was to re-open the CoS not kill HP (that may not have been the motive of LM in givng the diary to Ginny, however.) That came after, only after Ginny had told TR everything she knew about HP. > GoF - Yup, LV wanted HP and HP alone....because he is wrongly convinced, through circumstantial evidence, that HP is the kid from the prophecy. > OotP - LV was after the prophecy more than he was after HP. After LV found out he was working with dunderheads who kept saying they 'could' get the orb when they really couldn't, he had to lure HP to the DoM to get the orb for him. > charme: I believe that, regardless of the circumstances and actions surrounding it, each and every instance you pointed out above LV tried to kill Harry at the end. Hence my comment about consistency and reliability. I also disagree with your COS point - I believe that that is taken out of context in your view, but you're entitled to it just the same. I'm not convinced it's canon that Ginny told TR *everything* about Harry in the diary. If TR didn't have any memories of what he became (LV), he wouldn't know what he was capable of, would he? That's a very complex twist that has no tangible reliabe basis in canon (we didn't see what she wrote or what TR wrote back to her.) DuffyPoo now: Sorry, when I read you're consistently and reliably I read "he set about to" kill HP in each book and I don't believe he did, as stated above, he just ended up trying to kill him or wanting him killed eventually. It still doesn't point to the fact that HP is the one who fulfills the prophecy, only that LV believes HP is the one. No, we don't know what Ginny told TR, precisely, but we do have "You see, Ginny told me *all* about you, Harry, " said Riddle. "Your *whole* fascinating history," and "From everything Ginny had told me aout you, I knew you would go to any lengths to solve the mystery - particularly if one of your best friends was attacked. And Ginny had told me the whole school was buzzing because you could speak Parseltongue..." charme:"If TR didn't have any memories of what he became (LV), he wouldn't know what he was capable of, would he?" DuffyPoo again: We haven't ruled out what LM may have or may not have written in the diary. He obviously knew how it worked, or why would he give it to Ginny (or Harry, it that was what was initially intended) in the first place? Or for that matter, what LV may have added to the diary himself, before it was put into LM's hands. That aside, I think TR, at this point in his life, knows exactly where he is going and exactly what he will be capable of....he's already calling himself Lord Voldemort to his most intimate friends. (Who are that lot anyway, that's what I want to know.) Is he already planning to kill his father and grandparents? Already planning his reign of terror on the wizarding world? Already planning to overthrow DD in some way? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 2 09:58:19 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 05:58:19 -0400 Subject: Remember when Harry claimed he was Neville Longbottom on the Knight Bus? Message-ID: <005801c47877$3dacc270$9cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108479 > Cathy Drolet wrote: > > DuffyPoo: > > I know I post too much, but I had this very thought yesterday. A.J. "I nearly posted it too. Surely Harry's calling himself Neville Longbottom on the Knight Bus as the first name that popped into his mind, and Stan's repeated calling him that, is no random clue. I was actually surprised they left it out of the ... oops! I didn't say that! >;) Certainly, there is some underscoring of a link between them." DuffyPoo again: While re-reading PoA, I also noticed that HP had a dream, the night before the final Quidditch game against Slytherin. Harry dreamed he had overslept, and "Wood was yelling, 'Where were you? We had to use Neville instead!'" Another link/hint? I was surpised they left it out of the ... oops, as well. ;) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From strawberry at jamm.com Mon Aug 2 09:58:53 2004 From: strawberry at jamm.com (Jenni A.M. Merrifield) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 09:58:53 -0000 Subject: SHIP:Hermione's feelings for Ron in OotP (Was: Re: Harry's first Kiss) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108480 Jim Ferer wrote: If I gave a lady perfume and she termed it "unusual," I'd be bummed out. You have to add something to it to get anything better out of it. Jenni replies: Well, just goes to show what I know. I've always preferred more unusual perfumes - the typical cloying flowery stuff is just so boring. I guess I must have bummed out more than my fair share of past boyfriends. :-P -------------------- Jenni Again Sorry to reply to my own post but in doing the research necessary for my other recent response on this thread [*] my believe that Hermione actually liked the perfume that Ron gave her has been strengthened and I wanted to explain why. [*] I'm still not a SHIPper - I just needed to do the research to explain something to Udder Pendragon. At least, that's my story and I'm sticking to it! ;-) Okay, here are the two quotes that matter: --=+=-- They got up and dressed. They could hear the various inhabitants of the house calling 'Merry Christmas' to one another. On their way downstairs they met Hermione. 'Thanks for the book, Harry,' she said happily. 'I've been wanting that /New Theory of Numerology/ for ages! And that perfume's really unusual, Ron.' 'No problem,' said Ron. [...] --=+=-- Canadian Edition, OOp, p444, in chapter "Christmas on the Closed Ward" --=+=-- '/The Quibbler!/' she [Rita Skeeter] said, cackling. 'You think people will take him seriously if he's published in /The Quibbler?/' 'Some people won't,' said Hermione in a level voice. 'But the /Daily Prohet's/ version of the Azkaban breakout had some gaping holes in it. I think a lot of people will be wondering whether there isn't a better explanation of what happened, and if there's an alternative story available, even if it is published in a --' she glanced sideways at Luna, 'in a -- well, an /unusual/ magazine -- I think they might be rather keen to read it.' --=+=-- Canadian Edition, OOp, p501-2, in chapter "The Beetle at Bay" In the first quote, JKR puts absolutely no emphasis on the word "unsual" whereas, in the second quote, not only just she italicize it, but she very deliberately sets it off by having Hermione glance sideways at Luna and considers her words carefully. Additionally, in the first quote JKR uses the word "happily" to describe Hermione's inital tone when thanking Harry for his gift. JKR does not change this for the comment made to Ron and, if we were meant to think that Hermione did not like the perfume, I would have expected JKR to make this OBVIOUS, by doing something similar to what was done when Hermione was discussing the nature of /The Quibbler/. At the very least I would have expected to see Hermione's comment to Ron written as follows: --=+=-- 'Thanks for the book, Harry,' she said happily. 'I've been wanting that /New Theory of Numerology/ for ages! And that perfume's really ... ah, /unusual/, Ron.' --=+=-- Finally, Ron's response to Hermione's comment seems rather positive, sounding to be a "It was nothing, glad you liked it" sort of reply. This is not the response I'd expect to hear from Ron if Hermione had used the word "unusual" in a way that implied that she didn't like it. So, in short, the reasons why my brain is convinced that Hermione liked the perfume that she received from Ron at Christmas are that she was speaking happily when commenting on her prssents, she did not put any particular emphasis on the word "unusual" and Ron responded to her comments in a positive way. My brain also believes that Ron spent some time looking for a nice gift and deliberately selected an unusual perfume for her, which is another example showing that he *likes* her even if he hasn't really admitted it to himself yet. Jenni Who really, really, really isn't a SHIPper. Really. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 2 10:07:30 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 06:07:30 -0400 Subject: Werewolves as teachers Message-ID: <006101c47878$86425800$9cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108481 DuffyPoo: >>>> The name 'Professor R.J.Lupin' was stamped across one corner *in peeling letters*. He was obviously a Professor somewhere else before coming to Hogwarts, at least at some point since he graduated in 1978, or the letters wouldn't be peeling off his case. <<<<<<< Aggie: Bit of a twee theory but perhaps he wanted to be a teacher when he was at school, so when he finished he was bought the brief case as a graduation present. This was the first time he'd been able to use it!!! Did you mean 1978? He would only have been about 11!!! LOL! (Sorry, i'm nit picking!) DuffyPoo: Nitpicking as well...If this was the first time he'd been able to use it, why would the letters be peeling? ;-) Nope, I meant 1978. I was using the Lexicon that says Lupin was born in 1960 and attended Hogwarts from 1971 to 1978. I'm simply too lazy to try to figure it out myself - especially when those Lexicon people have already done the work. Is this incorrect? It also shows James as graduating in 1978 and I thought they were the same age? They took O.W.L.s at the same time, along with Sirius, Peter and Snape. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From crobocker at aol.com Mon Aug 2 01:29:26 2004 From: crobocker at aol.com (c_robocker) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 01:29:26 -0000 Subject: Either must die at the HAND of the other In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108482 Celestina wrote: > Someone posted their theory about this hand reference being that > the HAND of Harry or Voldemort is the ultimate weapon that would > destroy either. So please allow me to indulge once more on support > of this theory. > > 1. In GoF, we saw the effects of Priori Incantatem, so Harry's > and Voldemort's wands could never really work properly against each > other. So I assume any future wand duels would not be taking place > between the two. > > 2. In Gof, ch 1 The Riddle House, Voldemort makes a comment to > Wormtail that says "I will allow you to perform an essential task > for me, one that many of my followers would give their right hand > to perform...". Here is a literal reference to hands once more. Can I just add a little fuel to this theory - have you noticed all the hands on JKR's website? Particularly in the Rumors ads? There's a large one on the "Borgin and Burkes" where the "Hand of Glory" is for sale. Curious. CRobo, for what it's worth. :) From lorelei3dg at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 02:04:36 2004 From: lorelei3dg at yahoo.com (lorelei3dg) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 02:04:36 -0000 Subject: another wacko theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108483 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Peggy" wrote: > If they have a new toy that let's them see into the future by even > a few hours it may turn out to be a vital part of the defense in the > war against LV. You just might be on to something here! It would fit JKR's predilection for making casual mention of something that becomes much more important later. Ever since I read the description of the baby- headed Death Eater in the DoM, I've had a strong feeling that Time will play a significant role in future book(s). The idea was introduced in PoA, and then reinforced in OotP - it would make sense to have the Weasley Twins add their own special "flavor" to the mix. Lorel From larsonmart at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 04:18:26 2004 From: larsonmart at yahoo.com (Marty Larson) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 04:18:26 -0000 Subject: Death and Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108484 Erika: > I really don't think Snape will die. I think he will be badly > injured, and that Harry will save him. Maybe Snape will finally > have to admit that Harry is not all that bad. Along the lines of Harry and Snape's relationship and whether or not Snape dies - I think Harry and Snape will agree to disagree and never like each other. I do however see them accepting that they are both fighting Voldemort, and in a surprise move will be seen fighting together after the revelations about the backgrounds of James and Snape. I do recognize that this is pure specualtion. Both Harry and Snape then surviving to live in a "back to normal" WW. Also, in OoP, in the pensieve scene, we see that Snape removes "certain of his thoughts" Chap. 28 Snape's Worst Memory (p638 US Edition 2003). I find it interesting that the one memory Harry gets into involves his father. Now, of course, from the writer's perspective, it is a handy way to provide information. I also understand that Snape doesn't want Harry to see his humiliation, but isn't it curious that this is one of his worst memories that he wants to keep hidden? What about all the stuff that he is doing for DD, and his life prior to becoming Potions master - especially while a DE? Snape did not know that Harry would end up in the pensieve, since it was an interruption by Malfoy that called him away. Is it possible that he was trying to protect Harry from any information about his father? I doubt it, but what if it falls into a similiar category of "I'll do this (Save Harry's Life in PS/SS) for you and my debt will be paid." In addition, Snape removed memories three times at the first occlumency lesson (p 533 US Edtion, 2003). How many would he have had to remove by the time they reached the lesson mentioned above? Marty From Justine74 at aol.com Mon Aug 2 06:40:18 2004 From: Justine74 at aol.com (Justine74 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 02:40:18 EDT Subject: Harry n Easter Egg Message-ID: <20.2fa12b23.2e3f3bd2@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108485 Adi wrote: > I just wanted to ask why Harry feels so emotional when Ginny > hands him the easter egg sent my Mrs.Weasley in Book5? I think it could mean a lot of things, but when I first read that scene, I thought that Harry might be getting upset because in a weird "subconscious trigger" sort of way that the chocolate egg might have subconsciously reminded him of the Tournament where *Cedric* helps him figure out how to listen to the message in the golden egg, and of course, any memory of Cedric, even a subconscious one, could bring up all kinds of horrible feelings of sadness, since Harry is definitely tormented by nightmares and guilt and depression over what happened to Cedric. I had an acting teacher once who taught us how to find emotional triggers in the little details of our memories. So for example, the smell of carnations brings up feelings of sadness with me because my first strong memory of smelling carnations was at the wake and later the funeral of a very close family member. Hearing certain songs will make me feel happy and nostalgic because I will immediately remember hearing these songs when I was spending time with friends around the town swimming pool when I was a kid. Everybody has these weird little triggers. I definitely could be totally wrong, but I think it's possible that JKR made the egg an emotional trigger for Harry in that scene. Thanks, DJ From kempermentor at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 08:13:20 2004 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 08:13:20 -0000 Subject: Lily WAS muggle-born and what happened in CoS. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108486 sad1199 wrote: I've been reading through 1-5 again and found some answers and some questions. I'm reading the U.S. Scholastic version Chamber of Secrets- 1999. In regards to Lily's family. Page 316 "No one knows why you lost your powers when you attacked me," Harry said abruptly. "I don't know myself. But I know why you couldn't kill(italicized) me. Because my mother died to save me. My common Muggle-born(italicized)mother," he added shaking with suppressed rage. So, reading this, I believe we know that Lily's parents were muggles. If she had some wizard (or Elvin! I really like this!) blood somewhere in her ancestry, it was NOT her parents. Kemper responds: While the quote is canon, it is also from the POV of Harry, who has grown up with Petunia. She has not talked about her parents except to say how much they talked about Lily and how proud they were to have a witch in the family, and this she hasn't mentioned until his 11th birthday. Based on her behavior throughout the books I would guess that she has avoided speaking about her parents at all in front of Harry and especially in front of Vernon and Diddy. JKR has said in some interview (sorry, I don't have the link) that Lily's was from Muggle parentage. That seems an odd way to put it. Why not just come out and say "Lily's parents were Muggles"? My Webster's defines parentage as 'derivation or descent from parents or ancestors.' My theory is that Lily and Petunia mostly come from Muggles and that one of their parents was a Squib the other one a Muggle. Lily turns out to be a witch and Petunia turns out to be a Squiggle. Petunia, having a Squib in the family, is aware of the WW and knows that Dementors guard Azkaban and gets that Voldemort returning is bad for everyone. My theory expands further to what JKR has said about someone developing magic late in life... it's Petunia. She will (knowingly or ignorantly)use what she abhors most (magic) to protect what she love most (Dudley, and maybe Vernon). I don't think this theory is unreasonable. I'm open to reading some feedback. From gaylenekb at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 09:20:55 2004 From: gaylenekb at yahoo.com (Gaylene Bartlett) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 09:20:55 -0000 Subject: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108487 "meidbh" wrote: > > Why did Voldemort pick Harry and not Neville? > > > > JK Rowling replies -> Dumbledore explains this in 'Order of the > > Phoenix'. Voldemort identified more with the half-blood boy and > > therefore decided he must be the greater risk. > > > Aggie: (With evil grin - playing devil's advocate!) > That doesn't prove anything one way or the other! That's not JKR > saying that Harry's 'The One' - just reiterating *Dumbledore's* > belief! Knowing how 'cunning' she can be, this could still be a trick > answer! As I read it, DD believes that Harry must be "the one" because LV "marked" him as an equal -- isn't possible that Neville simply hasn't been marked YET? I do believe that there is more to Neville than meets the eye. Gaylene From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 2 10:47:34 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 06:47:34 -0400 Subject: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry Message-ID: <007a01c4787e$1f163ce0$9cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108488 > Aggie: (With evil grin - playing devil's advocate!) > That doesn't prove anything one way or the other! That's not JKR > saying that Harry's 'The One' - just reiterating *Dumbledore's* > belief! Knowing how 'cunning' she can be, this could still be a trick > answer! > > Thought I'd save your fingers DuffyPoo! Geoff: "There seems to be a question "What if Neville was the guy in the prophecy and it was only the fact that Voldemort attacked Harry first which forestalled that?" DuffyPoo: First of all, thanks to Aggie for trying to save me, but it came too late. I didn't see your response to the original question until after I posted my own You did say virtually the same thing I did though.. ;-) Geoff, that's my theory, in a nutshell. Or, more appropriately, because both Harry & Neville are still alive, the prophecy can still refer to either of them. The possibility exists that it can be either Harry or Neville. Geoff: "Let's suppose. If Voldemort had attacked Neville first, would Neville have survived? Was he with his parents at the time of the attack on Harry? Or were they away and he was with Grandma Longbottom? Would any of these three have had any way of blocking an Avada Kedavra spell? If he had atacked and killed Neville first and gone on to Godric's Hollow, then the same scenario might well have played out and we would have a similar setup to the current one but minus Neville. Whichever way, he might still have finished up on a hiding to nothing... Thoughts?" DuffyPoo: My thoughts, which by now everyone is sick of hearing: The answer to your first three questions is we don't know, or at least, I don't know.. We don't know anything about the situation around Neville at the time. I am assuming that DD would have informed Frank and Alice about the prophecy, not necessarily the exact wording, and they would, or Gran and Neville at least, would have gone into hiding (with, apparently a better secret-keeper than the Potters had). I think that Alice Longbottom could have well saved baby Neville in the same way Lily saved HP. It was only Lily's sacrifice of herself for Harry (that we *know* of, we don't *know* there was a spell involved) that saved Harry. Would Alice have sacrificed herself for baby Neville? Quite probably. Could Neville's Grandmother have produced a similar sacrificial protection if it were only herself standing between LV and baby Neville? Hard to say, possibly. My whole theory hinges on this: "If he had attacked and killed Neville first and gone on to Godric's Hollow...." If LV had attacked Neville first and Neville died, then my 'it could still be Neville' theory is obviously blown out of the water. If Neville dies in book 6 or 7 my theory is blown out of the water. But because LV became aware of the Potters' whereabouts first, he went there first. Neville was still being hidden from him. LV was thwarted, by Lily's sacrificing herself for Harry, and he was vapourized. Since both Neville and Harry are alive, the *possibility exists* that the one to fulfill the prophecy can still be either Harry or Neville. Geoff: "Whichever way, he might still have finished up on a hiding to nothing..." DuffyPoo: Sorry, I don't understand what you're saying here. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gaylenekb at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 09:52:48 2004 From: gaylenekb at yahoo.com (Gaylene Bartlett) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 09:52:48 -0000 Subject: another wacko HBP theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108489 Why are we all assuming that the half-blood prince has to be half muggle and half wizard? Maybe the HBP is 1/2 goblin and 1/2 elf?? Gaylene From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 2 11:12:37 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 07:12:37 -0400 Subject: Lily WAS muggle-born and what happened in CoS. Message-ID: <008301c47881$9eb1e730$9cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108490 sad1199 here "Now, a question. I have read these books through at least 5 times and I am an intelligent person but! I still don't understand WHY Dobby tried to prevent Harry from returning to Hogwarts. I mean, obviously, Dobby overheard his master talking about the diary and knew(?) he was going to give it to Ginny(or was that just luck that she got it?) and Dobby knew(?) who Tom Riddle was when most of the wizards in WW don't even know." DuffyPoo: My personal opinion is that LM was going to give the diary to HP, or why would Dobby have indicated that HP would be in mortal danger? LM would have no idea that HP would come to GW's aid. LM's purpose in giving HP the book was to have the CoS opened again and Mudbloods killed ( I think this was his reasoning). HP's mortal danger would be: being caught and having his soul sucked out by Dementors. I think GW got the diary as a last minute change of plan after a) the discussion between LM and Mr. Borgin about the New Muggle Protection Act, that Arthur Weasley is probably behind it, that LM has to get rid of certain items that may be embarrassing if found in his possession, combined with b) the fight with Mr. Weasley in Flourish and Blotts. LM had GW's used transfiguration book in his hands as the fight took place. sad1199 here: "Does this tell us that Lucius Malfoy is MUCH closer to Voldemort than JKR has let on so far?" DuffyPoo: LV spoke to LM first, the very first, in the Graveyard scene in GoF. Mr Weasley always believed that LM was in LV's 'inner circle.' LV was there, front and centre, in the DoM when HP first got the prophecy orb. I think LM is much closer to LV that we may know. Much, MUCH closer, and very good at hiding it from people like Fudge. (I've even wondered if it wasn't LM who was the eavesdropper at the Hog's Head, but haven't really had time to research the theory. LM would have been about 25 at the time.) sad1199 here "Someone posted about a passage from Lucius' house to Hogwarts, is there direct canon on this or speculation? " DuffyPoo: No canon that I know of but that would have to be a heck of a long tunnel. The Malfoy mansion is in "Wiltshire" appears to me to be a fair distance to anywhere in Scotland (no matter where in Scotland Hogwarts is supposed to be). I haven't ruled something to do with the passage on the fourth floor behind the mirror that had been blocked since the winter of CoS. Malfoy, Sr was so occupied with *something* that Christmas that darling Draco had to spend Christmas at Hogwarts. After saying "I do feel so sorry for all those people who have to stay at Hogwarts for Christmas because they're not wanted at home." in PS, referring, of course to HP. It's odd to me that no one in the school "last winter" felt any vibration from a tunnel collapse. They wouldn't, however, if someone filled in the tunnel at the Hogwarts end, entering to do the job from the Hogsmeade end. We don't know where that tunnel comes out in Hogsmeade (or area) but we know it does because F&G used it "until last winter" when it caved in. (the winter of CoS). Since HP couldn't use the tunnel, he didn't bother to follow it on the map to see where it came out, like he didn't know where the tunnel under the Whomping Willow came out either, because F&G said you can't use it. sad1199 here "AND house elves are obviously more intelligent than given credit for if Dobby knew who Harry even was. Wait, it says that house elves are intelligent, right? I am just very confused about the whole Dobby thing, any help would be appreciated." DuffyPoo: I think House-elves are quite intelligent and have very powerful magic of their own. I can't think of any canon at the moment to show the intelligence part. My brain's jammed. (I can hear you all cheering! ;-) ) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 2 11:20:03 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 07:20:03 -0400 Subject: The Prophecy -- "Marking" Message-ID: <008901c47882$a8df61f0$9cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108491 Valky: " usually in an unfavorable sense; as, a notorious thief; a notorious crime or vice" "To this end Harry and Voldemort are exactly equal." DuffyPoo: Oh, gosh, Valky, I'm not going to pick over dictionary definitions with you. The first dictionary I picked up didn't even have the word "notoriety". But your dictionary pointed it out clearly....all those things "Generally known and talked of by the public; universally believed to be true; manifest to the world; evident;" are *Usually in an unfavorable sense as, a notorious thief; a notorious crime or vice*. Says it right there. HP & LV are not *exactly* equal. They are only somewhat equal in that they are both "famous" but certainly not for what they are famous 'for.' DD is quite famous, as well, that would make him also their equal, not to mention the Weird Sisters, Cornelius Fudge, Sirius Black, Celestina Warbeck, Cassandra Trelawney, the Muggle Prime Minister, Viktor Krum, Ludo Bagman and the Lestranges, to name just a few. Maybe even Stubby Boardman. :-) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 2 11:30:07 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 07:30:07 -0400 Subject: Werewovles as teachers (was Re: Flitwick for HBP) Message-ID: <009601c47884$10e229d0$9cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108492 DuffyPoo wrote: >>Would Durmstrang take a half-blood teacher like Remus? Do you have to put your blood-status on your application for employment? Remus is a pretty good liar by this point I'm not sure he wouldn't put down pure-blood just to get a job. ;-) << HunterGreen: "Perhaps it only mattered that he was a pure-blood wizard underneath the werewolf-ness. Certainly being a 'half-blood' because of being bitten by a werewolf is not as bad as being *born* one (at least in the eyes of those who care about things like that)." DuffyPoo: You really do have to quit challenging my brain this early in the morning. And if I open that Lexicon once more today I think it will be a world record. According to a WBD chat (or interview or something) Lupin is a half-blood wizard (there's a Muggle in that there background somewhere). HunterGreen: Now if Lupin *lied*, then it doesn't matter if Durmstrang cares about werewolves-as-teachers or not, because they wouldn't know about it, now would they? (of course, I wonder how on earth he would hide it) DuffyPoo: See, it's too early. I meant Lupin lied about being a pure-blood (vice half-blood) wizard, not that he lied about being a werewolf. That would be hard to hide. Unless that Durmstrang lot are thicker than Crabbe and Goyle put together. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 11:40:14 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 11:40:14 -0000 Subject: Just a comment about Lupin's malady. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108493 Valky wrote: Please, I have absolutely no idea where anyone gets the notion that time travel has been overextended in the story. It sounds to me like personal bias. Now don't get me wrong, I *am* biased in favour of more timeturning because I have a scientific and adventurous mind. I don't mind a challenging paradox myself, its good exercise for me. Frankly, the excellence that JKR put into creating the timeturned paradox sequence *did* leave me thirsting for more. But I am not posting on behalf of that at all, I promise. I just want to know how so little can be too much all of a sudden? vmonte responds: I agree with you Valky. My original comment was not against time- travel, but a side remark that I hope that the reason why Lupin became a were-wolf had nothing to do with time-travel. Although I've never liked time-travel stories in the past, I do like the way JKR has handled it in the series. In fact, most of the time- travel theories posted around here are from me. I have found, though, that people get very upset when you start talking about time-travel. I've even had people email insults to me directly, telling me that I should not post about it. (I've also had people who emailed me with support by the way.) I don't know what the big deal is but people really freak out when it comes to time-travel. What's funny is that you and I didn't insert the idea into the series, JKR did. vivian From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 12:01:44 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 12:01:44 -0000 Subject: Remember when Harry claimed he was Neville Longbottom on the Knight Bus? In-Reply-To: <003901c4786e$18e39440$9cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108494 DuffyPoo wrote: Exactly! Dumbledore has made a huge whopping mistake by reading the circumstantial evidence as 'fact'. HP didn't lose his parents because of a mistake. HP lost his parents because LV was going to kill every child that could possibly fulfill the part of the prophecy he knew "born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies". HP and NL fulfilled that part of the prophecy when they were both born at the end of July, 1980. LV started with HP, because, thanks to Wormtail, he knew where to find HP and the Longbottoms were still hidden from him. He was thwarted there by Lily's sacrifice. vmonte responds: What if (not based on canon, just a thought) Voldemort had originally picked Neville but was swayed by someone else to go after the Potter family. Could Snape have convinced Voldemort to go after Jame's family because of his personal hatred towards James? James saved Snape's life once, perhaps Snape couldn't kill him, but someone else could. There has to be a reason why Voldemort commented to Harry that his mother need not have died. Why, when he seems to enjoy killing anyone and everyone? Did someone tell him no to? Did Snape know that Lily had armed herself with a spell that would activate upon her death? Or was Voldemnort only interested in destroying the Potter line and was not interested in Lily because she was not bloodpure? Did Wormtail or another person want Lily's life spared? (Why Voldemort would agree I don't know.) It just seems like Voldemort is not playing with a full deck. Snape often reminds me of Shakespeare's Iago. He is very talented at manipulating people with his words. I wonder if Snape persuaded Voldemort to go after Harry. vivian (I'm not putting Snape down, I just want a real bad guy in the series that's not a joke like Voldemort.) From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 12:06:58 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 12:06:58 -0000 Subject: Remember when Harry claimed he was Neville Longbottom on the Knight Bus? In-Reply-To: <005801c47877$3dacc270$9cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108495 DuffyPoo again: While re-reading PoA, I also noticed that HP had a dream, the night before the final Quidditch game against Slytherin. Harry dreamed he had overslept, and "Wood was yelling, 'Where were you? We had to use Neville instead!'" Another link/hint? vmonte responds: I wonder if Neville will make the polyjuice potion and impersonate Harry? Neville is very courageous. He may try to lead Voldemort away from Harry and friends. vivian From drliss at comcast.net Mon Aug 2 12:18:34 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (drliss at comcast.net) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 12:18:34 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Digest Number 5024 Message-ID: <080220041218.22069.410E311900089EFC0000563522007623029C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 108496 HunterGreen: I never really thought about it that way...I suppose it could have just been that Lupin was really close to the Potters, and hadn't been killed by Voldemort yet, so *perhaps* that's enough to suspect him. However, I do think it was rather dense of Sirius to not suspect Peter at all (from all indications in PoA, Peter being the spy came right out of the clear blue sky to him). His animagus form is a *rat* for goodness sakes! Lissa: Well, I'll totally agree with you that Sirius was being pretty dense! However, as intelligent as Sirius is, it doesn't really surprise me. He strikes me as someone who a.) doesn't always have a lot of common sense and doesn't always listen to the common sense he DOES have, and b.) once he gets an idea in his head, he's NOT wrong, and you'd better not insinuate that he is! And rats don't have quite the same stigma in the WW that they do in the Muggle world- I mean, Ron kept "Scabbers" as a pet and was offered another rat by the magical animals shop. But yeah. Sirius, dude, he was a RAT. Huntergreen: Well, he comes up with that explanation so quickly that I assume the thought had occured to him before. If you thought someone was a spy, I can't imagine it would be wise to *tell* them they're under suspicion. However, you bring up a good point here, Lupin comes to grips with Sirius, James and Lily keeping something rather big from him because they thought he was a spy really fast, doesn't he? If ESE! Lupin is true, that's exactly how he'd react (how can he be offended about being thought a spy if he is one?). I think there had to be more than just 'narrowing down' that went into Sirius' choice to urge James and Lily to use Peter as the secret- keeper versis Lupin (of course, as a theory suggests, they *did* use Lupin, they just didn't tell Sirius in case *he* was the spy and figured it would be easy for Voldemort to break Peter, and it would be a good cover for him...but perhaps its better not to get into *that* here). Lupin would be the clear choice here, I just can't see Sirius sitting down and trying to decide between Lupin and Peter being the spy. Lupin was almost as close to him as James was, there had to be a reason he suspected him (if ESE!Lupin was acting odd, for example...). Lissa: SO against the ESE!Lupin theory. I could be wrong, and I know there's stuff in canon to point to it, but I just can't see JKR turning him evil. For one, he's one of her favorite characters. And for two, she's said that she's been playing with the theme of intolerance with Lupin. She's not going to turn him around and make him evil, because that basically says "See? He deserved the treatment he was getting all along!" SOMEONE'S a traitor, yes, I'm pretty sure. But it's not going to be Lupin, just because of "out of character" evidence. Someone else on another board pointed out that maybe Lupin WAS really stung that Sirius thought he was the spy, but decided that the Shrieking Shack was neither the time nor the place to get into it. There's a whole year in between the Shrieking Shack incident and when we see Sirius and Lupin together again, and we have no idea of what they said to each other in that year. I can definitely see your point about Sirius not sitting down and making a logical decision. He's much more impulsive and rash. I REALLY want to know how long he was thinking it was Lupin specifically though. It could have been a year... it could have been a few minutes right before they decided to do the Fidelus charm. My other thought on Lupin being so quick to forgive was that maybe he suspected Sirius before the Potters were actually murdered, while Sirius was suspecting him. So he can forgive Sirius now because it's "well, um... I kinda thought the same thing. Oops." I'm REALLY hoping that first chapter of Book 6 (that's been 13 years in the making) is going to be what happened that Halloween night. Huntergreen: Thank you (o; For some reason I see Lupin as the type who would rather *take* a picture than be in one. Lissa: I totally agree. I also wonder if there ARE any pictures of Lupin in that photo album Harry's got. Liss [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com Mon Aug 2 12:32:53 2004 From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 12:32:53 -0000 Subject: FILK: Hard-Eyed Realist Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108497 Hard-Eyed Realist To the tune of Cock-Eyed Optimist, from Rodgers & Hammrstein's South Pacific SNAPE: With a half-priced Prince of Machiavelli To instruct me in power politics You can call me a hard-eyed realist Who will play cynically with critics Though I have people running up to tell me There's some good to be found in ev'ry soul But because I'm a hard-eyed realist Such na?ve folk make my hard eyes roll I know our wizard crew Need ruthless rulers who Will show them where they need to go Without firm leadership We'll see Death Eaters rip Apart what we've tried hard to grow Life sure ain't no concert by Corelli It's a song that is neither sure nor sweet Nasty, short, quoting Hobbes Quite the brutal job Leave the kitchen if you can't stand heat I stand heat - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm (updated today with five dozen new filks) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 13:10:16 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 13:10:16 -0000 Subject: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108498 Vmonte responds: > > This scene has always bothered me. It is interesting that Snape tells > Harry that he is "neither special nor important." I mean what a drag > it must be for Snape to have to work with Harry if he really feels > that he is a nobody and not important. Why is Snape working for the > order anyway? Is it possible that the only reason Snape is at the > school is to protect Tom Riddle who is trapped inside Harry? I wonder > if Snape's loathing for Harry started on the first day of school when > he realized that Harry's will was stronger than Tom's. Alla: Hi, Vivian! Sorry but I have to say huh? Could you ellaborate a little bit, please? I mean I am always up for a session of Snape's bashing, but how does him telling Harry that he is "neither special, nor important" translates into possibility of Snape protecting Voldemort? I thought that Snape was him usual abusive self, when he said that. You know, always trying to humiliate Harry, put him in whatever place Snape thinks Harry should be, But what you are saying translates in very ESE! Snape and I am having trouble believing it. Vivian: > Harry stands up to Snape in his very first potions class. He also > does not allow the hat to sort him into Slytherin. Why does Snape > tell Draco to use Serpentsorcia during the duel? And why does he have > a calculating, almost satisfied look on his face when he sees that > Harry has this power? Alla: Oh, as we discussed it earlier, I believe that Snape told Draco to use Serpensotia, BUT I think he did it because he suspected that Harry is a Parselmouth and wanted to see for himself. Vivian: > I'm thinking that Snape knows something about what happened at > Godric's Hollow. What if Snape really put a stopper on death at GH, > by saving Riddlemort who vaporized and went into Harry. Maybe Snape's > comment in potions class about putting a stopper in death was really > directed to Tom. He let the Tom in Harry's head know that he saved > his life. (So in essence he tells Tom: 'I saved you, and I'm at this > school to protect you...' snip. > So, Snape hasn't really been saving Harry all of these years, he's > been saving his master. And according to Snape Harry is neither > important or special it's what is inside of him that is important. > Alla: Well, it is possible as any other scenario, but again I would prefer it not to be true. Sorry! Snape saving Voldemort from the beginning exceeds all my standards of evillness. :o) So, are you saying in effect that Snape is the real Dark Lord and Voldemort is in his debt? I hope that "stopper in death" will play out in Harry's fate in the positive way (namely saving him at the end). I have to say one thing, if it turns out to be true, your scenario will be very funny. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 2 13:36:24 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 13:36:24 -0000 Subject: Occulmency Lessons WAS Re: Snape's Attitude towards the Students In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108499 Dzeytoun: > > Will Harry continue Occlumency with Snape? That would seem odd > > as Dumbledore himself admits it was a severe mistake. > >>>>>>>>>snip>>>>>>>>>>> Aggie: > Do you not think that now Harry knows the truth that DD would be > able to teach him it? If not then perhaps now Harry will be more > willing to learn and therefore Snape *would* be able to teach him. > That is if Harry calms down re his perception of Snape's part in > Sirius' death. SSSusan: You know what, Aggie? The way you phrased this first question really struck me as showing just how BIG DD's error was in OotP. "Do you not think that now Harry knows the truth that DD would be able to teach him [occlumency]?" If you're right, then it means that he could've/should've spilled the beans after the graveyard and allowed Harry to know. Then he could've taught him himself in Year 5 and not added so much to Harry's sense that he was 1) being left in the dark and 2) being ignored by DD, whom he needed! Grrrr. I know, I know. This was the way the story unfolded, so hindsight does us no good. But still! Dumbledore--you really muffed this one, didn't you? Siriusly Snapey Susan From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Aug 2 13:43:58 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 13:43:58 -0000 Subject: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108500 > Vmonte: > > > > This scene has always bothered me. It is interesting that Snape > tells > > Harry that he is "neither special nor important." I mean what a > drag > > it must be for Snape to have to work with Harry if he really feels > > that he is a nobody and not important. > Alla: > I thought that Snape was him usual abusive self, when he said that. > You know, always trying to humiliate Harry, put him in whatever place > Snape thinks Harry should be.. Jen: Even though I hardly ever wonder about Snape (I know, hard to believe), these two comments struck me--who exactly *does* Snape think Harry is, if not special or important? He's so obviously both of these things. Why does he persist on putting Harry in "his place" and what is that place, exactly? It makes me re-think why he specifically singles out Harry & Neville. Maybe Snape was somehow involved in their parents death, and Harry & Neville are his failures staring him in the face. Or he was orphaned like them, and despises them for being like him, instead of feeling empathy. Or it is just simply him trying to put them in their place, keep them from getting big heads (lol, Neville with the big ego). I like the first idea, that he failed them, because abusing them over his own failure seems like a Snapey thing to do. Like if he was the one who overheard the prophecy and told LV, and seeing Harry & Neville reminds him of his past. Jen, branching out into Snape analysis and hearing the veterans snicker about her elementary first thoughts on the matter :). From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 2 13:43:49 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 13:43:49 -0000 Subject: Harry's discoveries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108501 Andromeda: > > 4. Harry discovers that there are a lot of similarities between > > himself and Riddle/Voldemort. Geoff: > > 5. Tom Riddle is Voldemort. Vivian wrote: > > 6. He also learns what "mudbloods" are and that certain pure > > blood families feel they are superior to them. Ron also explains > > that wizards would have died out if they had not intermarried. > Laura (theredshoes86) wrote: > ALSO!!!! Harry learns that Voldemort feels that muggle-borns don't > matter anymore, rather, Voldemort is now after Harry. SSSusan: Good catch! That *is* something Harry discovered, both in "Chamber" and in *the* Chamber. Laura (theredshoes86) wrote: > I feel that whatever is special about Harry that the Dark > Lord 'knows not' is what Harry will find out in book six. > > Although didn't Dumbledore say something like 'it's the same power > which brought you to Siris to try to rescue him' or something? So, > doesn't that imply love? Could, perhaps the whole Harry Potter > Series focus on love? SSSusan: Could be love--many believe it so. My personal theory is that it's a slight variation--that it's *sacrificial* love as opposed to just plain old love. (Almost everyone is capable of love and loves others, but sacrificial love is a rarer thing, imo.) Siriusly Snapey Susan From caseylane at wideopenwest.com Mon Aug 2 13:43:17 2004 From: caseylane at wideopenwest.com (Casey) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 13:43:17 -0000 Subject: Time Turner: Was Just a comment about Lupin's malady. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108502 > Valky wrote: > > Please, I have absolutely no idea where anyone gets the notion that > time travel has been overextended in the story. > > It sounds to me like personal bias. > > Now don't get me wrong, I *am* biased in favour of more timeturning > because I have a scientific and adventurous mind. I don't mind a > challenging paradox myself, its good exercise for me. Frankly, the > excellence that JKR put into creating the timeturned paradox > sequence *did* leave me thirsting for more. But I am not posting on > behalf of that at all, I promise. > > I just want to know how so little can be too much all of a sudden? Casey responds: My only issue is that Time Travel can be used too easily to right something. To do something and go back and erase everything that happened. Use the Time Turner to go back and protect Lupin, or James and Lilly, or even go back and make sure Baby Riddle is adopted into a loving home so that he doesn't turn out evil. I'm not saying that this is what JK plans, but it's why I get a knee jerk reaction to time travel. Guess I've watched too many poorly written Star Trek episodes. Casey From patientx3 at aol.com Mon Aug 2 13:54:31 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 13:54:31 -0000 Subject: Just a comment about Lupin's malady. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108503 vmonte wrote: > >> (JKR better not do some weird time-travel thing where some of the Order go back in time to fix something, and Lupin ends up being >the werewolf that bites baby Lupin as a child.) << huntergreen (previously) replied: > I'll second that. I've had enough time-travel to last me the > series. Valky replied: >> isn't that statement an exaggeration? Just *how much* timetravel have we actually had in the series. Ok I start the count at one chapter then two chapters then....... thats it! TWO CHAPTERS in um..... over a hundred! It's barely a full percentage of the entire series and yet there is *already* too much? Please, I have absolutely no idea where anyone gets the notion that time travel has been overextended in the story. It sounds to me like personal bias. Now don't get me wrong, I *am* biased in favour of more timeturning because I have a scientific and adventurous mind. I don't mind a challenging paradox myself, its good exercise for me. Frankly, the excellence that JKR put into creating the timeturned paradox sequence *did* leave me thirsting for more. But I am not posting on behalf of that at all, I promise. I just want to know how so little can be too much all of a sudden? << HunterGreen: Its not a personal bias at all. I enjoy a little time travel-story now and again. However, you and I are looking at it two different ways. You see it as two chapters, I see it as one finale out of seven (yes, PoA did have quite a lot more going on besides the time travel, but it was a major part -- the last part -- of its climax). I just think that another book involving time-travel in a major way would just seem like too much; for lack of a better way to put it, its just too easy of a narrative device. If time-travel gets involved than nothing ever "happens", it can always be undone or re-done or fixed somehow, and as a reader I find that annoying (okay, maybe it does have to do with a 'bias', sort of). From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 13:57:49 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 13:57:49 -0000 Subject: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108504 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: snip. > I like the first idea, that he failed them, because abusing them > over his own failure seems like a Snapey thing to do. Like if he was > the one who overheard the prophecy and told LV, and seeing Harry & > Neville reminds him of his past. Alla: Oh, yes. Absolutely. I believe that Snape was the eavesdropper too. I also believe that he went to Voldie first and started the chain of event s which eventually killed Potters and brought Longbottoms to St.Mungo. This is partially the reason why Snape saving Harry does not impress me much. If he is guilty of allerting Voldie to the prophecy in the first place, all that happens afterwards is just Snape trying to correct his mistakes. Yes, many people don't even do that, I know. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Aug 2 14:01:17 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 14:01:17 -0000 Subject: Occulmency Lessons WAS Re: Snape's Attitude towards the Students In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108505 > SSSusan: > You know what, Aggie? The way you phrased this first question really > struck me as showing just how BIG DD's error was in OotP. "Do you > not think that now Harry knows the truth that DD would be able to > teach him [occlumency]?" If you're right, then it means that he > could've/should've spilled the beans after the graveyard and allowed > Harry to know. Then he could've taught him himself in Year 5 and not > added so much to Harry's sense that he was 1) being left in the dark > and 2) being ignored by DD, whom he needed! Grrrr. > > I know, I know. This was the way the story unfolded, so hindsight > does us no good. But still! Dumbledore--you really muffed this one, > didn't you? Jen: Hey Susan! You've got me thinking this morning. If Dumbledore *does* take over teaching Occlumency, this may be the way we learn more about DD and his mysterious past. Dumbledore could start to tell Harry more about himself if they're spending concentrated doses of time together, or DD may also teach Harry Legilimency, opening up his own mind to Harry. Wouldn't that be the ultimate trust? I mean, teaching someone Occlumency is an incredibly invasive process with the wrong person--letting someone have access to your most emotional moments. Yuck, the idea that Harry had to go through that process with Snape was definitely an error on Dumbledore's part. Dumbledore has to start trusting Harry, that's the bottom line. He owes him that. I still think DD has made the best choices he could, given the burden of being the one to hear the prophecy and safeguard Harry, but it's time for a new relationship between the two of them. Jen From aphrodeia at gmail.com Mon Aug 2 14:02:34 2004 From: aphrodeia at gmail.com (aphrodeia) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 10:02:34 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108506 Jen: <> If the entire future of the Wizarding World rests on Harry's shoulders, as we are frequently led to believe, the /last/ thing they need is for their angsty hero to decide that he's the center of the universe. Teenagers are a handful by nature, even without a massive ego and the fate of thousands of lives in their hands. He is, after all, only human, regardless of the mantel he must eventually assume. On a more simplistic level, Snape is rather stuck in the past when it comes to Messrs Moony, Padfoot, Prongs, and Wormtail, and the point has been driven home repeatedly that Harry seems so much like his father. Wee Gryffindor seeker, messy hair, irritating propensity for breaking rules. As demonstrated in the infamous Worst Memory scene, James also had the ability to be very, very cruel. Snape can't let that go, try as he might. Constantly putting Harry in his place is a way of getting back at James. A few disordered thoughts as I read through OotP again. Lisa, who hasn't read the books NEARLY enough times From caseylane at wideopenwest.com Mon Aug 2 14:04:19 2004 From: caseylane at wideopenwest.com (Casey) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 14:04:19 -0000 Subject: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108507 Vmonte: This scene has always bothered me. It is interesting that Snape tells Harry that he is "neither special nor important." I mean what a drag it must be for Snape to have to work with Harry if he really feels that he is a nobody and not important. Casey: I always took it as punishment for Harry's father. James was always special in school, i.e. popular, athletic and handsome, three things Snape wasn't. Now here comes his son, who by his very existence, was a hero, it had to irk. Snape hated "special" James and he sees Harry being set up to be just the same. And we all know how James handled his status. Jen: It makes me re-think why he specifically singles out Harry & Neville. Maybe Snape was somehow involved in their parents death, and Harry & Neville are his failures staring him in the face. Or he was orphaned like them, and despises them for being like him, instead of feeling empathy. Or it is just simply him trying to put them in their place, keep them from getting big heads (lol, Neville with the big ego). Casey: I'm mixed on my feelings on this issue. I thought Snape punished Neville for just the opposite reasons than Harry. We've never heard anything bad about them, even in dealings with Snape (if there were any). Heroes in the war, injured in the line of duty, their son is turning out to be a huge disappointment. Barely above squib (when the books start) and accident prone, he's a far cry from what his parents deserved. Snape isn't a nice man and seeing this boy doesn't make him pity him, instead it makes him hate him for his weaknesses on the Longbottom's behalf. Then again, he's cruel to Hermione when given the chance so, it may be something as simple as Neville gives Snape more opportunity to show his bad side. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 2 14:08:32 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 14:08:32 -0000 Subject: Time-turning as literary device (was: Just a comment about Lupin's malady) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108508 Lorel wrote: >>> I get the sense that the theme or device of Time isn't played out yet. The rescue in PoA provided the setup, and the clock in the DoM was a reminder as well as (IMO) a hint of more to come. I just *really* hope there's more to it than a cheesy "out." <<< vmonte: >> Yeah, I agree with you, it's definitely going to return. Be warned though, some HPFGU's get really upset when you start talking about time-travel. For some reason it's ok to have theories that are not based on canon as long as they are not about time-travel. << HunterGreen: > I don't know about them returning, personally I think the whole > thing in PoA with Harry saving himself from the dementors and > rescuing Sirius and Buckbeak and all that was enough. Sort of like > the huge polyjuice plot in GoF being enough use of polyjuice as a > narrative device. Valky: > I mean no offense by this as you are generally one of my favourite > posters Hunter, but isn't that statement an exaggeration? > Just *how much* timetravel have we actually had in the series. > TWO CHAPTERS in um..... over a hundred! It's barely a full > percentage of the entire series and yet there is *already* too much? > Please, I have absolutely no idea where anyone gets the notion that > time travel has been overextended in the story. > It sounds to me like personal bias. > Now don't get me wrong, I *am* biased in favour of more timeturning > because I have a scientific and adventurous mind. I don't mind a > challenging paradox myself, its good exercise for me. SSSusan: With all due respect, Valky, I'd call it "personal preference" or "personal opinion" and not "personal bias," as the latter strikes me as a negative phrase. I would be VERY happy indeed if there is no more use of time-turning or polyjuice. And it's not the quantity of chapters in which they've been used. It's because of what HunterGreen said: they were used as a narrative device, and once is enough for some of us. For some, these parts of the storyline are fun, adventurous and a challenge to figure out. For others, they feel like "deus ex machina"--almost like a cop-out. "How can I get X to happen when it's really not very likely or possible? Oh, I know--I'll use time- travel. Or maybe I'll allow one person to be disguised as another for an entire year." Do you see what I mean? They WERE creative ways of getting from point A to point B or of solving a dilemma. Many people felt they were fun, too. But to rely on them again [and that phrase shows my slant, I know] would feel like a cop-out to some of us. PoA is my favorite of the books so far, but the time-turning was the part that was weakest *to me*. [Interestingly, Cuaron's treatment of it felt clearer & more exciting than the print version for me....] ANYWAY, it all boils down to personal preference. What Lorel said originally I totally agree with--no "cheesy outs," please! If the device is going to be brought back, I hope it's a really fresh, creative use of it, otherwise I will likely be disappointed. Siriusly Snapey Susan From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 14:13:28 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 07:13:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Just a comment about Lupin's malady. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040802141328.84817.qmail@web50102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108509 >> huntergreen: >> I'll second that. I've had enough time-travel to last me the >> series. I wouldn't go quite that far but I will say that I would have high expectations for time-travel if it comes back into the plot again. The POA usage was fine because there was a lot of tension built into the action (will they make it back to the hospital wing in time?), we were learning how it actually worked (come again, Hermione?) and there was a major plot development (Harry can make a darn good patronus and it looks like his dad!). But it's a little too "deus ex machina" for my tastes and after the Grawp rescue in OOTP (which was an EXACT duplicate of the Flying Ford Anglia saving the kids from the spiders at the last minute in CoS) I'm afraid I'm going to have to see proof that it's not just a matter of "oops we're in a jam better pull out the time turner and save our butts!". Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 2 14:16:13 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 14:16:13 -0000 Subject: Remember when Harry claimed he was Neville Longbottom on the Knight Bus? In-Reply-To: <005801c47877$3dacc270$9cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108510 DuffyPoo: > > > I know I post too much, but I had this very thought yesterday. A.J.: > > "I nearly posted it too. Surely Harry's calling himself Neville > > Longbottom on the Knight Bus as the first name that popped into > > his mind, and Stan's repeated calling him that, is no random > > clue. I was actually surprised they left it out of the ... > > oops! I didn't say that! >;) Certainly, there is some > > underscoring of a link between them." DuffyPoo again: > While re-reading PoA, I also noticed that HP had a dream, the night > before the final Quidditch game against Slytherin. Harry dreamed > he had overslept, and "Wood was yelling, 'Where were you? We had > to use Neville instead!'" Another link/hint? > > I was surpised they left it out of the ... oops, as well. ;) SSSusan: At the risk of sounding nasty when I don't want to...perhaps these two things were left out of the You-Know-Whats *because* they won't play into the plot in any way?? Perhaps these two references in the books were foreshadowing of the link between Harry & Neville--yes, there is one by virtue of their both having been possible candidates for The One--but perhaps that's ALL the link between them is? Siriusly Snapey Susan From annemehr at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 14:29:33 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 14:29:33 -0000 Subject: Harry n Easter Egg In-Reply-To: <20.2fa12b23.2e3f3bd2@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108511 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Justine74 at a... wrote: > > Adi wrote: > > I just wanted to ask why Harry feels so emotional when Ginny > > hands him the easter egg sent my Mrs.Weasley in Book5? > DJ: > I think it could mean a lot of things, but when I first read that scene, I > thought that Harry might be getting upset because in a weird "subconscious > trigger" sort of way that the chocolate egg might have subconsciously reminded > him of the Tournament where *Cedric* helps him figure out how to listen to the > message in the golden egg, and of course, any memory of Cedric, even a > subconscious one, could bring up all kinds of horrible feelings of sadness, since Harry is definitely tormented by nightmares and guilt and depression over what happened to Cedric. > Annemehr: I never thought of the egg connection with Cedric, good one! Another thing is that this happens right after "Snape's Worst Memory," and the chocolate Easter egg is decorated with little iced Snitches -- just what his father had been playing with in the Pensieve memory. So, Harry's hit with a double-whammy in addition to being just depressed in general. Annemehr From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 14:30:37 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 07:30:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lily WAS muggle-born and what happened in CoS. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040802143037.30303.qmail@web50101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108512 > Now, a question. I have read these books through at least 5 times > and I am an intelligent person but! I still don't understand WHY > Dobby tried to prevent Harry from returning to Hogwarts. I mean, > obviously, Dobby overheard his master talking about the diary and > knew(?) he was going to give it to Ginny(or was that just luck that > she got it?) and Dobby knew(?) who Tom Riddle was when most of the > wizards in WW don't even know. > > Have a Happy Love Filled day sad1199 Well, I thought it was because Dobby realized that the purpose was to let the Basilisk loose in the school to kill non-purebloods and Harry is by DE standards not a pureblood. Since Harry is revered in the house elf universe, then Harry's demise would mean more to Dobby than the fate of dozens of anonymous kids. (Not that I'm implying that Dobby wouldn't care about that, he'd just not be so emotional about it.) On the other hand, there's a great theory at Red Hen publications: http://www.redhen-publications.com/Basilisk.html that suggests that HARRY was supposed to be the recipient of the diary so Riddle could take him over (if you can't kill 'em, join 'em, I guess would be Voldemort's logic) and really possess him. After all, Voldemort is looking for a human body again and Harry would fit the bill wonderfully and with a deliciously ironic twist to boot. Lucius only shoved the diary in Ginny's textbook because he'd had that dust-up with Arthur and was feeling particularly anti-Weasley at that moment. (Proof that Draco's gets his short-sightedness legitimately.) Interesting that Lucius didn't trust Draco to take the diary to Hogwarts and get it to Harry anonymously. Obviously Lucius knows that Draco wouldn't have been able to resist poking into the diary himself and the last thing Lucius wants is a son-and-heir channeling the Dark Lord. On a side note, it's also interesting that for all their supposed closeness, Lucius didn't just give the diary to Snape to get to Harry. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 2 14:30:55 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 14:30:55 -0000 Subject: Snape's choice of memories for the pensieve (was: Death and Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108513 Marty wrote: > Also, in OoP, in the pensieve scene, we see that Snape > removes "certain of his thoughts" Chap. 28 Snape's Worst Memory > (p638 US Edition 2003). I find it interesting that the one memory > Harry gets into involves his father. Now, of course, from the > writer's perspective, it is a handy way to provide information. I > also understand that Snape doesn't want Harry to see his > humiliation, but isn't it curious that this is one of his worst > memories that he wants to keep hidden? What about all the stuff > that he is doing for DD, and his life prior to becoming Potions > master - especially while a DE? Snape did not know that Harry > would end up in the pensieve, since it was an interruption by > Malfoy that called him away. Is it possible that he was trying to > protect Harry from any information about his father? I doubt it, > but what if it falls into a similiar category of "I'll do this > (Save Harry's Life in PS/SS) for you and my debt will be paid." SSSusan: Fascinating thoughts, Marty. The way you've written this causes me, for the first time, to consider other possibilities for Snape's pensieve selections besides simply, "These memories are awful and I don't want Potter to know this about me." Is it possible that Snape's motive WAS preventing Harry from seeing something about some OTHER person/people, not necessarily just that he didn't want Harry to see him upside in grey undies? But then again, why WOULDN'T he have wanted Harry to know his dad & Sirius were jerks at 15? I am so intrigued by all of this! Does anybody have any ideas on this?? Siriusly Snapey Susan From patientx3 at aol.com Mon Aug 2 14:35:45 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 14:35:45 -0000 Subject: Just a comment about Lupin's malady. In-Reply-To: <080220041218.22069.410E311900089EFC0000563522007623029C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108514 Huntergreen previously: >>> you bring up a good point here, Lupin comes to grips with Sirius, James and Lily keeping something rather big from him because they thought he was a spy really fast, doesn't he? If ESE!Lupin is true, that's exactly how he'd react (how can he be offended about being thought a spy if he is one?).<<< Lissa replied: >> SO against the ESE!Lupin theory. I could be wrong, and I know there's stuff in canon to point to it, but I just can't see JKR turning him evil. For one, he's one of her favorite characters. << HunterGreen: That I would not trust. The evil characters are usually the most fun to write (especially subversively evil). And just because he's ESE! doesn't negate the fact that he's a good teacher and can, on some things, be a good person (as in he has a good personality, but a very big dark side). >> And for two, she's said that she's been playing with the theme of intolerance with Lupin. She's not going to turn him around and make him evil, because that basically says "See? He deserved the treatment he was getting all along!" << I wouldn't see it that way. Its more the intolerance *turned* him ESE!. As you said yourself in your previous post, Sirius might have suspected Lupin because >>One of Voldie's strategies that we keep hearing about is to recruit creatures that the WW denies rights to<< that very well may have been the reason that ESE!Lupin turned to Voldemort's side. Its not he deserved the intolerance because he's evil, he became evil because of the intolerance. On the other hand, you are free to believe what ever you want to, and I know you're not alone in being against ESE!Lupin. From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com Mon Aug 2 14:38:32 2004 From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 14:38:32 -0000 Subject: Occulmency Lessons WAS Re: Snape's Attitude towards the Students In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108515 > Jen: Hey Susan! You've got me thinking this morning. If Dumbledore > *does* take over teaching Occlumency, this may be the way we learn > more about DD and his mysterious past. Dumbledore could start to > tell Harry more about himself if they're spending concentrated doses > of time together, or DD may also teach Harry Legilimency, opening up > his own mind to Harry. Wouldn't that be the ultimate trust? I mean, > teaching someone Occlumency is an incredibly invasive process with > the wrong person--letting someone have access to your most emotional > moments. Yuck, the idea that Harry had to go through that process > with Snape was definitely an error on Dumbledore's part. Dumbledore > has to start trusting Harry, that's the bottom line. He owes him > that. > > I still think DD has made the best choices he could, given the > burden of being the one to hear the prophecy and safeguard Harry, > but it's time for a new relationship between the two of them. > > Jen boyd: I was under the impression (for example in PoA's GP scenes) that DD has very important business to attend to: running Hogwarts, working for the OoP (recruiting, spying, etc.), trying to keep the MoM in line, and only Jo knows what else. So where would DD have the time to tutor Harry in Occlumency or anything else? It feels like a given of the series that DD is a kindly, brilliant, powerful and *busy* wizard who can only give small portions of his time to Harry. Besides, Harry hasn't asked DD to teach him, has he? --boyd who subscribes to the BADD ANGST theory of Dumbledore's actions (#81068 and #81487) From patientx3 at aol.com Mon Aug 2 14:45:22 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 14:45:22 -0000 Subject: Snape's choice of memories for the pensieve (was: Death and Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108516 Marty wrote: > Also, in OoP, in the pensieve scene, we see that Snape > removes "certain of his thoughts" Chap. 28 Snape's Worst Memory > (p638 US Edition 2003). I find it interesting that the one memory > Harry gets into involves his father. Now, of course, from the > writer's perspective, it is a handy way to provide information. I > also understand that Snape doesn't want Harry to see his > humiliation, but isn't it curious that this is one of his worst > memories that he wants to keep hidden? SSSusan replied: >> Fascinating thoughts, Marty. The way you've written this causes me, for the first time, to consider other possibilities for Snape's pensieve selections besides simply, "These memories are awful and I don't want Potter to know this about me." Is it possible that Snape's motive WAS preventing Harry from seeing something about some OTHER person/people, not necessarily just that he didn't want Harry to see him upside in grey undies?<< HunterGreen: Perhaps the reason he put the memories in the pensieve was not to protect them from Harry accidently seeing them (he wasn't teaching Harry legimency after all, the chance of Harry using a rebound spell probably seemed like a remote possibility), but to keep them from affected Snape's attitude toward Harry. Meaning that if those memories are in the pensieve, they won't be in his head, and he won't be associating Harry with James through the lesson and he can just be his regular unpleasant self as opposed to ultra unpleasant. *Harry* assumes that they are things Snape is keeping from him, but how often are Harry's assumptions correct? By this line of thinking *all* of the memories in the pensieve are about James. SSSusan: >>But then again, why WOULDN'T he have wanted Harry to know his dad & Sirius were jerks at 15? << HunterGreen: Snape didn't see it that way. When he pulls Harry out of the pensieve he assumes Harry thinks James was being "amusing". Snape is really thick when it comes to Harry. Even with the recent glimpses he's had of Harry's mind, it doesn't connect with him that Harry would see James the same way Snape sees James in that memory. He assumes that Harry would think its funny to see his hated potions teacher attacked by his father and his godfather. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 14:48:10 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 07:48:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: [Just a comment about Lupin's malady. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040802144810.22128.qmail@web50107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108517 --- huntergreen_3 wrote: > Lupin would be the clear choice here, I just can't see > Sirius sitting down and trying to decide between Lupin and Peter > being the spy. Lupin was almost as close to him as James was, there > had to be a reason he suspected him (if ESE!Lupin was acting odd, > for example...). I assume that one of the results of the Prank (sending Snape to the Whomping Willow to meet a werewolf) was that there was a bit of a divide between Sirius and Remus afterwards. Sirius would have apologized for using Remus and Remus would have accepted it, because after all in the end no one got hurt. But I can imagine that Remus felt more than a little miffed about being used (and about Snape -their supposed mortal enemy - now knowing about Remus' malady) and Sirius feeling a little guilty and that a certain coolness resulted. At the same time James was getting more involved with Lily and wasn't as aware as he might have been about tensions in the group. And then they all graduated and weren't dorm-mates anymore so there was another reason for them not being together all the time. And IMO Peter (his animagus should have been a jackal, not a rat) moved in to push the small divide into an open chasm. Even if he hadn't gone over to Voldemort, I think Peter would have been jealous of the respect that James and Sirius had for Remus - and not for Peter. But I also think that as Members of the Order of the Phoenix under Dumbledore's leadership, Sirius had no business trying to decide on his own who the spy in the ranks was. He should have told Dumbledore if he really suspected Remus. Lives were at stake. This was not just some Hogwarts Gryffindor dorm plot. Sirius was out of line in not reporting his suspicions. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 14:54:34 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 07:54:34 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040802145434.99600.qmail@web50102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108518 > > Aggie: (With evil grin - playing devil's advocate!) > > That doesn't prove anything one way or the other! That's not JKR > > saying that Harry's 'The One' - just reiterating *Dumbledore's* > > belief! Knowing how 'cunning' she can be, this could still be a > > trick answer! It's Harry. There are five books in print (and another one on the way) titled "Harry Potter and the ......". There's no way that Harry's not the one. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Aug 2 15:04:34 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 15:04:34 -0000 Subject: Snape's choice of memories for the pensieve (was: Death and Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108519 > SSSusan: > Fascinating thoughts, Marty. The way you've written this causes me, > for the first time, to consider other possibilities for Snape's > pensieve selections besides simply, "These memories are awful and I > don't want Potter to know this about me." Is it possible that > Snape's motive WAS preventing Harry from seeing something about some > OTHER person/people, not necessarily just that he didn't want Harry > to see him upside in grey undies? > > But then again, why WOULDN'T he have wanted Harry to know his dad & > Sirius were jerks at 15? > > I am so intrigued by all of this! Does anybody have any ideas on > this?? Jen: One theory (from Greywolf, I think) was the incident Harry saw was only a "cover memory" placed in the Pensieve to protect other memories. That way if Harry did get in there by chance, he would see perhaps a humiliating memory, but not the actual *worst* memory Snape is protecting. If this is true, then Snape probably specifically chose that cover memory because it was proof of James' arrogance. I like this theory, but wonder if Snape would really want Harry seeing him in a humiliating position, even if he's also seeing James as an arrogant bully? That's the downside of the idea for me. From patientx3 at aol.com Mon Aug 2 15:14:47 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 15:14:47 -0000 Subject: [Just a comment about Lupin's malady. In-Reply-To: <20040802144810.22128.qmail@web50107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108520 Magda wrote: >> I assume that one of the results of the Prank [snip] I can imagine that Remus felt more than a little miffed about being used (and about Snape -their supposed mortal enemy - now knowing about Remus' malady) and Sirius feeling a little guilty and that a certain coolness resulted. At the same time James was getting more involved with Lily and wasn't as aware as he might have been about tensions in the group. And then they all graduated and weren't dorm-mates anymore so there was another reason for them not being together all the time. << HunterGreen: Interesting analysis! It very well could be that Sirius didn't exactly suspect Lupin of being a spy, but just had a general feeling of mistrust about him. However, though, this doesn't explain why James and Lily went along with it. Remember, who they chose as a secret-keeper was up to them. They could have chose Lupin if they wanted to, but they went with Peter. Why? From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 15:28:30 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 08:28:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape's choice of memories for the pensieve (was: Death and Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040802152830.84959.qmail@web50104.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108521 > Marty wrote: > > Also, in OoP, in the pensieve scene, we see that Snape > > removes "certain of his thoughts" Chap. 28 Snape's Worst Memory > > (p638 US Edition 2003). I find it interesting that the one > > memory Harry gets into involves his father. I think we have to put some OOTP book context into this answer. The last time that Snape saw Harry before the occlumency lesson was at 12GP where he and Sirius had almost dueled and where Sirius called Snape "Snivellus" in front of Harry. It would be natural for Snape to assume that Harry asked Sirius "what was THAT all about?" and that Sirius would have told Harry about how he and James used to rag Snape and prank him. (Snape not realizing that Harry is almost tongue-tied in Sirius' presence; throughout the books so far Snape actually has quite a romantic and idealized view of the Marauders' friendship and Harry's relations with Sirius.) So when Harry comes into his first occlumency lesson, Snape is already loaded for bear and looking for signs of increased disrespect ("Don't give me orders! My dad used to hang you upside down in the air!") based on this new knowledge of Snape's earlier humiliations. That's why the hyper-insistence on being addressed as "sir" or "professor". That's why the coming-down-like-a-hammer on the slightest hint of attitude (which Harry is manifesting big-time anyway). And that's why the worst memory (worst in that it would be the worst memory that HARRY could see, considering the Harry/Snape relationship of student/teacher) goes into the pensieve, so that if by some miracle Harry breaks into Snape's head, it won't be there. Magda (who really thinks that Sirius was nothing but trouble for Harry's emotional development and maturity and is glad that he's gone from the series) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 2 15:53:13 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 15:53:13 -0000 Subject: Why was Harry in mortal danger in Dobby's eyes? (was: Lily WAS muggle-born) In-Reply-To: <008301c47881$9eb1e730$9cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108522 sad1199 asked: >>>"Now, a question. I have read these books through at least 5 times and I am an intelligent person but! I still don't understand WHY Dobby tried to prevent Harry from returning to Hogwarts. I mean, obviously, Dobby overheard his master talking about the diary and knew(?) he was going to give it to Ginny(or was that just luck that she got it?) and Dobby knew(?) who Tom Riddle was when most of the wizards in WW don't even know."<<< In 108512 Magda did a nice job of summarizing in a response: >>Well, I thought it was because Dobby realized that the purpose was to let the Basilisk loose in the school to kill non-purebloods and Harry his by DE standards not a pureblood. Since Harry is revered in the house elf universe, then Harry's demise would mean more to Dobby than the fate of dozens of anonymous kids.... On the other hand, there's a great theory at Red Hen publications: http://www.redhen-publications.com/Basilisk.html that suggests that HARRY was supposed to be the recipient of the diary so Riddle could take him over (if you can't kill 'em, join 'em, I guess would be Voldemort's logic) and really possess him. After all, Voldemort is looking for a human body again and Harry would fit the bill wonderfully and with a deliciously ironic twist to boot. Lucius only shoved the diary in Ginny's textbook because he'd had that dust-up with Arthur and was feeling particularly anti-Weasley at that moment. << DuffyPoo also responded, saying: >>My personal opinion is that LM was going to give the diary to HP, or why would Dobby have indicated that HP would be in mortal danger? LM would have no idea that HP would come to GW's aid. LM's purpose in giving HP the book was to have the CoS opened again and Mudbloods killed (I think this was his reasoning). HP's mortal danger would be: being caught and having his soul sucked out by Dementors. << SSSusan now: You're right, DuffyPoo, that giving the diary to Ginny wouldn't necessarily bring Harry into things. Who could guess with certainty what would happen to Ginny *or* what Harry would do in response, if anything? (It's only CoS, after all, and we don't know quite so much about Harry's "hero thing" yet. :-)) BUT whether the diary went to Ginny or Harry, there was the danger for Harry that he'd be attacked himself by the basilisk in the halls, as a "half-blood" *or*, if Lucius got lucky, of his encountering a Diary!Tom in the Chamber who could do just what he did?set the basilisk on him there. sad1199 asked: >>>"Does this tell us that Lucius Malfoy is MUCH closer to Voldemort than JKR has let on so far?"<<< DuffyPoo responded: >>LV spoke to LM first, the very first, in the Graveyard scene in GoF. Mr Weasley always believed that LM was in LV's 'inner circle.' LV was there, front and centre, in the DoM when HP first got the prophecy orb. I think LM is much closer to LV that we may know. Much, MUCH closer, and very good at hiding it from people like Fudge. << SSSusan: I have no doubt that Lucius has always been in Voldy's inner circle. What I DO have doubts about is whether he used the diary as part of a plan to HELP Voldy. In fact, I think he did not. First, do we know that Voldy made contact w/ Lucius after he managed to get himself barnacled onto Quirrell's head and before he was reduced to vapor again at the end of PS/SS? No evidence of it?in fact, the graveyard speaks against this having happened. Second, I think Mr. Lucius Malfoy is one very power-hungry wizard himself and has GRAND PLANS for his future, with or without Voldy in it. I even wonder if Lucius wouldn't prefer a world without Voldy, as it would clearly make the possibility of his being at the top greater. Anyway, I maintain that Lucius dropped the diary?whether to hurt Arthur's reputation, to draw Harry into danger, to wreak havoc on mudbloods, or to get DD into hot water [or all the above] ON HIS OWN. I maintain that he did this in order to help smooth his own way to a position of power at Hogwarts and at the Ministry. I also maintain that if Lucius had done the diary-drop *for* Voldy, then when Voldy spoke to him in the graveyard, he would have NOT chastised Lucius for never coming to find him, but would rather have held Lucius up as a worthy, loyal follower for at least having attempted to assist him in his return. Siriusly Snapey Susan From naama_gat at hotmail.com Mon Aug 2 15:57:33 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 15:57:33 -0000 Subject: Snape's choice of memories for the pensieve (was: Death and Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108523 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > Marty wrote: > > Also, in OoP, in the pensieve scene, we see that Snape > > removes "certain of his thoughts" Chap. 28 Snape's Worst Memory > > (p638 US Edition 2003). I find it interesting that the one memory > > Harry gets into involves his father. Now, of course, from the > > writer's perspective, it is a handy way to provide information. I > > also understand that Snape doesn't want Harry to see his > > humiliation, but isn't it curious that this is one of his worst > > memories that he wants to keep hidden? What about all the stuff > > that he is doing for DD, and his life prior to becoming Potions > > master - especially while a DE? > > SSSusan: > Fascinating thoughts, Marty. The way you've written this causes me, > for the first time, to consider other possibilities for Snape's > pensieve selections besides simply, "These memories are awful and I > don't want Potter to know this about me." Is it possible that > Snape's motive WAS preventing Harry from seeing something about some > OTHER person/people, not necessarily just that he didn't want Harry > to see him upside in grey undies? > > But then again, why WOULDN'T he have wanted Harry to know his dad & > Sirius were jerks at 15? > Especially since he has been at pains throughout the books to put James down. Think how snarly he got when Harry told him that he knows that James had saved Snape's life. He wasted no time in showing James in the worst possible light he could - attempting to save himself from expulstion and not heroically risking himself to save somebody else. Regarding the worst memory. I think we should distinguish between worst memory in the sense of the most painful one, and the worst memory in the sense of the worst for other people to share. In fact, the most shameful. And I have to say that being hung upside down in front of a lot of teenagers, exposing dirty underwear - for Snape's sake I hope he *doesn't* have more shameful memories than that. Naama From sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com Mon Aug 2 16:23:36 2004 From: sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com (Amey Chinchorkar) Date: 2 Aug 2004 16:23:36 -0000 Subject: The Power, Time Travel and Occlumency Message-ID: <20040802162336.9785.qmail@webmail31.rediffmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108524 Amey: Feels really good to be back hunting after a lot of prowling in shadows . - - Laura (theredshoes86) wrote: - I feel that whatever is special about Harry that the Dark - Lord 'knows not' is what Harry will find out in book six. - Although didn't Dumbledore say something like 'it's the same power - which brought you to Siris to try to rescue him' or something? So, - doesn't that imply love? Could, perhaps the whole Harry Potter - Series focus on love? - SSSusan: - Could be love--many believe it so. My personal theory is that it's a - slight variation--that it's *sacrificial* love as opposed to just - plain old love. (Almost everyone is capable of love and loves - others, but sacrificial love is a rarer thing, imo.) Amey: *Sacrifice* or in other words, not fearing death. Let the pain stop, thought Harry let him kill us end it, Dumbledore death is nothing compared to this And I'll see Sirius again And as Harry's heart filled with emotion, the creature's coils loosened, the pain was gone; Harry was lying face down on the floor, his glasses gone, shivering as though he lay upon ice, not wood (OOtP) So, here also, we have one more instance where love is combined with another emotion, the knowledge that death is not the last thing, and not a thing of which you should be afraid of. This is the thought and emotion (IMO) which drove Voldemort away, the *love* for somebody and at the same time, thought of death which Voldemort fears above anything else. Yes, fits more into *sacrificial love* than just love. Maybe the way to conquer Voldemort is to rise above the fear of death (which Sirius did, according to Nick). - Casey responds: - My only issue is that Time Travel can be used too easily to right - something. To do something and go back and erase everything that - happened. Use the Time Turner to go back and protect Lupin, or James - and Lilly, or even go back and make sure Baby Riddle is adopted into - a loving home so that he doesn't turn out evil. Amey: I don?t think time travel will be used to do anything that important. Saving Sirius was one thing, (after all, he did not live much on borrowed time. I wonder if Dumbledore knew that Sirius was anyways going to die not much later and maybe that?s why he wanted to save him from a fate which was much worse than death in a duel, trying to save his godchild.), but saving Potters is a wholely different thing. When Dumbledore says that *the consequences of our actions are always so complicated, so diverse, that predicting the future is a very difficult business indeed...*, there is also one more side to this, if we change something by time travel, it is going to have very complex impact on the world. Think of Tom Riddle, if he is adopted by some good family, then he does not hate the thought to go back to orphanage. This might induce him not to stop attacks when he opened the Chamber, or he might not open the Chamber at all. He might marry, might have children, and then someday they might open the Chamber. I am not saying that opening the Chamber is a must, and that it must happen irrespective of anything else. But nobody knows the consequences, and so Dumbledore (or should I say JKR) will not take that chance. IMO any ending which involves massive time travel will leave more questions unanswered than solving the questions. - SSSusan: - Is it possible that Snape's motive WAS preventing Harry from seeing something - about some OTHER person/people, not necessarily just that he didn't want Harry - to see him upside in grey undies? But then again, why WOULDN'T he have - wanted Harry to know his dad & Sirius were jerks at 15? Amey: If he had some memory which would have shown them in that light, without involving his grey undies, he would have chosen it. But I think he was not at all thinking that Harry could enter into his memories, whether by defending himself or by penseive. He was saving the memory from Harry because he thought Harry was like his father (rude and all) and would enjoy the memory and maybe it night be another *snape in stuffed vulture hat* type of incident. One moer thing though, *For some reason, Snape seemed even angrier than he had done two minutes before, when Harry had seen into his teacher's memories*. Does this start any thoughts in somebodies minds? Also, why Harry is able to penetrate only once into Snape?s mind? Does the fact that he *guessed* Snape?s role just before that matters here? Is Snape somewhat offguard because he is gloating that he is playing important role?? Some food for thought here . Amey [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From drliss at comcast.net Mon Aug 2 16:30:06 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (drliss at comcast.net) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 16:30:06 +0000 Subject: Just a comment about Lupin's malady. Message-ID: <080220041630.3661.410E6C0D000DF99800000E4D22007354469C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 108525 HunterGreen: That I would not trust. The evil characters are usually the most fun to write (especially subversively evil). And just because he's ESE! doesn't negate the fact that he's a good teacher and can, on some things, be a good person (as in he has a good personality, but a very big dark side). Lissa: See, she speaks differently of characters she enjoys writing but are not good people- the Dursleys and Snape, for example. But she flat out loves Lupin, and does put him in the same category as the trio and a few others I'd bet money on will stay on the good side until the end. Not only that, she's done the "good teacher/good personality turned evil" thing with Moody. Granted, that wasn't really Moody, but for all the competent DADA teachers to be ESE so far? It just seems too close there to me. Huntergreen: I wouldn't see it that way. Its more the intolerance *turned* him ESE!. As you said yourself in your previous post, Sirius might have suspected Lupin because >>One of Voldie's strategies that we keep hearing about is to recruit creatures that the WW denies rights to<< that very well may have been the reason that ESE!Lupin turned to Voldemort's side. Its not he deserved the intolerance because he's evil, he became evil because of the intolerance. On the other hand, you are free to believe what ever you want to, and I know you're not alone in being against ESE!Lupin. Lissa: I do see the point there, and I can see where she might have gone that way. In fact, I think it's so plausible I think that's why Sirius believed it. And if Wormtail hadn't already turned out to be ESE, I'd be much more sold on the idea. But again, I tend to think that two of the mauraders turning out to be traitors is just too much. I keep thinking to myself that 1.) we only have two books left, and 2.) I know from my own experience that there's only so much you can load onto your characters before they go overdramatic. Harry's lost his father and he's lost Sirius. To lose Lupin to death I think he can cope with, but to lose him because Lupin betrayed him is just getting to be a little too much (especially when you add in everything else that Harry's going to be going through). I know this one's been argued to death, and we're not gonna know the answer anyway until the books are written (and Lupin freaking dies at Wormtail's hand), but yeah. I'm definitely not an ESE-er! Ah well. Liss [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 2 16:37:32 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 12:37:32 -0400 Subject: Time Turner: Was Just a comment about Lupin's malady. Message-ID: <002201c478af$02d770e0$bcc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108526 > Valky wrote: " I just want to know how so little can be too much all of a sudden?" Casey responds: "My only issue is that Time Travel can be used too easily to right something. To do something and go back and erase everything that happened. Use the Time Turner to go back and protect Lupin, or James and Lilly, or even go back and make sure Baby Riddle is adopted into a loving home so that he doesn't turn out evil. I'm not saying that this is what JK plans, but it's why I get a knee jerk reaction to time travel. Guess I've watched too many poorly written Star Trek episodes. " DuffyPoo: I'm with you on this Casey. I've heard several people say that DD uses a time-turner regularly. If he does and did, why didn't he fix this stuff (that I'm afraid is going to be time-turner fixed in the next two books) long ago when no one would have to go back so far? He only would have to have time turned back so that no one overheard the prophecy. That would make a big difference. He could have done it then within the hour .... but then, we wouldn't have the books. Quite frankly I'm expecting Harry to time-turn back and save himself, like he did in PoA with the Patronus. Except I can't figure out how he wouldn't be a baby if he time-turned back 16-17 years.....but anything is possible in the wizarding world I suppose. HunterGreen: "I just think that another book involving time-travel in a major way would just seem like too much; for lack of a better way to put it, its just too easy of a narrative device. If time-travel gets involved than nothing ever "happens", it can always be undone or re-done or fixed somehow, and as a reader I find that annoying (okay, maybe it does have to do with a 'bias', sort of). DuffyPoo: I agree with you, too. And I don't care if it is a personal bias. Harry and Hermione already fixed the past once, how many more times do we need to see it? OK, now we know it exists in JKR's world. Let's move on to the next thing. My biggest fear is that we're going to see HP wake up in his cupboard under the stairs in Privet Drive, it's the morning that his first Hogwarts letter arrives, and we'll find out it's all been a dream. It's that whole dream year of Dallas coming back to haunt me. ;-) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Aug 2 16:48:16 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 16:48:16 -0000 Subject: Lily WAS muggle-born and what happened in CoS. In-Reply-To: <008301c47881$9eb1e730$9cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108527 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: DuffyPoo: > My personal opinion is that LM was going to give the diary to HP, > or why would Dobby have indicated that HP would be in mortal > danger? HP's mortal danger would be: being caught and having his > soul sucked out by Dementors. Geoff: Sorry, I don't follow your drift here. How do Demenotrs come into this? sad1199: > "Someone posted about a passage from Lucius' house to Hogwarts, is > there direct canon on this or speculation? " DuffyPoo: > No canon that I know of but that would have to be a heck of a long > tunnel. The Malfoy mansion is in "Wiltshire" appears to me to be a > fair distance to anywhere in Scotland (no matter where in Scotland > Hogwarts is supposed to be). Geoff: The nearest point in Wiltshire to the Scottish border, which itself is a long way south of the Highland Region, would be of the order of 400 miles. Wiltshire is a county to the west of London. DuffyPoo: > I haven't ruled something to do with the passage on the fourth > floor behind the mirror that had been blocked since the winter of > CoS. > It's odd to me that no one in the school "last winter" felt any > vibration from a tunnel collapse. Geoff: Why? The tunnel entrance at the school end would be more of a passageway; Hogwarts is not built into the side of a hill as far as I know so the collapse would very likely have occurred in the underground section well away from the buildings. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 2 17:37:04 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 13:37:04 -0400 Subject: Lily WAS muggle-born and what happened in CoS. Message-ID: <002d01c478b7$538c2be0$bcc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108528 Magda: "Well, I thought it was because Dobby realized that the purpose was to let the Basilisk loose in the school to kill non-purebloods and Harry is by DE standards not a pureblood." DuffyPoo: My understanding (doesn't mean it's correct) was it was Slytherin's desire to rid the school of Muggle-borns (aka Mudbloods) "He believed that magical learning should be kept within *all-magic* families. He disliked taking students of Muggle parentage, believing them to be untrustworthy." Yes, parentage can mean remoter ancestors that parents, but, as someone posted recently (sorry, I can't quote) if a student were like Seamus for example, that would be a magical family in Slytherin's eye (possibly) because Seamus has some magical parentage. The problem at the time of Slytherin's concern was that "they built the castle far from prying *Muggle* eyes, for it was an age when magic was feared by common people and witches and wizards suffered much persecution." If there were already magic in the family (like Seamus'), there would be less to fear of persecution, or someone 'telling' where the school was, etc, than in a situation like Justin Finch-Fletchley's. Riddle made the diary when he was 16, after five years hard work, so that someone else could continue Slytherin's *noble work*. We know Riddle hates Muggles. "You think I was going to use my filthy Muggle father's name forever? ... I, keep the name of a foul, common Muggle." Riddle says, "She [Ginny] set the Serpent of Slytherin on four Mudbloods, and the Squib's cat," and "Haven't I already told you,' said Riddle quietly, 'that killing Mudbloods doesn't matter to me any more?" and "You'll be back with your dear Mudblood mother soon, Harry." Draco told Harry and Ron (as Crabbe & Goyle) ""Father's always said Dumbledore's the worst thing that's ever happend to this place. He loves Muggle-borns. A decent headmaster would never've let slime like that Creevey in." and "But I know one thing; last time the Chamber of Secrets was opened, a Mudblood died." and in GoF he said "Well, you know his [Malfoy, Sr's] opinion of Dumbledore -- the man's such a Mudblood lover -- and Durmstrang doesn't admit that sort of riff-raff." We also know Malfoy Sr has something against Arthur Weasley and calls him a Muggle-loving fool, and tells him they have a clearly different idea of what disgraces the name of wizard, when Mr. W is in the company of Hermione's parents "the company you keep...I thought your family could sink no lower.". It all seems to be against Muggle-borns, far more than half-bloods. Besides, Riddle is Slytherin's heir, and he is half-blood himself. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From griffin782002 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 11:36:25 2004 From: griffin782002 at yahoo.com (sp. sot.) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 04:36:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Either must die at the HAND of the other In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040802113625.53304.qmail@web90002.mail.scd.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108529 c_robocker wrote: Can I just add a little fuel to this theory - have you noticed all the hands on JKR's website? Particularly in the Rumors ads? There's a large one on the "Borgin and Burkes" where the "Hand of Glory" is for sale. Curious. Griffin782002 now: I wonder if it has anything to do with Pettigrew's silver hand. We should not forget that he is still in debt to Harry. And a small notice: even though its colour is silver, it is not necessary made of silver. In the potion that was used in L.V.'s rebirth contained unicorn's blood. Could it be possible that the silver colour is because of that? Just a thought Griffin782002 From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Mon Aug 2 13:01:56 2004 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 13:01:56 -0000 Subject: Lily's grandparents Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108530 On JKR's website, whilst answering a question about what constitutes a half-blood wizard, JKR stated that HP would be considered half- blood due to his maternal grandparents! If Lily was the first ever witch/wizard in her family then surely JKR would have stated HP was half blood due to Lily's parents! This seems to suggest that Lily's grandparents were Muggles. Lets suppose that the subsequent child (i.e. Lily's mum or dad) was also a Muggle. Then it seems perfectly reasonable that Lily's other parent was a wizard/witch. If one parent is a witch/wizard and one is a muggle - which world do they live in? The fact that Lily is referred to as a mudblood, and also Petunia's general behaviour would suggest that they were brought up in the Muggle world. However, Petunia's apparent knowledge of certain wizarding facts suggests she has had some contact with wizards i.e. her mum/dad. This leads on to a number of other questions; (1) Does Petunia's knowledge of Azkaban stem from the fact that one of her parents was imprisoned there! (Hence there need to live with the Muggle parent) (2) Is Godric's hollow the family home for Lily's mum or dad (and hence HP is descended from Gryffindor). (3) Is this theory absolute twaddle??? "esmith" From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Mon Aug 2 12:04:00 2004 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 12:04:00 -0000 Subject: prophecies and choice..was Re: Neville and the Prophecy - VERY LONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108531 I agree that DD has been intentionally allowing HP to be tested from the word go. In fact, DD has allowed HP to confront LV on three seperate occasions (PS/SS, COS and OOTP). And only in OOTP did DD intervene to protect HP directly from LV. >From the very start, it appears that DD has known that (i) HP and LV would battle to the death at some point in the future (due to 'The Prophecy') and (ii) the scar provided a link between HP and LV. LV's reincarnation using HP's blood seems to have strengthened that bond, to the extent that they can possess each other's minds. All this suggests that DD has allowed HP controlled access to LV in order to prepare him for a final confrontation - one where DD will not be able to help Harry! Where could a confrontation take place outside of DD's help - in the mind!! I think book 6 will involve LV possessing HP on several occasions (with Wormtail saving HP at some point), but by the end HP will have mastered Occlumency and be able to block out LV. Book 7 will involve HP willfully possessing LV, and then it is a case of who is the stronger wizard (DD will be completely incapable of directly influencing the result). "esmith" From crobocker at aol.com Mon Aug 2 12:43:00 2004 From: crobocker at aol.com (c_robocker) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 12:43:00 -0000 Subject: Narcissa sent Dobby? (Was Re: Lily WAS muggle-born and what happened in CoS.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108532 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sad1199" wrote: sad1199 says: > >snip > Now, a question. I have read these books through at least 5 times > and I am an intelligent person but! I still don't understand WHY > Dobby tried to prevent Harry from returning to Hogwarts. I >snip CRobo says, I'm rereading them again too and I had some similar questions about Dobby's motives. Here's some speculation (probably not new but an appropriate time to mention it) What if Narcissa sent Dobby? We know that she didn't want to send her son to Durmstrang where he would have learned Dark Arts, but instead talked Lucious into letting Draco go to Hogwarts. She could tell Dobby to leave the house and keep a secret from Lucious - and even then Dobby'd have to punish himself? If it's worthy of expansion I'll let someone who is more eloquent pick up the thought and run. Otherwise, I'll go back to lurking. Cheers! CRobo. From melaniertay at yahoo.com Sun Aug 1 15:12:36 2004 From: melaniertay at yahoo.com (Mel) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 15:12:36 -0000 Subject: prophecies and choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108533 Vivian (vmonte) wrote: > I hate the prophecy as well. I've mentioned several times that it > takes away from JKR's highlight of the importance of free will > (that runs throughout the books). I disagree. In order for a prophecy to come true, first someone must "choose" to believe it, as Voldemort did. Then he "chose" who would be the "marked" one (this is where I believe it can't possibly be Neville, it would go against choice). A prophecy is based on predicting what choices people will make (which is often easy) not fate. Meltay From iosonoregina at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 14:41:02 2004 From: iosonoregina at yahoo.com (iosonoregina) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 14:41:02 -0000 Subject: HBP theory Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108534 Hi everyone. It's my first post so be nice. Looking at my HP books on the shelf it just came to me. Sorry if I'm not good to explain it, but try to follow my thought. I'll be very synthetic: 1) Harry Potter and Philosopher Stone 2) Harry Potter and Chamber of Secrets 3) Harry Potter and Prisoner of Azkaban 4) Harry Potter and Goblet of Fire 5) Harry Potter and The Order of Phoenix 6) Harry Potter and The Half Blood Prince 7) Harry Potter and ? a) Philosopher Stone I always consider it as a positive thing. At least I suppose that it has been made for the good cause if used properly. b) Chamber of Secrets made by Slytherin used by Voldemort definitely a negative place c) Prisoner of Azkaban synonym for Sirius. Even though we were made to believe that he was a traitor, murderer and Voldemort "best friend" at the end we found out that he was/is a positive character d) Goblet of Fire at first sight just an impressive magic object, but it was used against Harry so for me is a negative thing e) The Order of Phoenix in a few words: a positive organization that suppose to fight against evil. Did anyone notice this pattern? So, according to this HBP should be a negative character? I'm not going to discuss here who he mite be, but can we think about him as a negative character and in that case eliminate some "suspects"? Any thoughts? maya From dzeytoun at cox.net Mon Aug 2 15:04:02 2004 From: dzeytoun at cox.net (dzeytoun at cox.net) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 11:04:02 -0400 Subject: Occlumency Lessons WAS Re: Snape's Attitude Toward the Students Message-ID: <20040802150402.BSDK28993.lakermmtao05.cox.net@smtp.east.cox.net> No: HPFGUIDX 108535 Boyd T. Smythe wrote: So where would DD have the time to tutor Harry in Occlumency or anything else? It feels like a given of the series that DD is a kindly, brilliant, powerful and *busy* wizard who can only give small portions of his time to Harry. Besides, Harry hasn't asked DD to teach him, has he? DZEYTOUN: But Dumbledore himself says it was a mistake for him not to teach Harry Occlumency. That implies that Dumbledore certainly thinks he has the time. And watching Harry "more closely than you can have imagined" certainly has to take quite a chunk of hours as well. As we've said with regard to Snape and McGonagall, time at Hogwarts seems to expand and contract as needed for the plot. As far as Harry asking Dumbledore to teach him, well, I'm not sure Dumbledore will leave it up to Harry and I don't really think he should. I mean you have a kid who is in danger of mental assault and possession by the most evil wizard around. In addition, he might endanger all sorts of other people if Voldemort seizes control. Yes, Dumbledore does need a new relationship with Harry, and yes, he does need to start treating Harry with more respect, but let's not be silly here! This is a time when you approach a sixteen-year-old and say "Listen kid, this is how we're going to handle this situation." Importantly, and the thing Dumbledore did not do in OOTP, you also say "this is WHY we're going to do this." Dzeytoun From chinaskinotes at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 2 15:46:35 2004 From: chinaskinotes at sbcglobal.net (chinaskisnotes) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 15:46:35 -0000 Subject: another wacko theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108536 Lorel: > Do Fred and George have a time-turner? How did they know the outcome > of the World Cup ahead of time? > > I just reread that chapter last night! In the past I'd always assumed > that it was a very lucky guess, but their demeanor in the chapter > implies otherwise. It appears that they had planned to gamble all > along: they know exactly how much money they have to wager; they give > their prediction for the outcome of the game without any hesitation > as if they'd previously determined what they would say; and at the > end of the game immediately approach Bagman with the demeanor of > people confidently claiming what is theirs: > > "For Fred and George had just scrambled over the backs of their seats > and were standing in front of Ludo Bagman with broad grins on their > faces, their hands outstretched." > > The "broad grins" made me think something's up. They are too cocky > about this. The MoM regulates the whole Time thing way too closely, > so I doubt it's a time-turner per se, but maybe they've invented > something else? My problem with this is that F&G are pretty fair players- they have a sense of fairness and honesty (well, not-cheating honesty, at least-even when Slytherin cheats at Quidditch, they don't cheat to retaliate). Peeking ahead with a time turner or otherwise would be cheating, and thus putting them on the same level as Bagman. I can't see them doggedly pursuing Bagman (who WAS a cheater) if they were guilty of a similar offense. Besides, they wouldn't have much of a case against Bagman if it came out that they cheated. F&G may be a lot of things, but not cheaters. chinaski From meidbh at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 16:31:02 2004 From: meidbh at yahoo.com (meidbh) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 16:31:02 -0000 Subject: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108537 > > "meidbh" quotes: "Why did Voldemort pick Harry and not Neville? JK Rowling replies -> Dumbledore explains this in 'Order of the Phoenix'. Voldemort identified more with the half-blood boy and therefore decided he must be the greater risk." > > Aggie: (With evil grin - playing devil's advocate!) "That's not JKR saying that Harry's 'The One' - just reiterating *Dumbledore's* belief! Knowing how 'cunning' she can be, this could still be a trick answer!" Meidbh responds; Aaaaagh - no - don't say that - theory quicksand threatens again! :-) I did think of that actually but she does sound quite clear and definite here. No sense of coyness or dodging the question. No "VMs given DD his story and DD believes him" type stuff. I'm going to trust her on this one. And maybe it's not so terribly important to the 'who has the power to vanquish VM' question because all it really tells us is VM thought Harry was a greater risk. VM could have been wrong... I guess I hoped this quote would resolve the debate on VMs motivations that night and let it roll back onto the questions that might tell us what the future holds. (How naive to underestimate HPFGUs love of a good debate though ) IMVVHO the Prophecy question whose answer will really tell us what is going to happen next is ***Has VM marked anyone as his equal yet?*** Meidbh :-) From karen at dacafe.com Mon Aug 2 15:50:43 2004 From: karen at dacafe.com (karen at dacafe.com) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 08:50:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Why sort half-blood Riddle into Slytherin? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <44459.192.35.35.34.1091461843.squirrel@cafemail.giscafe.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108538 Hi all, This question may have been answered but with the sorting hat's song in OOP I want to know how Tom Riddle with his half-blood hertitage got sorted into Slytherin? Could there be other "half-bloods" in Slytherin? Thanks for the chance to ask this question, kmc From witchypooh67 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 16:57:03 2004 From: witchypooh67 at yahoo.com (Kelly Duhon) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 09:57:03 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040802165703.48810.qmail@web52208.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108539 Lisa wrote: Snape can't let that go, try as he might. Constantly putting Harry in his place is a way of getting back at James. Kelly: I agree that Snape seems to hate HP because he is so much like his father. That makes sense to me. What I do not understand, however, is the favoritism he shows toward Malfoy. If Snape has indeed turned his back on LV and the DE, why does he favor the son on a known DE? It makes me wonder where Snape's true loyalties lie. I have started reading OooP again, too. :) --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Mon Aug 2 17:42:37 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 17:42:37 -0000 Subject: Snape's choice of memories for the pensieve In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108540 > > SSSusan wrote: > > But then again, why WOULDN'T he have wanted Harry to know his dad & > > Sirius were jerks at 15? > > > > I am so intrigued by all of this! Does anybody have any ideas on > > this?? > > > And Jen replied: > One theory (from Greywolf, I think) was the incident Harry saw > was only a "cover memory" placed in the Pensieve to protect other > memories. That way if Harry did get in there by chance, he would see > perhaps a humiliating memory, but not the actual *worst* memory > Snape is protecting. If this is true, then Snape probably > specifically chose that cover memory because it was proof of James' > arrogance. > > I like this theory, but wonder if Snape would really want Harry > seeing him in a humiliating position, even if he's also seeing James > as an arrogant bully? That's the downside of the idea for me. So I say: I think the cover memory is a good theory. Lets look at the "suspicious activity" surrounding this little event, shall we? 1. Snape either a) borrowed the pensieve from someone (most likely Dumbledore), or b) he has one of his own. I'm leaning towards (a) since I doubt they are common items. Dumbledore is 150 with thoughts probably doing 150 in his head, which is why he got the thing. Snape wouldn't really need it that we can see, so he probably borrowed it, or Dumbledore suggested he use it. 2a. If Dumbledore suggested Snape use the pensieve, he would probably warn Snape not to let Harry know he was using it, since Harry knows what it is and he sort-of knows how it works. And he woulod do this because... 2b. Harry is curious as a cat. What happened the first time he saw a pensieve? That's right, he jumped in with both feet :). No matter what, Snape should know better than to leave the thing even within Harry's reach. He'll just _have_ to see what it is. 3. Snape actually _lets_ Harry see him putting the memories into the pensieve. If that doesn't pique the curiosity meter, I don't know what will. 4. Then Snape leaves Harry alone with the pensieve. Was that smart? Don't think so... So Snape shows Harry that he is using the pensieve, knowing full well that Harry can't help but look into it, and then leaves Harry alone with it. Ok, so MAYBE Snape didn't have anything to do with Montague just coincidentally showing up in a toilet, and Draco running down to get the Head-of-House, during the occlumency lessons. But maybe Snape had something planned for later ("left a cake in the oven, Potter, be right back"), and Draco provided a better excuse for running out. Or maybe, Snape arranged for Draco to interrupt him that evening with some excuse. Snape may have even been involved in Montague "reappearing" at that moment. All we know is that when a "coincidence" happens in a HP book, JK had it happen for a very particular reason. Now, the shockingly subtle thought here is almost funny how JK fools us. *Obviously* Snape wants to protect this horrid memory of Harry's father and co mistreating him. So, he _very_ *obviously* puts the memory in the pensieve, so even if Harry breaks through into Snape's mind, the memory is safe. If he wanted to hide that memory so badly, wouldn't he have put it in the pensieve a little less conspicuously? Maybe he _did_ want Harry to see it. We know that Harry is getting better at fighting this power, as seen by the last time he got into Snape's head. But that last time, he could only see a glimpse of a memory, only for a few seconds, before Snape forced him out. It wouldn't be like Snape to let Harry in and let him hang around a while for this whole scene to play out, but he (or someone he has to answer to, say Dumbledore) wants Harry to see this whole memory. So he pretends to hide it, knowing full well that Harry is going to poke around, trying to find out what this memory is. This way, Harry gets to see this memory in full. Then Snape pulls him out, pretending to be angry (though he is a good pretender, I'll admit) and chases him off so he can think about what he saw. He sees his father and Sirius in a whole new light, plus his mother and Lupin. Sirius and James are no longer infallible heroes, and Lily didn't even care much for James at all at first, even though James Potter, who had all the girls chasing him, had a crush on HER. We also see Snape use the term Mudblood for the first time: notice how he is a Slytherin (thus almost certainly a pure-blood), and yet he doesn't use bloodlines as an insult except in the direst of situations. Definitely an insight into his character. My point is that Snape wasn't hiding the memories. He only made it look like that, ensuring that Harry _will_ see that particular one, and seeing his family, particularly his father, as human, instead of this ghostly god-like figurehead. Just some thoughts... ~Yb From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 2 17:57:39 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 13:57:39 -0400 Subject: Snape's choice of memories for the pensieve (was: Death and Snape) Message-ID: <003601c478ba$33cb2ce0$bcc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108541 SSSusan: <<<"These memories are awful and I don't want Potter to know this about me." Is it possible that Snape's motive WAS preventing Harry from seeing something about some OTHER person/people, not necessarily just that he didn't want Harry to see him upside in grey undies? >>> DuffyPoo: I don't usually get in on the Snape conversations so please excuse my butting in. What about "These memories are awful and I don't want Potter to know this about me because LV is getting into his head and I can't afford to have LV know this about me?" Snape said to Harry after his second Legilimens attempt, "You are allowing me access to memories you fear, handing me weapons!" Would this memory be a weapon LV could use against Snape? Snape is still, at the very least, meeting with those who are in LV's inner circle. (I have a whole 'nother theory about Snape but I'm still working on it at the moment.) Is he meeting with LV as well (the *next man* in the graveyard scene)? If so, he doesn't want LV to have any access to this memory (or the others in the pensieve that we didn't see) that can be used against him. He can block it himself with Occlumency. He put it/them in the pensieve just in case HP managed to break through to Snape's mind. He wouldn't be able to prevent LV getting the memory from HP now that LV is breaking into HP's mind. Unfortunately, Snape didn't plan on HP sticking his head in the Pensieve. There, I think that made sense. I'm sure you'll tell me if it didn't ;-) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 2 17:58:47 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 13:58:47 -0400 Subject: Remember when Harry claimed he was Neville Longbottom on the Knight Bus? Message-ID: <003e01c478ba$5c58f340$bcc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108542 vivian said: "What if (not based on canon, just a thought) Voldemort had originally picked Neville but was swayed by someone else to go after the Potter family. Could Snape have convinced Voldemort to go after Jame's family because of his personal hatred towards James? James saved Snape's life once, perhaps Snape couldn't kill him, but someone else could. There has to be a reason why Voldemort commented to Harry that his mother need not have died. Why, when he seems to enjoy killing anyone and everyone?" DuffyPoo: Good theory. Wish it was in canon then my theory could go out the window. (I have a big long essay type e-mail written about my theory on Snape, I'm going to think on it for a while before I post. But it fits in with your theory. Oh, maybe not, I just read another post of yours...) However, I don't see any reason why Lily had to have died either. She didn't have to die, nor did James, for that matter, if LV picked a different time to show up at GH. Wormtail was in the Order and would probably know James' schedule if he was doing work for the Order. LV could have gone there when James was out. (Didn't JKR say James didn't have to 'work' because of his fortune but he did something very important?) Obviously, James needed to be killed for some reason...as you said, to destroy the Potter line, perhaps. In which case, what does LV know about the Potter family that we don't yet?. Lily didn't have to die because she's not in the Potter line, but she wouldn't get out of the way, so LV could finish off the Potter line. Your "why, when he seems to enjoy killing anyone and everyone" is my exact question when people say LV chose to go after HP and him alone. WHY? When Neville, at the time, also fit the prophecy (as much as LV knew), and when who knows who else could possibly fit the prophecy someday. LV wasn't opposed to killing people or causing them to be killed by others (I think the DEs did as much killing as he did...maybe more...like Charles Manson). He'd have gone after every kid born anywhere near the end of July...and...he only heard the first part of the prophecy (I never thought of this before) he didn't know it would be a boy. The "and the Dark Lord will mark *him* as his equal" part came after the eavesdropper was chucked out of the Hog's Head. DuffyPoo again: >>While re-reading PoA, I also noticed that HP had a dream, the night before the final Quidditch game against Slytherin. Harry dreamed he had overslept, and "Wood was yelling, 'Where were you? We had to use Neville instead!'" Another link/hint?<< vmonte responds: "I wonder if Neville will make the polyjuice potion and impersonate Harry? Neville is very courageous. He may try to lead Voldemort away from Harry and friends. " DuffyPoo: Good idea....Then Neville can grab some ear muffs and kill LV with a Mandrake plant! ;-) Or, how bad does that stinksap get as the Mibulus Mimbletonia ages? SSSusan: "At the risk of sounding nasty when I don't want to...perhaps these two things were left out of the You-Know-Whats *because* they won't play into the plot in any way??" DuffyPoo: My "I was surpised they left it out of the ... oops, as well. ;)" was in regard to AJ's post about Harry calling himself Neville on the Knight Bus, not my own dream about Neville replacing Harry at Quidditch post. I knew I didn't make that clear as soon as I pressed 'send.' I'm afraid I'm in the "the You-Know-Whats" are not canon camp. JKR didn't write the screenplay or direct the...oops, almost said the 'm' word! I don't care what thrills and chills she got when she saw it. Stuff isn't left out because it isn't important (always) it is left out due to time constraints, clarity for the audience, it doesn't advance the story, etc. Just look at LOTR. Arwen says: "Frodo, Im Arwen. Telin le thaed." Speaking in Elvish she should really have used Frodo's Sindarin name 'Iorhael' but why add to the confusion of Gandalf, Mithrandir, Gray Pilgrim, Gandalf Stormcrow, etc.? If they put everything in those three movies that was in the book, we'd still be at the theatre. ;-) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 2 18:02:57 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 18:02:57 -0000 Subject: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: <20040802165703.48810.qmail@web52208.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108543 Kelly: > I agree that Snape seems to hate HP because he is so much like his > father. That makes sense to me. What I do not understand, > however, is the favoritism he shows toward Malfoy. If Snape has > indeed turned his back on LV and the DE, why does he favor the son > on a known DE? It makes me wonder where Snape's true loyalties > lie. SSSusan: Oft-asked question. Many of us believe he treats Draco with favoritism because he must maintain the appearance of being a loyal Voldy follower amongst the DE kids. They're sure to write home, you know... wouldn't do for their DE parents to doubt Snape's loyalty. Siriusly Snapey Susan From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 18:06:32 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 11:06:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lily WAS muggle-born and what happened in CoS. In-Reply-To: <002d01c478b7$538c2be0$bcc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: <20040802180632.25901.qmail@web50110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108544 --- Cathy Drolet wrote: > It all seems to be against Muggle-borns, far more than half-bloods. > Besides, Riddle is Slytherin's heir, and he is half-blood himself. I don't get too hung up on the whole pureblood-halfblood definition stuff because I suspect that it really doesn't stand up to careful scrutiny. For the Malfoys and Blacks of the wizarding world, you'd have to be able to trace your family back through multiple generations of nothing but wizards and witches to qualify as a pureblood. Of course, it would then also help if you're wealthy, have a gruesome old house, plenty of house elves and know a lot of Dark Arts spells. I lean towards the Red Hen publication argument that while Tom Riddle hated his father, he really doesn't hate muggles or muggle-borns anymore than he hates other people. All that mudblood stuff is just to rally the kind of troops he needs for his world conquest plans. That's why I reject the "Peter must be a pureblood because they let him play in the DE sandbox" argument: Voldemort will take help wherever he can get it until he reaches his goal. I haven't seen anything in the series that indicates that being considered a half-blood doesn't have more to do with the perceptions of the person who's doing the considering rather than the person being considered. It seems to have more than a bit of "people we don't like" mixed in with the designation. And for those people who are undeniably pureblood - by even the most intolerant standards - like Arthur Weasley, there's always the "disgrace to the name of wizard" insult to throw at them, as Cathy says. As for Salazar Slytherin himself, again I site Red Hen Publications. I wouldn't necessarily take Tom Riddle's opinion on this as gospel. Tom/VOldemort has an agenda and he/they have a tendency to alter the facts to fit their preconceived notions. So I'll give old Salazar a break until I can see proof that he really hated muggleborns rather than was just nervous about them. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From caseylane at wideopenwest.com Mon Aug 2 18:09:06 2004 From: caseylane at wideopenwest.com (Casey) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 18:09:06 -0000 Subject: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: <20040802165703.48810.qmail@web52208.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108545 > Kelly: > > I agree that Snape seems to hate HP because he is so much like his father. That makes sense to me. What I do not understand, however, is the favoritism he shows toward Malfoy. If Snape has indeed turned his back on LV and the DE, why does he favor the son on a known DE? It makes me wonder where Snape's true loyalties lie. Casey: Maybe because Malfoy is a brown-noser? I mean he's the son of a very wealthy, highly respected, old wizarding family, and he shows Snape a lot of respect. Harry doesn't, he back talks and argues all the time, which, in Snape's mind, makes him arrogant like James was. Snape was wrong in the beginning but Harry hasn't done anything to disabuse Snape of his first impression. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 18:17:03 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 18:17:03 -0000 Subject: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108546 Casey: snip. > Snape was wrong in the beginning but Harry hasn't done anything to > disabuse Snape of his first impression. Alla: I would put it differently. It is not Harry's job to show Snape's that he is not his father. It is Snape's job as a teacher to see Harry for himself. > Casey: snip. > I always took it as punishment for Harry's father. Alla: And you summmed up perfectly the part of Snape's personality which I loathe so much. He has NO right to punish Harry for the sins of his father. NONE, IMO. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 18:27:07 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 18:27:07 -0000 Subject: Why was Harry in mortal danger in Dobby's eyes? (was: Lily WAS muggle-born) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108547 > SSSusan: snip. > > Anyway, I maintain that Lucius dropped the diary?whether to hurt > Arthur's reputation, to draw Harry into danger, to wreak havoc on > mudbloods, or to get DD into hot water [or all the above] ON HIS > OWN. I maintain that he did this in order to help smooth his own way > to a position of power at Hogwarts and at the Ministry. > Alla: Susan, I think I agree with you. I don't think that Diary was a part of Lucius master plan to help Voldie return. Get Ginny or Harry in dager? Yes, absolutely. Help Voldie to come back? I don't think so mainly for the reason (speculation of course) that Lucius did not know or was not sure whether his former master could return at all. I am not sure whether Lucius wanted all the power for himself, but I think that this will be very in character for him to do. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 2 18:31:33 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 14:31:33 -0400 Subject: Lily WAS muggle-born and what happened in CoS. Message-ID: <005501c478be$f00475c0$bcc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108548 DuffyPoo: > My personal opinion is that LM was going to give the diary to HP, > or why would Dobby have indicated that HP would be in mortal > danger? HP's mortal danger would be: being caught and having his > soul sucked out by Dementors. Geoff: "Sorry, I don't follow your drift here. How do Demenotrs come into this?" DuffyPoo again: Um...Dobby says HP will be in 'mortal danger' if he goes back to Hogwarts. If Ginny Weasley were the intended recipient of the Diary, I just can't see how that would cause HP to be in 'mortal danger'. If, however, as I said, HP is the intended recipient (and the plan was changed at the last moment) HP is discovered attacking and killing Muggle-borns...he's not going to walk away free. Unless there's a wizard juvenile detention somewhere, the kid would be going to Azkaban. The Dementors were pretty quick to zero in on HP in PoA - for no reason, an innocent - and Fudge was pretty quick to have a dementor suck out young Barty Crouch's soul in GoF...he wasn't even questioned. sad1199: > "Someone posted about a passage from Lucius' house to Hogwarts, is > there direct canon on this or speculation? " DuffyPoo: > No canon that I know of but that would have to be a heck of a long > tunnel. The Malfoy mansion is in "Wiltshire" appears to me to be a > fair distance to anywhere in Scotland (no matter where in Scotland > Hogwarts is supposed to be). Geoff: >>>The nearest point in Wiltshire to the Scottish border, which itself is a long way south of the Highland Region, would be of the order of 400 miles. Wiltshire is a county to the west of London.<<< DuffyPoo again: So, are you saying I'm right, that it would be a heck of a long tunnel? DuffyPoo: > I haven't ruled something to do with the passage on the fourth > floor behind the mirror that had been blocked since the winter of > CoS. > It's odd to me that no one in the school "last winter" felt any > vibration from a tunnel collapse. Geoff: "Why? The tunnel entrance at the school end would be more of a passageway; Hogwarts is not built into the side of a hill as far as I know so the collapse would very likely have occurred in the underground section well away from the buildings." DuffyPoo: Beg pardon, I just instinctively felt someone would have 'felt' something. Even a collapse outside could have, might have, caused vibration inside; think earthquake. Since we don't know exactly where on the fourth floor this tunnel starts, or where it ends, the bottom of the stairs or slide could still be in the school. If the tunnel HP uses collapsed, someone would feel it, I'm sure When the tunnel in the CoS collapsed, I'm sure they must have felt it, in the school, but since they shortly knew what happened, there was no need to discuss it. None of this really matters, it's just a feeling I had when I first read the reference F&G make to the tunnel collapsing. I thought they would feel vibrations, but as it was never mentioned, an alternative is someone closing in the tunnel from the other end. To F&G it would look like it collapsed, since it was completely blocked. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 18:31:58 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 18:31:58 -0000 Subject: Percy Weasley In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108549 George wrote: > What does everyone think of the possibility of Percy Weasley becoming > Minister of Magic? snip. Alla: Actually, I don't think anybody mentioned Percy as a possible candidate yet, but I think that he is too young yet, althought I don't think we know what the minimal age requirement for becoming a Minister From manawydan at ntlworld.com Mon Aug 2 18:46:22 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 19:46:22 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Wizarding Professions References: <1091431442.38115.35114.m24@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <000c01c478c1$0281d1a0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 108550 Steve wrote: >Another good example, Fred and George's Joke shop; let's look down the > road several years and assume the business is very successfull. Fred >and George aren't going to have time to make everything themselves. >So, the will have a whole factory full of people; probably several >factories. One that specializes in fireworks. In that factory, one >person will work on rockets, another on Cathrine wheels, another on >firecrackers, another on complex airborne displays. Just the fireworks >factory alone will probably have many many emplyoyees. Then the joke >part of the business. Some guy will sit on an assembly line all day >long enchanting trick wands, another guy will form the wands from >sticks of wood, etc... etc.... In another department, a whole crew of >people will make trick sweets. An interesting thought, and one where there's very little canon, is whether production in the WW is based on factories or on workshops. All the businesses we see in the books appear to be small ones - we don't hear the factory hooter going at Ollivander's and hundreds of wandmakers streaming out to the pub at lunchtime, for example! The only _possible_ exception are the broomstick makers, where there's a slight implication that one or two manufacturers dominate the market for "quality" broomsticks. That's not to say of course that there aren't dozens of "village broommakers" turning out the kind of slow steady ones that are great for getting Mrs Witch to the farmers' market to do her shopping, or for the kids to learn on, but wouldn't get you anywhere against a Nimbus or a Firebolt. So maybe, rather than having a factory attached, Gred and Forge would have a network of small suppliers up and down the country, each of whom had a good line in producing whatever was wanted. I do wonder what happened to Gambol and Japes, though. Can Diagon Alley _really_ support two joke shops? Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From caseylane at wideopenwest.com Mon Aug 2 18:53:54 2004 From: caseylane at wideopenwest.com (Casey) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 18:53:54 -0000 Subject: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108551 > > Casey: > > snip. > > > I always took it as punishment for Harry's father. > > > Alla: > > And you summmed up perfectly the part of Snape's personality which I > loathe so much. He has NO right to punish Harry for the sins of his > father. NONE, IMO. Okay, right off the bat I'll admit I'm a Snape apologist. For 11 years he's heard stories about how Harry Potter, the son of nemeses James Potter, saved the wizarding world. The golden boy has had a golden son, who has now come to Hogwarts to begin second generation of cruelty and rule breaking. Snape has no idea what kind of life Harry's led, he can only picture a spoiled upbringing because he's "The Boy Who Lived" and the "Savior of the Wizarding World". Harry comes to class and looks as if he isn't paying attention (even though we know differently). Snape swoops in to confront the spoiled boy using words meant to bring him down to earth. To let him know he won't continue to receive special treatment. Harry back talks his teacher, which more or less proves to Snape right away that Harry *is* like James, not showing any respect for authority. In many ways Harry is like James. He doesn't have the cruel streak but he flagrantly disregards the rules, gets himself and his friends into lethal situations and Dumbledore ignores it all. In fact he gets rewarded for his rule breaking and extra house points. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 2 18:54:09 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 14:54:09 -0400 Subject: Lily's grandparents Message-ID: <005e01c478c2$18c99870$bcc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108552 "esmith" "On JKR's website, whilst answering a question about what constitutes a half-blood wizard, JKR stated that HP would be considered half- blood due to his maternal grandparents! DuffyPoo: I believe this is a mistake on JKR's part, and I will believe that until it has been there awhile. She meant to say Harry's grandparents (I think) but that would lead to speculation about James' side of the family. Quickly changing the answer she made a mistake and left in grandparents when it should have said "Mother's parents". That's my theory. (She still has the mistake about the prefects and points business which we know has been corrected by a new edition of OotP) If it is not a mistake, it is very simple. If Lily is the first witch in a long string of Muggles (as we have been led to believe) her grandparents were Muggles as well and JKR is using "grandparents" here to connect with "grandparents" in the next paragraph in her answer about Aryans (sp). esmith: "If one parent is a witch/wizard and one is a muggle - which world do they live in?" DuffyPoo: Good question. Seamus is a half-blood and seems to know a lot about the wizarding world. I can't think who any other half-bloods at the school are, except HP, and he's no good as an example as he was raised by Muggles. "esmith" "This leads on to a number of other questions; "(1) Does Petunia's knowledge of Azkaban stem from the fact that one of her parents was imprisoned there! (Hence there need to live with the Muggle parent)" DuffyPoo: "And what the ruddy hell are Dementors?" [Vernon speaking] "They guard the wizard prison, Azkaban,' said Aunt Petunia "How do you know that?" [Vernon] asked her, astonished. "I heard -- that awful boy -- telling her about them, years ago," she said jerkily As I said above, I believe Lily and Petunia's parents are Muggles. It is what we have been led to believe through five books. "(2) Is Godric's hollow the family home for Lily's mum or dad (and hence HP is descended from Gryffindor)." DuffyPoo again: Goderic's Hollow is a Muggle Village where Lily and James were hiding from LV. Goderic's Hollow was the home of Bowman Wright the inventor of the Golden Snitch. And the Lexicon says that James and Lily were living as Muggles there, in a two story cottage. JKR has confirmed, I believe, that Goderic's Hollow is named after Goderic Gryffindor. Personally I think Lily's parents were Muggles, regardless of how JKR wrote her answer on the website. Lily would be a half-blood if her grandparents were Muggles but one of her parents was magical, yet she is nearly always referred to as Muggle-born or the more tasteless Mudblood. Can't think Snape would mix up Mudblood and half-blood. (3) Is this theory absolute twaddle???" DuffyPoo: Well, I don't know about twaddle, but that last question certainly gave me a good laugh! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 18:55:55 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 18:55:55 -0000 Subject: The Power, Time Travel and Occlumency In-Reply-To: <20040802162336.9785.qmail@webmail31.rediffmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108553 Amey: I don't think time travel will be used to do anything that important. Saving Sirius was one thing, (after all, he did not live much on borrowed time. I wonder if Dumbledore knew that Sirius was anyways going to die not much later and maybe that's why he wanted to save him from a fate which was much worse than death in a duel, trying to save his godchild.), but saving Potters is a wholely different thing. When Dumbledore says that *the consequences of our actions are always so complicated, so diverse, that predicting the future is a very difficult business indeed...*, there is also one more side to this, if we change something by time travel, it is going to have very complex impact on the world. Think of Tom Riddle, if he is adopted by some good family, then he does not hate the thought to go back to orphanage. This might induce him not to stop attacks when he opened the Chamber, or he might not open the Chamber at all. He might marry, might have children, and then someday they might open the Chamber. I am not saying that opening the Chamber is a must, and that it must happen irrespective of anything else. But nobody knows the consequences, and so Dumbledore (or should I say JKR) will not take that chance. IMO any ending which involves massive time travel will leave more questions unanswered than solving the questions. vmonte responds: If time-travel comes back Harry is not going to be able to save his parents, period. The problem with time-travel stories (and why I usually hate them) is that (as several fans have posted) they can be used as an easy fix. I would feel seriously cheated at the end of the series if at the end of book seven we were to see James, Lily and Harry holding hands with Lily proclaiming: "I knew you would save us. Look it's starting to fade, the scar..." I think that JKR has built some rules into time-travel. I believe that DD warns Hermione of the consequences in PoA because there are rules that need to be followed. You could actually make things worse when you mess with time-travel and history. You could kill a bad guy but in the process allow an even worse bad guy into power. Maybe Voldemort would have never come into power if DD didn't defeat Grindelwald in the first place. Who knows? DD is definitely messing with time somehow, and I think he has made some serious mistakes. vmonte From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 19:06:45 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 19:06:45 -0000 Subject: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108554 casey: > Okay, right off the bat I'll admit I'm a Snape apologist. Alla: LOL! And as many posters know - I am not. Casey: snip. Snape has no idea what kind of life > Harry's led, he can only picture a spoiled upbringing because > he's "The Boy Who Lived" and the "Savior of the Wizarding World". > > Harry comes to class and looks as if he isn't paying attention (even > though we know differently). Snape swoops in to confront the spoiled > boy using words meant to bring him down to earth. To let him know he > won't continue to receive special treatment. Harry back talks his > teacher, which more or less proves to Snape right away that Harry > *is* like James, not showing any respect for authority. Alla: Sorry, Casey. I have no sympathy for Snape in that scene. What I saw was incredibly sadistic teacher having a go at the eleven year old orphan, who just been thrown in the world, unknown to him. By the way, are you sure that Snape had no idea what kind of life Harry led? He is supposed to be Dumbleldore's trusted person. Surely, if it is so Dumbledore told him what kind of muggles(the worst one) he was leaving Harry with. If Dumbledore would not, McGonagall could have done so (Snape appears to have decent relationbship with her). Some time ago myself and Potioncat discussed whether students had any kind of assignments before the first clas and I think (at least me and Potioncat) agreed that no assignments were given out yet. Now, it is quite possible that by making Snape mentioning those potions to Harry, she foreshadowed their usefullness int he final battle, but it still does not make Snape's actions look better, because how would he know that? Casey: > In many ways Harry is like James. He doesn't have the cruel streak > but he flagrantly disregards the rules, gets himself and his friends > into lethal situations and Dumbledore ignores it all. In fact he > gets rewarded for his rule breaking and extra house points. Alla: We will have to REALLY disagree on this one, before I start ranting. :o) Just one point - Harry usually breaks rules with the noble intentions in mind and that to me excuses a lot of things. By the way, he gest rewarded for fighting with Voldie (and winning often) From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 2 19:08:52 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 15:08:52 -0400 Subject: Why sort half-blood Riddle into Slytherin? Message-ID: <006701c478c4$26eaed30$bcc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108555 kmc "Hi all, This question may have been answered but with the sorting hat's song in OOP I want to know how Tom Riddle with his half-blood hertitage got sorted into Slytherin? Could there be other "half-bloods" in Slytherin? Thanks for the chance to ask this question," DuffyPoo: Hello to you too! My first answer would be that regardless of purity of blood, Tom Riddle was a direct descendent of Salazar Slytherin through his mother. My second answer is, I don't have any proof that only pure-bloods now reside in Slytherin House. If you believe the sorting hat does the actual sorting, and not the kids' preferences, (that is what I believe), then the sorting hat at least considered Harry for Slytherin. He is half-blood as well. If Tom Riddle was a Slytherin and HP could have been, what's to say there are not others? We just haven't met them yet, or at least don't know their blood-status yet.. Also, if you check on JKR's site, there is a story about Mafalda, a Weasley cousin who didn't make it into GoF. She was to be the daughter of "I think Mum's got a second cousin who's an accountant, but we never talk about him" and his Muggle wife. She was going to end up in Slytherin. Unfortunately, she got written out of the book. Does that count as proof that there are half-bloods in Slytherin? ;-) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From caseylane at wideopenwest.com Mon Aug 2 19:18:43 2004 From: caseylane at wideopenwest.com (Casey) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 19:18:43 -0000 Subject: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108556 > Alla: > By the way, are you sure that Snape had no idea what kind of life > Harry led? He is supposed to be Dumbleldore's trusted person. Surely, > if it is so Dumbledore told him what kind of muggles(the worst one) > he was leaving Harry with. If Dumbledore would not, McGonagall could > have done so (Snape appears to have decent relationbship with her). Casey: I imagine Harry's location would be on a "Need To Know" basis. Dumbledore knows how quickly things can get out. I can't imagine him letting Harry's whereabouts be known before he goes to Hogwarts. Alla: > Now, it is quite possible that by making Snape mentioning those > potions to Harry, she foreshadowed their usefullness int he final > battle, but it still does not make Snape's actions look better, > because how would he know that? Casey: Or maybe Snape was just seeing if Harry had bothered trying to learn anything as a child. Others, like Hermione have, but Harry hadn't bothered. Again, that's going with the assumption that Snape has no idea where Harry was growing up. > Alla: > > Just one point - Harry usually breaks rules with the noble intentions > in mind and that to me excuses a lot of things. By the way, he gest > rewarded for fighting with Voldie (and winning often) Casey: Roaming the halls and sneaking to Honeydukes when he was supposed to remain at Hogwarts wasn't for a nobel cause. Neither is roaming the halls with his invisibility cloak. Yes he gets extra points for fighting Voldimort, but in the process almost gets Ron killed with the chess match and eaten by spiders. Sure he got saved but, if I were Molly Weasley, I wouldn't want my child to hang out with Harry. As an adult I would have to take Snapes stance that Harry Potter is a lot of trouble in one boy and he needs to be reigned in. But then my kids call me mommy meanie. From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Mon Aug 2 18:10:31 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 18:10:31 -0000 Subject: Why sort half-blood Riddle into Slytherin? In-Reply-To: <44459.192.35.35.34.1091461843.squirrel@cafemail.giscafe.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108557 kmc asked: I want to know how Tom Riddle with his half-blood hertitage got sorted > into Slytherin? > > Could there be other "half-bloods" in Slytherin? Well, who would be more deserving of a place in Slytherin than Slytherin's heir himself? Not to mention, he had the personality qualities that befit a Slytherin. Actually, I think it's really funny that Tom Riddle was a half-blood, and the last of his family line, and he was the descendant of ol' Sal Slytherin, who seemed to place purity of blood over anything else when measuring a wizard's worth. Probably had poor old Sal spinning in his grave. Another thought: we know LV/TR isn't the HBP. What if it is someone in his bloodline, like Sal Slytherin? It could explain why he put so much focus on purity of blood. Anyway, that's why. And regarding other "half-bloods?" I doubt it. There would have to be a really good reason, like when the Hat said Harry would do well in Slytherin, it was because even though his mother was a muggle-born, so he wasn't pure-blood, he had so many qualities like TR did (explained in CoS by Dumbledore as "Voldemort had tranferred soem of his powers to you [Harry]"). So it's possible that some of the Slytherins have muggle blood in them (through probably way WAY up the family tree). In fact, I would venture to guess that nearly all of them do if you could trace the family lines back far enough. After all, Sirius said that all the pure-blood families have been mixing for a while now, so they're all related in some way or another, so without ANY non-pure blood, inbreeding is a serious threat. And it's possibly rearing it's ugly head already with Crabbe and Goyle. :) ~Yb From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 19:31:23 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 19:31:23 -0000 Subject: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108558 Geoff: Let's suppose. If Voldemort had attacked Neville first, would Neville have survived? Was he with his parents at the time of the attack on Harry? Or were they away and he was with Grandma Longbottom? Would any of these three have had any way of blocking an Avada Kedavra spell? If he had atacked and killed Neville first and gone on to Godric's Hollow, then the same scenario might well have played out and we would have a similar setup to the current one but minus Neville. Whichever way, he might still have finished up on a hiding to nothing.... Thoughts? vmonte responds: I don't think Neville would've survived as a child. But I do think that Neville has an important part in the ultimate defeat. The prophecy has been carefully worded so that no reference of time is mentioned. You don't know when, where, and a what time anything will take place. You also don't know if part of the prophecy has been fullfilled or if it will be fullfilled in the future, or in the past if time-travel is used. I think that this may be an important key to the whole prophecy: time is not mentioned because it plays an important factor in how the final outcome may turn out. vivian From meidbh at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 18:16:55 2004 From: meidbh at yahoo.com (meidbh) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 18:16:55 -0000 Subject: Snape's choice of memories for the pensieve (was: Death and Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108559 marty wrote: "but isn't it curious that this is one of his worst memories that he wants to keep hidden? What about all the stuff that he is doing for DD, and his life prior to becoming Potions master - especially while a DE?" Meidbh Agreed. I always felt this was a little disappointing as a worst memory. I assumed JKR was writing to the kids on this one, that she had a momentary lapse of imagination. Could Snape's life post Grey Underwear Incident really have been so dull? Maybe there *is* more to it than meets the eye...but what?? Meidbh :-) From jferer at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 19:35:03 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 19:35:03 -0000 Subject: Percy Weasley In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108560 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > George wrote: > > > What does everyone think of the possibility of Percy Weasley > becoming > > Minister of Magic? > snip. > > > Alla: > > Actually, I don't think anybody mentioned Percy as a possible > candidate yet, but I think that he is too young yet, althought I > don't think we know what the minimal age requirement for becoming a > Minister Percy's allegiance to Fudge would be a huge negative right now, with Fudge disgraced and Harry vindicated. Besides, he's 18/19. You can't put someone with that many "negatives" in as Minister. Some people believe that Percy may have been a spy for Dumbledore, working so deeply undercover that he alienated his family. There's no support for it, but there's nothing to contradict it, either, and I like the idea because I don't like to think ill of a Weasley. Against Spy!Percy: If he's working for the Order, he's a great actor. Why did he warn Ron off Harry? he didn't have to to maintain his cover. His seemingly revolting sycophancy is consistent with the, uh, lesser aspects of Percy's makeup. For Spy!Percy: Dumbledore needs a spy in Fudge's office, so DD would take the chance to place one; Percy admired Dumbledore all his school life; he's a Weasley, and I don't want to think ill of one, Percy's a Gryffindor, which ought to mean bravery, and 99% of what Percy does that hurts his family so could be explained by him trying hard to maintain a cover. For Spy!Percy: From kateydidnt2002 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 19:48:26 2004 From: kateydidnt2002 at yahoo.com (kateydidnt2002) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 19:48:26 -0000 Subject: Why sort half-blood Riddle into Slytherin? In-Reply-To: <006701c478c4$26eaed30$bcc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108561 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > kmc > > "Hi all, > This question may have been answered but with the sorting hat's song in > OOP I want to know how Tom Riddle with his half-blood hertitage got sorted > into Slytherin? > > Could there be other "half-bloods" in Slytherin? > > Thanks for the chance to ask this question," > > Well, according to JKR's site the definition of a pureblood is quite stringent and so by that definition Harry would be a halfblood-yet the Hat still wanted to put him in Slytherin. This is something I posted in response to a similar question a while ago: Message 84538 * I would call the sorting-hat's words a generalization. I doubt that in the thousand or so years Hogwarts has been open that there has *never* been a half blood or muggle born in slytherin. In books one through four Slytherin is described as cunning, using any means to achieve their own ends and such. *That* is the main criteria for Slytherin house, and pureblood is a second consideration. It is my thought that Tom Riddle's slytherin characteristics outweighed the drawback of him being a halfblood. * I would further add this: "For instance, Slytherin / Took only pure-blood wizards / Of great cunning, just like him..." (OotP, pg. 205) This is the quote from the Sorting Hat-I would hazard a guess that while Slytherin himself was alive no half-blood was admitted to Slytherin House, however despite Slytherin's wishes and ideas and the Sorting Hat's recitation of these ideas, it does not necessarily mean the *Sorting Hat* follows those guidelines--especially since Gryffindor was the one to create the Sorting Hat. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 2 19:50:45 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 19:50:45 -0000 Subject: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108562 Alla: > > By the way, are you sure that Snape had no idea what kind of > > life Harry led? He is supposed to be Dumbleldore's trusted > > person. Surely, if it is so Dumbledore told him what kind of > > muggles(the worst one) he was leaving Harry with. If Dumbledore > > would not, McGonagall could have done so (Snape appears to have > >decent relationbship with her). Casey: > I imagine Harry's location would be on a "Need To Know" basis. > Dumbledore knows how quickly things can get out. I can't imagine > him letting Harry's whereabouts be known before he goes to > Hogwarts. SSSusan: He doesn't have to know his precise whereabouts nor the name of the people he's living with nor any other specifics of Harry's situation to get a SENSE of what Harry's life is like. Alla: > > Now, it is quite possible that by making Snape mentioning those > > potions to Harry, she foreshadowed their usefullness int he final > > battle, but it still does not make Snape's actions look better, > > because how would he know that? Casey: > Or maybe Snape was just seeing if Harry had bothered trying to > learn anything as a child. Others, like Hermione have, but Harry > hadn't bothered. Again, that's going with the assumption that Snape > has no idea where Harry was growing up. SSSusan: I'm afraid I'm not buying this, either. I mean, why just find out if *HARRY* "bothered" to learn anything as a child? Why not find out if SEVERAL of the children did so, by spreading around the questions? Instead, he asked three questions--ALL of Harry. Snape may have been curious whether Harry "bothered" to learn anything as a child [although why he didn't "bother" himself to ask DD whether Harry knew about being a wizard or would have had access to wizarding books in his childhood, who knows?], but there are ways of ascertaining this information without being a git. Siriusly Snapey Susan, who is a Snape-aholic but who's definitely not a full-fledged Snape-apologist From kateydidnt2002 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 19:59:30 2004 From: kateydidnt2002 at yahoo.com (kateydidnt2002) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 19:59:30 -0000 Subject: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108563 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Casey" wrote: > Casey: > Roaming the halls and sneaking to Honeydukes when he was supposed to > remain at Hogwarts wasn't for a nobel cause. Neither is roaming the > halls with his invisibility cloak. I would contribute these to the normal folly of youth and should be treated no different than any other child's childishness. Neither Dumbledore nor Snape seems to understand that in someways, Harry *is* just a teenager and therefore is going to act like one from time to time. >Yes he gets extra points for > fighting Voldimort, but in the process almost gets Ron killed with > the chess match and eaten by spiders. Sure he got saved but, if I > were Molly Weasley, I wouldn't want my child to hang out with Harry. > If I recall correctly, Harry didn't ask Ron to join him in confronting Quirrell--Ron and Hermione made the decision to join him, he was planning on going *alone*. And with the spiders Ron made that choice too, he could have refused to go, but he *wanted* to go despite his fears. Do not blame Ron's choices on Harry. True, Ron might not have been in the situation to make the choices he did were it not for Harry, but that is a consequence of friendship. What I notice about those around Harry is that because of his tendency to survive, others around him do to. Yes Sirius perished, but six *students* survived a full on Death Eater attack. Harry keeps on surviving and because of that people are drawn to him and they survive too. > As an adult I would have to take Snapes stance that Harry Potter is > a lot of trouble in one boy and he needs to be reigned in. But then > my kids call me mommy meanie. I agree that Harry needs guidance and "needs to be reigned in" however I do not agree with Snape in the slightest. When a parent/adult reigns in a child it is for the child's own good-and presumably the parent/adult knows something about the child. Snape on the other hand has no uncerstanding of Harry's personality-in fact he willfully misunderstands it and uses the fact that Harry needs to be "reigned in" as an excuse to act out his anger at past events. He has no thought for Harry's betterment but instead is only focused on his own revenge and hatred. From caseylane at wideopenwest.com Mon Aug 2 20:02:08 2004 From: caseylane at wideopenwest.com (Casey) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 20:02:08 -0000 Subject: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108564 > SSSusan: > He doesn't have to know his precise whereabouts nor the name of the > people he's living with nor any other specifics of Harry's situation > to get a SENSE of what Harry's life is like. Casey: Not really. Would Dumbledore actually want anyone to know that he placed the hero of the wizarding world in an abusive home? > SSSusan: > I'm afraid I'm not buying this, either. I mean, why just find out if > *HARRY* "bothered" to learn anything as a child? Why not find out if > SEVERAL of the children did so, by spreading around the questions? > Instead, he asked three questions--ALL of Harry. Casey: For all we know asking those questions may be part of Snapes first class every year, much like the "foolish wand waving" speach. I imagine he started with Harry because he was their "new celebrity". If Harry had answered something correctly Snape might have moved on, but Harry didn't. Thus he could knock Harry down from his celebrity status to that of a mortal. Then Harry back talked and confirmed Snapes worst assumptions. As for why Snape didn't ask about Harry's background, well, if he doesn't ask about the other children why should he ask about Harry? From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Aug 2 16:35:10 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 16:35:10 -0000 Subject: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry In-Reply-To: <007a01c4787e$1f163ce0$9cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108565 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: Geoff: > >Whichever way, he might still have finished up on a hiding > >to nothing... > DuffyPoo: > > Sorry, I don't understand what you're saying here. Geoff: Sorry. It's a Britishism meaning being in a no-win situation. From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Aug 2 20:12:36 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 20:12:36 -0000 Subject: For whom was the diary intended ? (Was Re: what happened in CoS.) In-Reply-To: <005501c478be$f00475c0$bcc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108566 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > Geoff: > "Sorry, I don't follow your drift here. How do Demenotrs come into > this?" > > DuffyPoo again: > Um...Dobby says HP will be in 'mortal danger' if he goes back to Hogwarts. If Ginny Weasley were the intended recipient of the Diary, I just can't see how that would cause HP to be in 'mortal danger'. If, however, as I said, HP is the intended recipient (and the plan was changed at the last moment) HP is discovered attacking and killing Muggle-borns...he's not going to walk away free. Geoff: This is obviously in the area of hypothetical speculation. However, let's consider canon for a moment... '"Haven't you guessed yet, Harry Potter?" said Riddle softly."Ginny Weasley opened the Chamber of Secrets. She strangled the school roosters and daubed threatening messages on the walls. She set the Serpent of Slytherin on four Mudbloods and the Squib's cat." "No," Harry whispered. "Yes," said Riddle calmly. "Of course, she didn't know what she was doing at first. It was very amusing......" (COS "The Heir of Slytherin" p.229 UK edition) So Riddle used the diary to possess Ginny. '"If I say it myself, Harry, I've always been able to charm the people I needed. So Ginny poured out her soul to me and her soul happened to be exactly what I wanted. I grew stronger and stronger on a diet of her deepest fears, her darkest secrets. I grew powerful, far more powerful than little Miss Weasley. Powerful enough to start feeding Miss Weasley a few of /my/ secrets, to start pouring a little of /my/ soul back into /her/..."' (COS "The Heir of Slytherin" p.228 UK edition) Taking your hypothesis that Harry was meant to get the diary, would he have reacted in the same way? I doubt it. What does Harry normally do when something bothers him? He clams up, frequently keeps it to himself until the end of the incident. I can't see him pouring out his soul to Tom's diary and Tom being able to insinuate himself into Harry's so deeply as to possess him and for him not to know what he was doing. Harry's interest in the diary dates from when he found it and because he wanted to find out more about the Chamber. If it had come to him before anything untoward had happened, would he take an interest in an old, apparently empty diary bought from a stationery shop in Vauxhall Road in or around 1942? When Voldemort did try to take over Harry, the result was very different to that with Ginny.... '"We wanted to talk to you, Harry," said Ginny, "but as you've been hiding ever since we got back - " "I didn't want anyone to talk to me," said Harry who was feeling more and more nettled. "Well, that was a bit stupid of you," said Ginny angrily, "seeing as you don't know anyone but me who's been possessed by You-Know-Who and I can tell you how it feels." Harry remained quite still as the impact of these words hit him. Then he wheeled round. "I forgot," he said. "Lucky you," said Ginny, coolly. "I'm sorry," Harry said and he meant it. "So... so, do you think I'm being possessed then?" "Well, can you remember everything you've been doing?" Ginny asked, "Are there big blank periods where you don't know what you've been up to?" HArry racked his brains. "No," he said. "The You-Know-Who hasn't ever possessed you," said Ginny simply...' (OOTP "Christmas on the Closed Ward" pp. 441-42 UK edition) I suggest that Harry would not have fallen into the same trap as Ginny. Again, /no/ Mudbloods were killed even if Harry was accused of attacking them so I think the risk of a Dementor's kiss being the verdict was a no-no. I think there was a much greater threat posed when the final scenario evolved and Harry found himself face to face with Riddle in the Chamber - maybe a face off even Dobby didn't visualise. But this all past history and belongs in ACT (the Archive of the Conspiracy Theorists). Geoff: > >>>The nearest point in Wiltshire to the Scottish border, which itself > is a long way south of the Highland Region, would be of the order of > 400 miles. Wiltshire is a county to the west of London.<<< > > DuffyPoo again: > So, are you saying I'm right, that it would be a heck of a long tunnel? Geoff: Indeed I am, fair lady. :-) From kateydidnt2002 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 20:19:32 2004 From: kateydidnt2002 at yahoo.com (kateydidnt2002) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 20:19:32 -0000 Subject: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108567 > > Casey: > For all we know asking those questions may be part of Snapes first > class every year, much like the "foolish wand waving" speach. I > imagine he started with Harry because he was their "new celebrity". > If Harry had answered something correctly Snape might have moved on, > but Harry didn't. I honestly doubt he would have backed down if Harry had answered correctly. Snape has shown he loves to badger Harry, (points off for breathing too loudly?!?!?!) and even when backing down or giving Harry some space would have been the appropriate or adult thing to do he continues to provoke Harry, *wanting* the type of reaction that reconfirms his views, without stopping to think of other motivations for Harry's actions. If Snape were to provoke any other student the way he does Harry he would most likely get the *same* reaction. If someone were to provoke Snape the way he provokes Harry...... I think that Snape would react the same way or worse. >Thus he could knock Harry down from his celebrity > status to that of a mortal. Then Harry back talked and confirmed > Snapes worst assumptions. > However, Snape *wanted* his assumptions confirmed. *Any* eleven year old would have spoken up to defend him/her self in that situation and I think most of the other teachers would have listened to a protest that something was unfair. Snape though, was deliberately seeking anything that would fit into the mold he had already stuffed Harry into. What bugs me most about the whole situation is that *Harry* had no preconceived notions about Snape-as I interpret the books he only had a curiousity as to whether or not Snape really was biased as was rumored. He made no judgments until *after* seeing Snape and seeing his actions. Snape had his judgement already made. > As for why Snape didn't ask about Harry's background, well, if he > doesn't ask about the other children why should he ask about Harry? The problem, as I see it is not that Snape did not ask about Harry's background-it is the fact that he made unsubstantiated assumptions about it and then made an unwarranted attack based on those assumptions. Did he make similar assumptions about the backgrounds of others? we don't know, because he did not act on any assumptions he might have made. Snape *did* have a responsibility to find out Harry's background before acting on his assumptions. He would have the responsibility to find out if *any* of his assumptions (not just those involving Harry) were true before being justified in acting on them. kateydidnt From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 2 17:59:40 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 17:59:40 -0000 Subject: Occlumency Lessons WAS Re: Snape's Attitude Toward the Students In-Reply-To: <20040802150402.BSDK28993.lakermmtao05.cox.net@smtp.east.cox.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108568 Boyd T. Smythe wrote: >> I was under the impression (for example in PoA's GP scenes) that DD >> has very important business to attend to: running Hogwarts, working >> for the OoP (recruiting, spying, etc.), trying to keep the MoM in >> line, and only Jo knows what else. >> >> So where would DD have the time to tutor Harry in Occlumency or >> anything else? It feels like a given of the series that DD is a >> kindly, brilliant, powerful and *busy* wizard who can only give >> small portions of his time to Harry. DZEYTOUN: > But Dumbledore himself says it was a mistake for him not to teach > Harry Occlumency. That implies that Dumbledore certainly thinks he > has the time. And watching Harry "more closely than you can have > imagined" certainly has to take quite a chunk of hours as well. As > we've said with regard to Snape and McGonagall, time at Hogwarts > seems to expand and contract as needed for the plot. > > As far as Harry asking Dumbledore to teach him, well, I'm not sure > Dumbledore will leave it up to Harry and I don't really think he > should. I mean you have a kid who is in danger of mental assault > and possession by the most evil wizard around. In addition, he > might endanger all sorts of other people if Voldemort seizes > control. Yes, Dumbledore does need a new relationship with Harry, > and yes, he does need to start treating Harry with more respect, > but let's not be silly here! This is a time when you approach a > sixteen-year-old and say "Listen kid, this is how we're going to > handle this situation." Importantly, and the thing Dumbledore did > not do in OOTP, you also say "this is WHY we're going to do this." SSSusan: I think Dzeytoun is right. There are times when you say, "I'm just too busy!" And there are times when you say, "I don't CARE how busy I am--I'll do whatever I have to do to get this done!" Clearly, THIS is one of those latter times. I mean, the war is building; Sirius is dead; even Fudge knows/acknowledges that Voldy's back; Harry failed at Occlumency and Voldy was able to manipulate his mind & his behaviors. This is getting SERIOUS. This is NOT a time like 8 or 10 years previous, when things were calm & peaceful, and DD had the luxury of being busy solely with Hogwarts matters. Right now, he can delegate certain tasks to Deputy Headmistress McGonagall and other staff members [I can't imagine Flitwitck, Sprout, et al. would refuse or complain]. But he MUST focus on whatever Harry needs because the Wizarding World is at risk, not just a kid or a school. Siriusly Snapey Susan From mnaperrone at aol.com Mon Aug 2 14:05:29 2004 From: mnaperrone at aol.com (mnaper2001) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 14:05:29 -0000 Subject: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108569 > > Vmonte: > > > > > > This scene has always bothered me. It is interesting that Snape > > tells > > > Harry that he is "neither special nor important." I mean what a > > drag > > > it must be for Snape to have to work with Harry if he really > feels > > > that he is a nobody and not important. > Jen: >Even though I hardly ever wonder about Snape (I know, hard to > believe), these two comments struck me--who exactly *does* Snape > think Harry is, if not special or important? He's so obviously both > of these things. Why does he persist on putting Harry in "his place" > and what is that place, exactly? > > It makes me re-think why he specifically singles out Harry & > Neville. Maybe Snape was somehow involved in their parents death, > and Harry & Neville are his failures staring him in the face. Or he > was orphaned like them, and despises them for being like him, > instead of feeling empathy. Or it is just simply him trying to put > them in their place, keep them from getting big heads (lol, Neville > with the big ego). > Ally: Actually, someone once broke down every single scene between Snape and Neville, and I was surprised at how much milder these scenes looked when you saw them all together in context. Snape is almost always reacting to a potentially serious mistake Neville makes in class. He does take some shots at Neville, but I'm not so sure he is quite as personally invested in Neville as he is with Harry. So while I think your theory has some merit -- its one I've toyed with, too -- I'm not sure I see Snape's treatment of them as similar. With Harry, its definitely personal and a unique situation. I think Snape is very envious of Harry's fame and popularity, which he feels is unearned. Just as he was envious of James, for whom everything seemingly came very easily. With Harry, there is definitely a personal level of loathing that I think is much more intense than his feelings for Neville, who I think he just views as particularly incompetent. From meltowne at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 20:26:13 2004 From: meltowne at yahoo.com (meltowne) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 20:26:13 -0000 Subject: Lily's grandparents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108570 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "esmith222002" wrote: esmith: If one parent is a witch/wizard and one is a muggle - which world do they live in? The fact that Lily is referred to as a mudblood, and also Petunia's general behaviour would suggest that they were brought up in the Muggle world. However, Petunia's apparent knowledge of certain wizarding facts suggests she has had some contact with wizards i.e. her mum/dad. This leads on to a number of other questions; (1) Does Petunia's knowledge of Azkaban stem from the fact that one of her parents was imprisoned there! (Hence there need to live with the Muggle parent) Meltowne: I suspect someone from the family was, but maybe a grandparent. Or maybe someone who brought harm to the family. We know Harry is considered a half-blood because of Lily's grandparents - but this does not mean ALL of her grandparents, but maybe only 1 was a muggle, though I suspect both on one side were, and perhaps one on the other side. Maybe a good question would be, if a wizard and a muggle produce a non-magic child is that child a squib or a muggle? If a muggle, then a child of 2 such people - maybe Lily? - with 2 wizard grandparents would still be considered muggle-born! esmith: (2) Is Godric's hollow the family home for Lily's mum or dad (and hence HP is descended from Gryffindor). Meltowne: I do think HP is descended from Gryffindor, through Lily, but don't think the family had lived there in a long time. esmith: (3) Is this theory absolute twaddle??? Meltowne: All theories are fair game, until they are disproven either by canon, or by the next book. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 2 20:31:51 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 16:31:51 -0400 Subject: Fred & George (was Re: another wacko theory) Message-ID: <003101c478cf$bea16c70$a762acce@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108571 chinaski" My problem with this is that F&G are pretty fair players- they have a sense of fairness and honesty (well, not-cheating honesty, at least-even when Slytherin cheats at Quidditch, they don't cheat to retaliate). Peeking ahead with a time turner or otherwise would be cheating, and thus putting them on the same level as Bagman. I can't see them doggedly pursuing Bagman (who WAS a cheater) if they were guilty of a similar offense. Besides, they wouldn't have much of a case against Bagman if it came out that they cheated. F&G may be a lot of things, but not cheaters." DuffyPoo Thank you for posting that. F&G are a lot of things (including two of my favourite characters so I hope we still get to see quite a bit of them in the next two books) but they are not dishonest in this way. Someone posted that maybe they will take over Honeydukes in Hogsmeade and so be closer to Hogwarts to help in the upcoming war. I don't think Ron could stand that. They'd have to take over the Zonko's premises so Ron can still get his fix of sweets. ;-) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 2 20:32:24 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 16:32:24 -0400 Subject: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry Message-ID: <003501c478cf$d2634120$a762acce@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108572 Magda: "It's Harry. There are five books in print (and another one on the way) titled "Harry Potter and the ......". There's no way that Harry's not the one." DuffyPoo: I wasn't going to reply to this (hoping Aggie would do it for me - said with a grin) but I just had to. Maya was kind enough to post all the titles: 1) Harry Potter and Philosopher Stone - HP still saved the stone, and slowed down LV's return. 2) Harry Potter and Chamber of Secrets - HP still rescued Ginny, and finished off the Basilisk and Diary!Tom possibly slowing LV's return or not helping it along at least 3) Harry Potter and Prisoner of Azkaban - with Hermione's help set an innocent man and an innocent Hippogriff free 4) Harry Potter and Goblet of Fire - won the Triwizard Tournament, found out LV's back and got away, alerting DD 5) Harry Potter and The Order of Phoenix - saved Arthur Weasley's life, attempted to learn Occlumency, found out he couldn't be possessed by LV, learned about the prophecy, learned he's got three more people willing to help him if needed (Im sure I'm missing something good here but my brain's jammed again.) 6) Harry Potter and The Half Blood Prince - we have no idea yet, but I'm sure it will be something good 7) Harry Potter and ? - what if this is Harry Potter and The Kid Who Fulfills the Prophecy? (Sorry, it was too good to resist!) It would just be such a good plot twist to have it be Neville. Such a good "gotcha" at the end of the series. It doesn't make Harry any less of a hero, IMO. I'm not saying it IS Neville just that it is still possible that it could be him. I just can't help thinking what HP is going to turn into if it IS him that has to destroy LV. Not only has he been "The Boy Who Lived" for 17 years, he's been given every blessed opportunity DD can throw his way to learn to deal with what is coming (he is not the only one who is going to have to fight in this war), has been let get away with things other students could only dream of doing without being put in detention/suspended/expelled, but he'll then be "The One Who Vanquished The Dark Lord" as well. It will be superstardom in a way Tom Cruise and Julia Roberts have never known and only dreamed of. He'll be set up on a pedestal so high he will hardly be able to resist becoming the "Next One." Voldemort in reverse at the very least. Worshipped. Adored. He won't be able to call his life his own he'll have so many people pulling at him wanting him to be the next MoM, Headmaster at Hogwarts, Supreme Mugwump of the of the International Confederation of Wizards, Chief Warlock of the Wizengamot, Seeker for every Quidditch Team, Defence Against the Dark Arts teacher - right under Snape's hooked nose, not to mention the parents of every 17 year old witch will want him for a son-in-law. Having Neville step in at the last moment as 'the one' leaves HP the "Boy Who Lived," the hero of 6-1/2 books, and gives Neville a spot in the limelight, that can't possibly do to him what I fear for HP, simply because he hasn't had the build up, and has always been pushed down. He'll be standing there white with shock, as he was when he won 10 House Points to win Gryffindor the house cup, saying "I vanquished You Know Who?" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 2 20:39:27 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 20:39:27 -0000 Subject: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108573 SSSusan: > > He doesn't have to know his precise whereabouts nor the name of > > the people he's living with nor any other specifics of Harry's > > situation to get a SENSE of what Harry's life is like. Casey: > Not really. Would Dumbledore actually want anyone to know that he > placed the hero of the wizarding world in an abusive home? SSSusan: Sure, why not? DD had a REASON for placing Harry there. In your next section, below, you talk about Snape bringing Celebrity Harry down a notch. This was part of what DD was doing when he left Harry with the Dursleys, wasn't it? DD knew it wouldn't be an easy life, but he felt strongly that it was better for Harry to grow up away from the WW and all the attention he would've received there. He had nothing to hide from his staff, esp. from someone he trusts as much as Snape and who will end up being an Order member alongside DD. SSSusan: > > I'm afraid I'm not buying this, either. I mean, why just find > > out if *HARRY* "bothered" to learn anything as a child? Why not > > find out if SEVERAL of the children did so, by spreading around > > the questions? Instead, he asked three questions--ALL of Harry. Casey: > For all we know asking those questions may be part of Snapes first > class every year, much like the "foolish wand waving" speach. I > imagine he started with Harry because he was their "new celebrity". > If Harry had answered something correctly Snape might have moved > on, but Harry didn't. Thus he could knock Harry down from his > celebrity status to that of a mortal. Then Harry back talked and > confirmed Snapes worst assumptions. SSSusan: For all we know, yes. But I seriously doubt it. Casey: > As for why Snape didn't ask about Harry's background, well, if he > doesn't ask about the other children why should he ask about Harry? SSSusan: Precisely because he *is* Harry! Like it or not, Harry *is* a special case. He also will be a TARGET of certain students. This is not canon, of course, but I can quite easily imagine DD having a little staff meeting shortly before Harry's arrival at Hogwarts. He might let the staff know that Harry was coming, what Hagrid had found out about Harry's past 10 years and maybe even give a little advice about how to treat/not to treat Harry. Whether DD did this or he didn't, Snape didn't have to ASSUME all the crap he did about Harry--that he relished being in the limelight, that he was just like James, that he had ample opportunity to learn all his materials before school started. Please. Snape was just being mean. And yes, Harry, in the end, "gave him cheek." How many of us would have joined him in that action after being provoked? Let's see. You've know you're a wizard for one month. It's your first day at school. A teacher gives you what appears to be a nasty glare during opening meal. In your first class, same teacher asks you three questions you've no reason to know, while another student sits there with her hand up and there's a classroom full of other students who might be asked. Teacher is snarky to you. Doesn't make it right to be cheeky, but it makes it understandable. AND it gives the student reason to wonder why this guy can't stand him. Seems, from what we see in the book, no other teacher felt compelled to treat Harry in this manner. Siriusly Snapey Susan From drliss at comcast.net Mon Aug 2 20:44:07 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (drliss at comcast.net) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 20:44:07 +0000 Subject: RRe: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy Message-ID: <080220042044.2218.410EA797000796B2000008AA22007348409C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 108574 Kelly: > I agree that Snape seems to hate HP because he is so much like his > father. That makes sense to me. What I do not understand, > however, is the favoritism he shows toward Malfoy. If Snape has > indeed turned his back on LV and the DE, why does he favor the son > on a known DE? It makes me wonder where Snape's true loyalties > lie. Lissa: I've wondered about this too. Is it possible that Snape sees a lot of himself in Draco? A kid who (speculation) doesn't live up to his father's expectations, is being raised by a death eater, but has some brains and some guts? Perhaps Snape doesn't want to see Draco go down the same path as he himself went down? Snape's not the most intuitive of people- he's not going to win Draco's trust by relating to him like Lupin did to Harry. This might be his clumsy way of trying to accomplish that? Or maybe he does it just to annoy Harry, since we only ever see them together when Harry's around. One of the most frustrating things is we don't see any interactions between Snape and Malfoy without Harry. I'd love to know if they have any sort of student-teacher relationship beyond what Harry sees in Potions, especially as Snape is the Head of Malfoy's house. (Not that Harry and McGonagall have all that close of a relationship, but....) I also like the idea that it might be because Malfoy's a brown noser. Snape reminds me of a lot of scientists that I work with- absolutely brilliant... and wants everyone to acknowledge it. They're pussycats if you stroke their egos, but if you dare insinuate they're wrong (especially when they aren't...) watch out! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 20:44:40 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 13:44:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lily's grandparents In-Reply-To: <005e01c478c2$18c99870$bcc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: <20040802204440.8201.qmail@web50105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108575 > "esmith" > > "On JKR's website...JKR stated that HP would be considered half- > blood due to his maternal grandparents! > > DuffyPoo: > > I believe this is a mistake on JKR's part, and I will believe that > until it has been there awhile. She meant to say Harry's > grandparents (I think) but that would lead to speculation about > James' side of the family. "Maternal grandparents" means "grandparents on mother's side of the family". What mistake is there to correct? Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 20:50:01 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 20:50:01 -0000 Subject: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108576 Casey: For all we know asking those questions may be part of Snapes first class every year, much like the "foolish wand waving" speach. I imagine he started with Harry because he was their "new celebrity". If Harry had answered something correctly Snape might have moved on, but Harry didn't. Thus he could knock Harry down from his celebrity status to that of a mortal. Then Harry back talked and confirmed Snapes worst assumptions. As for why Snape didn't ask about Harry's background, well, if he doesn't ask about the other children why should he ask about Harry? vmonte responds: If Harry was able to answer Snape's questions he would not be allowed to speak in his class, like Hermione. He doesn't really care if a student knows their stuff (the little know-it-alls) or if they don't (like Crabb & Goyle). What he loves is putting CERTAIN people down. Snape really loves "twisting the dagger" in his students. He really is metaphorically like a vampire, slowly sucking the life out of people. He doesn't just knock them down, he lets them know that they are neither important nor special. I'm not so sure it has anything to do with keeping face with Voldemort's gang. I knew someone at my previous job like Snape and unfortunately I had to deal with this person for nine years. People like this cannot change. You always have to walk on egg shells with people like this. You also have to go out of your way to acknowledge every little thing they do while avoiding any positive attention focused on yourself. It was exhausting! I'm so glad I left that job. vmonte From kateydidnt2002 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 20:52:06 2004 From: kateydidnt2002 at yahoo.com (kateydidnt2002) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 20:52:06 -0000 Subject: RRe: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: <080220042044.2218.410EA797000796B2000008AA22007348409C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108577 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, drliss at c... wrote: > > Kelly: > > I agree that Snape seems to hate HP because he is so much like his > > father. That makes sense to me. How much do we actually know about James? How much is Harry actually like his father? People keep telling Harry that he looks and acts a great deal like his father, but at the same time in which aspects does Harry act like his father? It is preposterous to say that Harry is identicle in personality to a man he has *no memory* of. We have seen *one* detailed scene with James in it and that is in Snape's penseive and Harry has *never* acted anything like what is depicted. How much is Harry actually like James, and how much is assumed by everyone who knew James? From kateydidnt2002 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 20:54:51 2004 From: kateydidnt2002 at yahoo.com (kateydidnt2002) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 20:54:51 -0000 Subject: Lily's grandparents In-Reply-To: <20040802204440.8201.qmail@web50105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108578 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > > "esmith" > > > > "On JKR's website...JKR stated that HP would be considered half- > > blood due to his maternal grandparents! > > > > DuffyPoo: > > > > I believe this is a mistake on JKR's part, and I will believe that > > until it has been there awhile. She meant to say Harry's > > grandparents (I think) but that would lead to speculation about > > James' side of the family. > > "Maternal grandparents" means "grandparents on mother's side of the > family". What mistake is there to correct? > > Magda > It actually says "mother's grandparents" on the site. which is causing a great deal of discussion. I believe this was simply an error in posting. She could have phrased it either "his mother's parents" or "his grandparents" but flubbed up and said a combination of the two- simple. From flamingstarchows at att.net Mon Aug 2 21:07:22 2004 From: flamingstarchows at att.net (texaschow) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 21:07:22 -0000 Subject: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry In-Reply-To: <003501c478cf$d2634120$a762acce@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108579 > > It would just be such a good plot twist to have it be Neville. Such a good "gotcha" at the end of the series. It doesn't make Harry any less of a hero, IMO. I'm not saying it IS Neville just that it is still possible that it could be him. > Voldermort fulfilled the prophecy himself by attacking Harry. For anyone who has trouble with prophecies, I would suggest you read Oedipus Rex. Most people know the prophecy was that he would kill his father and marry his mother. What they don't know (this is the abbreviated version) if they haven't read it is that his father tried to circumvent the prophecy by having the baby Oedipus taken in the wilderness and left to die. Instead, he was found and brought up by someone else. When he became of age, he went off to town. There, he fell in love with a woman and ended up in a battle with her husband. He killed the man and married the woman. It just happend to be he killed his father and married his mother (without knowing who they were at the time). If his father had not sent him off to die, none of it may have ever happened. By the same token, Voldermort picked Harry, so he is the one. ~Cathy~ From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 21:10:12 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 21:10:12 -0000 Subject: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108580 > Casey: > > If Harry had answered something correctly Snape might have moved > > on, but Harry didn't. Thus he could knock Harry down from his > > celebrity status to that of a mortal. Then Harry back talked and > > confirmed Snapes worst assumptions. > > SSSusan: > For all we know, yes. But I seriously doubt it. > > Alla: Yes, what Susan said. In addition, I am having a lot of trouble with assumption that any eleven year old needs to be KNOCKED DOWN from whatever imaginary place his teacher ASSUMES him to be. Snape should have at least found out what Harry's life was before school from Dumbledore or leave Harry alone. Why? Again as Susan said because he is a special case. All WW depends on him for survival. Yes, I'd say this child needs A LOT of special attention and help. > SSSusan: .... > Whether DD did this or he didn't, Snape didn't have to ASSUME all the > crap he did about Harry--that he relished being in the limelight, > that he was just like James, that he had ample opportunity to learn > all his materials before school started. Please. Snape was just > being mean. Alla: Yep. agreed again. The scene itself was fantastically written and I understand the need of it and possible foreshadowing, but boy, oh, boy that was one of my "Want to slap Snape many times" moment. :o) From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 21:15:50 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 21:15:50 -0000 Subject: For whom was the diary intended ? (Was Re: what happened in CoS.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108581 Geoff wrote: (COS "The Heir of Slytherin" p.229 UK edition) So Riddle used the diary to possess Ginny. '"If I say it myself, Harry, I've always been able to charm the people I needed. So Ginny poured out her soul to me and her soul happened to be exactly what I wanted. I grew stronger and stronger on a diet of her deepest fears, her darkest secrets. I grew powerful, far more powerful than little Miss Weasley. Powerful enough to start feeding Miss Weasley a few of /my/ secrets, to start pouring a little of /my/ soul back into /her/..."' vmonte responds: This paragraph has always given me the creeps! He sounds a lot like a vampire doesn't he? Charming but deadly. Why was he pouring his soul back into Ginny? Why does he reciprocate? Was he planning on turning her into something else? Something undead? A dementor? What secrets did he feed Ginny? vivian From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 21:20:56 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 21:20:56 -0000 Subject: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108582 Cathy wrote: > Voldermort fulfilled the prophecy himself by attacking Harry. For > anyone who has trouble with prophecies, I would suggest you read > Oedipus Rex> snip. By the same token, Voldermort picked Harry, so he is the one. Alla: Hi, Cathy! I read Oedipus Rex and I do understand what you are saying about self- fulfillment of the prophecy, BUT there is too much unclearness with the Rowling's prophecy yet. I suspect that it will turn out to be different than prophecies from greek tragedies. As such, freedom of choice will play some part in it. It is possible that prophecy was imsinterpreted somehow, IMO. I don't exclude the possibility that Neville maybe the one at the end, if only to see the disbelieving look at Dumbledore's face. :o) And it will be a good plot twist and Harry will not be any less of a hero, IMO. He fought Voldie how many times by now? Yes, I love Neville and would be delighted to see him finish up Voldie. Having said all that, I would not bet much on that possibility coming true, unfortunately From kateydidnt2002 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 21:22:02 2004 From: kateydidnt2002 at yahoo.com (kateydidnt2002) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 21:22:02 -0000 Subject: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108583 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "texaschow" wrote: > > > > > It would just be such a good plot twist to have it be Neville. > Such a good "gotcha" at the end of the series. It doesn't make Harry > any less of a hero, IMO. I'm not saying it IS Neville just that it > is still possible that it could be him. > > > I don't see it as being a good plot twist. It would actually be incredibly cruel to Harry. The Wizarding World has shown itself to be easily swayed and entirely too gullible and trusting. If suddenly they found out that it was Neville all along they would disregard all that Harry did for them without a second thought. Harry has the burden of the wizarding world on his shoulders and he feels it quite heavily (in my interpretation anyway). If it were to turn out to be Neville all his sacrifice, all his pain, and his baring of that burden would be completely forgotten and would completely tear apart any self-respect and self-esteem he had because it would reconfirm once again that nobody cared about "Harry Potter" they only cared about "The Boy-Who-Lived" and once that became moot, they would forget he ever existed. Ergh, now I sound like I want him to have the attention he will get upon defeating Voldemort, because Harry doesn't like attention in general, and especially not media attention. So I really don't know what I mean here, except for this-it would be incredibly cruel for the world to not ackonwledge what Harry has done, simply because he did not accomplish the final step. (And I see no doubt that that is the reaction the wizarding world *would* have). From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Aug 2 21:24:54 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 21:24:54 -0000 Subject: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108584 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > SSSusan: > > > He doesn't have to know his precise whereabouts nor the name of the people he's living with nor any other specifics of Harry's situation to get a SENSE of what Harry's life is like. <<< > > Casey: > > Not really. Would Dumbledore actually want anyone to know that he placed the hero of the wizarding world in an abusive home?<< > > SSSusan: > Sure, why not? DD had a REASON for placing Harry there. << One of the reasons was to keep the WW from treating Harry like a pampered princeling. I am sure the teachers were instructed to treat Harry like any other student, and I suspect Snape really does believe he treats Harry so--or at least like any other Gryffindor who gets on his nerves. Trouble is, Harry gets on Snape's nerves just by existing--and where have we heard that before? I also think Snape had different reasons for putting Harry down in his first class and for his "You are neither special nor important "statement. In the first case, Snape does not expect Harry to be able to answer the questions. He doesn't expect anyone to answer them...the Slytherins haven't got their hands in the air, have they? What the Snape wants is the class cowed into submission, and to do that he's going to have to put Potter, the student everyone looks up to, in his place, the same place he wants all the other students, ie properly respectful of Severus Snape. That is, scared to death of him. Snape can afford to make an exception for Draco. In the first place, it is what Lucius expects of him. Secondly, Snape probably already knows that Draco is a coward, and that should he ever need to intimidate Draco, he can manage it easily enough. In the other case, Snape has just discovered that Occlumency is not working--after two months of lessons Voldemort is still putting stuff into Harry's head, since Rookwood's escape happened after the lessons started. I don't think Snape has been told why the hall of prophecy is important or what Harry has to do with it--but he's not about to admit that to Harry either. He has to find out what Harry knows without revealing his own ignorance. One of the things Voldemort does to people is try to win them over by convincing them that they are special and important to him--that's what he did to Ginny and Barty Jr. Is the Dark Lord trying something similar with Harry? Snape needs to find out. It doesn't matter if Harry actually tells him--if he can get Harry to think of the answer, Snape is probably enough of a legilimens to ferret it out Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 21:26:43 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 21:26:43 -0000 Subject: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108585 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kateydidnt2002" < snip. > So I really don't know > what I mean here, except for this-it would be incredibly cruel for the > world to not ackonwledge what Harry has done, simply because he did > not accomplish the final step. (And I see no doubt that that is the > reaction the wizarding world *would* have). Alla: Katey, I don't really think Rowling will do it, but as I said I would not mind it happening even only it will give Harry an extra chance of survival at the end of the series and no, I would not be upset, if WW will not acknowledge all his trials and tribulations, everything he sacrificed, if people who love Harry will still be with him, because their attention is the only one which matters to Harry. From patientx3 at aol.com Mon Aug 2 21:36:43 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 21:36:43 -0000 Subject: prophecies and choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108586 Meltay wrote: >>In order for a prophecy to come true, first someone must "choose" to believe it, as Voldemort did. Then he "chose" who would be the "marked" one (this is where I believe it can't possibly be Neville, it would go against choice). A prophecy is based on predicting what choices people will make (which is often easy) not fate.<< HunterGreen: That is a matter of opinion. Yes, Voldemort chose to believe it, and thus it came true, (in order words, was a self-fulfilling prophecy), but what about the other one at the end of PoA. No one hears that from Harry, and we know at least half of it has come true (whoever the 'servant' was, Wormtail or Barty Jr., they did break free, and it had noting to do with them hearing a prophecy about it). If it was referring to Wormtail, then there are a lot of cirmcumstances and human choices that occured that allowed him to escape. IMO, there's no point to a prophecy if its not *actually* seeing into the future (and the future may be determined by someone reacting to the prophecy, but the future is the future). Anyone with a good read on people can predict what choices someone might make, that wouldn't be 'prediciting' the future, but making an educated guess. (I don't want to get into the argument about the 'mark' again so if you don't think that Harry's scar is the 'mark' in the prophecy, just disregard the rest of my messege) For example, anyone could have made a prediction (knowing that both Alice and Lily were pregnant) that one of their kids would have the 'power' to defeat Voldemort, and thus cause Voldemort to go after one of the kids, but how would they know that one of them would end up with a 'mark' on their forehead from Voldemort? She knew because she *saw* it, she was seeing into the future, and in the future because of her prophecy, Voldemort would go after Harry and 'mark' him on the forehead. From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 21:43:05 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 21:43:05 -0000 Subject: Was Harry in Danger from the Basilisk? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108587 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sad1199" wrote: > sad1199 here: > > ...edited... > > Now, a question. I have read these books through at least 5 times > and I am an intelligent person but! I still don't understand WHY > Dobby tried to prevent Harry from returning to Hogwarts. > ...edited... AND house elves are obviously more intelligent than > given credit for if Dobby knew who Harry even was. Wait, it says > that house elves are intelligent, right? I am just very confused > about the whole Dobby thing, any help would be appreciated. > > Have a Happy Love Filled day > > sad1199 Asian_lovr2: I think we are over-thinking the danger to Harry in CoS; meaning that we are trying do hard to look past the obvious, that we are missing the obvious. First, on the issue of House-Elf intelligence; they may be very intelligent, but based on their speech patterns and vocabulary, they are uneducated and that combined with limited world experience, means they are unsophisticated. This lack of sophistication certainly comes into play to a great degree in Harry's interaction with Elves. Now the Basilisk and the danger to Harry, in this case, I think we are giving the too much weight to the intelligences of the Basilisk. This is a reptile, though very large, it probably had a brain the size of a walnut. Generally speaking, reptiles are only capable of two modes of operation; 'Lunch' and 'Sleep'. A parseltongue might be able to communcate with it, but I seriously doubt the conversations would sound like a dialog with a Shakeperean actor. It is able to relay primitive thoughts and obey simple orders, but I think that's about the extent of it. Any sense of sophisticated language on the part of the reptile is likely to be more a reflection of the listener than the speaker. Also, I'm not totally convinced that the Basilisk can tell a muggle from a wizard. The fact is that the eyes of a Basilisk are deadly to ANYONE who looks into them, wizards or purebloods have no special protection. So, Dobby knew that if all went well with his Master, a monster would be loose in the castle. The presence of a monster put Harry at risk along with everyone else. And if the plan continued, Tom Riddle AKA:Voldemorts would be loose in the castle. Neither of these circumstances bode well for Harry; or anyone else for that matter. So, to an unsophisticated Dobby, the release into the school of a deadly monster followed by the rebirth/re-appearance of Riddle/Voldemort was cause enough for concern. While these are general threads, certainly Lucius, along with a multitude of other agendas, had Harry specifically on his mind. Dobby would have been aware of this emphasis on Harry. Also, one can't deny that once back Riddle/Voldy would have had a specific interest in Harry. Just a few thoughts. Steve/asian_lovr2 From meidbh at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 18:27:44 2004 From: meidbh at yahoo.com (meidbh) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 18:27:44 -0000 Subject: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry In-Reply-To: <20040802145434.99600.qmail@web50102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108588 magda writes: "It's Harry. There are five books in print (and another one on the way) titled "Harry Potter and the ......". There's no way that Harry's not the one." Meidbh: I'm pretty convinced that Harry is it but not because his name is in the title. Being the hero of his own story doesn't necessarily mean he's going to turn out to be a hero in a broader sense. This could just be the tale of the boy "who thought he was the one"! Harry Potter and the Great Misunderstanding. But I do hope not. Meidbh :-) From maritajan at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 20:16:01 2004 From: maritajan at yahoo.com (Marita Jan) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 13:16:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Snape's choice of memories for the pensieve (was: Death and Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040802201601.39386.qmail@web12103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108589 > marty wrote: > "but isn't it curious that this is one of his worst memories that he > wants to keep hidden? What about all the stuff that he is doing for > DD, and his life prior to becoming Potions master - especially while > a DE?" > > Meidbh: > Agreed. > I always felt this was a little disappointing as a worst memory. I > assumed JKR was writing to the kids on this one, that she had a > momentary lapse of imagination. Could Snape's life post Grey > Underwear Incident really have been so dull? > > Maybe there *is* more to it than meets the eye...but what?? My take on that wasn't that it was Snape's WORST memory, just a memory he didn't want Harry to see, in case he got through Snape's defenses -- which he (Snape) had good reason to fear, since Harry did get through briefly enough to see little boy Snape cowering in a room while his dad raged on. I think grown-up Snape was embarrassed enough about that memory not to want to even entertain the possibility that Harry might see him hanging upside down with his dirty underwear showing. Just my 2 knuts. MJ ===== --------------------------------------------------------------------------------Need a real estate professional? Visit my site at www.maritabush.com With Marita, great service comes first.....and lasts! From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Mon Aug 2 21:52:58 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (aggiepaddy) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 21:52:58 -0000 Subject: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108590 "kateydidnt2002" < > snip. >> > So I really don't know > > what I mean here, except for this-it would be incredibly cruel for > >the world to not ackonwledge what Harry has done, simply because > >he did not accomplish the final step. (And I see no doubt that > >that is the reaction the wizarding world *would* have). Alla: > > Katey, I don't really think Rowling will do it, but as I said I >would not mind it happening even only it will give Harry an extra >chance of survival at the end of the series and no, I would not be >upset, if WW will not acknowledge all his trials and tribulations, >everything he sacrificed, if people who love Harry will still be >with him, because their attention is the only one which matters to >Harry. Aggie: I completely agree with Alla on this one and was just about to post a similar message on this. I don't think that it would be cruel to Harry if Neville ends up being the one (Love the title of Book 7 by the way DuffyPoo!!!). I understand what you're saying, that if someone else destroys LV then Harry might get forgotten about, but IMHO I think that Harry would quite like this. He would be able to live a normal life and just drift along at his own pace doing what he wants instead of having to open supermarkets or do interviews for Witching Hour etc. Even if he refused to go down the 'celebrity' path he'd still have everyone recognising him and stopping him in the street (he may still get that if NL fulfills the prophecy but to a lesser extent I would imagine). I'm sure that Harry would LOVE it if Neville turned out to be 'The One'. Neville would get some recognition, his gran and Uncle Algie (who I think is someone we've met but the only Algeron we've come across is a DE, so maybe not!) would be proud at last and the pressure would be off Harry. Who would be complaining?? I don't think that it's likely to happen but the more I think about it, the more I like the idea! ;o)) From lorelei3dg at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 20:17:42 2004 From: lorelei3dg at yahoo.com (lorelei3dg) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 20:17:42 -0000 Subject: F & G -- Time-Turner? Cheaters? (Re: another wacko theory) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108591 >> Lorel: Do Fred and George have a time-turner? How did they know the outcome of the World Cup ahead of time? The MoM regulates the whole Time thing way too closely, so I doubt it's a time-turner per se, but maybe they've invented something else? << > chinaski wrote: My problem with this is that F&G are pretty fair players- they have a sense of fairness and honesty (well, not-cheating honesty, at least- even when Slytherin cheats at Quidditch, they don't cheat to retaliate). Peeking ahead with a time turner or otherwise would be cheating, and thus putting them on the same level as Bagman. I can't see them doggedly pursuing Bagman (who WAS a cheater) if they were guilty of a similar offense. Besides, they wouldn't have much of a case against Bagman if it came out that they cheated. F&G may be a lot of things, but not cheaters. < Now Lorel: You may have a point, but I'm not so sure. I adore F&G and would rather believe the best about them. You're right that they do have a sense of fair play, but it seems to be one that they define themselves. As they even discussed, their pressure on Bagman to pay up could amount to blackmail; they stole the Marauders' Map from Filch's office; they even most likely slipped Hermione a Sleeping Draught in the Gryffindor common room so that they could test their wares on the other students (OotP, American Hardcover, page 276): "'She's there,' said Fred... Hermione was dozing ... her drink slipping precariously in her hand... 'Let her sleep,' said George hastily. It was a few moments before Harry noticed that several of the first years gathered around them bore unmistakable signs of recent nosebleeds." Again, I love the Twins, and would never consider them ESE, but their own code of conduct does not always mirror the strictest conventional morality. From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Mon Aug 2 20:29:58 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 20:29:58 -0000 Subject: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108592 Geoff said: >> Let's suppose. If Voldemort had attacked Neville first, would Neville have survived? << And vivian responded with: > I don't think Neville would've survived as a child. But I do think that Neville has an important part in the ultimate defeat. < I say: Well, I think that Neville could have survived, because if LV had gone to his house that night, he would have attacked Neville, thus "choosing" him. Jo stresses choices throughout the book, and the reason Harry is The One is because LV chose him to be, by trying to kill him. Harry has been marked: he has the scar. Harry is LV's "equal": Priori Incantatem (sp) showed that, not to mention he has escaped LV's wrath 5 times now (counting when he was a baby.) LV had to mark the one as his equal, thus LV had to choose the child. Thus, it's Harry. ~Yb From aphrodeia at gmail.com Mon Aug 2 22:00:44 2004 From: aphrodeia at gmail.com (aphrodeia) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 18:00:44 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108593 Alla: > > Now, it is quite possible that by making Snape mentioning those > > potions to Harry, she foreshadowed their usefullness int he final > > battle, but it still does not make Snape's actions look better, > > because how would he know that? Casey: > Or maybe Snape was just seeing if Harry had bothered trying to > learn anything as a child. Others, like Hermione have, but Harry > hadn't bothered. Again, that's going with the assumption that Snape > has no idea where Harry was growing up. Lisa: This part, frankly, didn't surprise me. I wasn't taken aback by the way Snape responded to Harry when Harry appeared to be screwing around on his first day of class. I took it as less of a "You little insolent brat, I wish you were dead and I plan to see you to that grave" sort of thing and more as a "You little insolent brat, you've only just arrived and already you're not paying attention - you think you already know everything, we'll /see/ just how much you know" sort of thing. I've heard teachers turn to giggly, distracted, or otherwise irritating students and say "Oh, you already know this? Would you like to step up and teach? No? Then pay attention." Of all Snape's numerous transgressions, I really don't think of this as one of them. Lisa, who knows that Snape is, quite clearly, not /nice/, but believes he is /good/... and therein lies the importance From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Mon Aug 2 20:43:44 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 20:43:44 -0000 Subject: Occlumency Lessons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108594 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > Boyd T. Smythe wrote: > >> So where would DD have the time to tutor Harry in Occlumency or > >> anything else? It feels like a given of the series that DD is a > >> kindly, brilliant, powerful and *busy* wizard who can only give > >> small portions of his time to Harry. > > > DZEYTOUN replied: > > But Dumbledore himself says it was a mistake for him not to teach > > Harry Occlumency. That implies that Dumbledore certainly thinks > > he has the time. > > As far as Harry asking Dumbledore to teach him, well, I'm not > > sure Dumbledore will leave it up to Harry and I don't really > > think he should. > SSSusan furthered: > Harry failed at Occlumency and Voldy was able to manipulate his > mind & his behaviors. This is getting SERIOUS. I concur: Dumbledore may be busy, but he has to make time for this, and he probably will. He may not be able to devote as much time to "headmastering" as he wants to, but that's what deputy headmistresses do: they fill in when he can't be there. Harry is a very powerful wizard for his age, and he is the *ONLY* hope for the WW. He's the only one who can bring LV down. If LV gets control again, Harry could be toast. Dumbledore can certainly make time to train up the WW's saving grace, yes? On another thought, maybe it was a good thing Snape taught Harry at least a little about Occlumency. Harry has to clear his emotions in order to block out LV. Sure, it's easy when you aren't upset, but it's much harder when you are fighting with a teacher you hate. Harry would have a much easier time clearing his head with DD than with Snape, but do we think he will be calm and peaceful the next time he has to lie to LV? Probably not. Snape (inadvertently) showed him how hard it will be to stand up to LV. ~Yb From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Mon Aug 2 22:06:44 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 22:06:44 -0000 Subject: Time-turning as literary device (was: Just a comment about Lupin's malady) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108595 Valky wrote originally: > > Please, I have absolutely no idea where anyone gets the notion that time travel has been overextended in the story. > > SSSusan: I would be VERY happy indeed if there is no more use of time-turning or polyjuice. And it's not the quantity of chapters in which they've been used. It's because of what HunterGreen said: they were used as a narrative device, and once is enough for some of us. > > For some, these parts of the storyline are fun, adventurous and a > challenge to figure out. For others, they feel like "deus ex > machina"--almost like a cop-out. "How can I get X to happen when > it's really not very likely or possible? > > Do you see what I mean? Valky Now replying: I do see what you mean Susan, and I agree, but I also don't agree. I agree that there is a plot instrument role to the timeturner in POA and I can understand that when percieved *only* as this that a timeturner is a flat out, cop out. However, I disagree that the time turner is ever intended to be the deus ex machina of any plot, past or future in the books.. duh I am so lame, go the puns Valky :P I see time in the series as a complex and advanced branch of magic, having said that, I cannot see how one believing a cheesy application of it will happen can be validated. It seems to me that JKR has introduced time manipulation to the book with a dose of salts for the reader. So as to say that she has clearly sent the message: 'Now just supposing you could do this..... look here at the vast infinity of calculations involved in getting it right. Its no simplistic order to use time for anything.' Outside of strictly regulated small factor time control, the investigation of that branch of magic is confined to a kind of elite represented by the Dept O Mysteries. Anything further than the hour at a time that Hermione is allowed under the controlled conditions of Hogwarts supervision, it seems to me, is prohibited, which begs to me whether an underground or black market of time tampering might exist. But that is far from the point and besides it probably thickens things too much so I wouldnt be counting on it. What I truly do believe is precedented in our existing canon is that the elite learned of the WW have a peripheral foothold in time and are able to recognise the signs that time has played a part. I see DD as having laid down this precendent for us in POA, if nobody minds me saying so the movie seemed to back up a theory that DD had seen the hours from some several angles possibly using a TT of his own; seen in the way he deliberately delays the execution party by showing them the view from Hagrids Hut. What I mean here is that DD controlled the three hours of the POA finale as an observer carefully recognising what was out of place and where. For DD to have done so much overseeing was probably exhausting. I expect you wouldn't wake up the next day with a plan to repeat living it from all angles like you did yesterday, so I suspect he doesnt make a habit of doing it. But, I believe maybe that he recognised the gift in Hermione, again demonstrated more vividly by the movie when she sees herself and knows quickly not to interfere. So JKR, helped by Cuaron, I believe managed, in telling her story, to grant us an adventure in time while not neglecting to make us painfully aware of the exhaustive influence each speck of time has on the infinite, and basically that to be wise enough to interfere with time you must first be wise enough to know *not to interfere*. Aside: Just maybe this is why Sirius *had* to die. So I hope that you understand all I am really saying is I strongly disagree that POA's finale contained any undertones of a cheesy out, if anything JKR has set the stage for a warning for those that would percieve time travel as anything of that sort at all. Best to You All from Valky From aphrodeia at gmail.com Mon Aug 2 22:08:59 2004 From: aphrodeia at gmail.com (aphrodeia) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 18:08:59 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's choice of memories for the pensieve (was: Death and Snape) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108596 Meidbh: <> Lisa: That was the sole part in all the books that made me cry. Some people are unable to move beyond their childhood, and I think it's clear that Snape is one of these people. On one hand, he's apparently risking life and limb as a spy for the Order, but on the other, he's obsessed with the teenage boys who made his life hell. I think this 'worst memory' did wonders to humanize the character. Besides, we don't know what came next, as Snape caught Harry. If James did indeed make good on his final statement, I think it's safe to say that this was easily one of the mortifying things I could ever imagine. Teenaged Snape + exposed dangly bits in front of, well, everyone = PERMANENT DAMAGE. Lisa From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Mon Aug 2 21:06:15 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 21:06:15 -0000 Subject: Lily's grandparents / Petunia & Vernon In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108597 katydidn't: > It actually says "mother's grandparents" on the site. which is > causing a great deal of discussion. I believe this was simply > an error in posting. She could have phrased it either "his > mother's parents" or "his grandparents" but flubbed up and said > a combination of the two- simple. Yblitzka says: I think that's what happened. Petunia wouldn't be so worked up about "having a witch in the family" and "she was a freak" if her parents were "freaks" as well. I'm pretty sure Lily was a muggle-born and JKR's site should say "maternal grandparents", not "mother's grandparents." But if it isn't a flub-up... well, that's a whole new can of worms! Of course, that doesn't explain Petunia's remarks, unless she was just making them for Vernon. Notice that Petunia doesn't criticize her sister unless Vernon is around to hear it. Would he have married her if he knew her parents were wizards? ~Yb From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Mon Aug 2 21:10:37 2004 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 21:10:37 -0000 Subject: Lily's parents (Re: Lily's grandparents) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108598 There is another entry in JKR's website about the backstory to Dean Thomas. JKR states that Dean Thomas was raised by his muggle mother and muggle stepfather and therefore always assumed he was muggle born. However, he did have a wizard father. Is this a clue to Lily's situation? Was Lily also raised by muggles but actually had a wizard father that she did not know about? "esmith222002" From melaniertay at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 22:06:17 2004 From: melaniertay at yahoo.com (Mel) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 22:06:17 -0000 Subject: prophecies and choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108599 A prophecy is a definitive statement of what will happen. I agree with that. (I think I was a tad unclear originally). However, literarily speaking they usually come true, due to the fact that someone tries to stop them from happening (such as Oedipus and several other Greek Myths). In other words they "chose" to believe. What you used as an example was a prediction not a prophecy as it was very general and prophecies are specific. However, the 2nd prophecy is interesting in that it is not based on someone trying to keep it from happening. It's based on the fact that the "seer" knew Harry would "choose" to ignore it. Harry didn't even remember it until the end when talking to Dumbledore. The "seer" is able to make a prophecy solely because they know how the people will choose and has a mystical gift to see the outcome of these choices. My only point (which I actually wrote that post days ago, so I'm trying to remember my point. lol) is that prophecies do not contradict choice, they are based on choice. Meltay From rebekarg at yahoo.com.br Mon Aug 2 21:05:55 2004 From: rebekarg at yahoo.com.br (=?iso-8859-1?q?Rebeka=20Gomes?=) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 18:05:55 -0300 (ART) Subject: Time Turner: Was Just a comment about Lupin's malady. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040802210555.50725.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108600 Casey wrote: > My only issue is that Time Travel can be used too > easily to right something. To do something and go > back and erase everything that happened. Use the > Time Turner to go back and protect Lupin, or James > and Lily, or even go back and make sure Baby Riddle > is adopted into a loving home so that he doesn't > turn out evil. Rebeka: I think that's just what cannot happen, because it'll ruin the whole time line. I mean, it will generate paradox in time. I still can see a major time travel coming on in HBP, though; not that it will correct things I see it as an opportunity to make Harry accept all things better. ===== ~Rebeka From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Mon Aug 2 22:21:43 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (aggiepaddy) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 22:21:43 -0000 Subject: Occlumency Lessons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108601 ~Yb <<<<<<>>>>>>>>> > On another thought, maybe it was a good thing Snape taught Harry at > least a little about Occlumency. Harry has to clear his emotions in > order to block out LV. Sure, it's easy when you aren't upset, but > it's much harder when you are fighting with a teacher you hate. > Harry would have a much easier time clearing his head with DD than > with Snape, but do we think he will be calm and peaceful the next > time he has to lie to LV? Probably not. Snape (inadvertently) > showed him how hard it will be to stand up to LV. Aggie: I agree with what you're saying, which now also raises the question, which teacher will bring the *most needed* results? Taken from your post it seems that *Snape* will be the most effictive teacher, in the respect of outcomes, not teaching ability. I hope this is making sense, it's past my bed time!!! What I'm trying to say is that you are right. LV is *not* going to make it easy for Harry and he needs to learn to use Occulmency when he is angry and frustrated. Dumbledore is not going to give him that platform to learn from, whereas Snape will. I do think that if Harry calms down and acknowledges that Snape didn't play as big a part in Sirius' death as he (Harry) raved about then this situation *could* work out. From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 22:30:55 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 22:30:55 -0000 Subject: Wizarding Professions In-Reply-To: <000c01c478c1$0281d1a0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108602 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "manawydan" wrote: > Steve wrote: > >Another good example, Fred and George's Joke shop; l... Some guy > will sit on an assembly line all day long enchanting trick wands, > another guy will form the wands from sticks of wood, etc... etc.... > In another department, a whole crew of people will make trick > sweets. > Ffred: > > An interesting thought, and one where there's very little canon, is > whether production in the WW is based on factories or on workshops. > All the businesses we see in the books appear to be small ones - we > don't hear the factory hooter going at Ollivander's and hundreds of > wandmakers streaming out to the pub at lunchtime, for example! Asian_lovr2: My use of the term 'factory' might have been a bit of generalization, but I still stand by the concept. Can you really see one wizard in one shop meticulously handcrafting the dozens and dozens of Dung Bomb the kids buy every chance they get? These are comsumable joke items, they run them off by the hundreds. Wands are a different story, they truly are meticulously handcrafted by one man in one shop. Wands are made by a craftsman with deep knowledge, highly specialized talent, artistic skill, and years of experience. Plus a wand is not a consumable item. When a wizard buys his first wand he does so with the intent of using it for the rest of his life. Admitly, life may have other ideas, but that's the initial intent. Note, that F.Delacour's wand is probably custom made since she supplied the core for it. Even so, I suspect there is a large craftsman's shop like Ollivander's in Western Europe, as well as, Gregorovitch in Eastern Europe. Point: just because some things are made in a somewhat factory-like setting doesn't mean everything is. > Ffred continues: > > The only _possible_ exception are the broomstick makers, where > there's a slight implication that one or two manufacturers dominate > the market for "quality" broomsticks. That's not to say of course > that there aren't dozens of "village broommakers" turning out the > kind of slow steady ones that are great for getting Mrs Witch to the > farmers' market to do her shopping, or for the kids to learn on, but > wouldn't get you anywhere against a Nimbus or a Firebolt. > Asian_lovr2: The purchase of brooms is sufficient for four major broom companies to exist; Cleansweep (1926), Comet (1929), Nimbus(1967), & Firebolt(199x?). Just as in real life, I doubt that a small village broom maker can compete with large broom companies. You can have a car handcrafted today, and many people do, but for two or three times the money as a production car. There may be a few obscure handcrafted broom makers out there, but they are certainly out of the reach of the average broom rider. >Ffred continues: > > So maybe, rather than having a factory attached, Gred and Forge > would have a network of small suppliers up and down the country, > each of whom had a good line in producing whatever was wanted. Asian_lovr2: Whether distributed across the country or in one building, the main point is that it's hundreds of available jobs. Keep in mind, not only do Fred and George need a crew of people for each of the many diverse aspects of their business, but many secondary businesses are needed to support them; cloth for invisible hats, chemicals and materials for fireworks, ingredients for trick sweets, wood for fake wands, material for the objects the wands turn into, accounting, distribution, warehousing, transportation, store fixtures, office supplies, owls for mail order, owlries and food for those owls, etc.... My main point is that you have to look beyond the surface of individual shops and look at all the businesses and workers it takes to keep those shops up and running; butchers, bakers, candlestick makers, enchanters, charmers, speller, managers, and magical craftsmen of all sorts. > Ffred concludes: > > I do wonder what happened to Gambol and Japes, though. Can Diagon > Alley _really_ support two joke shops? > > Cheers > > Ffred Asian_lovr2: Actually, there are three joke shopes, Wizard Wheezes, Gambol & Japes, and Zonkos. All making mostly consumable items. I suspect Zonkos is the biggest and therefore an international company. There is probably a Zonko's shop in Paris, Frankfurt, Berlin, Rome, Amsterdam, Oslo, etc.... That's an aweful lot of workers just in the store, and many many more in the production plants of each company. Just a thought. Steve/asian_lovr2 From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Mon Aug 2 22:31:27 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (aggiepaddy) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 22:31:27 -0000 Subject: prophecies and choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108603 Meltay wrote: >>>>>>>Snip>>>>> > However, the 2nd prophecy is interesting in that it is not based on >someone trying to keep it from happening. It's based on the fact >that the "seer" knew Harry would "choose" to ignore it. Harry >didn't even remember it until the end when talking to Dumbledore. >SNIP>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Aggie: Are you saying then that had Harry told DD or someone about the prophecy that it wouldn't have played out? Kind of like the oppposite of a self-fulfilling one? It only happened because Harry didn't tell anyone, if he had told someone (namely DD) then something could have occurred to stop it. Somehow Wormtail could have been stopped from transforming and escaping and Sirius would have been free! Trelawney in her 'seer' guise 'knew' that Harry was going to forget and thus 'knew' it was going to happen! Wow! I'm getting headache now!! Very interesting! Thanks for sharing! From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 23:25:09 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 23:25:09 -0000 Subject: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108604 YB says: Well, I think that Neville could have survived, because if LV had gone to his house that night, he would have attacked Neville, thus "choosing" him. Jo stresses choices throughout the book, and the reason Harry is The One is because LV chose him to be, by trying to kill him. Harry has been marked: he has the scar. Harry is LV's "equal": Priori Incantatem (sp) showed that, not to mention he has escaped LV's wrath 5 times now (counting when he was a baby.) LV had to mark the one as his equal, thus LV had to choose the child. Thus, it's Harry. vmonte again: I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. Are you saying that whoever Voldemort chose would have survived? Are you sure? Because we don't know the exact time and place the events in the prophecy are/have taken place. I think that Harry is the "one" because that is the way it seems to be playing out. Voldemort picked Harry, and Harry was marked. (Neville, by the way, has also been marked but in a different way.) I believe that Harry is the "one" who will defeat the Dark Lord but I also believe that Neville is going to do something that will eventually make the prophecy read as though it can apply to both boys. The prophecy is very ambiguous on purpose. JKR is not going to tell us the ending of book seven that easily. There are probably going to be some big surprises. Have you noticed that she plays with the theme of mistaken identity throughout the series? We have fake Moody, polyjuice Harry and Ron as Crabb & Goyle, Sirius as bad guy but who is really good, the Grim is really Sirius, Voldemort is really Tom Riddle, Scabbers is Peter, the vision of James attacking the dementors is really time-turned Harry, Rita Skeeter is a bug, and Harry introducing himself as Neville on the Night Bus. Does anyone think this theme will come up again? What's Tonks purpose in the story if she is not going to impersonate another character? Aren't we going to also find out that someone we thought was a muggle (or squibb)is going to turn out to be a wizard or witch? (I lean towards Petunia as this person. Filch and Figg would not give me as much pleasure as Petunia's worst fear come to life.) Will Ginny turn out to be an animagus with all the feline references she gets (in the same manner that Sirius had doglike characteristics--even while in human form). We also had Hermione turning into a big cat but unfortunately JKR said none of the main three would become animagus. What's Neville's purpose? He was the only one that stood up against his fellow Gryffindors when he believed that they were wrong (PS/SS). Will he decide to go against the prophecy and by doing so change Harry Potter's fate? vivian From sad1199 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 23:32:13 2004 From: sad1199 at yahoo.com (sad1199) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 23:32:13 -0000 Subject: Occlumency Lessons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108605 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bex" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" >> > > > > >> > I concur: >> > On another thought, maybe it was a good thing Snape taught Harry at > least a little about Occlumency. Harry has to clear his emotions in > order to block out LV. Sure, it's easy when you aren't upset, but > it's much harder when you are fighting with a teacher you hate. Harry > would have a much easier time clearing his head with DD than with > Snape, but do we think he will be calm and peaceful the next time he > has to lie to LV? Probably not. Snape (inadvertently) showed him how > hard it will be to stand up to LV. > > ~Yb sad1199 replies: Maybe you've just hit the nail on the head! If Dumbledore is as great a wizard as he is known for maybe he WANTED Snape to teach Hary Occlumency because of their animosity towards one another. I think he was doing what he thought was best for Harry by having Snape teach him, unfortunately both Harry (being a teenager) and Snape (being raised in his abusive, dysfunctional home) were too immature to go through with the lessons. Maybe, after all that has happened now Dumbledore will have to teach him and Harry might not be strong enough to face LV and then, of course, Snape will have to step in and save him. Then, of course, Voldemort will know of Snape's skills... Have a Happy Love Filled Day sad1199 From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 23:46:59 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 23:46:59 -0000 Subject: F & G -- Time-Turner? Cheaters? (Re: another wacko theory) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108606 Now Lorel: You may have a point, but I'm not so sure. I adore F&G and would rather believe the best about them. You're right that they do have a sense of fair play, but it seems to be one that they define themselves. As they even discussed, their pressure on Bagman to pay up could amount to blackmail; they stole the Marauders' Map from Filch's office; they even most likely slipped Hermione a Sleeping Draught in the Gryffindor common room so that they could test their wares on the other students (OotP, American Hardcover, page 276): "'She's there,' said Fred... Hermione was dozing ... her drink slipping precariously in her hand... 'Let her sleep,' said George hastily. It was a few moments before Harry noticed that several of the first years gathered around them bore unmistakable signs of recent nosebleeds." Again, I love the Twins, and would never consider them ESE, but their own code of conduct does not always mirror the strictest conventional morality. vmonte responds: Lorel, I never noticed this scene before. I'm laughing right now! They probably did drug Hermione!!!! I love Fred and George, but I think you are right about the flexibility of their moral conduct. I still have a lot of admiration for them though. vivian From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Mon Aug 2 23:55:00 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 23:55:00 -0000 Subject: prophecies and choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108607 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Mel" wrote: ......prophecies are specific. However, the 2nd prophecy is interesting in that it is not based on someone trying to keep it from happening. It's based on the fact that the "seer" knew Harry would "choose" to ignore it. Harry didn't even remember it until the end when talking to Dumbledore. > My only point (which I actually wrote that post days > ago, so I'm trying to remember my point. lol) is that prophecies do not contradict choice, they are based on choice. > > Meltay Valky: I am glad that this discussion has been brought up because it gives me an opportunity to post something I wrote last year, and never got around to posting. Its a bit of a hacky theory about prophecies and choice and I wonder if it would be of interest to you since you seem to be seeing prophetics in much the same way as I do. -----------*********-------------- Thinking about prophecies and who is chosen to recieve them, I am starting to see a recurrence of a pattern I will tentatively name P.I. (Prophecy Instrument.) Firenze gives me the lever in his comments in OOtP about the wisdom of his kind and with his insistence that the future is not to be foretold because it has no certainty. Prophecy Instrument looks some thing like this: The person who recieves the prophecy at the moment of receiving they become its instrument through which it can be fulfilled. The canon support. Harry recieves the Voldemort ressurection prophecy alone. There is no-one else that hears it not even Trelawney. So Harry is *chosen* as the instrument. Harry's life then takes a turn to which the truth is revealed to *him*. Others present are denied the truth, but that does not matter to (lets call it the Fates) "the Fates" because their instrument has all the information he needs to make his choice openly. I am guessing this is the universal ethic of prophecy. So, post-Harry making his discovery about Peter he is given the choice to pave the prophecies way to fulfillment or end it. He has all the peices of the puzzle given to him and he freely chooses the next stage in the story. Secondly, Dumbledores responsibility for Harry is clear to us all. Thirdly, I am also thinking that the person who overheard the first prophecy was Snape. Now lets assume that *he* was a P.I. of the first prophecy aside Dumbledore. His prescence in the shrieking shack revealed the truth to him, and he *also* had a choice to believe or not believe. Further, as a prophecy instrument he had a choice to pave the first prophecy or condemn it in that moment as well. If Snape had believed Remus, Sirius et al then the course of the first prophecies fulfillment *may* have been halted. Interestingly, the emotions that Harry and Snape felt at that moment incited them to action in the former. And hence, the path was cleared by the instruments for the fulfillment of each prophecy. Comments are anticipated. So, as we *all* have already noted anyway, Harry was the instrument of the prophecy he heard, I have just extended it a bit and I want to add something else. Centaurs do not predict the future. Could that be a passive protest to a phenomenon like Prophecys Instrument? Do they conciously choose to avoid 'being the instruments of the fates', in their wisdom. Umm this is a little bit shabby as a theory, I guess. I put a lot of thought into the process but this is the first time I have written it down. Take a look anyway and tell me what you think. -----------------*************-------------------------- Some of the references are new tothis thread because I intended it to reply to a thread oh so long ago. Anyway I look forward to replies. Best to All valky From meidbh at yahoo.com Mon Aug 2 22:47:34 2004 From: meidbh at yahoo.com (meidbh) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 22:47:34 -0000 Subject: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108608 Cathy writes: "Voldemort fulfilled the prophecy himself by attacking Harry By the same token, Voldemort picked Harry, so he is the one." Meidbh responds; Well no. Choosing Harry and attacking Harry aren't enough. From the prophecy, the one with the power to vanquish Voldy must be *marked as his equal*. - If you think the prophecy is genuine and that Harry was marked in Godric's Hollow then Harry's the one with the power. - If you don't think anyone has been marked yet then it could be Harry or it could be Neville. You'll have to wait and see. - If you don't believe the prophecy then anything could happen! (this one is just too much for me I'm afraid) kateydidnt2002 writes: "I don't see it as being a good plot twist. It would actually be incredibly cruel to Harry it would be incredibly cruel for the world to not acknowledge what Harry has done, simply because he did not accomplish the final step." Meidbh again: It really would be awful if Harry went through all those dreadful years of living with the Dursleys, battling dementors and VM, losing Cedric and Sirius (not to mention full control of his own mind), only to have Neville suddenly discover the power to vanquish his nemesis at the very last minute.(though perhaps at this stage he might be more than happy for someone, anyone to step in and stop the madness). I think plotwise it is possible that most of what has happened to Harry has happened solely as a result of VM finding him and attacking him as an infant. He could be just a decoy. Maybe DD has been fooled too or maybe DD is playing along to protect the person with the real power.... It is possible but *I don't like it*!!! The idea of DD being fooled this badly or, worse still, playing along with a deception like this would make me wonder if the WW is really worth saving. The final battle would be one between Dumb and Nasty or Not-so-good and Evil. Way too much like real life. Harry for Vanquishing Hero! Meidbh From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 2 23:57:01 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 23:57:01 -0000 Subject: Was Harry in Danger from the Basilisk? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108609 sad1199 here: > > ...edited... > > Now, a question. I have read these books through at least 5 > > times and I am an intelligent person but! I still don't > > understand WHY Dobby tried to prevent Harry from returning to > > Hogwarts. ...edited... AND house elves are obviously more > > intelligent than given credit for if Dobby knew who Harry even > > was. Wait, it says that house elves are intelligent, right? I am > > just very confused about the whole Dobby thing, any help would > > be appreciated. Asian_lovr2: > Now the Basilisk and the danger to Harry, in this case, I think we > are giving the too much weight to the intelligences of the > Basilisk. This is a reptile, though very large, it probably had a > brain the size of a walnut. Generally speaking, reptiles are only > capable of two modes of operation; 'Lunch' and 'Sleep'. A > parseltongue might be able to communcate with it, but I seriously > doubt the conversations would sound like a dialog with a > Shakeperean actor. It is able to relay primitive thoughts and obey > simple orders, but I think that's about the extent of it. Any > sense of sophisticated language on the part of the reptile is > likely to be more a reflection of the listener than the speaker. > > Also, I'm not totally convinced that the Basilisk can tell a muggle > from a wizard. The fact is that the eyes of a Basilisk are deadly > to ANYONE who looks into them, wizards or purebloods have no > special protection. SSSusan: I agree with you in general about the brain size of the basilisk, Steve--I don't think it could have planned or carried out actions on its own. But I don't think I agree that the directions it was receiving were super-simple. Diary!Tom apparently controlled the basilisk enough [through Ginny, am I right?] that it attacked ONLY MUGGLE-BORNS. I do not believe this was a random happenstance nor sheer dumb luck. And while I can't explain *how* Tom set it all up so that it worked out this way [one of those frustrating gaps in explanation in the books], still, other than NHN, all the victims were right-on target. Tom described the list of victims quite proudly in the Chamber, as if they were just who/what he'd wanted. This makes me believe that, had Tom decided to single out Harry, he eventually could have done so. Siriusly Snapey Susan From liz_carver at insightbb.com Mon Aug 2 23:10:07 2004 From: liz_carver at insightbb.com (Liz) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 23:10:07 -0000 Subject: The Opening Chapter of Book SIX Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108610 On her site, JKR teases us (in "Extra Stuff/Edits" at the bottom of the page): "I have come close to using a chapter very like this in Philosopher's Stone, (it was one of the discarded first chapters), 'Prisoner of Azkaban', and 'Order of the Phoenix', but here, finally, it works, so it's staying. And that's all I'm going to say, but when you read it, just know that it's been about 13 years in the brewing." If you look back at the list of "Edits", you'll also see 'The Opening Chapter of Philosopher's Stone', which alludes to the chapters she had to throw out. Does she rat herself out here by giving the chapter in question? Liz From liz_carver at insightbb.com Mon Aug 2 23:13:38 2004 From: liz_carver at insightbb.com (Liz) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 23:13:38 -0000 Subject: Time Turner: Was Just a comment about Lupin's malady. In-Reply-To: <20040802210555.50725.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108611 earlier from Amey: (snip)I don't think time travel will be used to do anything that important. Saving Sirius was one thing, (after all, he did not live much on borrowed time.(end snip) Liz now: I've wondered this too, and having always been fascinated by the use of time travel in fiction. And I like this theory that it is being used for things not that "important", especially because we've been told that time-turning is highly dangerous to any wizard who uses it; isn't it supposed to be able to drive a wizard mad if he sees himself while using it? However, I don't think that saving Sirius, Buckbeak, Lupin, and Harry during PoA were frivolous uses of the device. There might be rules and regulations we don't know about (yet) for the time-turner, such as that it can revolve only so many hours at once, or only so far into the past? Perhaps the user would suffer severely if trying to warp too far...? But, my burning question is why Hermione, albeit smart as a whip, is allowed to use this device during such a turbulent time and being such a youngster. Just to take more classes? Is she trying to graduate early? We've not learned a lot about that device; I think we've either stumbled upon a truly "for narrative-purposes only" device, or we will soon see it turn up again. Perhaps then we'll learn why Hermione was the person JKR used to first show us this device, and that H will again be the one to have it on loan. From liz_carver at insightbb.com Mon Aug 2 23:16:40 2004 From: liz_carver at insightbb.com (Liz) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 23:16:40 -0000 Subject: Why sort half-blood Riddle into Slytherin? In-Reply-To: <006701c478c4$26eaed30$bcc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108612 > kmc (snip) > This question may have been answered but with the sorting hat's song in OOP I want to know how Tom Riddle with his half-blood hertitage got sorted into Slytherin? (end snip) Liz now: If the Sorting Hat put Riddle into Slytherin House, regardless of his blood line, then it must be Salazar's will for him to be there, because isn't the Hat a representation or memory of sorts of all the original house leaders? So, if the Hat put Riddle there, the Hat being Salazar incarnate, then Salazar "allowed" it, which would mean something altogether new and interesting about what Salazar truly believed (even if he didn't realize this himself) or, maybe that he makes as many mistakes as Riddle/Voldemort and therefore is not nearly as shrewd as he fancied himself. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 3 00:00:49 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 00:00:49 -0000 Subject: Snape's choice of memories for the pensieve (was: Death and Snape) In-Reply-To: <20040802201601.39386.qmail@web12103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108613 marty wrote: > > > "but isn't it curious that this is one of his worst memories > > > that he wants to keep hidden? What about all the stuff that > > > he is doing for DD, and his life prior to becoming Potions > > > master - especially while a DE?" Meidbh: > > Agreed. > > I always felt this was a little disappointing as a worst memory. > > I assumed JKR was writing to the kids on this one, that she had > > a momentary lapse of imagination. Could Snape's life post Grey > > Underwear Incident really have been so dull? > > > > Maybe there *is* more to it than meets the eye...but what?? MJ replied: > My take on that wasn't that it was Snape's WORST memory, just a > memory he didn't want Harry to see, in case he got through Snape's > defenses -- which he (Snape) had good reason to fear, since Harry > did get through briefly enough to see little boy Snape cowering in > a room while his dad raged on. SSSusan: I think this still begs a question, though: If that wasn't Snape's WORST memory--just one he didn't particularly care for Harry to see-- then why title the chapter "Snape's Worst Memory"? What makes it "worst"? I've heard people argue that the *real* worst one was one of the others Snape deposited in the pensieve and that Harry didn't get to. But, still, why would JKR name the chapter that if we've not going to get to see The One?? Siriusly Snapey Susan From liz_carver at insightbb.com Mon Aug 2 23:19:09 2004 From: liz_carver at insightbb.com (Liz) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 23:19:09 -0000 Subject: Just a comment about Lupin's malady. In-Reply-To: <080220041630.3661.410E6C0D000DF99800000E4D22007354469C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108614 If we haven't established where Moony was during the secret-keeper switch from Padfoot to Wormtail, then perhaps we should. Is it possible that he simply wasn't around, due to a full moon perhaps? And do we know why Padfoot was relieved of his secret-keeperness in the first place? Liz From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 00:07:22 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 00:07:22 -0000 Subject: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108615 Lisa wrote: This part, frankly, didn't surprise me. I wasn't taken aback by the way Snape responded to Harry when Harry appeared to be screwing around on his first day of class. I took it as less of a "You little insolent brat, I wish you were dead and I plan to see you to that grave" sort of thing and more as a "You little insolent brat, you've only just arrived and already you're not paying attention - you think you already know everything, we'll /see/ just how much you know" sort of thing. I've heard teachers turn to giggly, distracted, or otherwise irritating students and say "Oh, you already know this? Would you like to step up and teach? No? Then pay attention." Of all Snape's numerous transgressions, I really don't think of this as one of them. Lisa, who knows that Snape is, quite clearly, not /nice/, but believes he is /good/... and therein lies the importance vmonte reponds: Sorry Lisa, but Harry was not screwing around in class. He was actually startled by Snape's attack. Harry was paying attention in class, everyone was. It was the first thing mentioned in the chapter. It said something to the effect that even though Snape spoke barely above a whisper he had a gift, like McGonagall, of keeping everyone's attention. Clearly, there has to be another reason for why Snape went after Harry. vivian From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Aug 3 00:07:54 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 00:07:54 -0000 Subject: Just a comment about Lupin's malady. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108616 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Liz" wrote: > And do we know why Padfoot was relieved of his secret-keeperness in the first place? > > > Liz Valky: I can't answer your first question which is a really good one, but I can answer this. Sirius was being oh so clever in formulating a plan to help J and L to protect Harry. He suggested James make the feckless Peter his secret keeper while he (Sirius himself) went out into the open as bait for LV to keep him off the scent. The canon for this is in Sirius' story in the Shrieking Shack when he says: Paraphrase** 'it was the perfect plan I never dreamed that LV would use a weak person like Peter' Hope that helps. from Valky From aphrodeia at gmail.com Tue Aug 3 00:10:37 2004 From: aphrodeia at gmail.com (aphrodeia) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 20:10:37 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108617 <> Then I'll need to go back and re-read the chapter, as I thought Harry may have done something to indicate he wasn't quite there. Maybe it's the films meddling with me, because Harry certainly wasn't hanging on Snape's every word in the You Know What. Lisa ________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! Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ________________________________ Yahoo! Groups Links To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: HPforGrownups-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 00:26:48 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 00:26:48 -0000 Subject: prophecies and choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108618 Valky: Firenze gives me the lever in his comments in OOtP about the wisdom of his kind and with his insistence that the future is not to be foretold because it has no certainty. vmonte responds: I like this comment, and I agree with Firenze. His states that the future is not fixed, which means that the prophecy does not have to play out the way it's presently being interpreted. Doesn't Firenze also say at some point that the future/stars can also be misread? vivian From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 00:31:27 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 00:31:27 -0000 Subject: Snape's choice of memories for the pensieve (was: Death and Snape) In-Reply-To: <20040802201601.39386.qmail@web12103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108619 marty wrote: "but isn't it curious that this is one of his worst memories that he wants to keep hidden? What about all the stuff that he is doing for DD, and his life prior to becoming Potions master - especially while a DE?" vmonte responds: Maybe he recalls the the time he was a DE fondly. You know the good old days... From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 3 00:41:06 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 00:41:06 -0000 Subject: Time-turning as literary device In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108620 Valky wrote originally: > > > Please, I have absolutely no idea where anyone gets the notion > > > that time travel has been overextended in the story. SSSusan responded: > > I would be VERY happy indeed if there is no more use of time- > > turning or polyjuice. And it's not the quantity of chapters in > > which they've been used. It's because of what HunterGreen > > said: they were used as a narrative device, and once is enough > > for some of us. > > > > For some, these parts of the storyline are fun, adventurous and > > a challenge to figure out. For others, they feel like "deus ex > > machina"--almost like a cop-out. "How can I get X to happen > > when it's really not very likely or possible? > > Do you see what I mean? Valky Now replying: > I do see what you mean Susan, and I agree, but I also don't agree. > > I agree that there is a plot instrument role to the timeturner in > POA and I can understand that when percieved *only* as this that a > timeturner is a flat out, cop out. > > However, I disagree that the time turner is ever intended to be > the deus ex machina of any plot, past or future in the books.. duh > I am so lame, go the puns Valky :P > > What I mean here is that DD controlled the three hours of the POA > finale as an observer carefully recognising what was out of place > and where. For DD to have done so much overseeing was probably > exhausting. I expect you wouldn't wake up the next day with a plan > to repeat living it from all angles like you did yesterday, so I > suspect he doesnt make a habit of doing it. But, I believe maybe > that he recognised the gift in Hermione, again demonstrated more > vividly by the movie when she sees herself and knows quickly not > to interfere. > So I hope that you understand all I am really saying is I strongly > disagree that POA's finale contained any undertones of a cheesy > out, if anything JKR has set the stage for a warning for those > that would percieve time travel as anything of that sort at all. SSSusan: I *definitely* don't think there was anything cheesy about the finale of PoA--I totally agree with you there. And maybe it's wrong of me to worry that JKR might use time-turning again in such a way that I'd be annoyed...because the VAST majority of the time I have really enjoyed the way she's told the story, and I have faith in her ability to maintain that. (Hence, my confidence that she can weave an "elegantly simple" conclusion to the series that's a real WOW! but still beautiful in its simplicity--but that's another post. :- )) I guess in spite of this confidence I have in JKR, I do still also have a bit of a worry that if the time-turning shows up AGAIN I'll be feeling, "Been there, done that." You know? I want something new, fresh, creative...just like she's provided for us each time so far. You've got an interesting take on the time-turning in PoA and in general, so I guess I should just have more faith! Siriusly Snapey Susan From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 00:43:15 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 00:43:15 -0000 Subject: Time Turner: Was Just a comment about Lupin's malady. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108621 Liz wrote: But, my burning question is why Hermione, albeit smart as a whip, is allowed to use this device during such a turbulent time and being such a youngster. Just to take more classes? Is she trying to graduate early? We've not learned a lot about that device; I think we've either stumbled upon a truly "for narrative-purposes only" device, or we will soon see it turn up again. Perhaps then we'll learn why Hermione was the person JKR used to first show us this device, and that H will again be the one to have it on loan. vmonte responds: Good post Liz. There is something fishy about how thirteen-year-old Hermione was given the time-turner. I believe that the children are being trained by Dumbledore for a future role in the war. (SSSusan has also commented on this fact regarding Harry in SS/PS). By the way when I reread the last chapter of SS/PS, I was surprised and had forgotten that Harry actually confirms to Ron and Hermione that Dumbledore let him learn about the Mirror of Erised so that he would know how to use it when confronting Voldemort. Harry also tells his friends that Dumbledore probably knew that He was going to attempt to get to Voldemort, so he helped him just enough for the final confrontation. Sure sounds like the kids are in training to me. vivian From melaniertay at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 01:10:49 2004 From: melaniertay at yahoo.com (Mel) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 01:10:49 -0000 Subject: prophecies and choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108622 Valky: > > Firenze gives me the lever in his comments in OOtP about the wisdom > of his kind and with his insistence that the future is not to be > foretold because it has no certainty. Well, I don't think the Centaurs wisdom applies to the prophecies, since the prophecies by definition are specific events foretold. The Centaurs are not the ones that gave the prophecies in the books, because that is not what they do. They are "general" fortune tellers whereas prophecies are specific. When the Centaurs read the stars they read that "mars is bright" which means that conflict or war is on the horizon (I think). This is not a specific statement regarding certain people, but a general outlook about the world. Therefore it is not a prophecy. However, I do like the idea that you must have an "instrument" of the prophecies. Much better way of saying it then I could have thought up. Someone must take an action or make a choice to initiate the prophecy. However, the instrument almost has to go along with it. It's like if you're walking down the sidewalk and there's a tree in your way. You only have two choices 1. walk around it or 2. chop it. It's not a big leap to figure out you'd probably walk around it. Therefore, the prophecy is somewhat aware of the choices the instrument will make, even though he or she hasn't made them yet. Meltay From sad1199 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 01:31:52 2004 From: sad1199 at yahoo.com (sad1199) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 01:31:52 -0000 Subject: Snape's choice of memories for the pensieve (was: Death and Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108623 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" <> Meidbh: > > > Agreed. > > > I always felt this was a little disappointing as a worst memory. > > > I assumed JKR was writing to the kids on this one, that she had > > > a momentary lapse of imagination. Could Snape's life post Grey > > > Underwear Incident really have been so dull? > > > > > > Maybe there *is* more to it than meets the eye...but what?? > > MJ replied: > > My take on that wasn't that it was Snape's WORST memory, just a > > memory he didn't want Harry to see, in case he got through Snape's > > defenses -- which he (Snape) had good reason to fear, since Harry > > did get through briefly enough to see little boy Snape cowering in > > a room while his dad raged on. > > > SSSusan: > I think this still begs a question, though: If that wasn't Snape's > WORST memory--just one he didn't particularly care for Harry to see-- > then why title the chapter "Snape's Worst Memory"? What makes > it "worst"? > > I've heard people argue that the *real* worst one was one of the > others Snape deposited in the pensieve and that Harry didn't get > to. But, still, why would JKR name the chapter that if we've not > going to get to see The One?? > > Siriusly Snapey Susan sad1199 replies: If we think back to being 15, EVERYTHING embarassed us. I remember once walking down the hallway at school with a somewhat popular girl and, Heaven forbid!, a little toot slipped out. I am telling you I was mortified! I KNEW she would tell all her friends and they would laugh at me continuously. Actually, I don't think she told anyone because no one ever sniggered or laughed at me in the next few days. But! I remember that day vividly and it was over 20 years ago! Unlike Snape, I had a relatively normal childhood and don't dwell on my most humiliating moments or let them control my life now but, I still remember... I think in light of what happens later with James saving Snape's life and whatever feelings Snape had (real or imagined) for Lily that that could very well be a worst memory. Have a Happy Love Filled Day sad1199 From cassin12004 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 01:42:25 2004 From: cassin12004 at yahoo.com (cassin12004) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 01:42:25 -0000 Subject: Personal theories about what will happen next. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108624 I have just now found my way to this site so please forgive me if this was discussed previously. 1. The Half Blood Prince is Hagrid. 2. I could see Arthur Weasley as the next Minister of Magic. 3. It would take a miracle for Harry to get an O.W.L. in potions so Prof. Snape could be the next Defense against the Dark Arts Prof. 4. A Career for Harry, after school, could be Defense against the Dark Arts at Hogwarts. I could see that happen. 5. Here's an easy one. Lupin and Wormtail are going to fight. 6. War will be brought to the doorstep of Hogwarts and we will see an epic battle to make Tolkien proud. Centaurs, Giants, Aragog and his brood, thestrals, house elves, bowtruckles, Ghosts, Peeves, the whomping willow and everything all the way down to the castle suits of armor involved in defending hogwarts from an invading horde of goblins, dementors, giants and Death Eaters. What do you think? "cassin12004" From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 02:02:14 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 02:02:14 -0000 Subject: Personal theories about what will happen next. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108625 Personal theories about what will happen next. "cassin12004" wrote: I have just now found my way to this site so please forgive me if this was discussed previously. (snip) 2 . I could see Arthur Weasley as the next Minister of Magic. mhbobbin replies: Alas, JKR has said "Alas, no" on this one. Maybe the one after the next? 5. Here's an easy one. Lupin and Wormtail are going to fight. mhbobbin: Ooooh. I fear the silver hand. Hope Lupin fights as a werewolf and doesn't turn Wormtail into one. 6. War will be brought to the doorstep of Hogwarts and we will see an epic battle to make Tolkien proud. Centaurs, Giants, Aragog and his brood, thestrals, house elves, bowtruckles, Ghosts, Peeves, the whomping willow and everything all the way down to the castle suits of armor involved in defending hogwarts from an invading horde of goblins, dementors, giants and Death Eaters. mhbobbin: I do like the idea of the bowtruckles defending Hogwarts. Perhaps Lucius Malfoy could be fed to the spiders. Some fun ideas. mhbobbin From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 3 02:04:28 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 02:04:28 -0000 Subject: Occlumency Lessons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108626 "Bex" wrote: > > On another thought, maybe it was a good thing Snape taught Harry > > at least a little about Occlumency. Harry has to clear his > > emotions in order to block out LV. Sure, it's easy when you > > aren't upset, but it's much harder when you are fighting with a > > teacher you hate. Harry would have a much easier time clearing > > his head with DD than with Snape, but do we think he will be > > calm and peaceful the next time he has to lie to LV? Probably > > not. Snape (inadvertently) showed him how hard it will be to > > stand up to LV. sad1199 replies: > Maybe you've just hit the nail on the head! If Dumbledore is as > great a wizard as he is known for maybe he WANTED Snape to teach > Hary Occlumency because of their animosity towards one another. I > think he was doing what he thought was best for Harry by having > Snape teach him, unfortunately both Harry (being a teenager) and > Snape (being raised in his abusive, dysfunctional home) were too > immature to go through with the lessons. Maybe, after all that has > happened now Dumbledore will have to teach him and Harry might not > be strong enough to face LV and then, of course, Snape will have to > step in and save him. Then, of course, Voldemort will know of > Snape's skills... SSSusan: But you've hit on something that I've argued about for quite some time where Snape & Harry are concerned. If it's **really** important that Harry learn something, be it Potions or Occlumency, then the teacher needs to be SURE that his methods are working with Harry. Whether you think Snape's out of line or perfectly within his rights as a teacher, I think it's clear that the methods he's used with Harry aren't especially effective WITH HARRY. I argued re: potions--and I'll argue it again with Occlumency--that for a BEGINNING student, Snape is a horrible match for Harry. He's sarcastic and snarky and nasty; he gets Harry's back up. Harry takes the bait and either gets cheeky himself or quits trying. What Harry needs, I would argue, is a teacher good with a BEGINNING student. Someone who will interact with him in a calm, gentle & dare I say respectful manner, who'll teach him the BASICS of Occlumency, help him to understand the whys and wherefores, help him to figure out HOW to clear his mind, to let go of emotion, and who'll let him practice where he feels SAFE--if nothing else, from cruel sarcasm. I would argue that someone other than Snape-- Dumbledore, in this case--would be perfect for this. Then, once Harry has a decent grasp of the skills, *then* he could graduate to the tougher task of working with Snape, which would, as you two have noted, help him prepare for the even more difficult prospect of facing Voldy himself. For what it's worth. Siriusly Snapey Susan From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 02:12:00 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 02:12:00 -0000 Subject: Time-turning as literary device Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108627 Re: Time-turning as literary device Valky wrote originally: > > > Please, I have absolutely no idea where anyone gets the notion > > > that time travel has been overextended in the story. SSSusan responded: > > I would be VERY happy indeed if there is no more use of time- > > turning or polyjuice. And it's not the quantity of chapters in > > which they've been used. It's because of what HunterGreen > > said: they were used as a narrative device, and once is enough > > for some of us. > > mhbobbin writes: I suspect that if time turning appears again it will be in a different way than we have seen it. The mysterious Gred & Forge bet in GOF is possibly an instance when it has happened. I think that the time turning narrative device will reappear but presented as something that has already happened.I think we must be alert to events being out of kilter at some point (that will be hard since events are often out of kilter)and then learning that someone other than Harry and his cohorts had timeturned a major event. I could possibly stand that. But in general, I agree that I don't want to see much more of it. It makes my head spin and is a bit of a cop- out. Perhaps someone will die in a time turner episode. It is, after all, dark magic. mhbobbin From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 3 02:16:20 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 02:16:20 -0000 Subject: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108628 vmonte reponds: > Sorry Lisa, but Harry was not screwing around in class. He was > actually startled by Snape's attack. Harry was paying attention in > class, everyone was. It was the first thing mentioned in the > chapter. It said something to the effect that even though Snape > spoke barely above a whisper he had a gift, like McGonagall, of > keeping everyone's attention. > > Clearly, there has to be another reason for why Snape went after > Harry.>> Lisa answered: > Then I'll need to go back and re-read the chapter, as I thought > Harry may have done something to indicate he wasn't quite there. > Maybe it's the films meddling with me, because Harry certainly > wasn't hanging on Snape's every word in the You Know What. SSSusan: Must be the movies, Lisa. Snape paused during roll call, at the start of class, to remark, "Our new--*celebrity*" then goes on to give his "subtle science & exact art of potion-making" speech. As Vmonte recalled, "He spoke in barely more than a whisper, but they caught every word--like Professor McGonagall, Snape had the gift of keeping a class silent without effort." Snape continued on w/ his "little foolish wand-waving" and "even stopper death" remarks, concluding with "--if you aren't as big a bunch of dunderheads as I usually have to teach." Next comes this: "More silence followed this little speech. Harry & Ron exchanged looks with raised eyebrows. Hermione Granger was on the edge of her seat and looked desperate to start proving that she wasn't a dunderhead." *Immediately* after this, Snape says, "Potter!" and begins asking his sequence of questions. So, NO, Harry wasn't goofing off or letting his mind drift. Siriusly Snapey Susan From meltowne at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 02:21:00 2004 From: meltowne at yahoo.com (meltowne) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 02:21:00 -0000 Subject: Time-turning as literary device In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108629 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: Valky wrote originally: Please, I have absolutely no idea where anyone gets the notion that time travel has been overextended in the story. SSSusan responded: I would be VERY happy indeed if there is no more use of time- turning or polyjuice. And it's not the quantity of chapters in which they've been used. It's because of what HunterGreen said: they were used as a narrative device, and once is enough for some of us. ...maybe it's wrong of me to worry that JKR might use time-turning again in such a way that I'd be annoyed...because the VAST majority of the time I have really enjoyed the way she's told the story, and I have faith in her ability to maintain that. (Hence, my confidence that she can weave an "elegantly simple" conclusion to the series that's a real WOW! but still beautiful in its simplicity--but that's another post. :- I guess in spite of this confidence I have in JKR, I do still also have a bit of a worry that if the time-turning shows up AGAIN I'll be feeling, "Been there, done that." You know? I want something new, fresh, creative...just like she's provided for us each time so far. You've got an interesting take on the time-turning in PoA and in general, so I guess I should just have more faith! Meltowne: I suspect we will see both Polyjuice and time-turning again, but not necessarily in active use, but as explanations of things that occurred in earlier books. We keep seeing too many instances of things smelling of cabbage - why does Mrs. Figg's house smell like cabbage? Why does she have all those cats? I suspect Polyjuice is being used by someone there, but for what purpose? Then there's the time-turning, and the warnings about not changing anything. Harry realized he had seen himelf, and had the confidence to use the Patronus charm - he knew he wasn't changing anything, as it had already happened. We know that in PS/SS there's time missing when Hagrid went back to get Harry. We know he told McGonnagle where DD would be that evening. Sometime that morning, everyone knew LV had been defeated, but obviously DD didn't know where the Potters were hiding, or he would have known who the secret keeper was (that person would have had to have told him, not someone else). I would assume anyone who had been Imperio'd by was suddenly free, and that may have been how they knew he was "gone." But did they know right away that Harry was safe? Probably not, and they didn't know where to find him. Someone who had been told by Wormtail may have told DD where later that evening, and he sent Hagrid back with a timeturner to fetch him. But since they hadn't known Harry's fate until then, Hagrid couldn't very well show up with him right away, or it would create a paradox - they arranged to meet up later, at the Dursley household. The question is, who told DD where Harry was? That person had to know Wormtail was the secret keeper, or had to have been told by someone else who know he was. Who knew, and was would have told DD? Would that person have told DD after already knowing Harry wasn't there any longer? Maybe someone like Fudge, who perhaps claimed Sirius said something about it when he "blew up Wormtail?" From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 02:33:15 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 02:33:15 -0000 Subject: Occlumency Lessons (Snape's reaction to what he sees) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108630 The posts that I have read lately on the Occlumency lessons have been focusing on Harry and what he sees of Snape's memories, particularly the one in the Penseive. On re-reading the chapter, I've become intrigued by Snape's reaction to what he saw in Harry's memory. This has probably been discussed before but I haven't found it. In the Chapter Occlumency, Snape sees certain images in Harry's head. He reacts most strongly to the ones that are related to the Dept of Mysteries and/or Voldemort, scolding Harry. But the most interesting one might just be at the bottom of P 535 (Scholastic) Snape sees a dragon; Harry's parents in the Mirror; Cedric dead in the graveyard. Harry is very upset to see the image of Cedric. He notices that Snape is upset as well. ////"Snape looked paler than usual, and angrier, though not nearly as angry as Harry was."/// I assumed that Snape was upset by seeing Cedric, because that wAs what upset Harry. I originally thought that Snape was worried by the graveyard images-- that maybe Snape was there, or mentioned, or it brought up memories of DE days or something but now I wonder. What if...it was the image of Lily Potter in the Mirror that upset Snape...not the image of Cedric as had upset Harry. After this episode, Snape goes on a rant, "Fools who wear their hearts proudly on their sleeves, who cannot control their emotions, who wallow in sad memories and allow themselves to be provoked this easily--weak people...stand no chance against his powers" Who is Snape talking about as a fool? Harry or himself? This rant is particularly interesting as it follows the strongest reaction by Snape to anything seen in Harry's head--other than the Dept of Mystery stuff. It's very odd as it does not seem proportional to anything that Harry has done, or failed to do. ,,But then that also speaks to Snape's general attitude around Harry and his teaching methods. Many posters feel that Snape was fond of Lily but I haven't been sold on that yet. Hmmm. I'm not saying there is but I'm keeping these ideas open. And I do think the Awful Boy that Petunia mentions is Snape. Not James. mhbobbin From meltowne at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 02:37:46 2004 From: meltowne at yahoo.com (meltowne) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 02:37:46 -0000 Subject: another wacko theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108631 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Peggy" wrote: Peg: Lorel, I like your idea a lot! I've seen others comment on how F&G might have known the outcome of the Cup match before it happened (that *is* an odd sort of bet), but I wasn't really convinced that a time turner was the answer. That's because the terrible two were supposed to be with Arthur, getting firewood, while the others were getting water. I always thought that escaping from their Dad, using the time-turner to go to the future to see the end of the match, and then calculating their re-entry into the timestream before the match without Arthur noticing anything would be pretty tricky. Not that they aren't tricky, but I don't see them as taking unnecessary risks. I like the idea that they've invented something that's a little better--something that allows them to peek ahead without actually violating wizarding law or risking themselves unnecessarily. They strike me as the types to take very calculated risks. They aren't reckless, they're not stupid, and, as we saw in OOTP, they are very skilled wizards. If they have a new toy that let's them see into the future by even a few hours it may turn out to be a vital part of the defense in the war against LV. Meltowne: They didn't need a new device. Didn't they also disappear later that evening after the match - when everybody got slit up and the dark mark was cast? Maybe the boys, following the match, used a regular timeturner to go back and tell themselves what the outcome would be - just like we saw in the second Back to the Future movie. From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 03:05:32 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 03:05:32 -0000 Subject: another wacko theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108632 Meltowne: They didn't need a new device. Didn't they also disappear later that evening after the match - when everybody got slit up and the dark mark was cast? Maybe the boys, following the match, used a regular timeturner to go back and tell themselves what the outcome would be - just like we saw in the second Back to the Future movie. vmonte responds: Wow, I wonder if you are right? I think that there was a lot going on behind the scenes during GoF. I think that there were several miscalculations made by Dumbledore, and that Cedric was killed due to Dumbledore's interference with the time-line/history. If Fred and George have also messed around with time, who else might have? Something bad is going to happen due to time-travel, and someone is going to be killed because of it. Will someone kill their past or future selves? Or will they cause more deaths because by using it? This may be movie contamination but remember the scene where Lupin told Harry that walking around with the map was an unnecessary risk? That if Sirius were to find it it would be a map to Harry? What if Voldemort were to get his hands on a time-turner this way? He captures Fred/George and gets his hands on their time-turner. What would happen then? Just thoughts -- not canon, Vivian From cassin12004 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 01:49:33 2004 From: cassin12004 at yahoo.com (cassin12004) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 01:49:33 -0000 Subject: Snape's choice of memories for the pensieve (was: Death and Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108635 Meidbh: > Agreed. > I always felt this was a little disappointing as a worst > memory. I think that we were stopped before his worst memory become too graphic for children, and JKR left it to OUR imagination what happened when James was threatening to depants our beloved Snape altogether. Fortunately, the memory was interrupted before it became embarrassing to the extreme. "cassin12004" From dzeytoun at cox.net Tue Aug 3 02:40:29 2004 From: dzeytoun at cox.net (dzeytoun) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 02:40:29 -0000 Subject: Occlumency Lessons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108636 SSSusan wrote: > What Harry needs, I would argue, is a teacher good with a BEGINNING > student. Someone who will interact with him in a calm, gentle & > dare I say respectful manner, who'll teach him the BASICS of > Occlumency, help him to understand the whys and wherefores, help > him to figure out HOW to clear his mind, to let go of emotion, and > who'll let him practice where he feels SAFE--if nothing else, from > cruel sarcasm. I would argue that someone other than Snape-- > Dumbledore, in this case--would be perfect for this. Then, once > Harry has a decent grasp of the skills, *then* he could graduate to > the tougher task of working with Snape, which would, as you two > have noted, help him prepare for the even more difficult prospect > of facing Voldy himself. I think SSS has hit this square on the head. To invoke the martial arts analogy, you don't learn a martial art by beginning with a highly aggressive black belt who attacks you all out on the first day. You start going slow, with a relatively patient instructor. Once you have the basic skills, then you go on to more advanced combat. I am probably one of the few who is inclined to take Dumbledore at his word almost all the time. I think he is generally a sincere individual who has made a LOT of mistakes, largely based on the reasons we all make mistakes: lack of information, lack of foresight, misleading chains of logic, time-pressures, emotion clouding reason, and personal quirks. In Dumbledore's case, his most severe weaknesses, other than his feelings for Harry, are probably his tendancy to think the best of people and situations and the fact that having largely conquered negative emotion within himself years ago, he does not have an appropriate appreciation for how other people feel in some circumstances. He has sincere respect for both Harry and Snape and thought they could overcome their personal feelings to work together. Like a lot of people who don't themselves experience strong reactions in a given situation, he thought that Harry and Snape could overcome their emotions if they would *just decide to.* After all, the situation is pressing and it seems perfectly logical for Snape and Harry to get over their petty squabbles and work together, does it not? I think Dumbledore did see secondary benefits in Harry working with Snape, but I think these were a far second to his desire that Harry learn Occlumency. He may well have thought that Snape would provide a more "realistic" training partner than he would. I think he probably hoped even more, however, that in the intense experience of Occlumency training Snape and Harry could come to understand one another somewhat better and build some sort of foundation for a lasting trust, if not a fondness. Dzeytoun From generation2004 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 03:25:39 2004 From: generation2004 at yahoo.com (cassie marks) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 20:25:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Why sort half-blood Riddle into Slytherin? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040803032539.86873.qmail@web53703.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108637 > kmc asked: > I want to know how Tom Riddle with his half-blood > heritage got sorted into Slytherin? > > Could there be other "half-bloods" in Slytherin? ~Yb wrote: > Well, who would be more deserving of a place in > Slytherin than Slytherin's heir himself? Not to > mention, he had the personality qualities that > befit a Slytherin. > > And regarding other "half-bloods?" I doubt it. > There would have to be a really good reason, like > when the Hat said Harry would do well in Slytherin, > it was because even though his mother was a muggle- > born, so he wasn't pure-blood, he had so many > qualities like TR did . Hi every one, It's been nice to read all of your messages! I just wanted to point something out, it's interesting that the wizarding world puts so much attention on the purity of ancestry, but their children are educated and sorted (more specificly, the distinguished school of Hogwarts) by a very different principle (all though, not always apperent), which is talent. This e-mail just made me rememer its importance. Thanks Yb, raquel From sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com Tue Aug 3 05:18:09 2004 From: sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com (Amey Chinchorkar) Date: 3 Aug 2004 05:18:09 -0000 Subject: Penseive, Slytherin, Lily's Parents and Time Travel Message-ID: <20040803051809.19003.qmail@webmail8.rediffmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108638 - Jen: - One theory (from Greywolf, I think) was the incident Harry saw - was only a "cover memory" placed in the Pensieve to protect other - memories. That way if Harry did get in there by chance, he would see - perhaps a humiliating memory, but not the actual *worst* memory - Snape is protecting. If this is true, then Snape probably - specifically chose that cover memory because it was proof of James' - arrogance. Amey: Cover memory? Can anyone control what memories a person entering the penseive see? I mean you can choose memories out of penseive (as dumbledore does), but how can you control an intruder? And if it is true, does it mean that Dumbledore wanted Harry to see the trials? What did it show him? - Magda - So I'll give old Salazar a - break until I can see proof that he really hated muggleborns rather - than was just nervous about them. Amey: Then what was the Basilisk doing in the Chamber? Was he pulling out an Hagrid-Aragog act? (Sorry. Couldn?t help it . That was not supposed to sound as mean as it came out) - DuffyPoo: - I believe this is a mistake on JKR's part, and I will believe that until it has been there awhile. She meant to say Harry's grandparents (I think) but that would lead to speculation about James' side of the family. Amey: It is still there on the site, so I think it is final. But then, you don?t call a half-blood (like this makes Lily) a mudblood, right? And Snape is enough knowledgeable in that respect to differentiate between a mudblood and half-blood. So unless Snape made a mistake under duress, I think Lily?s parents are muggles and she is muggleborn. That makes her grandparents also muggles , right? - vmonte - You could kill a bad guy but in the process allow an even worse bad guy into power. Maybe Voldemort would have never come into power if DD didn't defeat Grindelwald in the first place. Who knows? DD is definitely messing with time somehow, and I think he has made some serious mistakes. Amey: Yes, I agree with you here about the side effects of the time travel. But about Dumbledore messing with time travel, I wouldn?t go that far. He has enough understanding of the complexity it will generate to mess with time. I think he is plainly acting as a historian or observer. He studies and analyses the events using time travel, not change them. Amey [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 05:32:13 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 05:32:13 -0000 Subject: Was Harry in Danger from the Basilisk? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108639 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > > Asian_lovr2: > > Now the Basilisk and the danger to Harry, in this case, I think we > > are giving the too much weight to the intelligences of the > > Basilisk. This is a reptile, though very large, it probably had a > > brain the size of a walnut. ... A parseltongue might be able to > > communcate with it,.... able to relay primitive thoughts and > > obey simple orders, .... > > > > Also, I'm not totally convinced that the Basilisk can tell a > > muggle from a wizard. The fact is that the eyes of a Basilisk are > > deadly to ANYONE who looks into them, wizards or purebloods have > > no special protection. > > > SSSusan: > ... But I don't think I agree that the directions it was > receiving were super-simple. Diary!Tom apparently controlled the > basilisk enough [through Ginny, am I right?] that it attacked ONLY > MUGGLE-BORNS. ... Tom set it all up ..., still, other than NHN, all > the victims were right-on target. ... > > This makes me believe that, had Tom decided to single out Harry, he > eventually could have done so. > > Siriusly Snapey Susan Asian_lovr2: '...ONLY MUGGLE-BORNS...' you say, and you know this for a fact, or is it really an assumption on your part? Is there anyplace in the book where it is cleary stated that Penelope (Percy's girlfriend) is a muggle-born? Do you also believe the Basilisk was sent to kill Hermione? Or did it just stumble across her and Penelope? Or take the night Colin was attacked, why would anyone send out the Basilisk in the middle of the night when everyone was in bed, unless whoever sent it had prior knowledge of a person in a particular location? If in Colin's case the Basilisk was just out hunting, who could it have hoped to find, and wouldn't the chance of randomly stumbling across someone be very high? Seem difficult for someone to see the Basilisk roaming the halls without accidently getting killed by it. Sorry, but I think it was either random luck, or the Basilisk was sent to a specific location by someone with prior knowledge of a person's presences there. Most likely a combination of the two. Can't prove it, but I just don't see the Basilisk as a very selective killing machine. Steve/asian_lovr2 From juli17 at aol.com Tue Aug 3 05:41:40 2004 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 01:41:40 EDT Subject: Snape's choice of memories for the pensieve Message-ID: <1a7.26c2c676.2e407f94@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108640 SSSusan wrote: > I think this still begs a question, though: If that wasn't Snape's > WORST memory--just one he didn't particularly care for Harry to see-- > then why title the chapter "Snape's Worst Memory"? What makes > it "worst"? > > I've heard people argue that the *real* worst one was one of the > others Snape deposited in the pensieve and that Harry didn't get > to. But, still, why would JKR name the chapter that if we've not > going to get to see The One?? > Julie replies: I kind of took it as his worst memory in the sense of his most embarassing/humiliating memory, not necessarily his most painful memory (that could be something from his childhood), or his most shameful memory (probably a DE deed), or his saddest memory. It also fits that this type of *worst* memory happened when he was a teenager. That's a time of fragile egos, and strong emotions. Memories laid down at that time--especially ones laden with emotions like humiliation--can be some of the most enduring. And reliving them brings that emotion flooding right back. I just wish we could have seen those other two memories Snape put in the pensieve! Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sachmet96 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Aug 3 05:42:44 2004 From: sachmet96 at yahoo.co.uk (sachmet96) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 05:42:44 -0000 Subject: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108641 > SSSusan: > Must be the movies, Lisa. > > Snape paused during roll call, at the start of class, to > remark, "Our new--*celebrity*" then goes on to give his "subtle > science & exact art of potion-making" speech. As Vmonte > recalled, "He spoke in barely more than a whisper, but they caught > every word--like Professor McGonagall, Snape had the gift of keeping > a class silent without effort." > > Snape continued on w/ his "little foolish wand-waving" and "even > stopper death" remarks, concluding with "--if you aren't as big a > bunch of dunderheads as I usually have to teach." > > Next comes this: "More silence followed this little speech. Harry > & Ron exchanged looks with raised eyebrows. Hermione Granger was on > the edge of her seat and looked desperate to start proving that she > wasn't a dunderhead." *Immediately* after this, Snape > says, "Potter!" and begins asking his sequence of questions. > > So, NO, Harry wasn't goofing off or letting his mind drift. sachmet Actually I took the raised eyebrows of Ron and Harry as them reacting in a sarcastic/condescending way to or making fun of what Snape just said (at least I would have seen it that way if I were the teacher). So I thought Snape was reacting to that and found his reaction perfectly understandable in that situation. sachmet, who just delurked for one post From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 06:06:48 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 06:06:48 -0000 Subject: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108642 sachmet Actually I took the raised eyebrows of Ron and Harry as them reacting in a sarcastic/condescending way to or making fun of what Snape just said (at least I would have seen it that way if I were the teacher). So I thought Snape was reacting to that and found his reaction perfectly understandable in that situation. vmonte responds: Sorry, you won't convince me that raising your eyebrows after the teacher just implied that the class was full of dunderheads is reason enough to attack an eleven-year-old you have never met before. Ron and Harry were not smiling and making fun of Snape, they were shocked. The reaction of the children sound more like fear, which is probably exactly what Snape wanted them to feel. Bullies like to intimidate their prey, and they often pick on those that are weaker and smaller than themselves. Notice that when fake Moody stands up to Snape (the night Harry was almost caught on the steps with the egg in GoF) and basically tells him to back off or he'll tell DD about his abusive behavior towards Harry, Snape immediately backs down. vivian From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Aug 3 06:55:20 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 06:55:20 -0000 Subject: Was Harry in Danger from the Basilisk? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108643 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: Steve > Sorry, but I think it was either random luck, or the Basilisk was > sent to a specific location by someone with prior knowledge of a > person's presences there. Most likely a combination of the two. > > Can't prove it, but I just don't see the Basilisk as a very selective > killing machine. Geoff: Hmm. But may I just repost the quote I gave yesterday in message 108566... '"Haven't you guessed yet, Harry Potter?" said Riddle softly."Ginny Weasley opened the Chamber of Secrets. She strangled the school roosters and daubed threatening messages on the walls. She set the Serpent of Slytherin on four Mudbloods and the Squib's cat." "No," Harry whispered. "Yes," said Riddle calmly. "Of course, she didn't know what she was doing at first. It was very amusing......" (COS "The Heir of Slytherin" p.229 UK edition) It seems to be implied there that the Basilisk was specifically being directed to target Muggles, i.e. your second scenario. The wording suggests that the creature wasn't going round aimlessly in the building; if that had been the case, would there have been a much higher number of casualties? Go back to Riddle's time at Hogwarts - we only seem to have a record of one attack, that on Moaning Myrtle. From ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com Tue Aug 3 05:27:23 2004 From: ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com (ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 01:27:23 EDT Subject: Paradoxes; Harry and the Patronus - was another wacko theory Message-ID: <1e3.26b45977.2e407c3b@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108644 meltowne at yahoo.com writes: > . That's because the terrible two were > supposed to be with Arthur, getting firewood, while the others were > getting water. I always thought that escaping from their Dad, using > the time-turner to go to the future to see the end of the match, and > then calculating their re-entry into the timestream before the match > without Arthur noticing anything would be pretty tricky While thinking about fwd time turning, I realized that our views on what happened down by the lake have to be incorrect. I'm confused about something I haven't thought about. Nothing says the time turner goes only one way. So when you go backward it goes like this: Time of origin will be O. The time an hour prior to this will be called P (for past). The you who is living during the time from P to O for the first time without any time turning will be called 1. The you that is living that time for the second time, after time turning will be called 2. The you that continues to live past O will be 3. You go back an hour. From P to O two of you exist at the same time as 1 and 2. At O, 1 stops existing in that time to go back to the future, becoming 2. When 2 reaches O the time turning has ended and he enters 3, the regular timeline. What on earth would happen if you took a trip an hour into the future? You've got O for your take off time, L (later) for when you land in the future. 1, the original you, ends up in L. While 1 is in the future for the first time around [(though this will never ever be seen which is why time travel pisses me off. You go to the future. You see stuff. You snap back to your original self. You know things that affect how events from the present to the future that place. You avoid them so that they don't take place. If they don't take place in the altered timeline, the past you who is about to jump never learns about them, never avoids the pitfalls, so they happen. Gah, paradox I can't put into words). Let me say this another way. Harry was saved by what he thought was his father. He goes back in time, and realize that it was himself who saved himself AND THAT IS THE REASON HE CAST THE SPELL. But the he had already been saved. It's not possible for him to have actually been attacked the first time around because... This is the only way that I see that the events could have gone down: Harry's being attacked by the dementors by the lake. Somebody other than himself with the patronus saved him. It couldn't have been him; the only reason he saved himself when he went back in time was because he knew he'd already done it, which couldn't have been possible the first time the timeline played out (or he wouldn't have been saved and he wouldn't know to save himself. It would be a paradox, and I have to argue because I don't like him. He was saved because he saved himself and he saved himself because he'd been saved. It doesn't work. You can't have both at the same time. So somebody else saved Harry. It was not efficient. That person could have been somewhere else. The Trio or whoever it was that saved him and knew about the time turner decide to use the time turner so that Harry can instead go back and save himself. They knew it wouldn't change anything for the negative because the events would be similar to what already played out (we'll never know what it was that played out since the timeline was destroyed when Harry went back and saved himself, preventing it from existing). Harry goes back and saves himself, but in a way that he's not clearly recognizable from across the lake. The first Harry, the one being attacked is saved. That starts a whole new timeline where Harry ends up across from the lake from himself (he could be there for any number of reasons. It doesn't matter). He saves himself, and we pick up with the Harry that just got saved. That Harry is the one from who's point of view we see the part of the book where all of this happens. timeline 1: Harry is attacked by the dementors by the lake. He is saved by somebody else. Bad things happen that that somebody else could have prevented, so, after the fact, that somebody else tells Harry to use the time turner to go back and take care of himself while they take care of business. timeline 2: Harry is attacked by dementors. He is saved by himself. The Harry doing the saving is aware of timeline 1. timeline 3: We're back in timeline 2 where Harry is being attacked by dementors. The Harry at the end of timeline 3 saves him. When Harry gets to the point where it's time to save himself, he remembers savior Harry from 2 and saves himself, this time having no knowledge of prior events ( I don't know what other people knew during the other timelines, I'm only focusing on Harry. On P411 US, Harry is looking for his 'dad' to appear to save him. He doesn't know which way he's coming from, which means that there could be a slight difference in the way he approaches the dementors and the way he did the first time he saved himself, and he wouldn't realize it because he'd been preoccupied with the dementors when he was attacked. Time line one never comes to exist because of timeline 3. I know a lot of what I said prolly doesn't make sense. If you don't get it email me. I haven't had such a headache since Back To The Future. Tell me if I'm overthinking this. When you time turn into the future and you get injured, do you return just a moment after you left with your new injured body, or do you create a new body when you time travel which stop existing and allowed your conscious to snap back to where you left off. -Mutt From ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com Tue Aug 3 05:31:17 2004 From: ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com (ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 01:31:17 EDT Subject: Another Thought - was another wacko theory Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108645 vmonte at yahoo.com writes: > Will someone kill their past or > future selves Should have read the whole thread prior to replying. Question. I go back in time. It results in my past self's death. Does the death of my past self prevent me from going back in time and causing my own death since I can't go back and kill myself if I'm already dead? What would happen next? -Mutt From chris.yuhico at gmail.com Tue Aug 3 06:15:34 2004 From: chris.yuhico at gmail.com (chris yuhico) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 14:15:34 +0800 Subject: Time travel and Sirius Black In-Reply-To: <1091491664.13363.16674.m24@yahoogroups.com> References: <1091491664.13363.16674.m24@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108646 I was reading all of your posts about time travel and Sirius, and that got me wondering. What if the Sirius that fell through the veil wasn't the *present* Sirius but some other Sirius from the future? What if the present Sirius went into hiding on Dumbledore's instructions? What do you guys think? Chris From ms_melanie1999 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 07:29:49 2004 From: ms_melanie1999 at yahoo.com (Miss Melanie) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 00:29:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040803072949.98830.qmail@web53402.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108647 (Sorry this is just a couple late getting out, I was just now able to get to my computer for the first time today. I'm really happy to lead the discussions for this chapter, to me it's one of the more interesting chapters in the book. So here it goes..enjoy!) Part One: Number 12 Grimmauld Place, just before the end of the Christmas Holiday. The chapter begins with the reappearance of Kreacher whom was found by Sirius in the attic. While Kreacher seemed to be in a better mood Sirius' mood took a drastic dive and he found himself locking himself in his room with Buckbeat for hours at a time. On the last day of the Christmas Holiday, Harry was called into the kitchen of the house to have a discussion with Professor Snape. Harry went to the kitchen, rather worried about what the discussion would be about, and finds that not only is Snape present but so is his Godfather. Snape explains to Harry that the headmaster wishes for Harry to study occlumency ( a form of magic that will protect him from external penetration). Dumbledore requested that Snape be his instructor. Sirius, upset that Dumbledore made Snape the instructor, warns Snape not to use these lessons to make life difficult for Harry. Snape informs Sirius that he believes that Harry is so arrogant, like James, that he is not in the least bit affected by the criticism that is placed upon him. Sirius is very upset by that statement and moves to pull out his wand.. The two man stand with ready to duel. Sirius shares his feeling that Snape is very much an active member of the Death Eaters and is really not working for the order. He even went as far as to call Snape Lucius Malfoy's "lapdog." Snape informs Sirius, for the first time, that Lucius recognized Sirius at the train station at the start of term. The fight would have continued to go on for quite sometime, however, Mr. Weasley returned from the hospital. He declared himself "completely cured." The next day, Sirius and Harry say their goodbyes. Sirius hands Harry a two-way mirror that should be used when he needs to get a hold of Sirius at any time. Harry didn't say anything to Sirius at that time, however, he knew that he would never use it. Harry feared that it would be dangerous to use it. The students take the knight bus back to Hogwarts, along with Lupin and Tonks. Before leaving Harry, Lupin reminds him that he needs to make sure that puts in every effort to learn occlumency. He told Harry that even Sirius knows how important it is for him to learn the skill. Part Two: Hogwarts Before Harry went to his first occlumency class he ran into Cho Chang . He assumed that Cho wanted to talk about the DA but instead she wanted to remind him of the upcoming Hogsmeade weekend. Cho gave Harry a great deal of hints before he realized that she wanted to spend the trip (which was on Valentine's day) with Harry. Harry asked her out, to which she of course replied yes. Harry then goes to Snape's office. Snape begins the occlumency lesson by explaining that Voldemort is very skilled at legilimency (the ability to extract feelings and memories from another person's mind). Snape tells Harry that legilimency is usually only effective if the two people can make eye contact. However, due to the connection that he and Voldemort share, through the scar, it is easier for Voldemort to have access to his mind. Harry is adverse to the idea of closing off his mind. If it had not been for him, Mr. Weasley would most likely had died. It was then that Snape informed Harry that it was not until very recently that Voldemort knew of the connection between the two of them. Snape began the lesson by having Harry block as much as he possibly could from being accessed by Snape. Harry does not find this task very easy and keeps letting Snape have access to them. Snape tells Harry that he needs to practice his occlumency every night before going to bed. He needs to make sure that he has a clear mind. When Harry got back to the tower, he went to bed after only a few short minutes. However, that night Harry had another vision. This one included Voldemort laughing, Harry assumed that this meant that he was happy about something. However, we don't know what it is that he would be happy about. Disscussion Questions 1) Once again we see the moody Sirius Black, what is the true source of his moodiness? And what on Earth does he do locked up in the room with Buckbeat all day? 2) Harry questions whether or not working with Snape is really helping to close off his mind. Harry believes that it may be making it more open. Is there any truth to Harry's thinking? Would his lessons have gone differently had someone else been in charge of them? 3) Sirius tells Snape that he still believes that he is very much a part of the Death Eaters..is there any evidence to back that up? What evidence do we have that he is just working for the order? 4) JK Rowlings said that the mirror will be brought up again in another book. In what capacity do you believe that it will be brought back? JKR has this to say about the mirror " The mirror might not have helped as much as you think, but on the other hand, will help more than you think. You?ll have to read the final books to understand that!" What do you think this means? 5) Snape asked several questions about the images that were scene in his visions. For example, he asked about Aunt Marge's dog. What purpose did he have in asking those questions? Do they lead to something, stand out in his mind, or is he just merely curious about them? 6) Snape tells Harry many times in this chapter not to say the name "Voldemort." Why is it that even Voldemort's own followers cannot say his name? Is their significance in calling him the Dark Lord? (this is just something that I have always been curious about..love to know what you guys think about it). That wraps up about all I have for right now. I might put some more questions or thoughts later in the week but I trust that this chapter will generate a great deal of discussion! ~Melanie NOTE: For more information on HPfGU's chapter discussions, please see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/67817 and http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85829 as well as "OotP Chapter Discussions" at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/database --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 08:29:28 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 08:29:28 -0000 Subject: Was Harry in Danger from the Basilisk? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108648 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" > wrote: > Steve > > > Sorry, but I think it was either random luck, or the Basilisk was > > sent to a specific location by someone with prior knowledge of a > > person's presences there. Most likely a combination of the two. > > > > Can't prove it, but I just don't see the Basilisk as a very > > selective killing machine. > Geoff: > Hmm. But may I just repost the quote I gave yesterday in message > 108566... > > '"Haven't you guessed yet, Harry Potter?" said Riddle softly."Ginny > Weasley opened the Chamber of Secrets. She strangled the school > roosters and daubed threatening messages on the walls. She set the > Serpent of Slytherin on four Mudbloods and the Squib's cat." > "No," Harry whispered. > "Yes," said Riddle calmly. "Of course, she didn't know what she was > doing at first. It was very amusing......" > > (COS "The Heir of Slytherin" p.229 UK edition) > > It seems to be implied there that the Basilisk was specifically > being directed to target Muggles, i.e. your second scenario. The > wording suggests that the creature wasn't going round aimlessly in > the building; if that had been the case, would there have been a > much higher number of casualties? Asian_lovr2: The random part of the Basilisk is that if anyone meets a Basilisk they are as good as dead. Given its many methods of effective killing, I think it is an extremely rare few who escape. To the not random aspect, let's take the example of Colin Creevy. Let's say Ginny saw Colin leave the common room late at night. Riddle who was 'along for the ride' lurking in the back of Ginny's mind saw a perfect opportunity and sent Ginny to the bathroom to call out the Basilisk. How do you tell the Basilisk to 'get Colin Creevy', how could it distinguish him from anyone else? Also, how could you say, 'go get that muggle'. For argument sake let's switch it to a dog, which I suspect is far more intelligent than a reptile. How can you tell the dog to attack one specific person that the dog has never met? Or how can you tell the dog to attack only Catholics? Do they smell different? Do they look different? So, Ginny probably said, attack the boy who is on his way to the hospital wing. Now what if the Basilisk had encountered Filch as it roamed the school? Could it determine that Filch was not the boy on his way to the hospital wing, and therefore decline to attack him? That seems like pretty deep thinking. The attack on Hermione appears the most random. Unless I'm mistaken it occurred at the beginning of a Quidditch match when a VAST majority of the school was out of the building. Why set it loose then? I could speculate that Ginny saw Hermione heading for the library while she went out to the Quidditch game, and ducked back to set the Basilisk loose. However, I can't see how Ginny could also know that Penelope was going to be in the halls at that time. So, I have to suspect that one of either Hermione or Penelope were random victims. So for each of the attacks, I can speculate that Ginny saw the victim and was able to call out the Basiliks. However, I admit a flaw in that speculation. When Justin was attacked, most people were in class. When Peeves raised a ruckus, people came pouring out of the classrooms. Persumably Ginny was in class, so I'm not sure how she could have isolated Justin. Keep in mind when I say 'she', meaning Ginny, I am realy talking about Riddle taking her over and seizing specific opportunities. So, my point is, while I do see an element of randomness in it all, I think the attacks were deliberate, however, I feel the scope of the deliberateness was limited by the intelligence of the Basilisk. > Geoff: > > Go back to Riddle's time at Hogwarts - we only seem to have a record > of one attack, that on Moaning Myrtle. Asian_lovr2: Not quite, if you read carefully you'll see that 50 years ago several people were attacked but only ONE person died. That dead person was Myrtle. I'm not saying I'm right, I'm just trying to come up with a speculation that resolves the most inconsistencies and at the same time has a reasonable degree of likelihood. Steve/asian_lovr2 From witchypooh67 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 02:42:27 2004 From: witchypooh67 at yahoo.com (Kelly Duhon) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 19:42:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: F & G and the QWC bet (Re: another wacko theory) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040803024227.2437.qmail@web52202.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108649 Meltowne: Maybe the boys, following the match, used a regular timeturner to go back and tell themselves what the outcome would be - just like we saw in the second Back to the Future movie. Kelly: Unless I am remembering wrong, Ginny was with them, so I don't think they could have gone back then. From cassin12004 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 02:33:17 2004 From: cassin12004 at yahoo.com (cassin12004) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 02:33:17 -0000 Subject: Occlumency Lessons / Snape's Nastiness In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108650 "Bex" wrote: > On another thought, maybe it was a good thing Snape taught > Harry at least a little about Occlumency. Harry has to clear his > emotions in order to block out LV. Sure, it's easy when you > aren't upset, but it's much harder when you are fighting with a > teacher you hate. Snape may be a toerag, but some of it could be for Malfoy's sake. Snape has motives and reasons that have not been revealed to us yet. He's an interesting enigma to me. Part cruel hatred, part unknown quantity. Remember how Mrs. Figg had to make Harry miserable so that the Dursleys wouldn't mind him visiting her? By the same token, how much of Snape is him ingratiating himself to Malfoy? "cassin12004" From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Aug 3 10:02:41 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 10:02:41 -0000 Subject: Was Harry in Danger from the Basilisk? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108651 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: Geoff: > > > > Go back to Riddle's time at Hogwarts - we only seem to have a record > > of one attack, that on Moaning Myrtle. > > Asian_lovr2: Steve: > Not quite, if you read carefully you'll see that 50 years ago several > people were attacked but only ONE person died. That dead person was > Myrtle. > > I'm not saying I'm right, I'm just trying to come up with a > speculation that resolves the most inconsistencies and at the same > time has a reasonable degree of likelihood. Geoff: I think this could open a whole can of worms. I've just found your reference: 'Riddle's reply came quickly, his writing becoming untidier as though he was hurrying to tell all he knew. "Of course I know about the Chamber of Secrets. In my day, they told us it was a legend, that it did not exist. But this was a lie. In my fifth year, the Chamber was opened and the minster attacked several students, finally killing one..."' (COS "The Very Secret Diary" p.181 UK edition) So there must have been petrified students back in 1942 before Myrtle's death since the only options with the Basilisk appear to be either death or petrification. So, what's with Dumbledore? 'At last Dumbledore straightened up. "She's not dead, Argus." he said softly. Lockhart stopped abruptly in the middle of counting the numbers of murders he had prevented. "Not dead?" choked Filch, looking though his fingers at Mrs.Norris. "But why's she all - all stiff and frozen?" "She has been petrified," said Dumbledore ("Ah, I thought so!" said Lockhart). "But how, I cannot say...." (COS "The Writing on the Wall" p.108 UK edition) The original implication of this is that he doesn't /know/. However, with Diary!Riddle's comment, does this mean he won't /tell/? And if so, why not? Does he know what caused the previous problems? Other evidence begins to raise its head... '"What does this /mean/, Albus?" Professor McGonagall asked urgently. "It means,"said Dumbledore, "that the Chamber of Secrets is indeed open again." Madam Pomfrey clapped a hand to her mouth. Professor McGonagall stared at Dumbledore. "But Albus.... surely.... /who/?" "The question is not /who/" said Dumbledore, his eyes on Colin. "The question is , /how/"' (COS "The Rogue Bludger" pp.135-36 UK edition) Re-reading this, it is taking on much more significance in my mind. Does this mean that Dumbledore knows about the Basilisk and is speculating, knowing that Voldemort is apparently out of the picture, as to which person now has the ability to open the Chamber? Hmmm. From griffin782002 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 09:55:23 2004 From: griffin782002 at yahoo.com (sp. sot.) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 02:55:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Was Harry in Danger from the Basilisk? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040803095523.86333.qmail@web90006.mail.scd.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108652 Steve wrote: '...ONLY MUGGLE-BORNS...' you say, and you know this for a fact, or is it really an assumption on your part? Is there anyplace in the book where it is cleary stated that Penelope (Percy's girlfriend) is a muggle-born? Sorry, but I think it was either random luck, or the Basilisk was sent to a specific location by someone with prior knowledge of a person's presences there. Most likely a combination of the two. Can't prove it, but I just don't see the Basilisk as a very selective killing machine. Griffin782002: A Basilisk might have a brain the size of a walnut, but it is not a common serpent. And I am afraid that fellow members don't have read any books about Zoology. Snakes can pick up the scent of their injured victim and them consume it. Some snakes, if not all, can see the heat a living organism radiates. What if the Basilisk can judge from the smell of a person whether he or she is a Muggleborn or not? Or perhars by visual indications? And as far as brain size is concert, there are parrots with which you can have a proper chat. Well, I don't think we have any proof for this. It is just a thought. Griffin782002 From griffin782002 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 10:31:54 2004 From: griffin782002 at yahoo.com (sp. sot.) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 03:31:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry / Neville, Pettigrew In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040803103154.7580.qmail@web90010.mail.scd.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108653 vivian wrote: (EDIT) What's Neville's purpose? He was the only one that stood up against his fellow Gryffindors when he believed that they were wrong (PS/SS). Will he decide to go against the prophecy and by doing so change Harry Potter's fate? Griffin782002 now: What about Pettigrew? He is still in debt to Harry. He may detray L.V.in the end. I can be sure if he will give the final blow to L.V., but perhaps he might give significant help to the end. And something else. What about a character that might seem impossible to turn against L.V. at a crucial moment and kill him? I haven't got any in particular in my mind, but I believe it is a possibility. Don't you think? Griffin782002 From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Tue Aug 3 11:22:39 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (aggiepaddy) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 11:22:39 -0000 Subject: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry / Neville, Pettigrew In-Reply-To: <20040803103154.7580.qmail@web90010.mail.scd.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108654 > Griffin782002: <<>> > And something else. What about a character that might seem impossible to turn against L.V. at a crucial moment and kill him? I haven't got any in particular in my mind, but I believe it is a possibility. Don't you think? <<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Aggie: Character that might seem impossible to turn against Lv??. . . How about Lucius Malfoy???!!! From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 3 11:29:30 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 07:29:30 -0400 Subject: Was Harry in Danger from the Basilisk? Message-ID: <005301c4794d$254220f0$6dc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108655 Steve/asian_lovr2 "Also, I'm not totally convinced that the Basilisk can tell a muggle from a wizard. The fact is that the eyes of a Basilisk are deadly to ANYONE who looks into them, wizards or purebloods have no special protection." DuffyPoo: The only problem I have with your whole post (which I loved but snipped) is that the only people we have seen attacked are Muggle-borns, apart from Mrs. Norris (wrong place at the wrong time?) and possibly Penelope Clearwater whose backstory we don't know although I think she may be Muggle-born, hence the need for Percy to sneak around to see her (apart from F&G of course, and privacy). Myrtle (called a Mudblood by Draco), Colin Creevey (knew nothing about the wizarding world, his father a milkman), Justin Finch-Fletchley (known Muggle-born) and Hermione (known Muggle-born). Maybe there's something particular about the "Serpent of Slytherin," that he does know more than 'Lunch' and 'Sleep' (I had a cat that must have been a reptile...that's all he understood as well). [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 3 11:51:21 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 11:51:21 -0000 Subject: Was Harry in Danger from the Basilisk? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108656 Asian_lovr2: >>> Now the Basilisk and the danger to Harry, in this case, I think we are giving the too much weight to the intelligences of the Basilisk. This is a reptile, though very large, it probably had a brain the size of a walnut. ... A parseltongue might be able to communcate with it,.... able to relay primitive thoughts and obey simple orders, .... Also, I'm not totally convinced that the Basilisk can tell a muggle from a wizard. The fact is that the eyes of a Basilisk are deadly to ANYONE who looks into them, wizards or purebloods have no special protection. <<< SSSusan: >> ... But I don't think I agree that the directions it was receiving were super-simple. Diary!Tom apparently controlled the basilisk enough [through Ginny, am I right?] that it attacked ONLY MUGGLE-BORNS. ... Tom set it all up ..., still, other than NHN, all the victims were right-on target. ... This makes me believe that, had Tom decided to single out Harry, he eventually could have done so.<< Asian_lovr2: > '...ONLY MUGGLE-BORNS...' you say, and you know this for a fact, > or is it really an assumption on your part? Is there anyplace in > the book where it is cleary stated that Penelope (Percy's > girlfriend) is a muggle-born? > Can't prove it, but I just don't see the Basilisk as a very > selective killing machine. SSSusan: Sorry, Steve, I should have provided canon when I posted originally. I am relying upon Tom's own words, here: "She [Ginny] set the Serpent of Slytherin on four Mudbloods, and the Squib's cat." [CoS, US hardback, p. 310] That tells me that, yes, Penelope was Muggle-born, unless we have reason to think Tom doesn't have his facts straight. As for the randomness of the attacks--the way you described them later--yes, I agree. *Anyone* walking down the hall who encountered the Basilisk's eyes would be a victim, regardless of his/her status as muggle-born, half-blood, pureblood, or whatever. I was referring to Tom's intention in directing the basilisk, which I believe was to go after Muggle-borns. Siriusly Snapey Susan From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 3 11:50:18 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 07:50:18 -0400 Subject: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry Message-ID: <006c01c47950$0c9a2630$6dc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108657 Meidbh "He could be just a decoy. Maybe DD is playing along to protect the person with the real power...." DuffyPoo: My husband, who has not read the books, said nearly those same words yesterday. Meidbh "The idea of DD being fooled this badly or, worse still, playing along with a deception like this would make me wonder if the WW is really worth saving" DuffyPoo again: I don't look at it as DD being badly fooled just jumping to the wrong conclusions. He knows the prophecy, he knows which kids could fulfill it, he knows what happened at the Potter home in GH, he adds up the circumstantial evidence and believes, wholeheartedly that it is Harry. I think DD is going to be as suprised as anyone to find out it is really Neville, because Neville has gone off DD's radar. As to DD creating the deception to protect the 'real' one, I haven't given that enough thought. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 3 11:59:48 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 07:59:48 -0400 Subject: Just a comment about Lupin's malady. Message-ID: <007501c47951$60c59590$6dc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108658 Liz "If we haven't established where Moony was during the secret-keeper switch from Padfoot to Wormtail, then perhaps we should. Is it possible that he simply wasn't around, due to a full moon perhaps? And do we know why Padfoot was relieved of his secret-keeperness in the first place?" DuffyPoo: >From PoA, Sirius wasn't 'relieved' of his duties, he relieved himself. "Harry... I as good as killed them,' he [Sirius] croaked. 'I persuaded Lily and James to change to Peter at the last moment, persuaded them to use him as Secret-Keeper instead of me.... I'm to blame, I know it.....I realized what Peter must have done. What I'd done." Later he says, "Lily and James only made you Secret-Keeper because I suggested it,' Black hissed...'I thought it was the perfect plan .. a bluff ... Voldemort would be sure to come after me, would never dream they'd use a weak, talentless thing like you ... it must have been the finest moment of your miserable life, telling Voldemort you could hand him the Potters." I don't know why Moony was out of the picture at the time, maybe it was a full moon. Or maybe it is something in the nature of a werewolf that they couldn't be a Secret-Keeper because of how they transform? No idea. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 12:32:40 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 12:32:40 -0000 Subject: Another Thought - was another wacko theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108659 I vmonte wrote: Will someone kill their past or future selves... Mutt wrote: Should have read the whole thread prior to replying. Question. I go back in time. It results in my past self's death. Does the death of my past self prevent me from going back in time and causing my own death since I can't go back and kill myself if I'm already dead? What would happen next? vmonte again: Yeah, I have no idea how this is possible but this comment was actually made by Hermione to Harry in PoA. If this scenario is possible I wonder if there are holes/time-line problems happening because of TT. If so, DD may be time-travelling to correct/fix problems in the time continuum. vivian From caseylane at wideopenwest.com Tue Aug 3 12:45:30 2004 From: caseylane at wideopenwest.com (Casey) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 12:45:30 -0000 Subject: Time travel and Sirius Black In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108660 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, chris yuhico wrote: > I was reading all of your posts about time travel and Sirius, and that > got me wondering. What if the Sirius that fell through the veil wasn't > the *present* Sirius but some other Sirius from the future? What if > the present Sirius went into hiding on Dumbledore's instructions? > > What do you guys think? > > Chris Seriously? That's why I hate time travel stories. It's too easy to play with the facts without an actual plot to fill in the holes. All of a sudden it's "Oh Sirius isn't *really* dead, we just couldn't let you know because he was on a secret mission." If they are going to do something like that I would want to be in for the initial discussion on bringing in another Sirius. I would want to know what the present Sirius was doing. To just, after the fact, make that statement would tick me off to no end. Casey From drliss at comcast.net Tue Aug 3 12:00:36 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (drliss at comcast.net) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 12:00:36 +0000 Subject: Personal theories about what will happen next Message-ID: <080320041200.20669.410F7E63000EAEBA000050BD22007481849C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 108661 I'm still pretty new too, so a lot of these haven't lost their shine for me. I'll play! cassin12004: 1. The Half Blood Prince is Hagrid. Lissa: This is one of my top guesses, although my current favorite (if we know the person) is Dumbledore. Someone brought up the concept of "prince" being more an ideal than an actual title, and pointed out how Dumbledore not only works to protect the Muggle-born and Muggles themselves, but half-blood/half-humans like Hagrid, Lupin, and the centaurs, and how Hogwarts is very much a sanctuary for a lot of misfits in the Wizarding World. But Hagrid makes a lot of sense too. cassin12004: 2. I could see Arthur Weasley as the next Minister of Magic. Other people have beat me to that one :) cassin12004: 3. It would take a miracle for Harry to get an O.W.L. in potions so Prof. Snape could be the next Defense against the Dark Arts Prof. Lissa: I agree it might take a miracle for Harry to get an O on his potions O.W.L., but there's a few ways around it. 1.) We don't know how good Harry REALLY is at potions, because Snape probably takes points off for Harry's messy handwriting and oops- you spelled that word wrong, another half point. 2.) Harry did feel like he did pretty well on his O.W.L. I'd guess he at least got an A, if not an E or an O. 3.) If Dumbledore decides Harry will take Potions, Snape may not be given his usual luxury of only accepting O students ;) and my personal favorite: 4.) Harry may still need to be studying occlumency, so even if he doesn't get Snape for potions, he may have him anyway. As for Snape himself, I doubt he'll be the DADA teacher. Dumbledore keeps Snape away from that position because he knows it brings out the worst in Snape. If he felt that way at a time when Voldie wasn't running around, I'm guessing he'll feel even more strongly about it when right now. I'd guess he'd argue with the MoM and bring Lupin back before moving Snape there, although I suspect it will be someone new. Again. (Which would be too bad. I want Lupin back.) cassin12004: 4. A Career for Harry, after school, could be Defense against the Dark Arts at Hogwarts. I could see that happen. Lissa: I could see that too. Although I could see him dying at the end, or I could see him going on to play Quidditch for England, or something like that. Not sure that he'll be an auror though. cassin12004: 5. Here's an easy one. Lupin and Wormtail are going to fight. Lissa: Oh yeah. And sadly, very sadly, I think Wormtail's going to win. I don't have very high hopes for Lupin surviving the series. The marauders are an incredibly tragic tale, when you really stop and think about it. My current theory is that Lupin and Wormtail will be forced to duke it out. The optimist says Wormtail will spare Lupin's life. I doubt it. For one, Wormtail had no problems framing Sirius and killing 12 innocent bystanders after Voldie's demise. And for two, Lupin will be bent on killing Wormtail- and when it's kill or be killed, it's much easier to actually deliver that final blow. I worry about that silver hand, not only because it's silver, but also because it's exceptionally strong- Wormtail was able to grind a twig to a fine powder. I have a nasty, nasty feeling that hand will be around Lupin's throat. (Given how mean JKR already is to Lupin, I don't see him having an easy death, either.) For some reason, just because it really works in my mind, I see Snape as being the one to kill Wormtail. cassin12004 6. War will be brought to the doorstep of Hogwarts and we will see an epic battle to make Tolkien proud. Lissa: Oh yeah. Totally agree here, at least with the first part. Not sure how epic the battle will be, but the war's coming to Hogwarts! Liss [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Aug 3 13:01:24 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 13:01:24 -0000 Subject: Who's the bully was Re: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108662 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > sachmet > Actually I took the raised eyebrows of Ron and Harry as them reacting in a sarcastic/condescending way to or making fun of what Snape just said (at least I would have seen it that way if I were the teacher). So I thought Snape was reacting to that and found his reaction perfectly understandable in that situation.< > > vmonte responds: Ron and Harry were not smiling and making fun of Snape, they were shocked. The reaction of the children sound more like fear, which is probably exactly what Snape wanted them to feel. < To me, the raised eyebrows and the exchanged glance with Ron indicate skepticism, not shock. Harry being frightened is not consistent with mouthing off to Snape a moment later, or catching Seamus's eye to see him wink. Harry and Snape are both playing to the audience. Harry is actually more frightened of McGonagall at this point in the story--you don't see him talking back to her! Harry isn't afraid of Snape until he catches Snape off-guard in the staffroom and "Snape's face was twisted with fury as he dropped his robes quickly to hide his leg." After the Pensieve scene in OOP I can understand why getting caught with his legs exposed in front of Harry would enfuriate Snape. But Harry thinks it's all about Fluffy,of course. > Notice that when fake Moody stands up to Snape (the night Harry was almost caught on the steps with the egg in GoF) and basically tells him to back off or he'll tell DD about his abusive behavior towards Harry, Snape immediately backs down. < What abusive behavior? Harry is out of bounds after hours and Snape has every right to discipline him. I think Snape backed down because Moody is the one Dumbledore called in specially to be responsible for Harry's safety during the tournament, and Moody is insisting that Harry's not there. Snape knows perfectly well where Harry is--he knows where the trick steps are as well as anyone. Actually if anybody is being bullied in that scene, it's Snape. Not that he doesn't deserve it... Pippin From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 13:01:37 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 13:01:37 -0000 Subject: Paradoxes; Harry and the Patronus - was another wacko theory In-Reply-To: <1e3.26b45977.2e407c3b@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108663 Mutt wrote: When you time turn into the future and you get injured, do you return just a moment after you left with your new injured body, or do you create a new body when you time travel which stop existing and allowed your conscious to snap back to where you left off. vmonte responds: I imagine time-travel is like jumping on to a train. You get on and you move from the present into the past (you are no longer in the present--you move from point B to point A). Once time elapses and you get back to the present you are again at point B. When you hop on the train and go to the future you move from point B to point C. When time elapses and point B catches up to point C you are now in again in current time. There are multiple problems and dangers with this kind of travel. The most important problem is that you have to be careful to not be spotted in several places at once. The other problem is that you could potentially be killed during point A or C and then people living during point B time will think you have vanished. This is until someone discovers or realizes what happened. (I think the hand of Glory probably belongs to someone important thats currently living: Voldemort? Also if there is going to be a graveyard featured in book 6 there may be someone buried there that is either unidentified or incorrectly labeled.) So in my opinion the safest way to actually time-travel would be to change your appearance. Become a new character! Someone that will not be identified in several places at once, and because they are unknown could probably do a lot of undercover work without being suspected. My favorite person for this character would be Aberforth Dumbledore. vivian From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Aug 3 13:11:30 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 14:11:30 +0100 Subject: Shared thoughts Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108664 To begin at the beginning..... "Mr and Mrs Dursley, of number four, Privet Drive..." Erm....no. That's no good; PS/SS is most definitely not the beginning - although the beginning of the end it may well be. We're all aware that JKR is verging on the obsessive when it comes to back-story; that there are uncounted reams of notes detailing the past lives of characters and the evolution of various concepts (130 pages on The Knights of Walpurgis, the original DEs, IIRC). So it's not stretching too far to reach the conclusion that the main themes in the books are continuations of ideas developed in the unseen history of the Potterverse. All the really interesting stuff, the things that *really* matter, happen before the books start. We are an audience that has been admitted to the theatre halfway through Act II; we've missed the Prologue, Act I and the first couple of scenes of the Second Act. And we haven't been given a programme on the way in that would provide a neat synopsis of the story so far. We're reduced to whispering among ourselves - "Who's he?" - "What's that supposed to mean?" - "Why did he do that?" To make life even more difficult for ourselves we often concentrate more on trying to predict the end rather than worrying about what we've missed - a big mistake IMO. Because it's starting to look as if the end will only make sense if we understand the ineluctable chain of events that led to the Harry Potter we all examine so assiduously. JKR has famously commented that no-one has yet cracked the puzzle - the "what's it all about", the kernel in the nut, though she admits that a couple of fans have come close. She has even more famously said that she'd be annoyed if anyone did come up with the answer - "because it's too late to change things now." Seemingly there is a built-in inevitability; the plot can't be changed and still make sense, the past of the books determines the future and there is no quick fix available if she needed to re-write the ending. She couldn't, for example, change the death of Voldy to the redemption of Voldy, or replace the death of Harry with a happy-ever-after resolution. Not doesn't want to - can't. It wouldn't work. That's my take on it, anyway. Now I don't have the bare-faced brass to claim success where all have failed before me, but it might be a useful exercise to attempt to highlight what are probably the key links in the chain and if possible offer some sort of rationale for their importance. To a certain extent Jo helps us - oh yes! - it's the things she doesn't tell us, the gaps in the history that scream out for explanation or exposition and yet even after 5 books are still shrouded in silence that catch our attention. There's only one reason for this resounding silence that I can think of - they would tell us too much. Elucidation will only occur when there is absolutely no alternative - and don't expect a slew of clues pointing to the key elements either; though to play fair with the customers there have to be some. Those members who browse with any regularity through the inane whitterings of Kneasy may have noticed that recently I've made a few speculations about Harry, his scar and what's inside his head. These ideas can be considered an extension of other speculations made a few months ago. Certain well-meaning individuals have prodded me with off-site comments ("I think this is important, don't you?" - Lyn J. Mangiameli) and questions ("Why don't you take that further?" - Carolyn; and "That's interesting - but what are you getting at?" - SSSusan) that have raised me from my usual stupor and set me to the keyboard. They must share the blame for inflicting the following speculations on an innocent public. Right: we start with Salazar Slytherin. "..a twisted old loony" according to Ron, though he couldn't always have been so. The Famous Four started as friends and all was sweetness and light until discord split them apart. What changed Sally; what made him leave and where did he go; why did he build the infamous Chamber of Secrets and why does Slytherin House have such a dodgy reputation? We're told that he prized cunning and ambition and his symbol is a snake. In mythology the snake is not normally symbolic of evil, rather it represents wisdom, eternity, subtlety. It was only later that it became associated with temptation and the devil. But what a combination of symbology! Fair makes the toes tingle applying that lot to Salazar. It's a useful convenience to consider evil as a force, as an entity in and of itself that has existed since the beginning of time. It's also a truism that the overly-ambitious and single-minded are prone to consort with evil to achieve their ends. However you want to look at it, it seems that ole Sally caught a hefty dose. It'd be because of something magical of course, and the only things that I can think of that would obsess that much are power and immortality. (Now who in the books seems to crave those? Riiiight! Got it in one.) I think he partially succeeded; the spirit could survive, but the flesh was corruptible. And the Chamber was built to house the essence of Salazar - his power and his personality. To be re-incarnated it needed a willing body - the heir. An heir need not be a descendant - just a legatee designated as such by the testator - and in this case anyone who could find and enter the Chamber qualified. They would automatically 'inherit' and become heir to what was in there, though an existing predeliction to Salazar's attitudes would be an advantage - and this would possibly be more evident in a direct descendant. All this could be considered as Prologue. Act I. The Chamber of Secrets. Tom Marvolo Riddle enters stage right. The timing of this is intriguing. Grindelwald is defeated and the Chamber is opened by Tom. Is this a coincidence or is it cause and effect? Could there be an ages long battle between good and evil and as the champion of one falls another is groomed to take his place? Such a continuity is seductively neat and tidy, you must admit. But no matter; what happened to Tom is critically important to the story IMO. A mean-spirited, spiteful, vengeful teenager accesses the Chamber, starts calling himself Lord Voldemort and starts planning a reign of terror. Unfortunately we've never been given the lowdown on what happened when he entered that Chamber, but it's possible to make an educated guess, given a vivid imagination and a theory or two. He is the heir - but heir to what? To Salazar Slytherin of course. And just what does that mean? A hell of a lot more than a damp hidey-hole and a ginormous death-dealing spider-frightener by my reckoning. He becomes heir to what remains of Sally himself. The spirit/personality/power of the original is at his disposal - sort of; Salazar would probably put it the other way about - Tom is at his disposal, for he has the power to enter minds and possess them. ("Give me an "A", George.") "That old Black Magic has me in it's spell, That old Black Magic that you weave so well" He has a body again and Tom is the junior partner in an (in)corporation. Tom's happy to go along with this - he can work off his spite against Muggles and Mudbloods, something that the original Tom Riddle didn't have the power or capability to do. Though the sequence could differ slightly - Salazar allows Tom to play with his slithery friend as a demonstration of the sort of thing he has on offer if Tom willingly signs on the dotted line. 'Willingly' is important; this raises it to magical contract status - "You get my body, I get your power. Oh, and we name the new company Voldemort." And what's the first priority for the happy couple after Tom leaves Hogwarts? Resuming the search for immortality - for the body this time. And they get close, but not quite close enough. Still, it hardly seems to matter as they cavort around the countryside dealing death and destruction, the Voldy construct is invincible - even that old fool Dumbledore and his laughable Order is slowly but surely sliding down the pan. Everything is going swimmingly until - there's this Prophecy that's overheard, and it seems to foretell of the birth of someone who can/will vanquish the Dark Lord. "Oh really? Right; we'll soon see about that!" Act II, scene I; Godric's Hollow. For whatever reason Voldy decides that young Harry Potter is at the top of his list for removal from this mortal plane. It all seemed to be going to plan - subvert/frighten one(?) of their friends; slip in the garden gate one dark night, catching them unawares; burst in, wand blazing - but it all goes wrong - for the first time *ever* he's defeated. Lots of theories why, I'll mention 3 - well, 3 and a non-runner. The one that seems most commonly accepted is that Lily or DD (or both) arranged a protective spell to take effect immediately upon the death or sacrifice of Lily. Simple and straightforward, though it does raise some questions, most if not all of which have been discussed at length on site. A much more interesting theory has been detailed by jodel_from_aol. This is incorporated in his 'Changeling' essay (link below) that is well worth reading. He theorises that "Take me, kill me instead.." constitutes a binding magical contract when Voldy does just that. And that by the implied terms Voldy is then considered in breach of contract if he attempts to kill Harry *after* he has killed Lily. Presumably the penalty for such an act would be proportionate to the attempted breach, i.e. death. The spell rebounds on the caster. Both of these theories have a weak spot which the third theory tries to address. Adherents to this one read a different significance into the words "Take me, kill me instead.." Could Salazar be up to one of his possession tricks? Is there something in Harry, potential power or whatever, that Voldy would rather have for his own? And did he try and take it by entering Harry? Because we know there has somehow been been a transfer of powers (and perhaps more) from Voldy to Harry. Quite frankly I for one don't see how a repelled AK could do that. And the non-runner? That Vapour!Mort made a partially successful attempt to take over Harry after it's own body had been destroyed. Very unlikely since the protection was in place by then. It's a difficult one, this. (Mind you, so is the next.) None of the theories are a snug fit. Most unsatisfactory, must do better in the speculation game. Anyway, we 'know' the outcome. Voldy loses his body (see below for possible repercussions) and a disembodied entity drifts off into the sunrise, wailing and gnashing its non-existent dentures. Harry meanwhile is left amongst the rubble sporting a brand new scar and a few extra pieces of software in his operating system. Trojan, virus or upgrade? Act II, scene 2; The 24 hours. There has been an inordinate amount of theorising about this blank spot in the timeline - and all to no avail. We have zero information about what transpired in the 24 hours after the GH episode. Something must have - we have the most momentous event in the history of the modern WW; the owls are fluttering about with the news by daybreak - and where's DD? And Harry - what happened with him during this long, long day? Hagrid turns up with Harry later that night - at a pre-arranged time. Why? How? What on earth was going on? If we knew it'd give us some strong pointers to the whys and wherefores of the main plot IMO. Want to bet that this is part of the 15 chapters that JKR excised because it gave the game away? No, didn't think you would. OK - we're up to date; this is where we came in. Some fans are a bit sniffy about the role of 'possession' in HP. Don't see why; it's written into 4 of the 5 books - it's one of Voldy's chief tools, weapons, attributes, what have you. It adds a comforting sense of continuity to the story - and those of us who base theories on it do so because it can be used to provide a possible answer to some very important questions: 1. What *is* Voldemort, how did he get that way and what could this mean for the future? I've given my ideas about what and how -- he's a composite of a Salazar mental entity incorporated (willingly) into Tom Riddle and it happened in the Chamber. And what next? DD tries to split Tom from Sally - this is possible because Tom is no longer bound by the original contract - his body is no more, the terms are now invalid. He could now be persuaded to repudiate Salazar. His spirit, perhaps taking Sally with it, could pass through the Veil. That's where most spirits reside, don't you think? SSSusan recently reminded us that JKR had said that the books were about death. It crops up in the text a few times too: "Death, the next great adventure." "There are worse things than death, Tom" The Death Chamber. While striving for immortality Voldy is effectively dead many times over - and DD reckons it's time for him to go. 2. What *is* Harry, how did he get that way and what could this mean for the future? Harry too is a composite; he has some of the Voldy construct in his mind - but, and it's a very important but - he didn't accept it willingly; it was imposed. When he eventually comes to terms with the situation he'll have a choice - accept or reject. Anybody think he'll accept? No; but it'd be an interesting finale if he did. How this intrusion will be eliminated, or even if it *can* be eliminated, is up for grabs. We'll probably have a better idea after we read book 6. I apologise for the length of this piece, it sort of grew on me. It was supposed to be a shortish overview of my take on possession, but I got caught up by the natural progression into the continuity of themes concept. A few interesting links. The first two are posts from Spring '03, a few weeks before I joined. Not that they would have made me stop and think even if I'd seen them; I was much too brash, too fascinated by the minutiae of HP to consider original causes - and anyway the new book was due out soon. The first is the origin of the 'Adopted!Harry' thread by ashandhp http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/57649 The second is an offshoot of that - jodel_from_aol and his 'Changeling' post http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/57993 The third, mentioned last week by Bex and thrust under my nose by Carolyn is jodel_from_aol's much expanded rewrite of 'Changeling' on redhen http://www.redhen-publications.com/Changeling.html All 3 are well worth reading Kneasy [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 13:24:49 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 06:24:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Penseive, Slytherin, Lily's Parents and Time Travel In-Reply-To: <20040803051809.19003.qmail@webmail8.rediffmail.com> Message-ID: <20040803132449.90502.qmail@web50103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108665 --- Amey Chinchorkar wrote: > - Magda > - So I'll give old Salazar a > - break until I can see proof that he really hated muggleborns > rather > - than was just nervous about them. > > Amey: > Then what was the Basilisk doing in the Chamber? Was he pulling out > an Hagrid-Aragog act? (Sorry. Couldnt help it. That was not > supposed to sound as mean as it came out) No, I think the basilisk was there as a break-open-in-case-of-Muggle-attack safeguard. Sort of a weapon of last resort in case the usual precautions such as wards and spells failed. Unlike most of the wizaring world since his time, old Salazar believed in the efficy of Plan B. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com Tue Aug 3 13:33:58 2004 From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 13:33:58 -0000 Subject: Occlumency Lessons WAS Re: Snape's Attitude Toward the Students In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108666 > DZEYTOUN wrote : > > As far as Harry asking Dumbledore to teach him, well, I'm not sure > > Dumbledore will leave it up to Harry and I don't really think he > > should. I mean you have a kid who is in danger of mental assault > > and possession by the most evil wizard around. In addition, he > > might endanger all sorts of other people if Voldemort seizes > > control. Yes, Dumbledore does need a new relationship with Harry, > > and yes, he does need to start treating Harry with more respect, > > but let's not be silly here! This is a time when you approach a > > sixteen-year-old and say "Listen kid, this is how we're going to > > handle this situation." Importantly, and the thing Dumbledore did > > not do in OOTP, you also say "this is WHY we're going to do this." > Then SSSusan wrote: > I think Dzeytoun is right. > > There are times when you say, "I'm just too busy!" And there are > times when you say, "I don't CARE how busy I am--I'll do whatever I > have to do to get this done!" > > Clearly, THIS is one of those latter times. I mean, the war is > building; Sirius is dead; even Fudge knows/acknowledges that Voldy's > back; Harry failed at Occlumency and Voldy was able to manipulate his > mind & his behaviors. This is getting SERIOUS. boyd: Hey, I agree with both of you that DD *should* have taught Harry personally. As you both say, this is pretty important. But what I'm wondering aloud is why he *doesn't*? My view (going along with the BADD ANGST boundary-respecting DD), is that DD feels it was a mistake that he didn't prompt Harry to ask DD to teach him personally. Let's remember, this is the same DD who did not actually tell H&H what to do with the time turner in PoA, despite the fact that an innocent life was held in the balance. This is also the same DD who, rather than telling Harry what to do prior to each of the three Triwizard tasks, instead allowed him to try on his own. DD just does not meddle in other people's business unless they ask him. In other words, he allows people to make their own choices. Another view that you may want to consider is that DD is plotting here. By not teaching Harry himself, he is *allowing* the connection with LV to grow for some as-yet-unknown purpose. This is the MAGIC DISHWASHER theory of DD's actions. Very subversive, by the way, so it's pretty fun. Not my cup of tea, though. Of course, you can maintain the illusion that old Albus merely made a mistake here in assigning Harry's most hated teacher to teach him the most important skill of his life, then did not correct the mistake for months. Sure, and Umbridge is none the worse for wear from her encounter with the centaurs, right? --boyd From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com Tue Aug 3 13:45:21 2004 From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 13:45:21 -0000 Subject: Personal theories about what will happen next In-Reply-To: <080320041200.20669.410F7E63000EAEBA000050BD22007481849C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108667 >> cassin12004 wrote: >> 2. I could see Arthur Weasley as the next Minister of Magic. > And Lissa replied: > Other people have beat me to that one :) boyd: OK, help me out here, Arthur-supporters. Why on earth would JKR make Arthur the next MoM? Sure, he's got some experience in the Ministry. And yes, he's a good guy, a supporter of Harry. That's why I *can't* see him as Minister. Look, with each book Harry's world has become darker and his task has become harder. Making Arthur, a supporter of Harry, Minister of Magic would be simply too easy for Harry plotwise. IMHO JKR will continue alienating Harry from those who care for him, and the MoM will continue to be ineffective, if not an outright opponent. And frankly I'll believe there's a new Minister in Book 6 only if/when I see it in print. But Arthur as MoM? Not a chance. --boyd From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Aug 3 13:51:14 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 13:51:14 -0000 Subject: Time-turning as literary device In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108668 SSSusan: > I guess in spite of this confidence I have in JKR, I do still also > have a bit of a worry that if the time-turning shows up AGAIN I'll > be feeling, "Been there, done that." You know? I want something > new, fresh, creative...just like she's provided for us each time so > far. You've got an interesting take on the time-turning in PoA and > in general, so I guess I should just have more faith! > potioncat: Well, I don't have a stong pro or con opinion about whether I want Time turning to return...but it seems to be it was "set up" in PoA, much like polyjuice was in CoS. Hermione explained a lot of rules while they were working that bit of magic. And, I don't know which version of Merlin it is (Once and Future King?) but Merlin was thought to live backward, he remembered the future. So I would not be surprised to see it used again. I did like the way JKR did Time turning. Remember, there was an explanation for everything we thought happened. We didn't see Buckbeak die then not die. Potioncat wondering why all the most interesting posts happen on the days when she can't get to the computer. From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 13:53:01 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 13:53:01 -0000 Subject: Who's the bully was Re: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108669 Pippin wrote: What abusive behavior? Harry is out of bounds after hours and Snape has every right to discipline him. I think Snape backed down because Moody is the one Dumbledore called in specially to be responsible for Harry's safety during the tournament, and Moody is insisting that Harry's not there. Snape knows perfectly well where Harry is--he knows where the trick steps are as well as anyone. Actually if anybody is being bullied in that scene, it's Snape. Not that he doesn't deserve it... vmonte responds: Yes, Harry was not obeying the rules again, but I think that Moody's comment was more a general observation of how Snape seems to be targeting Harry negatively at school. page 472, GoF, U.S. version: "Course Dumbledore trusts you," growled Moody. "He's a trusting man, isn't he? Believes in second chances. But me--I say there are spots that don't come off, Snape. Spots that never come off, d'you know what I mean?" Snape suddenly did something very strange. He seized his left forearm convulsively with his right hand, as though something on it had hurt him. Moody laughed. "Get back to bed, Snape." "You don't have the authority to send me anywhere!" Snape hissed, letting go of his arm as though angry with himself. "I have as much right to prowl this school after dark as you do!" "Prowl away," said Moody, but his voice was full of menace. "I look forward to meeting you in a dark corridor some time..." page 473 But Snape's black eyes were darting from the egg in Filch'e arms tothe map in Moody's hand, and Harry could tell he was putting two and two together, as only Snape could... "Potter," he said quietly. "What's that?" said Moody calmly, folding up the map and pocketing it. "Potter!" Snape snarled... That egg is Potter's egg. That piece of parchment belongs to Potter. I have seen it before, I recognize it! Potter is here! Potter, in his Invisibility Cloak!" ..."There's nothing there, Snape!" barked Moody, "but I'll be happy to tell the headmaster how quickly your mind jumped to Harry Potter!" "Meaning what?" Snape turned again to look at Moody, his hands still outstretched, inches from Harry's chest. "Meaning that Dumbledore's very interested to know who's got it in for that boy!" said Moody, limping nearer still to the foot of the stairs. "And so am I, Snape...very interested..." Snape was looking down at Moody, and Harry couldn't see the expression on his face. For a moment, nobody moved or said anything. Then Snape slowly lowered his hands. (What happened here I wonder? Did Snape try to read fake Moody's mind? What was his expression? Was it one of understanding?) page 474 "I merely thought," said Snape, in a voice of forced calm, "that if Potter was wandering around after hours again...it's an unfortunate habit of his...he should be stopped. For--for his own safety." "Ah, I see," said Moody softly. "Got Potter's best interests at heart, have you?" vmonte: See how even the bad guys know that Snape does not have Harry's best interest in mind! vivian From jferer at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 13:54:38 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 13:54:38 -0000 Subject: Personal theories about what will happen next In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108670 Boyd:"That's why I *can't* see him as Minister. Look, with each book Harry's world has become darker and his task has become harder. Making Arthur, a supporter of Harry, Minister of Magic would be simply too easy for Harry plotwise. IMHO JKR will continue alienating Harry from those who care for him, and the MoM will continue to be ineffective, if not an outright opponent." Arthur won't be the new Minister - JKR said so - but Harry won't have the same problem with the Ministry he did in OoP year. Fudge is toast and Dumbledore calls the shots now. Harry and Dumbledore are popular. This next year will be about external strife, I believe, not persecution of Harry by his own. He's likely to lose friends to Voldemort, perhaps very close friends. I never thought Arthur would be Minister. Even JKR can't take someone the wizarding public won't accept and make him or her Minister, but I don't have any idea who it will be. Jim Ferer From jferer at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 13:58:45 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 13:58:45 -0000 Subject: [OT] Another Thought about time travel In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108671 >> Mutt wrote: > >> Should have read the whole thread prior to replying. Question. I go >> back in time. It results in my past self's death. Does the death of >> my past self prevent me from going back in time and causing my own >> death since I can't go back and kill myself if I'm already dead? What >> would happen next? > Vivian again: > > Yeah, I have no idea how this is possible but this comment was > actually made by Hermione to Harry in PoA. If this scenario is > possible I wonder if there are holes/time-line problems happening > because of TT. If so, DD may be time-travelling to correct/fix > problems in the time continuum. That's why a muggle (?- not certain) named Albert Einstein said that time travel was impossible. From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com Tue Aug 3 14:02:38 2004 From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 14:02:38 -0000 Subject: Shared thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108672 > Kneasy wrote : > And the Chamber was built to house the essence of > Salazar - his power and his personality. To be re-incarnated it needed > a willing body - the heir. An heir need not be a descendant - just a > legatee designated as such by the testator - and in this case anyone > who could find and enter the Chamber qualified. boyd: Wonderful theory, Kneasy, and as you know I generally agree. But I have nagging questions: Why is it only after so many years that an Heir of Slytherin has come forward? What is so special about Tom? And why would Salazar be so selective about his "host"? Sure, JKR could have just written it this way for fun. Or maybe Salazar decided to wait 1,000 years just because it's a round number. (Arithmancy, anyone?) Or maybe Tom was the first who would have said yes? Hmmm. Still, seems a bit vague on these points. --boyd "You can't handle the truth!"--A Few Good Men From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Tue Aug 3 14:36:54 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (aggiepaddy) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 14:36:54 -0000 Subject: Sally's Spirit WAS Re: Shared thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108673 > boyd: > Wonderful theory, Kneasy, and as you know I generally agree. But I > have nagging questions: > > Why is it only after so many years that an Heir of Slytherin has >come forward? What is so special about Tom? And why would Salazar be >so selective about his "host"? >>>>SNIP>>>>> Aggie: It is my understanding that Kneasy is implying that the 'spirit' of Sally has been residing in the world's bad boys for the past 1000 yrs. He (Sally) went from Grindlewald in 1945 to Tom Riddle. From meriaugust at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 14:41:33 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 14:41:33 -0000 Subject: Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: <20040803072949.98830.qmail@web53402.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108674 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Miss Melanie wrote: > Disscussion Questions > > 1) Once again we see the moody Sirius Black, what is the true source of his moodiness? And what on Earth does he do locked up in the room with Buckbeat all day? Meri: I think it all goes back to Sirius wanting to be doing something important for the Order, not just sitting back and cooling his heels at No. 12. When he had Christmas company at the house it was easier for him to forget where he was, or at least ignore it, and with everyone leaving again, now Sirius is stuck in that wretched house with all those bad memories and no one to take his mind off it. And as to what he does with Buckbeak all day, probably feeds him, grooms him, and is reminded of that short summertime when he was free, between being rescued by Harry and hiding in the cave in Hogsmeade. > 2) Harry questions whether or not working with Snape is really helping to close off his mind. Harry believes that it may be making it more open. Is there any truth to Harry's thinking? Would his lessons have gone differently had someone else been in charge of them? Meri: I think that his lessons would absolutely gone better had someone else taught him, even DD attests to this by the end of the book. Snape hates Harry, and Harry hates Snape, and there's no two ways about this. Plus there is the fact that Harry believes that having a link into LV's mind might be helpful at times, so maybe he doesn't want to lose that power. I think that Harry, like Sirius, feels pretty useless, too, and maybe he believes that being able to look into LV's mind is the one thing he can do. > 3) Sirius tells Snape that he still believes that he is very much a part of the Death Eaters..is there any evidence to back that up? What evidence do we have that he is just working for the order? Meri: None whatsoever. Except, of course, DD's faith in Snape's loyalty. We still don't have all the answers to the Snape riddle, and hopefully HBP will provide some of those. But there is one thing: Snape is still alive, so for some reason LV believes he can trust old Sevvy. So something is going on there. > 4) JK Rowlings said that the mirror will be brought up again in another book. In what capacity do you believe that it will be brought back? JKR has this to say about the mirror " The mirror might not have helped as much as you think, but on the other hand, will help more than you think. You'll have to read the final books to understand that!" What do you think this means? Meri: I don't know what the mirror will be used for. I liked the posted theory that only his nickname (Padfoot) would have called Sirius to the mirror, but then again, Harry's mirror was broken and will need to be repaired. (Perhaps this will entail a trip to Weasley's Wizard Wheezes...how cool will that be?) Maybe once the mirror is fixed Harry will be able to give the other to, say, Ron, and be able to stay in constant contact: no more writing letters, no more Harry slipping into depression over lack of info, something like that. And if there is only one mirror left (either because Sirius left his behind and Harry can't fix his, or because Sirius had his with him and Harry repaired his own) perhaps it can be bewitched to do other things, like spy on people, or gather information. > 5) Snape asked several questions about the images that were scene in his visions. For example, he asked about Aunt Marge's dog. What purpose did he have in asking those questions? Do they lead to something, stand out in his mind, or is he just merely curious about them? Meri: He's probably just curious about them. Perhaps he didn't know the extent to which Harry was abused by the Dursleys and was, dare I say, slightly shocked? Even so, don't you really wish that Harry had asked Snape about those memories that Harry accessed? Not that he'd answer or anything... > 6) Snape tells Harry many times in this chapter not to say the name "Voldemort." Why is it that even Voldemort's own followers cannot say his name? Is their significance in calling him the Dark Lord? (this is just something that I have always been curious about..love to know what you guys think about it). > Meri: I don't know. This one has me stumped. Maybe LV is just an egomaniac who needs to know all the time that people fear and respect him. And perhaps calling out LV's name does have some sort of power. What I think is more significant is the way that DD called LV "Tom" in the MoM battle. That was just to damn cool. But remember, Trelawny also calls LV the "Dark Lord" in her prophecies, so I don't know what significance this might have. (On a side note, this is also a nickname given to Darth Vader, but that's a whole other thing.) From tinainfay at msn.com Tue Aug 3 12:25:31 2004 From: tinainfay at msn.com (mrs_sonofgib) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 12:25:31 -0000 Subject: portrait of Godric Gryffindor? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108675 As I was listening to OotP this morning I paused over a bit of info that I had previously read through quickly. In the chapter, The Lost Prophecy, Harry is welcomed back by a (loose paraphrase) corpulent red-nosed wizard sitting in a throne-like chair behind Dumbledore's desk. He speaks kindly to Harry, telling him that DD thinks very highly of him (Harry). The 'throne-like chair' is what piqued my interest (HBP info?). Also the fact that the portrait holds a prominent position (directly behind by DD's desk) might indicate the person's importance. I'm wondering if it is Godric Gryffindor... Thoughts? (GG's story is my guess {obviously} for the HBP storyline - hoping this is a clue) ~tina From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 3 14:51:49 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 10:51:49 -0400 Subject: Personal theories about what will happen next. Message-ID: <002501c47969$681944f0$9162acce@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108676 cassin12004" wrote: 6. War will be brought to the doorstep of Hogwarts and we will see an epic battle to make Tolkien proud. Centaurs, Giants, Aragog and his brood, thestrals, house elves, bowtruckles, Ghosts, Peeves, the whomping willow and everything all the way down to the castle suits of armor involved in defending hogwarts from an invading horde of goblins, dementors, giants and Death Eaters. DuffyPoo: I've always thought they need to send old Peevsey out to round up some of his Poltergeist friends for the final battle. I'm not sure what 'good' they could do, but they certainly would be a fine distraction. ;-) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com Tue Aug 3 14:55:58 2004 From: sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com (Amey Chinchorkar) Date: 3 Aug 2004 14:55:58 -0000 Subject: Snape And Neville, Dumbledore and CoS, Slytherin and Plan B Message-ID: <20040803145558.20552.qmail@webmail31.rediffmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108677 - Ally: - Actually, someone once broke down every single scene between Snape - and Neville, and I was surprised at how much milder these scenes - looked when you saw them all together in context. Snape is almost - always reacting to a potentially serious mistake Neville makes in - class. - He does take some shots at Neville, but I'm not so sure he is quite - as personally invested in Neville as he is with Harry. So while I - think your theory has some merit -- its one I've toyed with, too -- - I'm not sure I see Snape's treatment of them as similar. Amey: He got to his feet and strode past the class, his black robes billowing behind him. At the doorway he turned on his heel and said, "Possibly no one's warned you, Lupin, but this class contains Neville Longbottom. I would advise you not to entrust him with anything difficult. Not unless Miss Granger is hissing instructions in his ear." (PoA) What is this if not personally invested? This is not serious mistake Neville makes. It is not even Snape?s class and he says this. What is this if not picking up on Neville? - Geoff: - The original implication of this is that he doesn't /know/. However, - with Diary!Riddle's comment, does this mean he won't /tell/? And if - so, why not? Does he know what caused the previous problems? Other - evidence begins to raise its head... - Re-reading this, it is taking on much more significance in my mind. - Does this mean that Dumbledore knows about the Basilisk and is - speculating, knowing that Voldemort is apparently out of the picture, - as to which person now has the ability to open the Chamber? Amey: As for the second part, Dumbledore clears it in his usual after climax explanation. He knew Tom Riddle/Voldemort was the last heir of Slytherin, and he knew Voldemort was in Albania. So he was wondering who was possessed or who else had got those powers? If only the true heir of Slytherin can open the Chamber, then it means Voldemort is possessing somebody in some form (unless he married somebody and had some children which are in Hogwarts now, how about his son as HBP). As for the petrification, he knew that there was a monster in the Chamber who petrified (he had seen earlier attacks), but *maybe* there are many other creatures or spells which can petrify a person (at least that?s how I read the *but how* part). - Magda - No, I think the basilisk was there as a - break-open-in-case-of-Muggle-attack safeguard. Sort of a weapon of - last resort in case the usual precautions such as wards and spells - failed. Unlike most of the wizaring world since his time, old - Salazar believed in the efficy of Plan B. Amey: Plan B as Basilisk, my god!!! And if the Hogwarts castle is unplottable, muggles see it as a ruin with danger sign on it, also it is full of wizards and witches who can set the whole lot of spells on any attacking army. It would take a lot more than a simple muggle attack to capture Hogwarts, and remember even Voldemort didn?t try ot take it over (well, Hogwarts had Dumbledore, but there are also other defences). According to Binns, "Slytherin, according to the legend, sealed the Chamber of Secrets so that none would be able to open it until his own true heir arrived at the school. The heir alone would be able to unseal the Chamber of Secrets, unleash the horror within, and use it to purge the school of all who were unworthy to study magic." (CoS). The *horror* or *monster* within the chamber is clearly the basilisk, though nobody knows for sure. This makes Slythrin as mad about purebloodedness as Voldemort in my mind. He may have started with a weary dislike about muggles, but somewhere down the line he went really mad about it. Putting Basilisk in the Chamber is not a thing which I can forgive easily. Amey [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 3 15:06:30 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 11:06:30 -0400 Subject: another wacko theory Message-ID: <002e01c4796b$759272d0$9162acce@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108678 Meltowne: "They didn't need a new device. Didn't they also disappear later that evening after the match - when everybody got slit up and the dark mark was cast? Maybe the boys, following the match, used a regular timeturner to go back and tell themselves what the outcome would be - just like we saw in the second Back to the Future movie." DuffyPoo: First I have to say I don't buy the F&G used a time turner to learn the outcome of the match theory, they're sneaky but I don't think they're cheats. They were, after all, concerned about the wording of a letter so it wouldn't sound like blackmail. And, as someone posted yesterday, cheating would put them in the Ludo Bagman camp. It was him they were trying to get their money back from...if they had cheated as well.... Fred and George went into the woods with Ginny, with Harry, Ron and Hermione following right behind. Then Harry, Ron and Hermione were separated when Ron tripped and fell. They had a short conversation with Draco, then realized that Fred, George and Gnny were gone. Fred and George wouldn't have time-turned back leaving Ginny behind in that chaos, or are you suggesting she's in on it too? ;-) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com Tue Aug 3 15:08:22 2004 From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 15:08:22 -0000 Subject: Sally's Spirit WAS Re: Shared thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108679 > > Boyd wrote: > > Why is it only after so many years that an Heir of Slytherin has > >come forward? What is so special about Tom? And why would Salazar be > >so selective about his "host"? > >>>>SNIP>>>>> > Aggie: > It is my understanding that Kneasy is implying that the 'spirit' of > Sally has been residing in the world's bad boys for the past 1000 > yrs. He (Sally) went from Grindlewald in 1945 to Tom Riddle. Great, riddle resolved! Oh, wait, but then was Grindelwald at Hogwarts, too, and did he enter the Chamber but refuse to release the basilisk (neither we nor Ghost Professor Binns have heard of another outbreak) and why could DD kill him but not LV? Those dang nagging questions! --boyd mischief managed! From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Aug 3 15:09:32 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 15:09:32 -0000 Subject: Who's the bully was Re: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108680 > Pippin wrote: > > What abusive behavior? Harry is out of bounds after hours and Snape has every right to discipline him. I think Snape backed down because Moody is the one Dumbledore called in specially to be responsible for Harry's safety during the tournament, and Moody is insisting that Harry's not there. Snape knows perfectly well where Harry is--he knows where the trick steps are as well as anyone. > > Actually if anybody is being bullied in that scene, it's Snape. Not > that he doesn't deserve it... > > > vmonte responds: > > Yes, Harry was not obeying the rules again, but I think that Moody's comment was more a general observation of how Snape seems to be targeting Harry negatively at school. > Pippin: Really? I thought it was much more serious than that...I thought Moody was threatening to tell Dumbledore that it was Snape who had put Harry's name in the goblet--just before the snippet you quoted, Moody justifies his search of Snape's office with "auror's privilege." I doubt very much if Aurors are called in to deal with aggressive sarcastic teachers. Death Eaters that walked free, are another matter...It would be interesting to know if fake!Moody was aware of Snape's acquittal or not. > page 474 > > "I merely thought," said Snape, in a voice of forced calm, "that if Potter was wandering around after hours again...it's an unfortunate habit of his...he should be stopped. For--for his own safety."< > > "Ah, I see," said Moody softly. "Got Potter's best interests at > heart, have you?" > > vmonte: > > See how even the bad guys know that Snape does not have Harry's best interest in mind! < Pippin: LOL! They're both playing to their invisible audience: Harry. I suspect that Fake!Moody and Snape tried to use legilimency on each other and were foiled, but each realized that they had been foiled. Snape is saying something like "On your own head be it, Potter, if you get in trouble wandering around the corridors. There *is* someone on campus trying to kill you, but if you'd rather trust your miserable neck to Moody than to me, when I happen to have saved your worthless life at least once, I can't stop you." As for Fake!Moody, he is very anxious to find out what Potter saw on the map, and if Harry is sent back to bed or hauled off to detention, he won't get a chance to find out. Pippin From eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk Tue Aug 3 15:32:13 2004 From: eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk (iamvine) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 15:32:13 -0000 Subject: Time-turning as literary device (was: Just a comment about Lupin's malady) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108681 SSSusan wrote, speaking of the Time-Turner and Polyjuice Potion: > For some, these parts of the storyline are fun, adventurous and a > challenge to figure out. For others, they feel like "deus ex > machina"--almost like a cop-out. "How can I get X to happen when > it's really not very likely or possible? Oh, I know--I'll use time- > travel. Or maybe I'll allow one person to be disguised as another > for an entire year." To me, the Time-Turner is less of a deus ex machina than it looks, because the characters aren't allowed to change the past - or rather, they could only change things they assumed had happened, but turned out really not to have done. They thought Buckbeak had been killed because they saw the axe swing, but what they saw was never really the killing stroke. And they could only save Sirius because they set off while he was still un-Kissed. Circumstances like that are rare. I don't think they can use the Time-Turner to save anyone's life again, but there are many other original ways it could be used. How about Fred pretending to be both himself and George, while the real George went off on a secret mission, for instance? To me that would be an acceptable way to bring the Time-Turner back. Also I don't know if you've ever thought about it this way, but there are two basic ways for JKR to use a plot device: 1) Harry uses it to do something clever, or someone else uses it with his knowledge. 2) Someone else uses it, probably against Harry, and he and the readers are surprised when he finds out. We've had Polyjuice Potion used both ways - first by Harry and Ron, then by Crouch Jr. I always thought Harry and Ron's Polyjuice episode was setup to make Crouch's more plausible when it happened (though JKR wove it very cleverly into the plot of CoS at the same time). We've only had the Time-Turner used in sense 1 (I don't count Hermione using it to manage her timetable, because that was mainly setup too). I do suspect JKR has been preparing us for some other use of the Time-Turner later. She's told us about it - now when the next Death Eater starts appearing in multiple places at once, we stand a chance of guessing what's going on. I wouldn't mind if that happened, but I don't want to see Polyjuice again. It's been used twice, once rather implausibly, and I've had enough of it. Eleanor From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 3 15:36:54 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 11:36:54 -0400 Subject: Penseive, Slytherin, Lily's Parents and Time Travel Message-ID: <004601c4796f$b4d0f3a0$9162acce@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108683 Amey: "Cover memory? Can anyone control what memories a person entering the penseive see? I mean you can choose memories out of penseive (as dumbledore does), but how can you control an intruder? And if it is true, does it mean that Dumbledore wanted Harry to see the trials? What did it show him?" DuffyPoo: Does this mean that DD only showed Harry the parts of the prophecy he wanted him to see? Amey: "It is still there on the site, so I think it is final. But then, you don't call a half-blood (like this makes Lily) a mudblood, right? And Snape is enough knowledgeable in that respect to differentiate between a mudblood and half-blood. So unless Snape made a mistake under duress, I think Lily's parents are muggles and she is muggleborn. That makes her grandparents also muggles , right?" DuffyPoo: Well, it's only been a couple of weeks and the last I checked the Prefects/Points answer was still there as well, although we know it has been corrected in a new edition of OotP. I think you're right though, and I thought I posted it somewhere too, Lily's grandparents are muggles (so that is correct), and her parents are muggles as well. In PS Hagrid said 'Anyway, what does he know about it, some o' the best I ever saw were the only ones with magic in 'em in a long line o' Muggles -- look at yer mum!' We do know that Hagrid is not always correct, but he did appear to know (as we've found out through the other books) that he knew both James and Lily quite well. I can't imagine Snape making the mistake, duress or not. One thing those wizard kids know is the other kids' blood status, and the Slytherins seem to know it more so than most - of course, it's more important to them as well. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 3 15:53:55 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 11:53:55 -0400 Subject: Salazar Slytherin Question Message-ID: <005301c47972$15022030$9162acce@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108684 This is for the experts. After Binns explains all about the Chamber, we have this, "I always knew Salazar Slytherin was a twisted old loony,' Ron told Harry and Hermione, as they fought their way....."But I never knew he started all this pure-blood stuff." What is it about SS that makes Ron say he 'always' knew he was a 'twisted old loony?' This is before they know there's a basilisk in the chamber, they only knew what Binns had said about a monster/horror, and that Binns thinks it is "arrant nonsense" and "it does not exist, there is no chamber and no monster." And we now have the word 'loony' connected to Slytherin from Ron, Luna Lovegood from Ginny initially, and Remus Lupin from Peeves. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Aug 3 16:02:05 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 16:02:05 -0000 Subject: Penseive, Slytherin, Lily's Parents and Time Travel In-Reply-To: <20040803051809.19003.qmail@webmail8.rediffmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108685 >Jen said: >One theory (from Greywolf, I think) was the incident Harry saw was only a "cover memory" placed in the Pensieve to protect other >memories. That way if Harry did get in there by chance, he would see perhaps a humiliating memory, but not the actual *worst* memory > Snape is protecting. If this is true, then Snape probably > specifically chose that cover memory because it was proof of James' > arrogance. > Amey responded: > Cover memory? Can anyone control what memories a person entering the penseive see? I mean you can choose memories out of penseive (as dumbledore does), but how can you control an intruder? And if it is true, does it mean that Dumbledore wanted Harry to see the trials? What did it show him? Jen again: In GOF, the way Harry enters the pensieve makes it sounds like he goes into the first memory floating around on top, which would presumably be the most recent one DD pulled from his head. DD had to prod the surface to make other memories appear, so less recently-pulled memories would probably be underneath. I don't think DD intended Harry to see the trials; that just happened to be the thoughts he was pondering most recently. So if the 'cover memory' idea is true, then Snape pulled that memory of James & Sirius last and put it on top of the others he pulled out. As for controlling intruders, there doesn't seem to be another way besides the old standby DD points to--locking the pensieve away and charming the lock, no doubt. A cover memory would only keep an intruder occupied for a short time before they would move on to the next memory (as we saw Harry do in GOF, when he had more time to peruse DD's memories). Jen Reese From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Aug 3 16:36:46 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 16:36:46 -0000 Subject: Penseive, Slytherin, Lily's Parents and Time Travel In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108686 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > >Jen said: > >One theory (from Greywolf, I think) was the incident Harry saw was > only a "cover memory" placed in the Pensieve to protect other > >memories. That way if Harry did get in there by chance, he would > see perhaps a humiliating memory, but not the actual *worst* memory > > Snape is protecting. If this is true, then Snape probably > > specifically chose that cover memory because it was proof of James' > > arrogance. > Yes, he did. (This was in response to post 80835 on Snape's memories.) The answer I gave then still applies : "In addition the contents of the Penseive '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." Kneasy From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Aug 3 17:15:28 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 17:15:28 -0000 Subject: Penseive, Slytherin, Lily's Parents and Time Travel In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108687 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > Harry 'immerses' himself in the Pensieve, a bit more than skimming the surface. No, I think which memory is accessed is a random event."< This is kind of slap-yourself-on-the-forehead obvious, but what if the memories are in chronological order ? The trial memories in Dumbledore's pensieve were. Dumbledore stirs the pensieve and an earlier memory, that of schoolgirl!Bertha emerges, but that's *after* Dumbledore has added more thoughts. Snape presumably has many more dangerous or painful memories, but maybe Harry happened on this one first because it was the oldest of those that Snape had stored. And it may be 'worst' because of all his memories, it was the one Snape least wanted Harry to see. Pippin From snow15145 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 17:31:21 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 17:31:21 -0000 Subject: Shared thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108688 Snow replying to Kneasy's post 108664: We either think somewhat alike, Kneasy, or your brain waves are pretty strong because what I have been attempting to write about for the past several days has the same basic idea as your post, with a time-turner twist. I totally agree with you that the backlog to the story is where you will find the answer, which is where I went in writing this theory. Although I hate time turning purely because it is so difficult to explain, at least for me, the theory that I have written could be plausible without shifting the story we have seen so far. The following is the Time-Turner Tom Theory: What if Tom Riddle became Voldemort then sends himself back in time where he (call him X) begins his journey into ultimately becoming the Dark Lord. This time-traveling Voldemort or X, in search of immortality, finds a way in which to possess others. With each new possession he becomes stronger by sharing his victims talents and bodies until his next possessed victim. X has been sent back in time by Tom Riddle/Voldemort in an attempt to correct his own half-blooded future. X having reached a powerful state of being, chooses his ancestor for his next possession to ensure that his Tom Riddle status would be corrected into a pureblood wizard rather than the half-muggle he ended up becoming. Salazar Slytherin appears to be content in his agreement about the houses when Hogwarts was originally founded, via the sorting hat songs. At some point he became obsessed with the notion of only allowing purebloods to be taught there. Here is where the possession idea may have ultimately begun. X, having previously been Tom Riddle, is attempting to alter his own past which began as his future self. Hence the quote from Tom Riddle that Voldemort is his past, present and future. It also fits with the controversial issue of Tom Riddle being the last ancestor of Salazar Slytherin. When X possessed Salazar and confronted the other three founders of the school about only teaching purebloods, which they rejected, he began to realize that the three remaining founders might jeopardize his insurance of his future-self becoming pureblood. (assumption that Tom Riddle's mother attended Hogwarts and would have been taught pureblood prejudices against muggle interaction if Hogwarts only taught purebloods, which therefore would have assured himself against her marrying Tom Riddle Sr.) X was unable to convince the other three founders into his way of thought, so, X would have to alter his plan by building the Chamber of Secrets for his future self to find. X having once been Tom Riddle knew where the future Tom Riddle would look for information and supplied it for him. X needs to possess many people in his wait for his future-self to be born to reconnect with and become the ultimate wizard. The first downfall was X's possession of Grindlewald who was defeated by Dumbledore. (Vague interlude) Then in X's triumphant moment he reunited, via the Chamber, with his future-self (reconnection with future-self) thus his first horrid reign of power until the prophecy prediction. X could have been superior until the point where the prophecy came into play, where I believe Dumbledore intervened having already recognized his opponent in his defeat of Grindlewald. COS "Very few people know that Lord Voldemort was once called Tom Riddle " Side note: Why does Dumbledore always seem to know, possibly because he has already seen X and had dealt with X in his defeat of Grindlewald. Dumbledore may have recognized what Tom Riddle had done. Dumbledore does have a plan, as if we haven't all pretty much realized this, he knows that if Harry should fail all is lost. Dumbledore allows Harry to face, what is ultimately the other half of X that resides in Harry because if X ever should reunite with the rest of himself that's in Harry, X may never be totally vanquished. If in the Ministry, when Voldemort enticed Dumbledore into killing Harry (while Voldemort was possessing him), Dumbledore would have killed the body of Harry, but X would not have been destroyed but unified once again with that missing part of himself that was in Harry. The only way in which X can become "greater and more terrible than ever he was", as Trelawney's second prophecy stated, would be if X can reunite once again with the other half of him that is in Harry. If you look at Trelawney's second prophecy and substitute Dark Lord as X with servant being Tom Riddle, who has been chained these twelve years, this is not such a discountable theory. Let's take a look at Trelawney's second theory with Dark Lord and servant replaced respectively by X and Tom Riddle: The Dark Lord (X) lies alone and friendless, abandoned by his followers. His servant (Tom Riddle) has been chained these twelve years. (Remember it has, at the point this prophecy was made, been twelve years since Voldemort attempted the AK on Harry, Harry doesn't turn 13 for a few months) Tonight, before midnight the servant (Tom Riddle) will break free and set out (set out) to rejoin his master. The Dark Lord (X) will rise again with his servant's aid, (Tom Riddles aid) greater and more terrible than ever he was. Tonight before midnight the servant will set out to rejoin his master " Why all the breaks in the last sentence? My favorite break in supporting this theory is: will set out This segment being separated means, to me, that this statement is not literal but paused, as if an attempt was made to it doesn't enforce the fact that they came together only that he set out to rejoin his master with a bit of help from Pettigrew who brought X back to a semi-solid state. When Pettigrew nursed X back to this somewhat solid state, the connection between X (having part of Tom Riddle) and the part of Tom Riddle that is in Harry became pronounced. [In an attempt to allow you to understand what I am trying so desperately to represent, it is like Frodo putting on the ring, in LOTR, when Frodo put on the ring (even though it was always with him, it was undetectable until he put it on) the rafes (sic) could sense the presence of the ring only when it was physically on Frodo.] In the case with Harry, the portion of Tom Riddle that is within X could not be strongly felt by the other part of him in Harry until X came back to a somewhat solid state. The last part of this second prophecy has not yet been realized. The Dark Lord with his reconnection to the other part of Tom Riddle will become greater and more terrible that ever. This can only happen if the Dark Lord kills Harry and releases the part of Tom Riddle in him. Let's take a look at the first, annoying prophesy and see how this theory fits: "The one (Harry) with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord (X) approaches Born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies and the Dark Lord (X) will mark him as his equal, (by instilling in Harry part of Tom Riddle, Harry becomes equal to X's half of Tom Riddle) but he will have power the Dark Lord (X) knows not and either (X or Harry) must die at the hand (figure of speech, not actually meaning killed by but cant truly live with just half of the Tom Riddle in each of them) of the other (the link between them, which is Tom Riddle) for neither (Harry nor X) can live while the other (Tom Riddle) survives " If Harry can recognize that half of Tom Riddle that is inside of him (through force, not choice...therefore there is no direct connection) and can destroy his half, the other half of Tom Riddle (connected, willingly), to the Dark Lord Voldemort will die also because he had been willingly connected. If Voldemort can kill Harry it will set free the half of Tom Riddle that is in Harry to reunite with his half. From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com Tue Aug 3 17:45:53 2004 From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 17:45:53 -0000 Subject: Sally's Spirit WAS Re: Shared thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108690 > Eustace_Scrubb wrote: > One might also speculate whether the leap from Grindelwald to Tom > Riddle was _precipitated_ by the former's defeat by Dumbledore...or > whether in fact Dumbledore was only able to defeat Grindelwald > _because_ Spirit!Slytherin had abandoned Grindelwald already. > > Oh dear, _more_ nagging questions! boyd: My problem with all of this is that Tom says in CoS that he spent five years looking for the Chamber. So either 1) Salazar's spirit was stuck in there and couldn't help in the search very much (or possess Tom until he entered the Chamber), or 2) Salazar's spirit couldn't remember how to get into the Chamber. Or 3), the theory that Salazar's spirit has been "wandering" is wrong. What am I missing? --boyd From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 18:11:14 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 18:11:14 -0000 Subject: Who's the bully was Re: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108692 Pippin wrote: Really? I thought it was much more serious than that...I thought Moody was threatening to tell Dumbledore that it was Snape who had put Harry's name in the goblet--just before the snippet you quoted, Moody justifies his search of Snape's office with "auror's privilege." I doubt very much if Aurors are called in to deal with aggressive sarcastic teachers. Death Eaters that walked free, are another matter...It would be interesting to know if fake!Moody was aware of Snape's acquittal or not. LOL! They're both playing to their invisible audience: Harry. I suspect that Fake!Moody and Snape tried to use legilimency on each other and were foiled, but each realized that they had been foiled. Snape is saying something like "On your own head be it, Potter, if you get in trouble wandering around the corridors. There *is* someone on campus trying to kill you, but if you'd rather trust your miserable neck to Moody than to me, when I happen to have saved your worthless life at least once, I can't stop you." vmonte responds: I agree that Moody is threatening Snape. I also agree that Moody is up to no good. I also understand what you are saying about Snape. Unfortunately, I feel (just my opinion) that Snape is also up to no good. (I wouldn't mind if I was wrong though.) vivian :) From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 18:38:32 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 18:38:32 -0000 Subject: F & G and the QWC bet (Re: another wacko theory) In-Reply-To: <20040803024227.2437.qmail@web52202.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108696 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kelly Duhon wrote: > Meltowne: > > Maybe the boys, following the match, used a regular > timeturner to go back and tell themselves what the outcome would be - > just like we saw in the second Back to the Future movie. > Kelly: > > Unless I am remembering wrong, Ginny was with them, so I don't think > they could have gone back then. Asian_lovr2: Or maybe Fred and George reasonably concluded that the greatest Seeker in the World, maybe the greatest Seeker who ever lived, would be most likely to catch the Snitch. And that the best team in the world would have the highest score. Logical conclusion: Krum gets the Snitch, Ireland scores the points; Ireland wins, but Krem gets the Snitch. This is not such a far out conclusion that it requires time travel. Just a thought. Steve/asian_lovr2 From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Aug 3 18:48:25 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 18:48:25 -0000 Subject: Penseive, Slytherin, Lily's Parents and Time Travel In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108697 >Kneasy, responding to the idea of a 'cover memory': > Yes, he did. (This was in response to post 80835 on Snape's memories.) > The answer I gave then still applies : > > "In addition the contents of the Penseive '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." Jen: How do we know it looks like a random swirl to the person using the pensieve? We only know what Harry saw, not the user. Perhaps one of the safety features of the pensieve is that the memories only appear to be silvery swirls to another person looking into (not immersing in) the pensieve. Perhaps DD and Snape see an ordered set of memories in some form or another. DD certainly seems able to prod the bowl in such a way to produce exactly the memory he's looking for. If the memories are a random mass, and the user can't see the memory in some way or another, they would have to search a little for a specific memory. From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 19:06:05 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 19:06:05 -0000 Subject: Was Harry in Danger from the Basilisk? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108700 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > SSSusan: > >> ... But I don't think I agree that the directions it was > receiving were super-simple. Diary!Tom apparently controlled the > basilisk enough [through Ginny, am I right?] that it attacked ONLY > MUGGLE-BORNS. ... Tom set it all up ..., still, other than NHN, all > the victims were right-on target. ... This makes me believe that, > had Tom decided to single out Harry, he eventually could have done > so.<< > > Asian_lovr2: > > '...ONLY MUGGLE-BORNS...' you say, and you know this for a fact, > > or is it really an assumption on your part? ... anyplace ... book > > ... cleary stated that Penelope ... is a muggle-born? > > > SSSusan: > Sorry, Steve, I should have provided canon when I posted > originally. I am relying upon Tom's own words, here: > "She [Ginny] set the Serpent of Slytherin on four Mudbloods, and the > Squib's cat." [CoS, US hardback, p. 310] That tells me that, yes, > Penelope was Muggle-born, unless we have reason to think Tom doesn't > have his facts straight. > Asian_lovr2: To that I can only say that all Tom knows is what Ginny tells him, or shows him. > SSSusan: > > As for the randomness of the attacks--the way you described them > later--yes, I agree. *Anyone* walking down the hall who encountered > the Basilisk's eyes would be a victim, regardless of his/her status > as muggle-born, half-blood, pureblood, or whatever. I was referring > to Tom's intention in directing the basilisk, which I believe was to > go after Muggle-borns. > > Siriusly Snapey Susan Asian_lovr2: I also believe that Tom (through Ginny) is directing the Basilisk, and believe that he is sending it after Muggle-borns. I just have a hard time believing Tom's directions could have been, 'Go kill a muggle born'. As I illustrated in my example, that's like directing a dog to 'go attack the Catholics'. How does it know? Now, go attack the person who looks like this at or near this location, I can believe. The attacks on Colin, Justin, and Hermione/Penelope all occurred at times when it was very unlikely to find anyone wandering the hallways, much less specifically a Muggle-born. It's reasonable, although within definite limits, that a Basilisk could distinguish between Muggle and magic, but I can't see any reason why that would be a natural adaptation of a Basilisk. Just a thought. Steve/asian_lovr2 From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 3 19:16:24 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 19:16:24 -0000 Subject: Was Harry in Danger from the Basilisk? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108701 Asian_lovr2: > I also believe that Tom (through Ginny) is directing the Basilisk, > and believe that he is sending it after Muggle-borns. I just have a > hard time believing Tom's directions could have been, 'Go kill a > muggle born'. As I illustrated in my example, that's like directing > a dog to 'go attack the Catholics'. How does it know? > > Now, go attack the person who looks like this at or near this > location, I can believe. The attacks on Colin, Justin, and > Hermione/Penelope all occurred at times when it was very unlikely to > find anyone wandering the hallways, much less specifically a Muggle- > born. > > It's reasonable, although within definite limits, that a Basilisk > could distinguish between Muggle and magic, but I can't see any > reason why that would be a natural adaptation of a Basilisk. SSSusan: Then we are in agreement, actually. In my mind I guess I assumed that Ginny provided the information Tom wanted to know about which students were Muggle-born [to her knowledge, as you note], then, under Tom's "influence," simply reported to him when she saw one of those persons in a vulnerable location, with the final piece being Tom's instruction to the Basilisk to attack *then*. Granted, I've never understood how this could happen so rapidly, since the Basilisk is way down [or is that movie contam.?] in the Chamber. I figured there must be some means of rapid communication *and* rapid exit from the Chamber which allowed all this to unfold very quickly: Ginny sees one of the Muggle-born students out by himself; Ginny tells Tom; Tom sends the the Basilisk to X location and siccs him on the unsuspecting student. That's how I pictured it; doesn't mean it happened that way. But regardless, you & I are on the same page about the Basilisk NOT having an innate ability to sense a Muggle-born or to track down X student without detailed guidance. (Then again, that post earlier about the abilities of serpents was interesting!) Siriusly Snapey Susan From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 19:18:59 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 19:18:59 -0000 Subject: Was Harry in Danger from the Basilisk? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108702 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > Geoff: > ..... > > I've just found your reference: > 'Riddle's reply came quickly, his writing becoming untidier as > though he was hurrying to tell all he knew. > > "Of course I know about the Chamber of Secrets. In my day, they told > us it was a legend, that it did not exist. But this was a lie. In my > fifth year, the Chamber was opened and the minster attacked several > students, finally killing one..."' > > (COS "The Very Secret Diary" p.181 UK edition) > > So there must have been petrified students back in 1942 before > Myrtle's death since the only options with the Basilisk appear to be > either death or petrification. > > So, what's with Dumbledore? > > ...edited quote... > > "She has been petrified," said Dumbledore ("Ah, I thought so!" said > Lockhart). "But how, I cannot say...." > > (COS "The Writing on the Wall" p.108 UK edition) > > The original implication of this is that he doesn't /know/. However, > with Diary!Riddle's comment, does this mean he won't /tell/? And if > so, why not? Does he know what caused the previous problems? Other > evidence begins to raise its head... > > ... > "It means," said Dumbledore, "that the Chamber of Secrets is indeed > open again." .... > "But Albus.... surely.... /who/?" > "The question is not /who/" said Dumbledore, his eyes on Colin. "The > question is , /how/"' > > (COS "The Rogue Bludger" pp.135-36 UK edition) > > Re-reading this, it is taking on much more significance in my mind. > Does this mean that Dumbledore knows about the Basilisk and is > speculating, knowing that Voldemort is apparently out of the > picture, as to which person now has the ability to open the Chamber? > > Hmmm. Geoff Asian_lovr2: I think Dumbledore is saying he recognises the circumstances but not the method. He has seen people petrified before and knows all to well that previous pertifications were associated with the opening of the Chamber, but he does not know if it was done by spell, charm, curse, potion, or magical creature. The 'not who' but 'how' in the second quote implies to me that he suspects the same person this time as he suspected last time, but can't imagine how Riddle/Voldemort could possibly be acting now when he is suport to be powerless vapor lurking about the accursed mountains of Albania. Just a thought. Steve/asian_lovr2 From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Tue Aug 3 19:35:08 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (aggiepaddy) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 19:35:08 -0000 Subject: portrait of Godric Gryffindor? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108703 Tina: >>>>> In the chapter, The Lost Prophecy, Harry is welcomed back by a (loose paraphrase) corpulent red-nosed wizard sitting in a throne- like chair behind Dumbledore's desk. He speaks kindly to Harry, telling him that DD thinks very highly of him (Harry). The 'throne- like chair' is what piqued my interest (HBP info?). Also the fact that the portrait holds a prominent position (directly behind by DD's desk) might indicate the person's importance. I'm wondering if it is Godric Gryffindor... Thoughts? (GG's story is my guess {obviously} for the HBP storyline - hoping this is a clue)>>>>>>>>> > ~tina Aggie: This is a very interesting thought! I like the idea of JKR just casually describing the picture yet it turning out to be really important! I'm always sceptical of her 'casual statements'! *Constant Vigilance*! Perhaps the HBP part of CoS (that was removed) started with a discussion between DD and GG (the portrait). After that, maybe we got a 'flashback' scene, GG describing the events that ended with SS leaving Hogwarts. Perhaps Binns took over telling the tale in the revised version. Thanks for that observation Tina! Is this portrait mentioned at any other time in the 5 books, does anyone know (or care!) ? ;o)) From meltowne at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 19:37:17 2004 From: meltowne at yahoo.com (meltowne) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 19:37:17 -0000 Subject: Paradoxes; Harry, the Patronus, & Time In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108704 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: For the record, time doesn't happen twice. Instead of focusing on when Harry and Herione left the timeline at roughly midnight, you have to concentrate on the fact that they entered the timeline at 6:00 earlier that evening. So, starting at 6:00pm, both (NT!=Normal Time) NT!Harry and NT!Hermione and (TT!=Time Traveling) TT!Harry and TT!Hermione existed from that point on. Harry wasn't saved by someone else the 'first time' because there was no 'first time' 'second time'; there was only one time, and both of him were always there. Plus, mucking about in time is a dangerous thing. Just watch the movie series 'Back to the Future'. Essentually, Marty McFly mucks about in the past, severly altering the future in drastic ways, and he keeps mucking about the past until he finally create a future he likes. Then he goes with that alternate future. Great for him, but it does say how many lives were altered to the negative in order to create his positive future. I could see time travel entering the story again in some secondary way, but if Dumbledore turns out to be TT!Ron, or Harry goes back to the past and rehabilitates Tom Riddle, or some other such nonsense, it will be the most unbelievably unsatisfying ending to it all. Meltowne: I agree - I suspect it does play a role in how things have already played out, but any future use of time-turning will be reserved to correcting something within the timeframe of the same book. Remember also that Hermione missed one of her classes - because the boys missed her she could not go back and change it, she had simply forgotten. She was very clearly told not to change anything. The reason they were able to save Buckbeak and Harry could cast the Patronus charm was because it already happened - they just didn't know it had happened. DD was able to send them back because he knew Buckbeak had already been saved - yet somehow he also knew they were the ones that had to do it, or at least suspected that was how it was accomplished. Steve: The time traveler lives in linear real-time, so a time traveler who is injured in the future returns to the past with that injury. Take Hermione as an illustration. Let's assume she time traveled for an average of 6 hours per day. To a neutral outside observer, 24 hours passes each day, but to Hermione who lives it all in linear time, each of her days are 24hrs+6hrs=30hrs/day. You can see why she was tired all the time. A couple of us ran some estimates and concluded that Hermione aged about a month from her time travel experience. While in the 10 month school year, her classmates aged 10 month, Hermione, because of the extra hours in her day, live 11 months of linear time. Another reason why excessive time travel is a detrimental thing. Meltowne: Of course, we have no cannon for anyone being able to travel to the future at all. As far as we know, the timeturned is a one-way device, allowing you to go back and repeat a time. We haven't been told what happens if you interfere significantly with time (or even a small bit), but we have been told it is simply not to be done. The easy explanation for the boys is that either they guessed well, or their future selves travelled back to tell themselves - then they just had to remember to in fact go back at some point to do it. This also happend in the film "Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure." Bill's father had lost his keys early on (so it had already happened), and the boys wanted to find them in a bush outside the police station. They agreed to remind each other to go back later and take the keys (which they did). We also have the potential situation where Hagrid was using a timeturner when he got baby Harry from Godric's Hollow. Otherwise, why didn't he bring him immediately to DD? How did he know where to go, since Dumbledore would have to know who the secret-keeper was if he had told him where to find the Potters? If someone told them later (maybe after wormtail was blown up), they would need to send someone back to get him. I don't think time-turning will be used to save anyone, perse, but to explain things that have already happened, and that we don't understand. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Aug 3 19:46:15 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 19:46:15 -0000 Subject: Shared thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108705 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "snow15145" wrote: > Snow replying to Kneasy's post 108664: > > We either think somewhat alike, Kneasy, or your brain waves are > pretty strong because what I have been attempting to write about for > the past several days has the same basic idea as your post, with a > time-turner twist. > > What if Tom Riddle became Voldemort then sends himself back in time > where he (call him X) begins his journey into ultimately becoming the > Dark Lord. This time-traveling Voldemort or X, in search of > immortality, finds a way in which to possess others. With each new > possession he becomes stronger by sharing his victims talents and > bodies until his next possessed victim. X has been sent back in time > by Tom Riddle/Voldemort in an attempt to correct his own half-blooded > future. > huge snip> > > Dumbledore does have a plan, as if we haven't all pretty much > realized this, he knows that if Harry should fail all is lost. > Dumbledore allows Harry to face, what is ultimately the other half of > X that resides in Harry because if X ever should reunite with the > rest of himself that's in Harry, X may never be totally vanquished. > If in the Ministry, when Voldemort enticed Dumbledore into killing > Harry (while Voldemort was possessing him), Dumbledore would have > killed the body of Harry, but X would not have been destroyed but > unified once again with that missing part of himself that was in > Harry. > > The only way in which X can become "greater and more terrible than > ever he was", as Trelawney's second prophecy stated, would be if X > can reunite once again with the other half of him that is in Harry. > If you look at Trelawney's second prophecy and substitute Dark Lord > as X with servant being Tom Riddle, who has been chained these twelve > years, this is not such a discountable theory. > huge snip> > > If Harry can recognize that half of Tom Riddle that is inside of him > (through force, not choice...therefore there is no direct connection) > and can destroy his half, the other half of Tom Riddle (connected, > willingly), to the Dark Lord Voldemort will die also because he had > been willingly connected. If Voldemort can kill Harry it will set > free the half of Tom Riddle that is in Harry to reunite with his > half. Hope I haven't done too much damage with the snipping, but I try to give a response at least as long as the piece I'm quoting. Not sure if I can manage it this time, though. Firstly you may have noticed that I stay away from TT threads - that's because I dislike them intensely. I'm one of those who consider then as an authorial cop-out - there are very, very few writers who can make them work satisfactorily; off-hand I can only think of Ken Grimwood's 'Replay' as one I'd read again. And I get very cynical about SF on TV resorting to TT - I suspect that economising on sets and props and the barren-ness of the script-writers imagination has much to do with the frequency with which they turn up (or return up). Putting my prejudices aside - you've put your finger on a point that I've wondered about before - DD. You're right - he does seem to have fore-knowledge of events, he does on occasion seem to have had a peep at the script. Sometimes his reactions to events are just plain wrong; they don't fit unless he already knew about what has just happened. So far I've rationalised this by postulating that his plan *is* the result of fore-knowledge - he sees his plan in it's entirety and he makes damn sure it runs on rails - no deviations allowed, though I think he's about to hit a rocky patch. Where this fore- knowledge comes from, I'm none too sure, but I hope like hell it ain't TT or I'll be banging on the bookshop counter demanding my money back. You may also be right about Voldy wanting to be 'whole' or it (the fight in the Ministry) might have been an attempt to con DD into destroying Weapon!Harry - the WW's best bet as Voldy!Bane. You've obviously put a lot of thought into this one and I'm only sorry I can't be more enthusiastic about it. It deserves discussion, but I'd only try and change it into something else - which would be bloody annoying for you and unfair of me. Meanwhile I'll keep my fingers crossed that I'm right and you're wrong. Kneasy From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Aug 3 19:54:18 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 19:54:18 -0000 Subject: portrait of Godric Gryffindor? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108706 Aggie (I think) > Thanks for that observation Tina! Is this portrait mentioned at any > other time in the 5 books, does anyone know (or care!) ? ;o)) Potioncat: One of the prefects (Ernie maybe?) Mentions a conversation with a portrait in DD's office. I'm not sure if he identifies the portrait. And I think it's in OoP. Potioncat From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Tue Aug 3 19:59:39 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (aggiepaddy) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 19:59:39 -0000 Subject: Sally's Spirit WAS Re: Shared thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108707 Kneasy: >SNIP>>>>>>> > As for "why wait a 1,000 years?" - only JKR can answer that - 'cos > canon has it that it hasn't been opened since Sally packed his wand > and left in a marked manner. I can't argue with that. >SNIP>>>>>>>> Aggie: Has it been proven in Canon that Tom Riddle *was* the only one to have opened the Chamber since Sally's time? I've been skimming through CoS to try and find reference to the Chamber being opened; Binns didn't even acknowledge it had been opened *at all!* Denied it's very existence!! (UK version pp114-115) Then when Tom's explaining it via the diary he said that it was only considered a legend, that no-one believed it to be real. Yet he found it and opened it. Then, after he's framed Hagrid, he has to keep quiet about it. He's given a trophy for his 'efforts' (spit's on ground) and is 'warned to keep my [Tom's] mouth shut'. (UK vers p180). All this means that future students don't know anything about it. . . Until it happens again! Surely this *could* be construed to imply that it has been opened before, but hushed up as with the time Tom opened it. Thin reasoning, I know, but that's what it's all about! ;o) From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Aug 3 20:22:57 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 20:22:57 -0000 Subject: Who's the bully was Re: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108708 someone (Vivian I think) quoted: > > page 474 > > > > "I merely thought," said Snape, in a voice of forced calm, "that if > Potter was wandering around after hours again...it's an > unfortunate habit of his...he should be stopped. For--for his own > safety."< > > > > "Ah, I see," said Moody softly. "Got Potter's best interests at > > heart, have you?" > > > > vmonte: > > > > See how even the bad guys know that Snape does not have > Harry's best interest in mind! < Potioncat: This particular conversation happens on so many levels that I find it more confusing than the time turner. Keeping in mind that it appears consistent with what Moody would say. That it would be reasonable for Moody to doubt Snape's loyalty. And that Moody knows that Snape was a DE. On the other hand, what we didn't know on the first read and what Snape doesn't know at that moment, is that this is Barty Jr. And Barty Jr greatly resents DEs who walked free. I believe that Barty Jr knew Snape was a DE. And by asking "Got Potter's best interests at heart, have you?" he's really asking, though not in a way Snape would understand: "Where do your loyalties lie?" > > Pippin: > LOL! They're both playing to their invisible audience: Harry. I > suspect that Fake!Moody and Snape tried to use legilimency on > each other and were foiled, but each realized that they had been > foiled. > > Snape is saying something like "On your own head be it, Potter, > if you get in trouble wandering around the corridors. There *is* > someone on campus trying to kill you, but if you'd rather trust > your miserable neck to Moody than to me, when I happen to have > saved your worthless life at least once, I can't stop you." Potioncat: This is interesting! I never considered that Snape really knew Potter was still there. This is similar then, to the "conversation" in Umbridge's office. So is it your idea Pippin, that Snape also knew that Moody knew? Or do you think he left, intending for Potter to be stuck there for a while? Pippin: > As for Fake!Moody, he is very anxious to find out what Potter saw > on the map, and if Harry is sent back to bed or hauled off to > detention, he won't get a chance to find out. > Potioncat: I just happen to be reading that section and it still amazes me how JKR does the conversation between Harry and C!M and still, knowing what we know, the conversation doesn't give anything away. And I still find it very creepy that the "nice guy" is the bad guy and the "mean guy" is the good guy. Potioncat From dk59us at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 20:42:56 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 20:42:56 -0000 Subject: Sally's Spirit WAS Re: Shared thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108709 Boyd: > > My problem with all of this is that Tom says in CoS that he spent > five years looking for the Chamber. So either 1) Salazar's spirit > was stuck in there and couldn't help in the search very much (or > possess Tom until he entered the Chamber), or 2) Salazar's spirit > couldn't remember how to get into the Chamber. > > Or 3), the theory that Salazar's spirit has been "wandering" is > wrong. > What am I missing? > > --boyd Eustace_Scrubb: Well, that does pose a problem (or several), doesn't it? First, there's the timeline and what Tom Riddle's memory says in CoS. Tom heard about the Chamber and determined to find it during his second year (1938, according to the HP-Lexicon timeline). Hearing a school legend and deciding to seek it out does not indicate that he's already possessed by Spirit!Slytherin. It may well indicate Tom's developing into a good target for said possession, though. (Seek and ye shall find?) >From the same source, though, the date for the opening of the Chamber is 1942 (the end of Tom's fifth year, just over 50 years prior to the start of Harry's second year). Now since Grindelwald was defeated in 1945, one of the few actual dates given by JKR, that's a bigger problem. I would assume that at the time Tom enters the Chamber, the possession proposed by Kneasy and others would have to take effect. This _would_ seem to cast doubt on the wandering-spirit theory, though not necessarily on the Possessed!Tom theory...unless maybe it took 3 years to defeat Grindelwald once he'd been abandoned (or unless...and this may well be...JKR hasn't developed the back-timeline to the extent that HP-Lexicon and fandom have inferred). It would have been much easier to follow had Salazar done the sensible thing and put his essence/spirit/malice into a nice three-dimensional object (ring, amulet, broach, any of the usual things would do) that could slip off its host treacherously when it was ready to move on! Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb "If you're referring to the incident with the dragon, I was barely involved!" From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 20:53:29 2004 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 20:53:29 -0000 Subject: Shared thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108710 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith wrote: > To begin at the beginning..... > > "Mr and Mrs Dursley, of number four, Privet Drive..." > > > I apologise for the length of this piece, it sort of grew on me. It was > supposed to be a shortish overview of my take on possession, but I got > caught up by the natural progression into the continuity of themes > concept. > > A few interesting links. > The first two are posts from Spring '03, a few weeks before I joined. > Not that they would have made me stop and think even if I'd seen them; > I was much too brash, too fascinated by the minutiae of HP to consider > original causes - and anyway the new book was due out soon. > > The first is the origin of the 'Adopted!Harry' thread by ashandhp > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/57649 > > The second is an offshoot of that - jodel_from_aol and his 'Changeling' > post > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/57993 > > The third, mentioned last week by Bex and thrust under my nose by > Carolyn is jodel_from_aol's much expanded rewrite of 'Changeling' on > redhen > > > http://www.redhen-publications.com/Changeling.html > > > > All 3 are well worth reading > > Kneasy > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] I have posted on some of these ideas previously, particularly the Slytherin/Grindelwalde/Riddle connection, but Kneasy's was all-in- one rather succinct post. (I don't have the attention span to put it all in one.) When I posted, several people jumped on the possession aspect and disagreed with my statement that this would make TR/LV a more complex character. I see the complexity in the person versus persona idea. Being a shrink, I am more interested in process than content. I see the books thus far as content, with the process tying everything together being before the books (as stated by Kneasy). People who actually have read my posts know that I have a gnawing idea about Grindelwalde. IMO, his defeat by DD is much more than just a mere mention on a chocolate frog card. With this said, I still have the question of to whom is the prophecy referring? The persons of Tom Riddle and Harry Potter or the personas of Lord Voldemort and The Boy Who Lived. I don't have my books at work, so I cannot quote the prophecy, so please cut me a little canon slack. The one cannot survive while the other lives could be referring to the person and persona. Harry Potter cannot survive while he still has to be The Boy Who Lived. It may not be referring to LV vs HP. My pet hypothesis (not theory because it can be disproven by later books) is that the same force that compelled Sal, Grindelwalde, and LV will be offered to Harry. He will have the choice (real Frodoish, I know). If he chooses not to use this force, he has defeated it. LV would already have been defeated because Harry would be considered the new *host* thus not needing the old host. What does this mean for Tom? Death or redemption (or both)? Julie From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Tue Aug 3 17:32:32 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 17:32:32 -0000 Subject: Snape's *Worst* Memory? (Re: Penseive, Slytherin, Lily's Parents and Time Travel) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108711 SSSusan wondered: >> If this is not Snape's *worst* memory, then why is the chapter titles "Snape's Worst Memory"? << [paraphrased] I think: The books are written from Harry's point-of-view. (3rd person limited, for all you literary types out there.) We aren't "in his head," as he is not the narrator, but we see only what he sees, except in a sparse few places. The title is "Snape's worst memory" because that's what Harry /thought/ it was. I believe there is a chapter in PS/SS called "The Letters from No One." We know the letters are from Hogwart's (after the next chapter, when Hagrid tells us and Harry actually gets to read one), but they are "letters from no one" during that chapter, since Harry doesn't know whop they are from. In short, the chapters are titled according to Harry's perspective (except for the first one in PS/SS), and he would see this as Snape's worst memory, even though it may not be. ~Yb From meidbh at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 17:54:05 2004 From: meidbh at yahoo.com (meidbh) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 17:54:05 -0000 Subject: portrait of Godric Gryffindor? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108712 Tina wrote: "In the chapter, The Lost Prophecy, Harry is welcomed back by a (loose paraphrase)corpulent red-nosed wizard sitting in a throne- like chair behind Dumbledore's desk...The 'throne-like chair' is what piqued my interest (HBP info?). Also the fact that the portrait holds a prominent position (directly behind by DD's desk) might indicate the person's importance. I'm wondering if it is Godric Gryffindor..." Meidbh; I would be SO disappointed to hear that GG became corpulent and red- nosed having once been a champion of the courageous and fearless (though I suppose a comfortable old or middle age can happen to even the greatest warrior < g >). As for the throne like chair - I wouldn't read too much in to it, anyone wealthy or important enough to have had a portrait painted probably had some good furniture! But on the subject of the HBP I'm backing GG myself for the moment. I think he has a pretty good chance of having royal blood. When I try to imagine the kind of people who could have founded Hogwarts in the year 1000 I think they must have been educated (in the important skills of their time) and powerful. Professor Binns confirms this by telling us that they were "the greatest wizards of the age" and that they built the castle where Hogwarts now stands. Britain 1000 years ago was a feudal society, you would expect school founders to either be nobles or very powerful in the church. If the WW reflects our world (which it does to some extent) I think it is fair to assume that people with the resources to become great wizards and construct a castle would have been nobility in their world. Add GGs ruby studded sword into the equation and I would put all my galleons on GG being at the very least Sir GG. With nobility being notorious for inbreeding royal blood would not be unexpected. In fact it would be quite expected! Prince GG anyone? Meidbh :-) From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Tue Aug 3 20:58:13 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 20:58:13 -0000 Subject: portrait of Godric Gryffindor? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108713 Potioncat wrote: > One of the prefects (Ernie maybe?) Mentions a conversation with a > portrait in DD's office. I'm not sure if he identifies the > portrait. And I think it's in OoP. CONFIRMED!! I was looking through OotP on lunch break and read this, then came back and saw the thread. Talk about luck! When the DA is having their organizational meeting in the Hogs Head, the talk turns to Harry's accomplishments, and Ernie says that he spoke to "a portrait in Dumbledore's office" who told him about the sword on the wall, Godric Gryffindor's sword Harry used to defeat the basilisk. I don't think Ernie described the painting, and I don't know if he said "behind DD's desk" or not, but he did speak to the painting. There are probably many "framed folks" in the office, but I wouldn't be surprised if the one Ernie talked to is the same as the one we're talking about. Maybe it is GG in the picture... ~Yb From neil.zoe.collishaw at ntlworld.com Tue Aug 3 11:18:20 2004 From: neil.zoe.collishaw at ntlworld.com (zoe0coll) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 11:18:20 -0000 Subject: Was Harry in Danger from the Basilisk? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108714 SNIP! Geoff: > Re-reading this, it is taking on much more significance in my mind. > Does this mean that Dumbledore knows about the Basilisk and is > speculating, knowing that Voldemort is apparently out of the > picture, as to which person now has the ability to open the Chamber? > > Hmmm. I think you're forgetting that Dumbledore doesn't actually know that Tom Riddle opened the chamber and set a Basilisk on Moaning Myrtle and the others. Hagrid, with Aragog as the monster, was set up by Tom as the culprit, and was expelled for it, even though Dumbledore beleived he was innocent. Even if he suspected Tom, he had no proof, or would have done aomething about it at the time. We have no cannon for anyone knowing that Tom was the culprit all along. It is only with hindsight (at the end of COS) that Dumbledore knows for a fact that it was Riddle, due to Harry and Ginny's witness and the Diary itself. Zoe From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 15:10:21 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 15:10:21 -0000 Subject: Occlumency Lessons / Snape's Nastiness In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108715 > "Bex" wrote: > > On another thought, maybe it was a good thing Snape taught > > Harry at least a little about Occlumency. Harry has to clear his > > emotions in order to block out LV. Sure, it's easy when you > > aren't upset, but it's much harder when you are fighting with a > > teacher you hate. Only trouble is that Harry never learned how to do that, only to do so. Also, "learning" occlumency with Snape only made things worse. I also have a theory about that... First off, Harry's scar is one link to Voldemort. Dark Mark is yet another link to Voldemort. (Snape has one, and that's why Harry's scar reacted when *both* Quirrell(with Voldemort at the back of his head) were close by. It took three things: Scar, Dark Mark AND Voldemort's presence. At this point, Voldemort was *very* weak. Quirrellmort alone does not activate the scar. (or Harry would have been getting head-aches troughout the DADA lessons and realised it was Quirrell, not Snape!) (later in the first book... was Scabbers (or Peter) in the forest? Or maybe the death of Unicorn was the THIRD part.) Next time we hear of Harry's scar hurting - Voldemort has a DE, who also has a link to Harry (life-debt) next to him. He also kills someone with that killing curse... and Harry feels it as a pain. 5th book - supposedly the fact that Voldemort used *Harry's blood* and *Pettigrew's flesh* for his restorative potion, make Voldemort's feelings easier to leak over to Harry (noticed). Now Harry *knows* what Voldemort is feeling currently with no extra around. Then Snape who bears a Dark Mark forms a mind-link to him! It's no wonder Harry has it bad with Snape there... And as Harry, being 15 (and therefore subject to strong emotions due to hormonal disbalance) has trouble to control his own emotions, is ALREADY subject to feeling what Voldemort feels and gets even MORE load from Snape - in the hard way, is it wonder Voldemort got to Harry? And the person I blame for this mistake is Albus Dumbledore. Which ever side Snape's on, he STILL has the Dark Mark in his left arm. Honestly, if Dumbledore truly wanted to end Harry's connection to Voldemort, having him regularly form a mind link (although trying to stop it) with someone who ALSO has an active, scarlike connection to Voldemort? Are Albus Dumbledore and Severus Snape truly the only ones who can use a Legilimens spell? Hermione would learn, I'm sure. Why not teach her (while she and Ron were at the HQ), and then let her teach Harry if Dumbledore was so worried about Voldemort-possessed Harry trying to kill him? I also wonder: Is Aberforth Dumbledore a legilimens? Finwitch From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 15:39:01 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 15:39:01 -0000 Subject: F & G and the QWC bet (Re: another wacko theory) In-Reply-To: <20040803024227.2437.qmail@web52202.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108716 > Meltowne: > > Maybe the boys, following the match, used a regular > timeturner to go back and tell themselves what the outcome would > be - just like we saw in the second Back to the Future movie. > > Kelly Duhon wrote: > > Unless I am remembering wrong, Ginny was with them, so I don't > think they could have gone back then. Finwitch: I very much doubt Fred&George have a time-turner! Anyway, they would only need a note in pocket of the outcome of the match - but I think they DID take a risk. Educated - as I'm sure they know the teams' abilities AND Quidditch. Finwitch From griffin782002 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 16:10:59 2004 From: griffin782002 at yahoo.com (sp. sot.) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 09:10:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Randomized Prophesy Decoder is here! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040803161059.55340.qmail@web90008.mail.scd.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108717 nkafkafi wrote: > Neri's Randomized Prophesy Decoder > > (written as a service for the public of HPfGU members) Griffin782002 now: Oh, it sounds fun. I will give it a try! :-)) _Snape_with the power to vaniquish _Neville_ approaches... born to_Frank_(and)_Lily_ who thrice defied_James_, born as the seventh month dies... And _James_ will mark _Snape_as his equal, but_Snape_will have a power _Neville_ knows not... And_Snape_(and/or)_Neville_ must die by the _cauldron_ of _James_ for (neither) _Snape_ (nor) _Neville_ can live while _the cauldron_ survives. Erm... what do you think? Should I run for cover? :-/ Griffin782002 From mandyallen286 at fsmail.net Tue Aug 3 18:06:11 2004 From: mandyallen286 at fsmail.net (wapp13) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 18:06:11 -0000 Subject: Jobs Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108718 Hi all. I'm the new girl on the block! I just read some theories about how there seems to be an extraordinarily disproportionate number of witches and wizards working for the MoM (are you all impressed that I've got the hang of abbreviations already?!) and I have another viewpoint on this subject. No-one seems to have mentioned this and seems to concentrate on the jobs within the MoM and various shopkeepers and teachers already indicated. My theory is that someone has to maintain the economy by providing all the other stuff not mentioned, i.e. the Daily Prophet needs workers - journalists (other than Rita Skeeter!), typesetters, editor, printers etc., and also everything that is supplied to the shops needs to be manufactured. It can't be as simple as casting a spell to conjure something up or no-one would have to go to shops, they'd just magic everything and never leave their armchairs! Even when we are given a sight of Mrs. Weasley doing jobs around the house, although she does it with a wave of her wand she supervises the process and co-ordinates everything, therefore other witches and wizards may well wave their wands to create something but they need to be there to do it. Fred and George have spent hours developing their jokes and tricks for sale in their shop. Other people must work in manufacturing even if they use house elves or something similar - there need to be creators of the idea and co-ordinators to pull it all together, delivery people to transport it not only around the country but around the world, traders who negotiate contracts with other countries and all that stuff. Nowhere in the books have I got the impression that witches and wizards just sit around waving their wand and everything is done for them. It may take tricky magic to maintain the Hogwarts Express, for example (I personally no nothing about engines so couldn't even contemplate what sort of spells one might have to use to repair the steam engine). Someone would have to do this job. And there are loads of other examples of jobs, just because they aren't explicitly mentioned does not mean they don't exist. For the purpose of the stories it may be that the more attractive jobs have been outlined, or just ones that fit in with the general plot. Anyway, thanks for reading. Mandy Pandy. From rowansjet at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 20:46:24 2004 From: rowansjet at yahoo.com (rowansjet) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 20:46:24 -0000 Subject: Paradoxes; Harry and the Patronus - was another wacko theory In-Reply-To: <1e3.26b45977.2e407c3b@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108719 Mutt wrote: > What on earth would happen if you took a trip an hour into the > future? > You go to the future. You see stuff. You snap back to your > original self. You know things that affect how events from the > present to the future that place. You avoid them so that they > don't take place. If they don't take place in the altered > timeline, the past you who is about to jump never learns about > them, never avoids the pitfalls, so they happen. Gah, paradox > I can't put into words. You could have this both ways. You go into the past to complete the objective. If you complete the objective, your now future self has no reason to complete the objective, so they don't try to, so the whole timeline goes cablooey. What you have to do is make it look like you didn't complete the objective or there is no way you can complete it. > This is the only way that I see that the events could have gone > down: Harry's being attacked by the dementors by the lake. Somebody > other than himself with the patronus saved him. It couldn't have > been him; the only reason he saved himself when he went back in time > was because he knew he'd already done it, which couldn't have been > possible the first time the timeline played out (or he wouldn't have > been saved and he wouldn't know to save himself. It would be a > paradox, and I have to argue because I don't like him. He was saved > because he saved himself and he saved himself because he'd been saved. > It doesn't work. You can't have both at the same time. This is about where you could have probably made it a little shorter. You only need one person to pretend to be Harry/James and cast the patronus to save Harry, so he can go back in time, and save himself. This is just like the Terminator in that it's cool but sucks in reality. Rowan Sjet From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Tue Aug 3 20:49:46 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 20:49:46 -0000 Subject: F & G and the QWC bet (Re: another wacko theory) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108720 "Steve" : > Or maybe Fred and George reasonably concluded... ...keeping in mind that Gred and Forge were trying to raise money for their joke shop. Not only did the seeker/chaser matchups at the Cup make this prediction very, very possible, but its oddity also gives rise to very high betting odds (i.e. a high return on their investment). With regard to the time-travel theories, I doubt their access to a turner much more than their slipping away to use it, but more importantly, I don't think they would be making such a big deal out of the *unfairness* of their payment if they'd cheated in such a fashion. G&F may be pranksters, but they do seem to have honor above that of simple thievery. Josh (yes, a new guy) From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Tue Aug 3 21:10:53 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 21:10:53 -0000 Subject: Shared thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108721 Julie wrote: > I still have the question of to whom is the prophecy > referring? The persons of Tom Riddle and Harry Potter or the > personas of Lord Voldemort and The Boy Who Lived. I don't have my > books at work, so I cannot quote the prophecy, so please cut me a > little canon slack. The one cannot survive while the other lives > could be referring to the person and persona. Harry Potter cannot > survive while he still has to be The Boy Who Lived. It may not be > referring to LV vs HP. Yblitzka's turn: Actually, IMO it is referring to the One vs. the Dark Lord text quote: "The One with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches. Born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies. And the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have power that the Dark Lord knows not, and either must die at the hand of the other, for neither can live while the other survives." It's an interesting thought, but I don't think it works. The prophecy is worded such that if what you are arguing is true, then the Dark Lord knows not of the power of his person, or Harry has a power unknown to his persona. It just doesn't seem right. HOWEVER, you do have one point that I wholeheartedly agree with: the prophecy does not mention persons, just personas. Many people are taking this to mean that "The One" is really Neville, but that's not an arguement for this particular thread. The words say Dark Lord and The One, not Tom Riddle and Harry Potter. So it's possible that Tom will be separated from LV (the Dark Lord), and that will play a role in how he is defeated. Perhaps TR will not die. He was once a good kid too, ya know... ~Yb From EyeMelodius at hotmail.com Tue Aug 3 21:34:22 2004 From: EyeMelodius at hotmail.com (annunathradien) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 21:34:22 -0000 Subject: HPB guess - King Godric? In-Reply-To: <20040731223302.45725.qmail@web21527.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108722 > Meidbh wonders: > Has anyone worked the Godric Gryffindor idea through before? > > Godric Gryyfindor is the HBP. Harry is the Heir of Gryffindor. I bet > Godric had green eyes (but then Petunia and Dudley would also be > descendants... > > Any takers? I'll take it ;), but I actually don't think Godric was the HBP. I see Godric more as a King, as opposed to a Prince. This might be reaching, but I think back to that PS/SS chess game. The two Kings, White and Black, were respectively, Voldemort (White) and Dumbledore (Black), in representation to the current (or impending, in the case of PS/SS) war. However, in a more generalized sense, I think those Kings could also be representations of Slytherin (White) and Gryffindor (Black). For the ideologies displayed by the current two opposing sides, not only in this war, but seemingly ever conflict Hogwarts has experienced for the past 1000 years. The 1000 yr old breach (1000 yr old conflict?) that started with Slytherin and Gryffindor, a breach (curse?) eluded in the OOTP Sorting Hat Song. I actually think Godric's firstborn male-child was the HBP. A half- blood child, possibly believed - or at least lived as - a squib or a muggle. This could have also been a child born from a muggle mistress possibly. All of this likely happening in total secrecy (per most illicit affairs). Godric may have had other children, adopted children or had a sibling / cousin that could have kept the Gryffindor family alive in the WW (From whence we possibly get the Dumbledores? The Weasleys?), but this line isn't part of the rightful Heirs. That line could have been living in hiding in the muggle world for these past 1000 years. > Luckdragon64 replies: > > Yes! I posted that theory last week, but I think he is related through James rather than Lily and that makes him the last true heir of Gryffindor as well as explaining why James and Harry had to be killed and not Lily. However, Voldemort may have targetted and killed James - in this case - under false pretenses. He may have just assumed James was the Heir of Gryffindor (or HBP) since he was the pureblood... and maybe he might have been one of the (distant) descendants of Gryffindor, just not the actual Heir or "HBP" (as I speculate above, some Gryffindor blood may have remained in the WW as well as the MW). We read in COS Tom almost seemed fascinated about the amount of similarities between Harry and himself... for these similarities, Tom may have falsely assumed Harry inherited his "Heir" status from his pureblood parent, just as he believed he had. Tom completely unawares and possibly not even daring to consider it's through Lily and her family (the muggle Evanses) Harry inherits his Heir (of Gryffindor) status? Lily, who Voldemort was so dismissive of that night Oct. 31, 1981, was the rightful Heiress of Gryffindor all along. I admit this is rather cheesy, but I always go back to Lily's red hair and wonder why that could be important. I never thought it was just some coincidence we're told she just happens to be a red-head not unlike the everso famous red-heads, the dyed in the wool Gryffindors, the Weasleys. In a way, kind of like saying, very prominently through the Weasleys appearance, red-hair is synonymous with Gryffindor and it's *scarlet* & gold colors. We're also drummed in about the inherited family resemblances throughout HP (not just with the Weasleys but almost all families in the story). Could this *red hair* be a clue tying both the Weasleys and Evanses to a common (red-headed?) Gryffindor ancestor? Now I'm going off on a tangent, but this possible (distant) familial connection between Lily Evans-Potter and the Weasleys may also explain why Harry is allowed to stay with them part of the summer. Lily bound all the Gryffindor blood together via the ancient blood- protection she (whether intentionally or not) evoked that Halloween. So Harry is protected under his Aunt's roof, but he's also protected at the Burrow (Grimmauld Place in OOTP and his Hogwarts dorm) for the same reason? Wherever his Gryffindor family blood can be found... Harry will be protected? However, I have thought for awhile it's Petunia that was the firstborn, not Lily. This "half-blood *prince*" moniker would make rite of succession by birth order (per atypical royalty) understandable in this case. Hence, it's Petunia's child, Dudley, theoretically, that could be the current HBP and could be why Harry is indeed an Heir of Gryffindor, as COS rather anviliciously eluded, but not the HBP. His mother wasn't first in rite of succession. ~annunathradien From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Aug 3 21:43:04 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 21:43:04 -0000 Subject: To Where To When (TimeTurning that may make sense) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108723 What I see to have been resolved with some certainty by our Time Turning threads here lately is that if any Timeturning is going to occur in the books to come, by HRH or Otherwise, they will only accomplish things that have *already happened* in the current timeline. There are some such things in the books to date. Occurrences outside the scope of the Harry POV in detail and therefore unexplained. For thse of us who *do* have some interest in TimeTurning being further used in the story, rather than those who don't, I would like to begin compiling a list of events that bear on the story but are peripheral and without the forthcoming of a suspect responsible for them. Read on you'll see what I mean. 1 Who broke into Gringotts in PS/SS and attempted to take the Stone. We are given to assume, that QuirrelMort was the culprit. However, what if he was aware the stone was being transported to Hogwarts, already? It might have taken him sometime to aquire the troll. And even if it was QuirrelMort after the stone in London, Who foiled them? Who might have known that they would be there? Certainly noone suspected them in these early chapters of the books. A peripheral event that *did* happen and as yet *no actual culprits*. Therefore if I were an experienced TimeMastering Wizard I might be inclined to suspect that something has happened in *time*. Such as if I were DD and didn't already know what had happened, which he might. Does everyone get what I mean here? The imperative is the identification, then you can say hmmm there *might* be 'time' there. 2. How did it 'become clear' to Dumbledore to return to Hogwarts when he was in London at the end of PS/SS. It might have been an intuition or realisation of present facts, and ordinarily we could just dismiss it as one such. However since I have already placed time events in London in PS/SS I am beginning to suspect London in PS/SS is somewhere that the story may go. The short theory is that DD goes to London *because* something fishy *is* going down there, but when he arrives and realises that what's going on there is all future, he rushes back recognising that his place is in the present. So there you have it, a start. Maybe it's all wrong, at the very least it is continuous with the precedent in POA. Time Turning has already happened, there are no 'Cheesy Outs' just more story. Best to You All from Valky From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 3 21:53:37 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 17:53:37 -0400 Subject: Was Harry in Danger from the Basilisk? Message-ID: <002501c479a4$551f5250$07c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108724 Siriusly Snapey Susan *Anyone* walking down the hall who encountered > the Basilisk's eyes would be a victim, regardless of his/her status > as muggle-born, half-blood, pureblood, or whatever. I was referring > to Tom's intention in directing the basilisk, which I believe was to > go after Muggle-borns. > > Steve/asian_lovr2 "It's reasonable, although within definite limits, that a Basilisk could distinguish between Muggle and magic, but I can't see any reason why that would be a natural adaptation of a Basilisk. Just a thought." DuffyPoo: Could it not have been possible for Salazar Slytherin, the 'twisted old loony,' to put a spell on the snake to make it able to distinguish between Muggle and magic? Just another thought. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Aug 3 22:02:26 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 22:02:26 -0000 Subject: Was Harry in Danger from the Basilisk? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108725 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "zoe0coll" wrote: > SNIP! > > Geoff: > > Re-reading this, it is taking on much more significance in my mind. > > Does this mean that Dumbledore knows about the Basilisk and is > > speculating, knowing that Voldemort is apparently out of the > > picture, as to which person now has the ability to open the Chamber? > > > > Hmmm. > Zoe: > I think you're forgetting that Dumbledore doesn't actually know that > Tom Riddle opened the chamber and set a Basilisk on Moaning Myrtle > and the others. Hagrid, with Aragog as the monster, was set up by > Tom as the culprit, and was expelled for it, even though Dumbledore > beleived he was innocent. Even if he suspected Tom, he had no proof, > or would have done aomething about it at the time. We have no cannon > for anyone knowing that Tom was the culprit all along. It is only > with hindsight (at the end of COS) that Dumbledore knows for a fact > that it was Riddle, due to Harry and Ginny's witness and the Diary > itself. Geoff: My point is that if, as Riddle suggests, there were non-fatal attacks in 1942 on students, then presumably they were left petrified. So it is possible that Dumbledore has guessed what the source of the trouble was. In 1992, a similar situation arises. Students are found petrified and there is evidence that the Chamber has been opened. Dumbledore makes the observation "How, I cannot say". Binns points out that there is a belief that the Chamber is inhabited by "some sort of monster". so Dumbledore must realise that there is a link; he obviously had a shrewd suspicion that Tom Riddle was involved because he kept such a close watch on him previously that the latter felt unable to venture into the Chamber again. He must have theories about what the monster is because of the the 1942 events and his comment I record above is more that he cannot (or dare not) reveal what he knows or suspects rather than a statement of ignorance. And there is also his curious response to Professor McGonagall when he confirms that the Chamber is definitely reopened regarding not "who" but "how". If he suspects that Riddle opened it 50 years ago, then his thought may be moving along the line of "how" is Voldemort managing to control events, since he knows that Riddle is Voldemort. This is why I think there are levels in this deeper tha the superficial. An interesting side observation. Isn't it an extraordinary coincidence that in the latest attacks all the students manage to avoid being killed and only get petrified and on the previous occasion, several students must have got themselves petrified with only one fatality (assuming that we belive Riddle's version). There must be a lot of spilt water, mirrors, cameras and convenient ghosts around..... From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 22:06:36 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 22:06:36 -0000 Subject: Snape's choice of memories for the pensieve Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108726 SSSusan wrote: > I think this still begs a question, though: If that wasn't Snape's > WORST memory--just one he didn't particularly care for Harry to see-- > then why title the chapter "Snape's Worst Memory"? What makes > it "worst"? mhbobbin wonders: I wonder if the title is a play on words like "Grim Defeat" in POA and other chapter headings. Perhaps, one way it is intended is "Snape's Worst Memory" of Harry's father... mhbobbin From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Tue Aug 3 22:04:08 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 18:04:08 -0400 (EDT) Subject: HPB guess - King Godric? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040803220408.71563.qmail@web21522.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108727 Annunathradien writes: However, Voldemort may have targetted and killed James - in this case - under false pretenses. He may have just assumed James was the Heir of Gryffindor (or HBP) since he was the pureblood... and maybe he might have been one of the (distant) descendants of Gryffindor, just not the actual Heir or "HBP" (as I speculate above, some Gryffindor blood may have remained in the WW as well as the MW). We read in COS Tom almost seemed fascinated about the amount of similarities between Harry and himself... for these similarities, Tom may have falsely assumed Harry inherited his "Heir" status from his pureblood parent, just as he believed he had. Tom completely unawares and possibly not even daring to consider it's through Lily and her family (the muggle Evanses) Harry inherits his Heir (of Gryffindor) status? Lily, who Voldemort was so dismissive of that night Oct. 31, 1981, was the rightful Heiress of Gryffindor all along. Could this *red hair* be a clue tying both the Weasleys and Evanses to a common (red-headed?) Gryffindor ancestor? Luckdragon64 responds: I'm not one to trounce on anyone's theories as I believe until we read the next book one guess is as good and as interesting as the next, however I would like to bring up the fact that someone placed a good post a few weeks ago pointing out how interesting it is that everyone in the WW seems to be very aware of each others bloodlines. If Voldemort was trying to eliminate the heir of Gryffindor I think he would likely be the one to know who that person would be. I like the idea of the Weasleys being related to Harry, and it was mentioned in one of the books that all pureblood wizards are related somewhere along the line, but I think the relationship would be through James rather than Lily as Dumbledore mentioned that the Dursleys were Harry's only living relatives with his mothers protective blood. From meidbh at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 22:37:51 2004 From: meidbh at yahoo.com (meidbh) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 22:37:51 -0000 Subject: Shared thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108728 Snow writes: "If you look at Trelawney's second prophecy ... The Dark Lord lies alone and friendless, abandoned by his followers. His servant has been chained these twelve years. Tonight, before midnight the servant will break free and set out (set out) to rejoin his master. The Dark Lord will rise again with his servant's aid, greater and more terrible than ever he was. Tonight before midnight the servant will set out to rejoin his master " ... Why all the breaks in the last sentence?" Meidbh: Hi Snow, I assumed the breaks were just dramatic effect, repetition of key point, breaking up the sentence to emphasise that this message is coming from far far away aaand fadinggg ouuuuuut And for the first prophecy... I said it before but the logic and grammar are only correct for two people /personae /entities in the prophecy. For three it just doesn't work! (The post is 108241). Meidbh :-) From shrtbusryder2002 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 22:55:10 2004 From: shrtbusryder2002 at yahoo.com (Jason) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 22:55:10 -0000 Subject: F & G and the QWC bet (Re: another wacko theory) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108729 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "finwitch" wrote: > > > Meltowne: > > > > Maybe the boys, following the match, used a regular > > timeturner to go back and tell themselves what the outcome would > > be - just like we saw in the second Back to the Future movie. > > > > Kelly Duhon wrote: > > > > Unless I am remembering wrong, Ginny was with them, so I don't > > think they could have gone back then. > > > Finwitch: > > I very much doubt Fred&George have a time-turner! > Anyway, they would only need a note in pocket of the outcome of the > match - but I think they DID take a risk. Educated - as I'm sure they > know the teams' abilities AND Quidditch. > > Finwitch Jason: I am always somewhat shocked when I read posts containing what I read over and never think of again and what some of you great thinkers read, re read and theorize about. The Fred and George bet being one of them. When I read it, I considered it no more interesting than saying "Oh, I bet the Giants lose, but Barry Bonds hits a homerun," or "The diamondbacks will lose but Randy Johnson strikes out 20." Im with Kneasy on the time travel issue and I really hope we dont see any more of it. Or atleast no changing of the timeline meaning I really dont want to see someone going back and changing something. However, I could live with someone going back and getting information to change the present (the diary, pensieve, thoughts, or some other means of time travel than a time turner.) I also don't see the prophecy being about Neville, but thats another post. Keep up the good work everyone! I love reading it all even if I dont put much faith in most of it. Jason From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Aug 3 23:02:33 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 23:02:33 -0000 Subject: portrait of Godric Gryffindor? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108730 > Potioncat wrote: > > One of the prefects (Ernie maybe?) Mentions a conversation with a > > portrait in DD's office. I'm not sure if he identifies the > > portrait. And I think it's in OoP. Bex: > CONFIRMED!! > I was looking through OotP on lunch break and read this, then came > back and saw the thread. Talk about luck! > > When the DA is having their organizational meeting in the Hogs Head, > the talk turns to Harry's accomplishments, and Ernie says that he > spoke to "a portrait in Dumbledore's office" who told him about the > sword on the wall, Godric Gryffindor's sword Harry used to defeat the > basilisk. I don't think Ernie described the painting, and I don't > know if he said "behind DD's desk" or not, but he did speak to the > painting. There are probably many "framed folks" in the office, but I > wouldn't be surprised if the one Ernie talked to is the same as the > one we're talking about. Maybe it is GG in the picture... Jen: This same portrait was the one who called Phineas down when he was reluctant to help Dumbledore (US, chap. 22, p. 473): "Insubordination, sir!" roared a corpulent, red-nosed wizard, brandishing his fists. "Dereliction of duty!" Whoever he is, he certainly got some page time in OOTP! That would be funny if he's Gryffindor--I think of old Godric as being like Dumbledore, but maybe he was more of a blustery, military type-- issuing orders and honor-bound by the "code" and all that. He certainly has a prominent place in DD's office, looking over his shoulder... From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 23:23:50 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 23:23:50 -0000 Subject: portrait of Godric Gryffindor? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108731 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mrs_sonofgib" wrote: > As I was listening to OotP this morning I paused over a bit of info > that I had previously read through quickly. In the chapter, The > Lost Prophecy, Harry is welcomed back by a (loose paraphrase) > corpulent red-nosed wizard sitting in a throne-like chair behind > Dumbledore's desk. ...edited... I'm wondering if it is Godric > Gryffindor... Thoughts? ... > > ~tina Asian_lovr2: Sorry, but I think it's one of Mr. Fortescue's ancestors. --- Quote - Am Ed. HB - Chpt 27 - pg 614 --- "Blatant corruption!" roared the protrait of the corpulent, red-nosed wizard on the wall behind Dumbledore's desk. "The Ministry did not cut deals with petty criminals in my day, no sir, they did not!" "Thank you, Fortescue, that will do," said Dumbledore softly. - - - End Quote - - - Just passing it along. Steve/asian_lovr2 From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 23:38:54 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 23:38:54 -0000 Subject: Jobs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108732 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "wapp13" wrote: > Hi all. I'm the new girl on the block! > > I just read some theories about how there seems to be an > extraordinarily disproportionate number of witches and wizards > working for the MoM (are you all impressed that I've got the hang of > abbreviations already?!) and I have another viewpoint on this > subject. > > No-one seems to have mentioned this and seems to concentrate on the > jobs within the MoM and various shopkeepers and teachers already > indicated. > > ...edited... > > And there are loads of other examples of jobs, just because they > aren't explicitly mentioned does not mean they don't exist. For the > purpose of the stories it may be that the more attractive jobs have > been outlined, or just ones that fit in with the general plot. > > Anyway, thanks for reading. > > Mandy Pandy. Asian_lovr2: Actually, we just talked about that on Sunday, although that was 300 posts ago. Check it out, I think you'll see that you and I pretty much see eye-to-eye on this matter. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/108418 I see a full range of 'hidden' businesses. For every shop and cafe there are a dozen hidden businesses supplying them and keeping the running. And for each of those hidden businesses there are other hidden businesses keeping them running. Sorry, to cut so much of your post. Nice work, you obviously look deeper than the surface when analysing the books and that's exactly the kind of person we need here. WELCOME. Just a thought. Steve/asian_lovr2 From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Aug 3 23:47:44 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 16:47:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Who's the bully was Re: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040803234744.46379.qmail@web50105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108733 >>> "I merely thought," said Snape, in a voice of forced calm, "that >>> if Potter was wandering around after hours again...it's an >>> unfortunate habit of his...he should be stopped. For--for his own >>> safety." >>> >>> "Ah, I see," said Moody softly. "Got Potter's best interests at >>> heart, have you?" > Potioncat: > This particular conversation happens on so many levels that I find > it more confusing than the time turner. Keeping in mind that it > appears consistent with what Moody would say. That it would be > reasonable for Moody to doubt Snape's loyalty. And that Moody > knows that Snape was a DE. I always looked at this conversation slightly differently. Snape assumes he is talking to the real Alastair "Mad Eye" Moody, who's a very, VERY good friend of Albus Dumbledore. They have words, Snape insists that Dumbledore trusts him, Moody implies that he personally has doubts about Snape's loyalty and might share them with Dumbledore, especially since Dumbledore is wondering who entered Harry in the tournament. And what happens? Snape folds like a soggy newspaper. I think what happens in this scene is that we run into the boundary of Snape's belief that Dumbledore trusts him. That is, Snape isn't at all sure that Dumbledore would take his (Snape's) word over that of an old friend like Mad Eye Moody. There is a limit to Dumbledore's trust, and Snape is afraid that if it comes to a showdown, that Dumbledore will side with Moody over him. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From rubykelly at webtv.net Wed Aug 4 00:01:50 2004 From: rubykelly at webtv.net (rubyxkelly) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 00:01:50 -0000 Subject: Who's the bully was Re: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108734 MAJOR, MAJOR snipage... Regarding the coversation between FakeMoody (whom Snape believesto be geniune). > > > Potioncat: > I just happen to be reading that section and it still amazes me how > JKR does the conversation between Harry and C!M and still, knowing > what we know, the conversation doesn't give anything away. Try reading it this way: Snape thinks Moody isthe real thing. We now that Aurors were permitted broader authority dealing with DEs; before Severus Snape was revealed as a spy for Dumbledore he was likely arrested and interrogated (non too gently) by the REAL Moody (who probably still retained the deep-seated attitude of resentment/suspicion ove freed DEs FakeMoody shows. I think Snape would still be afraid of Moody (although doing hid best to conceal it). Moody-fake or genuine-would be aware of this; the conversation rees of intimidation towards Snape followed by Snape's hastily backing down (even though he DOES make the point that Harry is foolishly taking unneccessary risks yet again). Snape would naturally be furious about the search of his office-he might well be frightened that something Moody found could be improperly construed as harmful evidence against him by a powerful Auror with a grudge. Add to that the distinct possibility that both men are trying to Legilems each other, and while perhaps notpicking up EXACTLY what's going on they may each detect a subtle overtone of "not what he appears to be". Of course Snape knows Harry is there-but he does have to back of since at least Harry would be with Moody and therefore safe (as far as he knows). Theremark about Harry's careless wanderingsand not being held responsible for any misfortune Harry meets thereby is certainly intended for Harry-but I think not so much to excuse gimself as to try to get Harry to THINK about what he does BEFORE acting on impulse, for a change. (We already know what a waste of time THAT is!) Remember, wesee everythingthrough Harry's very subjective, not to mention immature, viewpoint. That is the biggest red herring in the deries, IMO. (I've often wondered if the symbolismof mirrrors is that people think they reflect the world around, when they actuall reflect the world in REVERSE.) Sometimes it's best to ignore Harry's emotional reactions to events, and just pay attention to the action more objectively. > > And I still find it very creepy that the "nice guy" is the bad guy > and the "mean guy" is the good guy. > But this has been a pattern from the very first book! Quirrell, whom Harry believes to be the poor victim of Prof. Snape's threats, turns out to be carrying You-Know-Who around on the back of his head; and quite willingly. In CoS, Prof. Lockhart-the-buffoon turns out to be nastily unethical; and that nice Tom from the diary, is...Mr. Evil-to-be! In PoA, whaddaya know-it'sthe damn rat! (Am I the only one who was suspicious of Scabbers right from the get-go? Rats don't live long enough to be hand-me-down pets through 3-4 beothers! And when te Peter Pettigrew story waas told, tattered-ear-missing-finger I knew why the pet-shop man was surprised at Scabers' length of life! Not to mention nice Prof. Lupin admitting that during his stint as prefect he didn't behave as strictly as he ought-we saw that in OotP. Andspeaking of OotP...therei's Harry who's carrying around the Lord Thingy connection, yetnever bothers to report the strange sensations. He also doesn't bother practicing the skill that, had he mastered it, might have prevented Sirius' death. No, by the end of the book, he's let himself be duped; violated Prof. Snape's huge (for him) leap of faith by trusting him to stay alone with te pensieve and respect his privacy; then manages to end up blaming Snape for Sirius' death. I can certainly foresee bad things to come resulting from that mindset! So, Moody fits into this pattern. Harry blinds himself to what might be suspicious were he to widen his perspective, and projects/reflects hostility most especially onto the Potions Master (the series' 2nd major red herring). Oh, and BTW Potioncat-the Persues legend refereces: remember the king that snt Perseus to kill the monster snake? Notice in CoS, in the Duelling scene, Gilderoy the "false king" creates a situation where a deadly snake is conjured and which is destroyed by Severus? :) KAT/rxk From ms_melanie1999 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 00:10:44 2004 From: ms_melanie1999 at yahoo.com (Miss Melanie) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 17:10:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chapter 24: Occlumency Message-ID: <20040804001044.41116.qmail@web53408.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108735 This is a repost because I realized that last night I did not label the chapter dicussion as such. Since this is such a popular and heavy chapter I wanted to make sure that it was discussed at greater length. (Sorry this is just a couple late getting out, I was just now able to get to my computer for the first time today. I'm really happy to lead the discussions for this chapter, to me it's one of the more interesting chapters in the book. So here it goes..enjoy!) Part One: Number 12 Grimmauld Place, just before the end of the Christmas Holiday. The chapter begins with the reappearance of Kreacher whom was found by Sirius in the attic. While Kreacher seemed to be in a better mood Sirius' mood took a drastic dive and he found himself locking himself in his room with Buckbeat for hours at a time. On the last day of the Christmas Holiday, Harry was called into the kitchen of the house to have a discussion with Professor Snape. Harry went to the kitchen, rather worried about what the discussion would be about, and finds that not only is Snape present but so is his Godfather. Snape explains to Harry that the headmaster wishes for Harry to study occlumency ( a form of magic that will protect him from external penetration). Dumbledore requested that Snape be his instructor. Sirius, upset that Dumbledore made Snape the instructor, warns Snape not to use these lessons to make life difficult for Harry. Snape informs Sirius that he believes that Harry is so arrogant, like James, that he is not in the least bit affected by the criticism that is placed upon him. Sirius is very upset by that statement and moves to pull out his wand.. The two man stand with ready to duel. Sirius shares his feeling that Snape is very much an active member of the Death Eaters and is really not working for the order. He even went as far as to call Snape Lucius Malfoy's "lapdog." Snape informs Sirius, for the first time, that Lucius recognized Sirius at the train station at the start of term. The fight would have continued to go on for quite sometime, however, Mr. Weasley returned from the hospital. He declared himself "completely cured." The next day, Sirius and Harry say their goodbyes. Sirius hands Harry a two-way mirror that should be used when he needs to get a hold of Sirius at any time. Harry didn't say anything to Sirius at that time, however, he knew that he would never use it. Harry feared that it would be dangerous to use it. The students take the knight bus back to Hogwarts, along with Lupin and Tonks. Before leaving Harry, Lupin reminds him that he needs to make sure that puts in every effort to learn occlumency. He told Harry that even Sirius knows how important it is for him to learn the skill. Part Two: Hogwarts Before Harry went to his first occlumency class he ran into Cho Chang . He assumed that Cho wanted to talk about the DA but instead she wanted to remind him of the upcoming Hogsmeade weekend. Cho gave Harry a great deal of hints before he realized that she wanted to spend the trip (which was on Valentine's day) with Harry. Harry asked her out, to which she of course replied yes. Harry then goes to Snape's office. Snape begins the occlumency lesson by explaining that Voldemort is very skilled at legilimency (the ability to extract feelings and memories from another person's mind). Snape tells Harry that legilimency is usually only effective if the two people can make eye contact. However, due to the connection that he and Voldemort share, through the scar, it is easier for Voldemort to have access to his mind. Harry is adverse to the idea of closing off his mind. If it had not been for him, Mr. Weasley would most likely had died. It was then that Snape informed Harry that it was not until very recently that Voldemort knew of the connection between the two of them. Snape began the lesson by having Harry block as much as he possibly could from being accessed by Snape. Harry does not find this task very easy and keeps letting Snape have access to them. Snape tells Harry that he needs to practice his occlumency every night before going to bed. He needs to make sure that he has a clear mind. When Harry got back to the tower, he went to bed after only a few short minutes. However, that night Harry had another vision. This one included Voldemort laughing, Harry assumed that this meant that he was happy about something. However, we don't know what it is that he would be happy about. Disscussion Questions 1) Once again we see the moody Sirius Black, what is the true source of his moodiness? And what on Earth does he do locked up in the room with Buckbeat all day? 2) Harry questions whether or not working with Snape is really helping to close off his mind. Harry believes that it may be making it more open. Is there any truth to Harry's thinking? Would his lessons have gone differently had someone else been in charge of them? 3) Sirius tells Snape that he still believes that he is very much a part of the Death Eaters..is there any evidence to back that up? What evidence do we have that he is just working for the order? 4) JK Rowlings said that the mirror will be brought up again in another book. In what capacity do you believe that it will be brought back? JKR has this to say about the mirror " The mirror might not have helped as much as you think, but on the other hand, will help more than you think. You?ll have to read the final books to understand that!" What do you think this means? 5) Snape asked several questions about the images that were scene in his visions. For example, he asked about Aunt Marge's dog. What purpose did he have in asking those questions? Do they lead to something, stand out in his mind, or is he just merely curious about them? 6) Snape tells Harry many times in this chapter not to say the name "Voldemort." Why is it that even Voldemort's own followers cannot say his name? Is their significance in calling him the Dark Lord? (this is just something that I have always been curious about..love to know what you guys think about it). That wraps up about all I have for right now. I might put some more questions or thoughts later in the week but I trust that this chapter will generate a great deal of discussion! ~Melanie NOTE: For more information on HPfGU's chapter discussions, please see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/67817 and http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85829 as well as "OotP Chapter Discussions" at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/database --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ms_melanie1999 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 00:12:53 2004 From: ms_melanie1999 at yahoo.com (Miss Melanie) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 17:12:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chapter 24: Occlumency Message-ID: <20040804001253.67879.qmail@web53404.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108736 This is a repost because I realized that last night I did not label the chapter dicussion as such. Since this is such a popular and heavy chapter I wanted to make sure that it was discussed at greater length. (Sorry this is just a couple late getting out, I was just now able to get to my computer for the first time today. I'm really happy to lead the discussions for this chapter, to me it's one of the more interesting chapters in the book. So here it goes..enjoy!) Part One: Number 12 Grimmauld Place, just before the end of the Christmas Holiday. The chapter begins with the reappearance of Kreacher whom was found by Sirius in the attic. While Kreacher seemed to be in a better mood Sirius' mood took a drastic dive and he found himself locking himself in his room with Buckbeat for hours at a time. On the last day of the Christmas Holiday, Harry was called into the kitchen of the house to have a discussion with Professor Snape. Harry went to the kitchen, rather worried about what the discussion would be about, and finds that not only is Snape present but so is his Godfather. Snape explains to Harry that the headmaster wishes for Harry to study occlumency ( a form of magic that will protect him from external penetration). Dumbledore requested that Snape be his instructor. Sirius, upset that Dumbledore made Snape the instructor, warns Snape not to use these lessons to make life difficult for Harry. Snape informs Sirius that he believes that Harry is so arrogant, like James, that he is not in the least bit affected by the criticism that is placed upon him. Sirius is very upset by that statement and moves to pull out his wand.. The two man stand with ready to duel. Sirius shares his feeling that Snape is very much an active member of the Death Eaters and is really not working for the order. He even went as far as to call Snape Lucius Malfoy's "lapdog." Snape informs Sirius, for the first time, that Lucius recognized Sirius at the train station at the start of term. The fight would have continued to go on for quite sometime, however, Mr. Weasley returned from the hospital. He declared himself "completely cured." The next day, Sirius and Harry say their goodbyes. Sirius hands Harry a two-way mirror that should be used when he needs to get a hold of Sirius at any time. Harry didn't say anything to Sirius at that time, however, he knew that he would never use it. Harry feared that it would be dangerous to use it. The students take the knight bus back to Hogwarts, along with Lupin and Tonks. Before leaving Harry, Lupin reminds him that he needs to make sure that puts in every effort to learn occlumency. He told Harry that even Sirius knows how important it is for him to learn the skill. Part Two: Hogwarts Before Harry went to his first occlumency class he ran into Cho Chang . He assumed that Cho wanted to talk about the DA but instead she wanted to remind him of the upcoming Hogsmeade weekend. Cho gave Harry a great deal of hints before he realized that she wanted to spend the trip (which was on Valentine's day) with Harry. Harry asked her out, to which she of course replied yes. Harry then goes to Snape's office. Snape begins the occlumency lesson by explaining that Voldemort is very skilled at legilimency (the ability to extract feelings and memories from another person's mind). Snape tells Harry that legilimency is usually only effective if the two people can make eye contact. However, due to the connection that he and Voldemort share, through the scar, it is easier for Voldemort to have access to his mind. Harry is adverse to the idea of closing off his mind. If it had not been for him, Mr. Weasley would most likely had died. It was then that Snape informed Harry that it was not until very recently that Voldemort knew of the connection between the two of them. Snape began the lesson by having Harry block as much as he possibly could from being accessed by Snape. Harry does not find this task very easy and keeps letting Snape have access to them. Snape tells Harry that he needs to practice his occlumency every night before going to bed. He needs to make sure that he has a clear mind. When Harry got back to the tower, he went to bed after only a few short minutes. However, that night Harry had another vision. This one included Voldemort laughing, Harry assumed that this meant that he was happy about something. However, we don't know what it is that he would be happy about. Disscussion Questions 1) Once again we see the moody Sirius Black, what is the true source of his moodiness? And what on Earth does he do locked up in the room with Buckbeat all day? 2) Harry questions whether or not working with Snape is really helping to close off his mind. Harry believes that it may be making it more open. Is there any truth to Harry's thinking? Would his lessons have gone differently had someone else been in charge of them? 3) Sirius tells Snape that he still believes that he is very much a part of the Death Eaters..is there any evidence to back that up? What evidence do we have that he is just working for the order? 4) JK Rowlings said that the mirror will be brought up again in another book. In what capacity do you believe that it will be brought back? JKR has this to say about the mirror " The mirror might not have helped as much as you think, but on the other hand, will help more than you think. You?ll have to read the final books to understand that!" What do you think this means? 5) Snape asked several questions about the images that were scene in his visions. For example, he asked about Aunt Marge's dog. What purpose did he have in asking those questions? Do they lead to something, stand out in his mind, or is he just merely curious about them? 6) Snape tells Harry many times in this chapter not to say the name "Voldemort." Why is it that even Voldemort's own followers cannot say his name? Is their significance in calling him the Dark Lord? (this is just something that I have always been curious about..love to know what you guys think about it). That wraps up about all I have for right now. I might put some more questions or thoughts later in the week but I trust that this chapter will generate a great deal of discussion! ~Melanie NOTE: For more information on HPfGU's chapter discussions, please see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/67817 and http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85829 as well as "OotP Chapter Discussions" at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/database __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Aug 4 00:24:37 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 00:24:37 -0000 Subject: portrait of Godric Gryffindor? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108737 Steve wrote: > > "Thank you, Fortescue, that will do," said Dumbledore softly. > > - - - End Quote - - - > > Just passing it along. > > Steve/asian_lovr2 Potioncat: Given DD's sweet-tooth, giving Fortescue a place of honor makes sense! (Assuming of course, the ancestor also had a sweet shop on Diagon Alley...) From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Aug 4 00:28:49 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 00:28:49 -0000 Subject: Who's the bully was Re: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: <20040803234744.46379.qmail@web50105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108738 Magda wrote: > snip There is a limit to Dumbledore's > trust, and Snape is afraid that if it comes to a showdown, that > Dumbledore will side with Moody over him. > Potioncat: So, although we now know that Snape did not put Harry's name in the goblet, Snape is insecure enough to doubt if DD will trust him? Potioncat who found this hard to snip! From rubykelly at webtv.net Wed Aug 4 00:43:14 2004 From: rubykelly at webtv.net (rubyxkelly) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 00:43:14 -0000 Subject: Snape's choice of memories for the pensieve In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108739 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mhbobbin" wrote:> > > > > SSSusan wrote:> > > I think this still begs a question, though: If that wasn't Snape's> > WORST memory--just one he didn't particularly care for Harry to > see--> > then why title the chapter "Snape's Worst Memory"? What makes> > it "worst"?> > mhbobbin wonders:> > I wonder if the title is a play on words like "Grim Defeat" in POA > and other chapter headings.> > Perhaps, one way it is intended is "Snape's Worst Memory" ofHarry's > father...> > mhbobbinI had the same thoughts-the play on words which it reminded me of wasalso from PoA, namely, the chapter "Cat, Rat, and Dog". Of course I immdietly recognized the reference to the famoushistorical slam of "The Cat, the Rat, and Lovell the DogRule all England under the Hog"; from the reign of Richard III (theTudor crest featuring a boar's head) and referincing Catesby,Ratliff/Ratcliff, andLLord Lovell.Naturally, I didn't expect Lord Lovell to show up (non-expectationfulfilled!); but I did get a giggle from it. Regarding the use of "Worst Memory", another possibility is that it'sHARRY's assumption since everything in the series is writtenabsolutley and utterly from HIS POV (well, except "The Riddle House").My question about those three memories is-who really chose them?Snape, or Dumbledore? It IS Dumbledore's Pensieve, and it wasDumbledorre's decision for Harry to learn Occlumency. it seems to menot unlikely that the Headmaster might have been the ultimate arbitor.Kat/rxk. From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Aug 4 01:02:45 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 01:02:45 -0000 Subject: Who's the bully was Re: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108740 snipping KAT/rxk wrote: > Try reading it this way: Snape thinks Moody isthe real thing.... I think Snape would still be afraid of Moody (although doing hid best to conceal it).... Potioncat: Yes, I get that idea too. But given that Snape has been cleared by a court and has DD's support. Why is he afraid? KAT: Snape would naturally be furious about the search of his office-he might well be frightened that something Moody found could be improperly construed as harmful evidence against him by a powerful Auror with a grudge. Add to that the distinct possibility that both men are trying to Legilems each other, and while perhaps notpicking up EXACTLY what's going on they may each detect a subtle overtone of "not what he appears to be". Potioncat: Although Snape insists he doesn't think DD approved Moody's search of his office (the search Snape referred to) he doesn't seem too eager to go ask DD, does he? So we have C!M searching Snape's office and teaching unforgivables and no one is telling DD! KAT: Of course Snape knows Harry is there-but he does have to back of since at least Harry would be with Moody and therefore safe (as far as he knows). Theremark about Harry's careless wanderingsand not being held responsible for any misfortune Harry meets thereby is certainly intended for Harry-but I think not so much to excuse gimself as to try to get Harry to THINK about what he does BEFORE acting on impulse, for a change. (We already know what a waste of time THAT is!) Potioncat: Again, I find this really interesting! I always thought he did not know. But the fact that Harry is merely inches away from his fingers makes me tend to think you (and someone else, I forget who) are right. I'll have to re-read yet again. Particularly as his choice of words seems to be sending a message...one that Harry most likely didn't get. KAT: Remember, wesee everythingthrough Harry's very subjective, not to mention immature, viewpoint. That is the biggest red herring in the deries, IMO. Potioncat: Oh, I agree! I'm not at all sure the look Snape gives him from time to time is correctly interpreted. On the other hand, I think Snape misreads Harry just as often. (But I am not looking for an understanding hug at the end of book 7.) > >Potioncat > > And I still find it very creepy that the "nice guy" is the bad guy > > and the "mean guy" is the good guy. > >KAT > But this has been a pattern from the very first book! Major Snippage (can we get JKR to use this name? Could be a friend of Col Fudbuster or whatever his name is.) Potioncat: I agree again. But you know, on this list, both C!M and Lupin are given as examples of the type of teacher Snape "should" be. (OK, I know Lupin is only rumored at being ESE!) But certainly, it's clear, you can't always trust the nice guy. On the other hand, with Umbridge as an example, you can't trust the mean one either. KAT: No, by the end of the book, he's let himself be duped; violated Prof. Snape's huge (for him) leap of faith by trusting him to stay alone with te pensieve and respect his privacy; then manages to end up blaming Snape for Sirius' death. I can certainly foresee bad things to come resulting from that mindset! Potioncat: Not too many think it was "trust" that Snape was doing when he left Harry alone. Many think it was a trick. I think he left in a rush, trusting Harry to leave his office and was greatly offended that Harry had gone into the Pensieve. I think he would have been justified in being angry if Harry had seen nothing more than a grocery list! But I agree. Personally, I think DD should have punished Harry if only for messing around with an unknown magical device. KAT: > Oh, and BTW Potioncat-the Persues legend refereces: remember the king that snt Perseus to kill the monster snake? Notice in CoS, in the Duelling scene, Gilderoy the "false king" creates a situation where a deadly snake is conjured and which is destroyed by Severus? Potioncat: Well, I did some digging into Perseus...laid it rest beside good old Mark Evans. So I know what you mean. But remember, it was Severus that suggested the snake in the first place. Potioncat From gopotter2004 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 01:13:22 2004 From: gopotter2004 at yahoo.com (gopotter2004) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 01:13:22 -0000 Subject: F&G and The Mauraders (Was: another wacko theory) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108741 I fully believe that Fred and George cheated. They knew WAY too exactly what would happen in the game. I'm sorry. I love them. They're high on my list of favorite characters (george is higher, but I love them both.) We seem to have forgotten, in our banter of time travel being illegal unless properly watched by the ministry, that we have a precedent for F&G to follow: The Marauders. It takes highly skilled wizards and the careful watch of the MoM to become Animagi, yet 3 underage wizards were able to accomplish the task. Given that F&G so admire Moony, Wormtail (the useless git), Padfoot, and Prongs I think they are quite likely to be just a law-bending as their predecessors. (As a side-note, did F&G ever find out that they knew the real live Moony and Padfoot?) Becky From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Aug 4 01:21:07 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 01:21:07 -0000 Subject: Snape's choice of memories for the pensieve In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108742 KAT/rxk wrote: Major Snippage Regarding the use of "Worst Memory", another possibility is that it'sHARRY's assumption since everything in the series is writtenabsolutley and utterly from HIS POV (well, except "The Riddle House").My question about those three memories is-who really chose them?Snape, or Dumbledore? It IS Dumbledore's Pensieve, and it wasDumbledorre's decision for Harry to learn Occlumency. it seems to menot unlikely that the Headmaster might have been the ultimate arbitor.Kat/rxk. Potioncat: As it is from Harry's assumption...the Pensieve may not be DD's. It could be Snape's. We saw Snape put the memories in the Pensieve and even if it was DD's Pensieve, he would have taken his memories out. I don't think DD would have said, take these three thoughts out of your head** and put them out for Harry to find. **although now that I think of it: I once suggested a conversation where Snape said "I can't teach Potter Occlumency given my memories of his father." and DD answering, "Here, put those thoughts out of your head." (lol) Potioncat (Who really enjoyed your information about the Cat Rat Dog word play. Oh the things that go over my head!) From cassin12004 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 00:46:39 2004 From: cassin12004 at yahoo.com (cassin12004) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 00:46:39 -0000 Subject: OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: <20040804001253.67879.qmail@web53404.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108743 > 6) Snape tells Harry many times in this chapter not to say the name "Voldemort." Why is it that even Voldemort's own followers cannot say his name? Is their significance in calling him the Dark Lord? (this is just something that I have always been curious about..love to know what you guys think about it). Only a wizard of equal or greater power would dare. Such as Dumbledore. Harry's got a lot of brass. He's also marked as Voldemort's equal. "Cassin" From isilvalacirca at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 00:23:36 2004 From: isilvalacirca at yahoo.com (Lanthiriel S) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 17:23:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Just a comment about Lupin's malady. Message-ID: <20040804002336.48172.qmail@web53503.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108744 On Mon, 02 Aug HunterGreen said: >Interesting analysis! It very well could be that Sirius didn't >exactly suspect Lupin of being a spy, but just had a general feeling >of mistrust about him. However, though, this doesn't explain why >James and Lily went along with it. Remember, who they chose as a >secret-keeper was up to them. They could have chose Lupin if they >wanted to, but they went with Peter. Why? My response: I have always thought that it was a simple process of elimination. Taking James out of the equation of course, you have three Marauders left. Sirius and James had been like brothers and James - knowing that Sirius had turned his back on his family and their support of the pureblood cause/dark arts - wouldn't even begin to suspect him. That leaves Peter and Remus. Of the two, Remus is a dark creature - a member of a species highly distrusted, even feared, by most of the wizarding world. Even though they had supported Remus through their years at Hogwarts, perhaps it was just easier to believe that he (because of his condition) could go over to Voldemort's cause rather than little Peter, who - from what we know of him as a young man - seems to have been rather inept (or at least pretending to be inept) and a bit on the dim (or at least immature) side (I'm taking this from the "Snape's Worst Memory" chapter of OotP). Now, that may not have been what Peter was truly like, but it was how he was perceived by James and Sirius. I think the idea of him being a spy would have been inconceivable to them - whereas they knew that Remus had the intelligence to pull off such a deception. My thoughts at least. Lanthiriel __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From isilvalacirca at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 00:57:02 2004 From: isilvalacirca at yahoo.com (Lanthiriel S) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 17:57:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Peeves [was Re: Personal theories about what will happen next.] Message-ID: <20040804005702.18297.qmail@web53501.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108745 DuffyPoo wrote: I've always thought they need to send old Peevsey out to round up some of his Poltergeist friends for the final battle. I'm not sure what 'good' they could do, but they certainly would be a fine distraction. ;-) My response: You know, I've always wondered about Peeves (and possibly I'm the only one). What purpose does he serve, besides general mayhem and comic relief? That's enough, of course, but he is a rather intriguing character. We know that poltergeists can be gotten rid off - Filch is always advocating that, and I believe it was Fleur who in GoF said something to the effect of had he been at Beauxbatons, Maxime would have forced him out a long time ago. So why does Dumbledore, possibly the most powerful wizard alive, allow him to remain at Hogwarts to pester students, staff, and inanimate objects? Does Dumbledore just find him amusing or is it something deeper? I'd like to see an explanation - from Rowling's perspective - of how poltergeists come to be (perhaps it mentions this in "Fantastic Beasts", which sadly I don't have). And it would be nice also to finally find out why Peeves fears the Bloody Baron so much. His absence in the films seems to indicate that he doesn't play some secret, meaningful part in the plot. For some twisted reason, this kind of saddens me. :( Anyone have any thoughts on Peeves? Lanthiriel __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Wed Aug 4 01:22:00 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 01:22:00 -0000 Subject: To Where To When (TimeTurning that may make sense) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108746 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > There are some such things in the books to date. Occurrences outside > the scope of the Harry POV in detail and therefore unexplained. I unfortunately have to discount the idea of TimeTurning!DD (cute, eh?) because he is so sad (crying) at the end of OotP that one would supect that he'd have 'turned' to affect those events, most likely by skipping back to be at the MoM at the same time as past self was conversing with Kreacher. If DD had ready access to timetravel, he would not have delayed that much in getting to what appeared to be an impending faceoff between Harry and LV. > 1 Who broke into Gringotts in PS/SS and attempted to take the Stone. I've always been rather interested in why DD, after 10 years of suspecting LV was still 'alive', suddenly decides to snatch the stone from Gringotts, where we presume it has been all along, except when needed by Flamel on occasion. The answer, I think, comes at the end of CoS. DD reveals to Harry that his sources have told him that LV has been hiding in Albania (spreading the cheer with Mom so no books handy). What sources? Perhaps DD has had tabs on LV all this time? > 2. How did it 'become clear' to Dumbledore to return to Hogwarts > when he was in London at the end of PS/SS. Again, the secret may lie in CoS. Harry's Hogwarts letter not only happens to find him at he Burrow, but it has been delivered by Errol (not the fastest owl in the world). Again, it might seem that Dumbledore has extra tabs on Harry, and thus realized the moral peril Harry was facing. He might have flown to London, but coming back was probably apparition or portkey. Josh From cassin12004 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 01:13:52 2004 From: cassin12004 at yahoo.com (cassin12004) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 01:13:52 -0000 Subject: Hermione in Gryffindor? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108747 The sorting hat placed Hermione in Gryffindor even though she, as Sirius put it, is the smartest witch of her age. Ravenclaw is for the bright ones and Hufflepuff will teach those of muggle parentage. My question is: She is exceptionally bright. Since she's in Gryffindor does that mean that she will perform feats of extraordinary bravery? Or did that hat just let her choose her house out of the three choices she had? (like Harry chose.) Cassin From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Wed Aug 4 01:33:36 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 01:33:36 -0000 Subject: Was Harry in Danger from the Basilisk? In-Reply-To: <002501c479a4$551f5250$07c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108748 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > DuffyPoo: > > Could it not have been possible for Salazar Slytherin, the 'twisted old loony,' to put a spell on the snake to make it able to distinguish between Muggle and magic? Just another thought. Well, owls and thestrals have no problems identifying locations of people and places, respectively. With or without spellwork, the possibility for the baselisk to distinguish individuals is certainly an easy reach. Even Marauder's Map-esque senses could have been spelled (thus avoiding Snape and Filch while hunting). Keep in mind that the blinded beast didn't mistakenly attack TMR in the chamber, and neither TMR nor Ginny were ever accidently killed or petrified while commanding it. Overall I still believe that the attacks were directed (perhaps not at Hermione, the cat, or Sir Nick intentionally), as Justin, Colin, and (I beleive) Penelope were all people whom Harry might want to target if he were the Heir. Remember that TMR quickly determined that he wanted to meet Harry, and that attacks could have been designed specifically to push him away from the general populace to help encourage an opportunity. Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Wed Aug 4 01:48:43 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 01:48:43 -0000 Subject: Poorly aiming Baselisk '42 and '92 [Re: Was Harry in Danger] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108749 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > An interesting side observation. Isn't it an extraordinary > coincidence that in the latest attacks all the students manage to > avoid being killed and only get petrified and on the previous > occasion, several students must have got themselves petrified with > only one fatality (assuming that we belive Riddle's version). There > must be a lot of spilt water, mirrors, cameras and convenient ghosts > around..... Probaly analogous to a very efficient virus that kills its hosts before it can spread. The first glance at the Baselisk's eyes (direct or indirect) is the final word, and with all the suits of armor, windows, etc, it's not all that unlikely that the first glance could be indirect. Poor Myrtle was ambushed in the toilet, and thus didn't have a chance. With the exception of Hermione and Penelope and if you don't count ghosts, all known victims were alone. Harry comments in OotP when looking for Nick that the place is usually overflowing with ghosts, so it is quite possible that other victims might have been conversing with ghosts as I would assume Justin was (Nick shouldn't have looked!) or staring out a window being wistful, etc. Josh From cassin12004 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 01:49:19 2004 From: cassin12004 at yahoo.com (cassin12004) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 01:49:19 -0000 Subject: Tom Riddle in Slytherin? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108750 I've read some of you talking about it, but shouldn't the hat have placed Riddle anywhere but Slytherin? Even if he was the heir of Slytherin he's a half blood. I'm stumped. cassin From karen at dacafe.com Wed Aug 4 01:23:11 2004 From: karen at dacafe.com (karen at dacafe.com) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 18:23:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] F&G and The Mauraders (Was: another wacko theory) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <61997.68.34.189.212.1091582591.squirrel@cafemail.edacafe.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108751 Becky: > We seem to have forgotten, in our banter of time travel > being illegal unless properly watched by the ministry, that we have a > precedent for F&G to follow: The Marauders. It takes highly skilled > wizards and the careful watch of the MoM to become Animagi, yet 3 > underage wizards were able to accomplish the task. Given that F&G so > admire Moony, Wormtail (the useless git), Padfoot, and Prongs I think > they are quite likely to be just a law-bending as their predecessors. More on Fred & George / James & Sirius There are a few places in OOP that give me the impression that James & Sirius were the Fred & George jokesters during their years at Hogwarts. When Sirius gives Harry the mirror, he mentions that he and James used them to talk to each other during detentions. Sirius refers to Lupin as the "good boy" and again mentioning the numerous detentions that James and Sirius received. Finally Lily mentions James jinxing other students in the halls. I think James did this more as pratical jokes instead of maliciousness similar to Fred & George's canary creams covering Neville with feathers. James and Sirius took care of their friends by learning to become Animagi to keep Lupin company. OOP has the fireworks (helping Dumbledore) and the swamp (helping Harry). Since they know that Lupin is a werewolf and Sirius can become a dog, I think George and Fred have figured out the Marauders identity. George and Fred are extremely intelligent wizards inspite of the fact they didn't get many OWLs. I'd like to think that during the summer at the Black's house - Sirius and maybe Lupin spent some time comparing notes with George and Fred. It could be one of the reasons Mrs. Weasly was critical of Sirius' child rearing skills. - kmc ----------------------------------------- Stay ahead of the information curve. Receive EDA news and jobs on your desktop daily. Subscribe today to the EDA CafeNews newsletter. [ http://www10.edacafe.com/nl/newsletter_subscribe.php ] It's informative and essential. From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Wed Aug 4 02:08:37 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 02:08:37 -0000 Subject: HPB guess - King Godric? In-Reply-To: <20040803220408.71563.qmail@web21522.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108752 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bee Chase wrote: > I'm not one to trounce on anyone's theories as I believe until we read the next book one guess is as good and as interesting as the next, however I would like to bring up the fact that someone placed a good post a few weeks ago pointing out how interesting it is that everyone in the WW seems to be very aware of each others bloodlines. If Voldemort was trying to eliminate the heir of Gryffindor I think he would likely be the one to know who that person would be. I like the idea of the Weasleys being related to Harry, and it was mentioned in one of the books that all pureblood wizards are related somewhere along the line, but I think the relationship would be through James rather than Lily as Dumbledore mentioned that the Dursleys were Harry's only living relatives with his mothers protective blood. Josh: In further support, if LV 'chose' Harry because of knowing he was the/a heir, and therefore knew Lily was the link, he wouldn't have givn her the chance to stand aside, and thus live to be able to produce another heir. However, I won't discount the Weasley-Evans theory so quickly because DD himself might not realize the family connection. Also, one might assume that the blood might be so diluted as to not afford the protection that Petunia can. Unfortunately, I sincerely believe from JKR's site that heirdom and the HPB are not related topics, as the HPB has no link to CoS, and heirdom does. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 02:22:33 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 02:22:33 -0000 Subject: Hermione in Gryffindor? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108753 Cassin wrote: > The sorting hat placed Hermione in Gryffindor even though she, as > Sirius put it, is the smartest witch of her age. snip. > My question is: She is exceptionally bright. Since she's in > Gryffindor does that mean that she will perform feats of > extraordinary bravery? Or did that hat just let her choose her house > out of the three choices she had? (like Harry chose.) > Alla: As we know, Hat wanted to put Hermione in Ravenclaw. G-d knows, this girl is smart enough for that House. :o) So, to answer your question, I think Hermione's sorting was similar to Harry's (as I think was Neville's). They both chose Gryffindor over other houses emphasizing once again the importance of our choices. I think Hermione already performed many acts of bravery. If the only thing she did was supporting Harry in his quest, that alone would have been very brave, but she demonstrated eceptional courage of her own. (Battle in MoM, not backing up against Sirius in PoA, going after the Stone with Harry and Ron, etc., etc.) From snow15145 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 02:28:30 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 02:28:30 -0000 Subject: Shared thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108754 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dcgmck" wrote: > > Snow replying to Kneasy's post 108664: > > > [Huge snip] > > If Harry can recognize that half of Tom Riddle that is inside of > him (through force, not choice...therefore there is no direct > connection) and can destroy his half, the other half of Tom Riddle > (connected, willingly), to the Dark Lord Voldemort will die also > because he had been willingly connected. If Voldemort can kill Harry > it will set free the half of Tom Riddle that is in Harry to reunite > with his half. > > dcgmck: > > Tom Riddle is described by Dumbledore as possibly the most brilliant > student ever to attend Hogwarts. That alone makes him a logical and > susceptible target for Slytherin/Voldemort/X. That said, doesn't > that also make him worth saving? So why not seek to unseat X rather > than kill Riddle in order to liberate Harry? Snow: Snow: As I see it there might not be anyone left to save. Voldemort died that night at Godric's Hollow. The only reason Voldemort has still gone on is because of the piece of him left behind in Harry. If Voldemort can obtain that living piece that resides in Harry he can live again, if not, he dies "complete"ly. From snow15145 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 02:35:35 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 02:35:35 -0000 Subject: Shared thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108755 Kneasy: Hope I haven't done too much damage with the snipping, but I try to give a response at least as long as the piece I'm quoting. Not sure if I can manage it this time, though. Firstly you may have noticed that I stay away from TT threads - that's because I dislike them intensely. I'm one of those who consider then as an authorial cop-out - there are very, very few writers who can make them work satisfactorily; off-hand I can only think of Ken Grimwood's 'Replay' as one I'd read again. And I get very cynical about SF on TV resorting to TT - I suspect that economising on sets and props and the barren-ness of the script-writers imagination has much to do with the frequency with which they turn up (or return up). Snow: Thanks for the reply Kneasy and I agree with you about Time Turning, I wasn't crazy about the idea but it seemed to fit, so I thought I'd bring up the idea. I apologize for not snipping any of your wonderful post, I thought it best to refer to your post number (108664) instead because I felt it would have been double posting since I couldn't properly snip it. Kneasy: Putting my prejudices aside - you've put your finger on a point that I've wondered about before - DD. You're right - he does seem to have fore-knowledge of events, he does on occasion seem to have had a peep at the script. Sometimes his reactions to events are just plain wrong; they don't fit unless he already knew about what has just happened. So far I've rationalised this by postulating that his plan *is* the result of fore-knowledge - he sees his plan in it's entirety and he makes damn sure it runs on rails - no deviations allowed, though I think he's about to hit a rocky patch. Where this fore- knowledge comes from, I'm none too sure, but I hope like hell it ain't TT or I'll be banging on the bookshop counter demanding my money back. Snow: Is this rocky patch you mention where Dumbledore might have to let go and give Harry the reigns? Kneasy: You may also be right about Voldy wanting to be 'whole' or it (the fight in the Ministry) might have been an attempt to con DD into destroying Weapon!Harry - the WW's best bet as Voldy!Bane. Snow: When you say Voldy!Bane are you referring to the centaur Bane? Kneasy: You've obviously put a lot of thought into this one and I'm only sorry I can't be more enthusiastic about it. It deserves discussion, but I'd only try and change it into something else - which would be bloody annoying for you and unfair of me. Snow: I put a lot of thought into Harry Potter period. Let's just call it obsessed. I don't care if I am right or wrong if someone can find an answer that is satisfying I would rather they pick my post apart. If something I post gives someone else an idea that contributes to getting closer to the ending, I am all for it even if they have to rip it apart. Even if I were the one to be able to complete this awesome puzzle that JKR created, very doubtful, I would credit having done so based on the enormous input from this site which is made up of people questioning and changing your original thoughts. What competition for JKR, and they say two heads are better than one. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 02:36:38 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 02:36:38 -0000 Subject: OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108756 Melanie: > > 6) Snape tells Harry many times in this chapter not to say the > name "Voldemort." Why is it that even Voldemort's own followers > cannot say his name? Is their significance in calling him the Dark > Lord? (this is just something that I have always been curious > about..love to know what you guys think about it). > Cassin: > Only a wizard of equal or greater power would dare. Such as > Dumbledore. Harry's got a lot of brass. He's also marked as > Voldemort's equal. > Alla: Frankly, this is one of the reasons why I started entertaining ESE! Snape after reading OoP for quite a long time. It does not necessarily mean that I thought of Snape as being already evil in OoP, BUT I thought that he is still very scared of Voldie and it could foreshadow that he could betray the Order again. But as Pippin recently pointed out that Crouch!Moody also called Voldie by his name, so I will refrain from holding this incident against Snape for a while. Regardless though, I feel very strongly that Harry by now EARNED the right to say Voldemort name as often as he wants to, so if Snape does not dare, he still has no right to decide whether Harry should say the name or not. Especially since Dumbledore encourages Harry to say it. From snow15145 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 02:57:35 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 02:57:35 -0000 Subject: Shared thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108757 Meidbh replies: >snip< And for the first prophecy... I said it before but the logic and grammar are only correct for two people /personae /entities in the prophecy. For three it just doesn't work! (The post is 108241). Snow: I looked back to the post you referenced and remember reading it. Little snip from your post 108241: "If the "other" is a third peson then the final part of the prophecy should read "both must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives"." This is a correct statement that a third person should be named in such a way in the prophecy but what I am implying is that both people involved, Voldemort and Harry, share "the other" (Tom Riddle) which would fit into the original prophecy. Only one can survive! Who ever wins the golden prize (Tom Riddle) and either reconnects with Tom Riddle or destroys Tom Riddle is the big winner. Snow From ladyramkin2000 at yahoo.co.uk Wed Aug 4 03:19:39 2004 From: ladyramkin2000 at yahoo.co.uk (ladyramkin2000) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 03:19:39 -0000 Subject: Snape's choice of memories for the pensieve Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108758 RubyxKelly (have we a fellowRicardian?) was reminded by the chapter heading "Cat, Rat & Dog" in PoA of the propoganda circulated against RichardIII's principal supporters, Catesby, Ratcliffe and Lovell. Me too. Must just point out though that the Hog refers to Richard's badge of the White Boar. It was never a Tudor crest. Sylvia (who has been in glorious Kephalonia for a fortnight and just caught that one in passing, before drowning in a sea of posts) From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Aug 4 03:23:19 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 03:23:19 -0000 Subject: Who's the bully was Re: Snape's Reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108759 > Magda wrote: > > snip > > There is a limit to Dumbledore's > > trust, and Snape is afraid that if it comes to a showdown, that > > Dumbledore will side with Moody over him. > Potioncat: > So, although we now know that Snape did not put Harry's name in the goblet, Snape is insecure enough to doubt if DD will trust him?< Pippin: I don't think it's that entirely. Snape was trying to find out who broke into his office, and Fake!Moody, by protecting Harry, made Harry look very guilty indeed. But if it was Harry, then Snape can stop hunting; the burglar is not the goblet-tamperer. Of couse Harry eventually tells Sirius that he saw Crouch breaking into the office. That information must have come to Dumbledore, along with the information from Snape that boomslang skin went missing. When DD discovers the imposter, he expects to find polyjuice in the flask, (thus the missing boomslang skin) and he knows to send for Winky. Pippin From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Aug 4 03:46:35 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 03:46:35 -0000 Subject: OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108760 Alla: > Regardless though, I feel very strongly that Harry by now EARNED the > right to say Voldemort name as often as he wants to, so if Snape does > not dare, he still has no right to decide whether Harry should say > the name or not. > Especially since Dumbledore encourages Harry to say it. Potioncat: Two points. I'm not sure, but I had the impression that hearing "Voldemort" caused pain to the DEs. And along with that, possibly alerted LV. Also, Snape isn't the only adult to tell Harry not to say Voldemort. I'm not saying Harry should't say Voldemort...just that I can see why Snape doesn't want him to. Potioncat From rubykelly at webtv.net Wed Aug 4 03:48:56 2004 From: rubykelly at webtv.net (rubyxkelly) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 03:48:56 -0000 Subject: Snape's choice of memories for the pensieve In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108761 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ladyramkin2000" wrote: > RubyxKelly (have we a fellowRicardian?) was reminded by the chapter > heading "Cat, Rat & Dog" in PoA of the propoganda circulated against > RichardIII's principal supporters, Catesby, Ratcliffe and Lovell. > Me too. Must just point out though that the Hog refers to Richard's > badge of the White Boar. It was never a Tudor crest. > > Sylvia (who has been in glorious Kephalonia for a fortnight and just > caught that one in passing, before drowning in a sea of posts) AHH! Yes-I forgot that...especially seeing as how Richard III was a Plantagenet (the last) and NOT a Tudor!!! :D KAT/rxk From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Aug 4 04:17:41 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 04:17:41 -0000 Subject: To Where To When (TimeTurning that may make sense) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108763 > Josh: > I unfortunately have to discount the idea of TimeTurning!DD (Re: OOtP DOM) If DD had ready access to timetravel, he would not have delayed that much in getting to what appeared to be an impending faceoff between Harry and LV. > Valky replies: It's interesting that you reply this way. And sadly I beg to differ. I am certain that DD *does* have ready access to timetravel among his many possessions, and uses it, but he cannot change what is past. Harry was *at* the MOM and that was past and certainly couldn't be changed. If Dumbledore stopped to timeturn between talking with Kreacher and going to the MoM, then just going to the MOM a few minutes earlier would be a fools errand, because at this point he really doesn't know precisely what is going on there. DD would put more thought than that into a timeturned event, I'm sure. To wit, DD arrived in the exact moment required to save Harry, he lost Sirius but he saved Harry. The tears are certainly for Harry's pain but I don't think DD would have factored whats going to happen to Sirius, if he timeturned he would have focussed all his efforts on whats going to happen to Harry. And given that equation, the notion that DD might use a timeturner to undo his delay in getting to the MOM cannot be discounted. Josh: > > 1 Who broke into Gringotts in PS/SS and attempted to take the Stone. The answer, I think, comes at the end of CoS. DD reveals to Harry that his sources have told him that LV has been hiding in Albania (spreading the cheer with Mom so no books handy). What sources? Perhaps DD has had tabs on LV all this time? > Valky some more: The answer at the end of COS is not the answer at the beginning of PS/SS. DD says his sources place him in Albania two years later. *After* DD becomes aware that LV's intentions to rejoin wizarding civilisation are at hand. Prior to this in PS/SS early chapters the *tabs* are failing DD because LV's latest deputy is walking the corridors of Hogwarts, having the Dark Lord's vapour essence attached to his cerebellum, apparently unbeknownst to DD. DD's 'sources may anyhoo *be* timeturned personages, this we do not know. And *that* is precisely my postulation. Josh: > > 2. How did it 'become clear' to Dumbledore to return to Hogwarts > > when he was in London at the end of PS/SS. > > Again, the secret may lie in CoS. Harry's Hogwarts letter not only > happens to find him at he Burrow, but it has been delivered by Errol (not the fastest owl in the world). Again, it might seem that > Dumbledore has extra tabs on Harry, and thus realized the moral peril Harry was facing. He might have flown to London, but coming back was probably apparition or portkey. > Valky: I agree with your second statement but not your first. Simply because it is what we are given to assume and I just refuse to take even the most gilded assumptions JKR hands us for granted. She coats them thick with easy sugar right before she whips away the spoon and reminds us *assume nothing!* Best to you Josh Thanks for your reply. From hexicon at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 04:45:05 2004 From: hexicon at yahoo.com (Kristen) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 04:45:05 -0000 Subject: Wizard/Muggle "Radar" Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108764 Earlier posts speculated about whether Molly might be a weakness in the OOtP, so I was wondering where Arthur's vulnerabilities might lie . . . This got me thinking: could a wizard "pass" as a muggle to fool another wizard? (Without the use of some kind of "hiding" spell on the one's part, or Legilimency on the other's; also disregarding for now the possibility of repressed magical powers as has been speculated of Petunia or Dudley.) In other words, if a (convincingly attired) witch or wizard walked up to Arthur and said, "Hi, I'm Joe/Jane Muggle and I need your help," would any magical "radar" alert the Arthur that things are not what they seem? From sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com Wed Aug 4 05:16:32 2004 From: sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com (Amey Chinchorkar) Date: 4 Aug 2004 05:16:32 -0000 Subject: Chamber of Secrets and the Potrait Message-ID: <20040804051632.5805.qmail@webmail7.rediffmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108765 - Kneasy - As for "why wait a 1,000 years?" - only JKR can answer that - 'cos - canon has it that it hasn't been opened since Sally packed his wand - and left in a marked manner. I can't argue with that. Amey: But we don?t have canon for 1000 years (how I hope we get Hogwarts: The History soon). We hear from Binns that there is no such thing as Chamber, and then Dumbledore confirms that the Chamber has been opened *again*. Also, we have a mention of Chmaber featuring in *History*. So that points to the fact that the Chamber is there and Binns is either hiding it from students to avoid the panic or does not believe in it as he was not there last time. Do we know how much time Binns is there? I think being a ghost, he must be there for a long time. - ~Yb - When the DA is having their organizational meeting in the Hogs Head, - the talk turns to Harry's accomplishments, and Ernie says that he - spoke to "a portrait in Dumbledore's office" who told him about the - sword on the wall, Godric Gryffindor's sword Harry used to defeat the - basilisk. I don't think Ernie described the painting, and I don't - know if he said "behind DD's desk" or not, but he did speak to the - painting. There are probably many "framed folks" in the office, but I - wouldn't be surprised if the one Ernie talked to is the same as the - one we're talking about. Maybe it is GG in the picture... Amey: 'And did you kill a Basilisk with that sword in Dumbledore's office?' demanded Terry Boot. That's what one of the portraits on the wall told me when I was in there last year ' 'Er - yeah, I did, yeah,' said Harry. (OOtP ? in hog?s head) There is no description of the portrait, but it can be anyone, all the portraits seem talkative (gossipy???) and many like Harry. - Zoe - I think you're forgetting that Dumbledore doesn't actually know that - Tom Riddle opened the chamber and set a Basilisk on Moaning Myrtle - and the others. Hagrid, with Aragog as the monster, was set up by - Tom as the culprit, and was expelled for it, even though Dumbledore - beleived he was innocent. Even if he suspected Tom, he had no proof, - or would have done something about it at the time. We have no cannon - for anyone knowing that Tom was the culprit all along. It is only - with hindsight (at the end of COS) that Dumbledore knows for a fact - that it was Riddle, due to Harry and Ginny's witness and the Diary - itself. Amey: "It means," said Dumbledore, "that the Chamber of Secrets is indeed open again." Madam Pomfrey clapped a hand to her mouth. Professor McGonagall stared at Dumbledore. "But, Albus ... surely ... who?" "The question is not who," said Dumbledore, his eyes on Colin. "The question is, how . . . ." (CoS) And "\What interests me most," said Dumbledore gently, "is how Lord Voldemort managed to enchant Ginny, when my sources tell me he is currently in hiding in the forests of Albania." This shows that Dumbledore knew that the Chamber was opened by Tom before events in CoS. Maybe when Voldemort gained power, Dumbledore studied his history and deduced this, or maybe he knew but had no proof of Hagrid?s innocence and Tom?s involvement when Tom opened the Chamber. This is canon for Dumbledore knowing that it was Tom/Voldemort all along. Also, he kept an eye on Tom and so Tom sealed it temperorily. Amey [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ms_melanie1999 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 05:52:52 2004 From: ms_melanie1999 at yahoo.com (Miss Melanie) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 22:52:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040804055252.10483.qmail@web53405.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108766 Cassin wrote:Only a wizard of equal or greater power would dare. Such as Dumbledore. Harry's got a lot of brass. He's also marked as Voldemort's equal. "Cassin" My reply: I'm not really sure I agree with that statement, Cassin. I mean I can see where one would assumeth Sirius is very arrogant and would think of himself as Voldemort's equal (or well as powerful as he) but Lupin? That doesn't seem very likely to me anyway. ~Melanie __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From romulus at hermionegranger.us Wed Aug 4 02:54:25 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 02:54:25 -0000 Subject: Hermione Granger's birthday Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108767 Dear List, I am new to this wonderful group, having just come across it in my travels! Needless to say, I am happy to be here. Regarding Hermione Granger's birthday -- September 19th. Did you know that September is "the seventh month"? Sincerely, RM McDougal The Mystery of Hermione Granger www.hermionegranger.us From stargaz77 at aol.com Wed Aug 4 03:17:59 2004 From: stargaz77 at aol.com (celestina707) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 03:17:59 -0000 Subject: Hermione in Gryffindor? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108768 Cassin wrote: > The sorting hat placed Hermione in Gryffindor even though she, as > Sirius put it, is the smartest witch of her age. > > Ravenclaw is for the bright ones and Hufflepuff will teach those of > muggle parentage. > > My question is: She is exceptionally bright. Since she's in > Gryffindor does that mean that she will perform feats of > extraordinary bravery? Or did that hat just let her choose her > house out of the three choices she had? (like Harry chose.) In PS/SS Hermione did say on the Hogwarts Express, after meeting Harry and Ron, that she had asked around about the houses and she said that Gryffindor sounded the best to her, but Ravenclaw didn't sound too bad.I think she had made up her mind right then and there which house she wanted. I honestly do feel she is in the right house, after all she has more than proven her bravery by accompanying Harry in SS/PS by going down the trap door, in CoS by drinking the polyjuice potion, in PoA by going back in time to save 2 innocent lives, OotF by going with Harry to the MOM. I agree with most posters here that it is our choices which gives us our ultimate power and I am sure the sorting hat must see where our talents and abilities will flourish. I believe the sorting hat must have been aware of Hermione's (at that point untapped) ability to face challenges with sheer bravery and her desire for justice where it is due. As she said to Harry in PS/SS, when Harry was about to go through the purple fire alone and ultimately face whoever was after the stone, there are things more important than books and cleverness, like friendship and bravery. She said that to Harry with such admiration for him that is is obvious, to me anyway, that she values friendship and bravery above all else.That is the mark of a true Gryffindor. Having said all this, I might add, (and I hope it doesn't sound like I am contradicting myself here) that every student must have a combination of talents/abilites that would possibly place them in other houses. However, I believe it is the sorting hats ability to peer into the heart and mind of each student and see what would be their strongest trait(s), which house would best suit them so they would prosper, but recognizing that its that particular students choices which will ultimately shape that students life. Celestina (who thinks the sorting has has a most difficult job) From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Wed Aug 4 04:14:21 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 04:14:21 -0000 Subject: Hermione in Gryffindor? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108769 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cassin12004" wrote: > The sorting hat placed Hermione in Gryffindor even though she, as > Sirius put it, is the smartest witch of her age. > > ... Or did that hat just let her choose her house > out of the three choices she had? (like Harry chose.) Didn't Harry simply eliminate Slytherin, not knowing any other choices? The hat came up with with Gryffindor on its own, and we can't be sure if it simply wanted to offer Harry the choice of Slytherin before defaulting to its first choice. Something similar might have happened with Hermione, or perhaps it simply made a comment similar to the one to Harry about having a fine mind, but more specific, i.e. naming Ravenclaw, e.g. *Hmm, excellent mind, yes, yes, excellent; however, while Ravenclaw would suit you very well, I see than you actually belong in...* Josh From upulwan80 at yahoo.com.au Wed Aug 4 04:39:08 2004 From: upulwan80 at yahoo.com.au (upulwan80) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 04:39:08 -0000 Subject: bee from OotP lodged in my bonnet Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108770 Hello everyone, First time poster here, so please pardon any transgressions, repetitions, redundancies etc.. if you point them out to me with compassion I promise I won't repeat them. I don't know if what I'm about to ask has already been discussed (yes I did read the OotP FAQ and it wasn't there), so if it has been please put me out of my misery and tell me where! In chapter 14 of OotP (Percy and Padfoot: page 268 in the hardback in Australia), after Ron's chucked Percy's mutilated sermon into the Gryffindor fire, Hermione holds her hand out for Ron's essay, with 'an odd expression on her face'. Any ideas what that expression might be? And yes I'm quite aware that this may turn into a shipping matter, but I think there is a good balance of all kinds of shippers and non-shippers out there for me to be able to glean a reasonable response?? "upulwan80" From kempermentor at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 04:42:24 2004 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 04:42:24 -0000 Subject: Shared thoughts / DD -- foreknowledge? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108771 Kneasy responding to Snow: (Re Dumbledore) Sometimes his reactions to events are just plain wrong; they don't fit unless he already knew about what has just happened. So far I've rationalised this by postulating that his plan *is* the result of fore-knowledge - he sees his plan in its entirety and he makes damn sure it runs on rails - no deviations allowed, though I think he's about to hit a rocky patch. Where this fore-knowledge comes from, I'm none too sure, but I hope like hell it ain't TT or I'll be banging on the bookshop counter demanding my money back. Kemper now: I don't think DD has fore-knowledge. I think he's taking all the evidence he's aware of and anticipating LV's next course and planning according to LV's moves. If there's another Time Turner, I'll be book burning. From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Wed Aug 4 05:10:08 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 05:10:08 -0000 Subject: To Where To When (TimeTurning that may make sense) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108772 Eek, not sure how to snip this! Please bear with if thought to be too long... --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > > Josh: > > I unfortunately have to discount the idea of TimeTurning!DD > (Re: OOtP DOM) If DD had ready access to timetravel, he would not > have delayed that much in getting to what appeared to be an > impending faceoff between Harry and LV. > > > Valky replies: > It's interesting that you reply this way. And sadly I beg to differ. > I am certain that DD *does* have ready access to timetravel among > his many possessions, and uses it, but he cannot change what is > past. Harry was *at* the MOM and that was past and certainly > couldn't be changed. > > If Dumbledore stopped to timeturn between talking with Kreacher and > going to the MoM, then just going to the MOM a few minutes earlier > would be a fools errand, because at this point he really doesn't > know precisely what is going on there. DD would put more thought > than that into a timeturned event, I'm sure. > > To wit, DD arrived in the exact moment required to save Harry, he > lost Sirius but he saved Harry. The tears are certainly for Harry's > pain but I don't think DD would have factored whats going to happen > to Sirius, if he timeturned he would have focussed all his efforts > on whats going to happen to Harry. And given that equation, the > notion that DD might use a timeturner to undo his delay in getting > to the MOM cannot be discounted. I've always been a big fan of time travel depicted as unable to change the past. I wish I'd brought home books 1-3 for reference so I could see what details were given for misusage of turners, so I could get a better grasp of JKR's theories. We are a little loose in the timescale of the events of that day, so timing gets tricky. However, let's assume that Dumbledore can timeturn at will. A whole bunch of possibilities turn up that wouldn't add up. CoS comes to mind. Knowing an attack had happened, why could DD have timeturned, set up some sort of monitoring system (spell, mirror like Sirius', ghost with his eyes closed) so as to learn any information possible? He couldn't change the past, but he could have informed himself for the future. Without the ability to change the past, I don't see the purpose of DD turning without making more appropriate usage of it. So, back to the MoM, barring that Dumbledore frequently enough visits himself so as to occasionally know what will happen, he would have been going in blind either in the present or earlier... as long as he didn't interfere with himself pre-turn. He would make use of such an opportunity not to prevent any known outcome (knowing it fixes it) but to minimize danger to the students and guarantee the privacy of the prophesy. I would content that TT!DD would have arrived at the MoM seconds behind the sextet, or even have been waiting for them at the telephone booth. For Voldy!Quirrel, it would depend on the nature of the tabs... though, now that I think of it, the Albania info had to have come from a different source, as it does give location. Wormtail managed to find LV, too, after all. > reminds us *assume nothing!* LOL, I have to agree, but only to a point. :) While I do expect JKR to be sneaky and secretive, all/most secrets will be revealed at the end, and I'm sure she hopes her now-10 year old child will be able to understand it when she's done. If this were meant for only adults to comprehend, Percy would have been caught doing a bit more than snogging by Ginny. :) Josh From gopotter2004 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 06:17:33 2004 From: gopotter2004 at yahoo.com (gopotter2004) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 06:17:33 -0000 Subject: Hermione Granger's birthday In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108773 RM McDougal wrote: > Regarding Hermione Granger's birthday -- September 19th. > > Did you know that September is "the seventh month"? Now me: 1. January 2. February 3. March 4. April 5. May 6. June 7. July 8. August 9. September Now, counting that way, it's not the seventh month, and this isn't meant to be snide at all (I can't figure out how to type this in a way that doesn't sound mean) but how are you counting? If you actually have a way that makes september the seventh, I'm totally up for it! (Though I'll still think Harry's the one, as cool as Hermione is) Becky who hopes she isn't being mean because that isn't her intent and it's much to late to use diction to sound nicer From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 06:26:21 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 06:26:21 -0000 Subject: Peeves Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108774 DuffyPoo wrote: I've always thought they need to send old Peevsey out to round up some of his Poltergeist friends for the final battle. I'm not sure what 'good' they could do, but they certainly would be a fine distraction. ;-) Lanthiriel: snip So why does Dumbledore, possibly the most powerful wizard alive, allow him to remain at Hogwarts to pester students, staff, and inanimate objects? Does Dumbledore just find him amusing or is it something deeper? I'd like to see an explanation - from Rowling's perspective - of how poltergeists come to be (perhaps it mentions this in "Fantastic Beasts", which sadly I don't have). And it would be nice also to finally find out why Peeves fears the Bloody Baron so much. snip Anyone have any thoughts on Peeves? mhbobbin: My understanding is that the tradition about Poltergeists is that they differ from ghosts in that they were never a living person and that they are attracted to households with adolescent children. They absorb the anxiety / anger / mayhem / resentment /energy of adolescence--- If that is the general tradition, then Peeves' true purpose at Hogwarts may be to absorb the excess adolescent energy at Hogwarts like a sponge==and as obnoxious as he is==may be seen by DD as a better way to manage that adolescent energy than leaving it to its own devices. I've always loved his name, as in, pet peeves. And fyi--Fantastic Beasts is a good support document for many odd bits in the books but has nothing on Peeves. mhbobbin From danmona at bellsouth.net Wed Aug 4 05:15:20 2004 From: danmona at bellsouth.net (danmona at bellsouth.net) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 1:15:20 -0400 Subject: OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chapter 24: Occlumency Message-ID: <20040804051520.OZKV1721.imf16aec.mail.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> No: HPFGUIDX 108775 Melanie: > 6) Why is it that even Voldemort's own followers cannot say his > name? Is there significance in calling him the Dark Lord? Cassin: > Only a wizard of equal or greater power would dare. Such as > Dumbledore. Harry's got a lot of brass. He's also marked as > Voldemort's equal. I think the reason no one says Lord Voldemort's name is the result of an old wives tale. They believed if evil's name was mentioned, they would appear: speak of the devil.. Just an idea. danmona From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Wed Aug 4 06:34:28 2004 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 06:34:28 -0000 Subject: Hermione Granger's birthday In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108776 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gopotter2004" wrote: > 1. January > 2. February > 3. March > 4. April > 5. May > 6. June > 7. July > 8. August > 9. September << snip << how are you counting? << snip << Becky Inge: In the very old days the year calender was different and September was in fact the 7th month. The last 4 months of the year have all been named after a number as in Sept = 7 Oct = 8 Nov = 9 Dec =10 From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Aug 4 06:44:40 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 06:44:40 -0000 Subject: Was Harry in Danger from the Basilisk? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108777 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Josh Warren" wrote: Josh: > Keep in mind that the blinded beast didn't mistakenly attack TMR in > the chamber, and neither TMR nor Ginny were ever accidently killed or > petrified while commanding it. Geoff: But also remember that Tom Riddle /wasn't/ "real" Tom Riddle - he was an echo, a ghost, a projection for want of a better term. He wasn't human and probably, the Basilisk could only hear him when he spoke; he would presumably have no scent and make no noise. 'A tall, black-haired boy was leaning against the nearest pillar, watching. He was strangely blurred around the edges as though Harry was looking at him through a misted window..... .."Are you a ghost?" Harry said uncertainly. "A memory," said Riddle quietly. "Preserved in a diary for fifty years."' (COS "The Heir of Slytherin" p.227 UK edition) From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk Wed Aug 4 07:58:38 2004 From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 08:58:38 +0100 (BST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione in Gryffindor? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040804075838.2231.qmail@web25309.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108778 cassin12004 wrote: Cassin wrote: The sorting hat placed Hermione in Gryffindor even though she, as Sirius put it, is the smartest witch of her age. Ravenclaw is for the bright ones and Hufflepuff will teach those of muggle parentage. My question is: She is exceptionally bright. Since she's in Gryffindor does that mean that she will perform feats of extraordinary bravery? Or did that hat just let her choose her house out of the three choices she had? (like Harry chose.) Now Udderpd >From the train journey we know that Hermione would have been OK with either Ravenclaw or Gryffindor, so IMO the hat put her in Gryffindor for one of two reasons: 1) She is braver than she is clever. She is a very brave girl but she is exceptionaly clever, still maybe? 2) She was put in Gryffindor to help Harry. We know that the Sorting Hat does a lot more than just sort First Years. She is definately where she needs to be. Worth thinking about. TTFN Udder Pen Dragon ________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! Yahoo! Groups Links --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Aug 4 08:03:55 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 08:03:55 -0000 Subject: To Where To When (TimeTurning that may make sense) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108779 Josh: > > > I unfortunately have to discount the idea of TimeTurning!DD Valky: > > It's interesting that you reply this way. > > I am certain that DD *does* have ready access to timetravel among his many possessions, and uses it, but he cannot change what is past. > Josh: > I've always been a big fan of time travel depicted as unable to > change the past. However, let's assume that Dumbledore can timeturn at will. A whole bunch of possibilities turn up that > wouldn't add up. CoS comes to mind. Knowing an attack had happened, why could DD have timeturned, set up some sort of monitoring system (spell, mirror like Sirius', ghost with his eyes closed) so as to learn any information possible? He couldn't change the past, but he could have informed himself for the future. Valky Now: This is a *really* good point Josh. I have set myself up to answer for every situation that DD could have Timeturned in haven't I, well I suppose if I want to float the raft......... ;D Firstly, if I answer this question well, there's about a couple of dozen more the same that I'll need to answer in turn following it. Thus I should start by saying that, if DD Timeturns, he uses it sparingly and with a great deal of discernment. I am sure he wouldn't TT himself for any old thing, its a convoluted and mysterious art. I am sure anyone, with half a mind, could see it would get you *into* more trouble than it would get you out of unless you resisted the temptation to do it over and over. Having said that, there is still, yet another possibilty that DD did use time to uncover the mystery in COS. Now if he was timeturning in COS, I agree that he would have done it exactly as you proposed, by going back to the place where an attack happened and observing. But I think he would probably be inclined to do it *only once*. There are great risks involved especially in a school full of inexperienced children who, would inevitably be entangled in any mess he might accidentally make, if it got out of hand, which we all agree timetravel quickly can even when we just *think* about it. Now, if I am correct in this premise then there is evidence that he *did* timeturn once and only once to get a little extra info on the COS incedent. He comments twice that he knew who was setting the Basilisk on the children and in both instances he admits he doesn't know how. In 'the Rogue Bludger' he says: The Question is not who. The Question is how... Now of course we *can* take this exclusively to mean that he knows it is Tom, but....... In Dobby's Reward after Harry had 'so far avoided mentioning Ginny or the Diary' DD says: What interests me most is How Lord Voldemort managed to enchant Ginny. Nobody *told him* that Ginny was doing Toms dirty work he *knew* already......... Thanks Josh. Now awaiting the next barrage of DD doesn't Timeturn. Oh and By the way...... Josh: I would content that TT!DD would have arrived at the MoM seconds behind the sextet, or even have been waiting for them at > the telephone booth. > > Valky: The problem is if it *didn't* happen in the correct timeline it *won't* happpen if you timeturn back to that spot. DD probably didn't, because who really knew? *when* they arrived. Snape waited an undetermined amount of time for them to return from the forest and there was no telling how they got to London from DD's POV at the time. I am thinking it may have taken several unsuccessful time turns to arrive at the correct moment you speak of which would be far too messy. I suspect DD would rather have *used* his *sources* to determine when *LV* would arrive at the DOM and would have set any timeturning to that moment. Best to You From j.balfour at leedsmet.ac.uk Wed Aug 4 09:21:29 2004 From: j.balfour at leedsmet.ac.uk (Boolean) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 09:21:29 -0000 Subject: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108780 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "meidbh" wrote: > > Canon (World Book Day chat) > > Why did Voldemort pick Harry and not Neville? > > JK Rowling replies -> Dumbledore explains this in 'Order of the > Phoenix'. Voldemort identified more with the half-blood boy and > therefore decided he must be the greater risk. But but but...Harry *isn't* a half-blood is he??? James & Lily were witch and wizard, therefore Harry is pure-blood, no? I though half-blood only applied to the child of a couple made up of a witch/wizard and a Muggle? Boolean From patientx3 at aol.com Wed Aug 4 10:03:56 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 10:03:56 -0000 Subject: Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: <20040803072949.98830.qmail@web53402.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108781 >> Sirius, upset that Dumbledore made Snape the instructor, warns Snape not to use these lessons to make life difficult for Harry. [snip] The two man stand with ready to duel. [snip] The fight would have continued to go on for quite sometime, however, Mr. Weasley returned from the hospital.<< HunterGreen (squinting through a headache): This is one of my favorite funny moments in the series. Its almost as absurdly funny as the "Egg and the Eye" chapter of GoF (which, oddly enough, is being discussed in another thread at the moment). I was so shocked by the sudden immaturity of both Sirius and Snape that I didn't notice the humor in this scene until my second read of OotP. "He and all the other Weasleys froze on the threshold, gazing at the scene in front of them, which was also suspended in mid-action, both Sirius and Snape looking towards the door with their wands pointing into each other's faces and Harry immobile between them, a hand stretched out to each, trying to force them apart." Visually this is just hilarious. Snape and Sirius standing there with their wands in each other's faces and a *fifteen-year-old* trying to pry them apart. (if this is cut out of the movie version I will be quite angry). Does anyone else see this as funny, or is it just me? >> 1) Once again we see the moody Sirius Black, what is the true source of his moodiness? And what on Earth does he do locked up in the room with Buckbeak all day? << As much as the 'Kreacher-poisoning-Sirius' theory seems to fit, I think Sirius truly is quite lonely, and afflicted with some serious cabin fever. His personality really is very much like a dog. He needs to be around others and he needs fresh air and exercise. >>2) Harry questions whether or not working with Snape is really helping to close off his mind. Harry believes that it may be making it more open. Is there any truth to Harry's thinking? Would his lessons have gone differently had someone else been in charge of them?<< I think the lessons are making his mind more open, but I don't think that was Snape's intention. The lessons seem to just be exhausting him, which might be what's letting in more of Voldemort. Personally, I don't think another teacher would have had much more luck than Snape unless they were able to convince Harry that he *needed* the skill (which, after the Arthur/snake incident, I don't blame Harry for having misgivings about blocking his mind). >>3) Sirius tells Snape that he still believes that he is very much a part of the Death Eaters..is there any evidence to back that up? What evidence do we have that he is just working for the order?<< I think the only hard evidence we have that he's on the order's side is Dumbledore's word. Now, Dumbledore has been wrong in the past, but this is not something he appears to have ANY doubt about. That makes me think there was a very strong (and very personal) reason that Snape left the Death Eaters. Something that perhaps only Dumbledore, Snape and Voldemort know. >>5) Snape asked several questions about the images that were scene in his visions. For example, he asked about Aunt Marge's dog. What purpose did he have in asking those questions? Do they lead to something, stand out in his mind, or is he just merely curious about them?<< His reaction seemed like suppressed surprise to me. I don't think he expected to see things like that in Harry's mind. As for the question about the dog, I think he was simply curious who's dog was chasing Harry up a tree. Its interesting that Snape does not mock Harry in any way about these memories, nor does he appear amused by them (as he usually does when he sees Harry in any sort of discomfort). This is what makes me think that they might be closer to having a non- completely-antagonistic relationship in book 6 or 7. Despite how things may appear at the end of the book, I think the Harry/Snape relationship took a step in the right direction for the first time in OotP. >>6) Snape tells Harry many times in this chapter not to say the name "Voldemort." Why is it that even Voldemort's own followers cannot say his name? Is their significance in calling him the Dark Lord? (this is just something that I have always been curious about..love to know what you guys think about it).<< Perhaps its sort of like the followers of a king not calling him by his name but by "Sire" or "Your Highness" out of respect. Other people in the Wizarding World don't say the name out of fear (I like the theory that someone once said that its out of a superstition that if you say his name that he'll appear), but his followers don't say it out of respect (which is why Bellatrix was so offended when Harry said it). Although it does seem strange that Tom would go to the trouble of making a new 'cool' name for himself and then not allow anyone to say it. -Rebecca/HunterGreen (who wrote a response to this last night that was swallowed by her computer, and nearly didn't reply again because she's getting ill) From eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk Wed Aug 4 10:12:00 2004 From: eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk (iamvine) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 10:12:00 -0000 Subject: Hermione Granger's birthday In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108782 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: > Dear List, > I am new to this wonderful group, having just come across it in my > travels! Needless to say, I am happy to be here. > > Regarding Hermione Granger's birthday -- September 19th. > > Did you know that September is "the seventh month"? > > Sincerely, > RM McDougal > The Mystery of Hermione Granger > www.hermionegranger.us Hi Romulus, I read your website (particularly http://www.hermionegranger.us/pages/hermepower.htm) and while not all of it convinces me (I don't think JKR is as reliable with days of the week as you think she is) I found the part about Trelawney very interesting. Summary for those who don't want to read the rather long page: it's a theory that Hermione was born "as the seventh month dies" and is the true subject of the prophecy. It relies on the dating of the night Dumbledore interviewed Trelawney at the Hog's Head - we've been assuming that this happened shortly before Harry was born, but Trelawney tells Umbridge earlyish in OotP that she's been working at Hogwarts for "nearly sixteen years", leading to the theory that she was engaged the year before Harry's birth, but after the beginning of the school year - i.e. just before Hermione was born. A couple of questions: Why bring lunar months into it? If September is "the seventh month" and Hermione was born "as the seventh month dies", why didn't JKR make her birthday later in the month than the 19th and make the explanation much simpler? I don't see how Hermione's dentist parents could have defied Voldemort three times, and I think treating "those she was born to" as meaning "Muggles as a whole" is splitting hairs. But maybe she's adopted! Could she by any chance be Lupin's secret love child? Happily theorising, Eleanor. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Aug 4 10:12:32 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 10:12:32 -0000 Subject: Sally's Spirit WAS Re: Shared thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108783 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Eustace_Scrubb" wrote: > Well, that does pose a problem (or several), doesn't it? > > First, there's the timeline and what Tom Riddle's memory says in CoS. > Tom heard about the Chamber and determined to find it during his > second year (1938, according to the HP-Lexicon timeline). Hearing a > school legend and deciding to seek it out does not indicate that he's > already possessed by Spirit!Slytherin. It may well indicate Tom's > developing into a good target for said possession, though. (Seek and > ye shall find?) > > From the same source, though, the date for the opening of the Chamber > is 1942 (the end of Tom's fifth year, just over 50 years prior to the > start of Harry's second year). Now since Grindelwald was defeated in > 1945, one of the few actual dates given by JKR, that's a bigger > problem. I would assume that at the time Tom enters the Chamber, the > possession proposed by Kneasy and others would have to take effect. > This _would_ seem to cast doubt on the wandering-spirit theory, though > not necessarily on the Possessed!Tom theory...unless maybe it took 3 > years to defeat Grindelwald once he'd been abandoned (or unless...and > this may well be...JKR hasn't developed the back-timeline to the > extent that HP-Lexicon and fandom have inferred). > Kneasy: How certain is this timeline? Yes, it was 50 years since the last opening of the Chamber, but my understanding is that CoS was set in 1995 or maybe a year or so later. If that's wrong then the idea of Sally as an itinerant troubador of discord is more or less up the pictures. Not that it's an essential element of the basic hypothesis, but it would have been an additional juicy morsel to speculate on. E.S.: > It would have been much easier to follow had Salazar done the sensible > thing and put his essence/spirit/malice into a nice three-dimensional > object (ring, amulet, broach, any of the usual things would do) that > could slip off its host treacherously when it was ready to move on! > Kneasy: You're not the first to bemoan the lack of a McGuffin. It makes it much easier to keep score and Voldy would have no trouble writing a nice, clear Mission Statement. Unless..... what if Harry is the McGuffin? From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Aug 4 10:24:42 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 10:24:42 -0000 Subject: Sally's Spirit WAS Re: Shared thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108784 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > Kneasy: > How certain is this timeline? > Yes, it was 50 years since the last opening of the Chamber, but my > understanding is that CoS was set in 1995 or maybe a year or so later. Geoff; Surely it's fairly well established that Harry was born in 1980 so his First Year at Hogwarts was 1991/2 and thus his Second Year was 1992/3. Harry hears the Basilisk's voice for the first time after doing his detention with Lockhart in September 1992 which dates the previous events as 1942, if it is exactly the 50th anniversary. From patientx3 at aol.com Wed Aug 4 10:25:30 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 10:25:30 -0000 Subject: Just a comment about Lupin's malady. In-Reply-To: <20040804002336.48172.qmail@web53503.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108785 HunterGreen previously: >It very well could be that Sirius didn't >exactly suspect Lupin of being a spy, but just had a general feeling >of mistrust about him. However, though, this doesn't explain why >James and Lily went along with it. Remember, who they chose as a >secret-keeper was up to them. They could have chose Lupin if they >wanted to, but they went with Peter. Why? Lanthiriel replied: >> I have always thought that it was a simple process of elimination. [snip] That leaves Peter and Remus. Of the two, Remus is a dark creature - a member of a species highly distrusted, even feared, by most of the wizarding world. Even though they had supported Remus through their years at Hogwarts, perhaps it was just easier to believe that he (because of his condition) could go over to Voldemort's cause rather than little Peter, who - from what we know of him as a young man - seems to have been rather inept (or at least pretending to be inept) and a bit on the dim (or at least immature) side (I'm taking this from the "Snape's Worst Memory" chapter of OotP). << HunterGreen: That just doesn't sit well with me. I can't see James and Sirius suddenly turning on Lupin based only on his condition which had never been an issue before. I especially can't see Lily doing that (I imagine she would be warmer to Lupin than she would to Peter, since Lupin was the least supportive of the behavior in the pensieve flashback that she was very much against). There had to be something *more* than just the werewolfness. Personally, I think it was ESE! Lupin acting a little odd, something that Sirius (and perhaps James and Lily as well), picked up on. Or, as it was suggested upthread, Sirius and Lupin had a splintered relationship following the prank so Sirius naturally suggested Peter over him (and we don't know *for sure* that Lily and James took Sirius' suggestion...). From j.balfour at leedsmet.ac.uk Wed Aug 4 10:47:52 2004 From: j.balfour at leedsmet.ac.uk (Boolean) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 10:47:52 -0000 Subject: OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: <20040804051520.OZKV1721.imf16aec.mail.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108786 > Melanie: > > 6) Why is it that even Voldemort's own followers cannot say his > > name? Is there significance in calling him the Dark Lord? > > Cassin: > > Only a wizard of equal or greater power would dare. Such as > > Dumbledore. Harry's got a lot of brass. He's also marked as > > Voldemort's equal. Dammona: > I think the reason no one says Lord Voldemort's name is the result of > an old wives tale. They believed if evil's name was mentioned, they > would appear: speak of the devil.. Just an idea. Me: I think the issue that is more pertinent here is why Snape says Dark Lord rather than You-Know-Who. Old DE habits die hard? Or a clue that Snape is not in fact loyal to the OotP? If so it's a bit of an obvious one. From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Wed Aug 4 10:57:48 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 10:57:48 -0000 Subject: Sally's Spirit WAS Re: Shared thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108787 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" > wrote: > > > Kneasy: > > How certain is this timeline? > > Yes, it was 50 years since the last opening of the Chamber, but my > > understanding is that CoS was set in 1995 or maybe a year or so > later. > > Geoff; > Surely it's fairly well established that Harry was born in 1980 so > his First Year at Hogwarts was 1991/2 and thus his Second Year was > 1992/3. Harry hears the Basilisk's voice for the first time after > doing his detention with Lockhart in September 1992 which dates the > previous events as 1942, if it is exactly the 50th anniversary. Carolyn: Alas, RL has temporarily interrupted the post I was writing in response to Kneasy, but on timelines, may I respectfully refer you gents to my post: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/106265 and Pip's much funnier reply: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/106272 What is bothering me about all this possession stuff is that, frankly, Voldie/Tom has not been that great a catch for Salazar, has he? Waits 1000 years, finds a suitable victim, who then cocks things up on a mega scale. After 20 years in the wilderness trying to get the Evil Overlord rules by heart, Voldie finally has a go at carrying out Salazar's commands, succeeds up to a point, but screws up with Harry, gets banished again, and then he re-appears as a cardboard cut- out that really wouldn't frighten anyone. As jodel_from_aol pointed out in the Changeling theory "his [Voldie's] performances reflect nothing of the charisma and power that they must once have displayed. The current Lord Voldemort is quite literally 'not all there' ". Either JKR is amazed we don't find him frightening (rather in the same way that she is apparently taken aback by the massed enthusiasm for Snape & Draco), or she is having us on, yet again, and the real evil that Harry is up against is something rather different and yet to be explained. Carolyn From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 4 11:19:05 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 07:19:05 -0400 Subject: Hermione in Gryffindor? Message-ID: <002401c47a14$db01cf40$2dc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108788 Alla: "As we know, Hat wanted to put Hermione in Ravenclaw. G-d knows, this girl is smart enough for that House. :o) So, to answer your question, I think Hermione's sorting was similar to Harry's (as I think was Neville's). They both chose Gryffindor over other houses emphasizing once again the importance of our choices." DuffyPoo: Harry never, in canon, 'chose' Gryffindor. All he said to the hat was "not Slytherin, not Slytherin" based on what Hagrid had said "There's not a single witch or wizard who went bad who wasn't in Slytherin. You-Know-Who was one," and the conversation on the train with Hermione 'hoping' to be in Gryffindor (a good reason to not want to be), and with Ron about Slytherin House and "whatever house *she's* in, I hope I'm not in it." The Sorting Hat knew enough not to put HP in Ravenclaw, when he said 'not Slytherin.' It must have seen that he was more 'brave at heart, daring, chivalrous, than just, loyal, patient, true and unafraid of toil.' The Sorting Hat's song first year says "You might belong in Gryffindor, Where dwell the brave at heart, Their daring, nerve and chivalry Set Gryffindors apart. You might belong in Hufflepuff, Where they are just and loyal, Those patient Hufflepuffs are true and unafraid of toil" What, in that, would make Neville, choose Gryffindor over Hufflepuff? His Grandmother would wet herself laughing if she ever found out Neville 'chose' Gryffindor. The only thing that could possibly make him decide on Gryffindor was that Hermione, who helped him look for Trevor, was sorted there ahead of him. I only have one problem with the kid choosing the house theory. What about the Muggle-borns who, unlike Hermione, didn't read every blessed thing they could lay their hand to, and thus already have made up their minds? They barely have time to make an informed choice about what house to go into from the Sorting Hat's song before they're in the processes of being sorted. Particularly poor Hannah Abbott who was first in line that year.(I'm not saying she's Muggle-born, just that she would, most likely, be under stress at the moment as well.) I'm sure a lot of the kids felt just like Harry did while waiting his turn to be sorted "The hat seemed to be asking rather a lot; Harry didn't feel brave or quick-witted or any of it at the moment. If only the hat had mentioned a house for people who felt a bit queasy, that would have been the one for him....He was starting to feel definitely sick now. He remembered being picked for teams during sports lessons at his old school....What if he wasn't chosen at all? What if he just sat there with the hat over his eyes for ages..." Also "...then it was Ron's turn. He was pale geen by now." We also see the Sorting Hat taking it's own good time with some choices "Seamus, the sandy-haired boy next to Harry in the line, sat on the stool for almost a whole minute before the hat declared him a Gryffindor." If it had been Seamus' decision to go to Gryffindor, it should have been on and off like Draco Malfoy's. And the hat certainly seemed to be trying to come to some kind of decision when HP heard it say "Hmm. Difficult. Very difficult. Plenty of courage, I see. Not a bad mind, either. There's talent, oh my goodness, yes - and a nice thrist to prove yourself, now that's interesting.....So where shall I put you?" Then it seemed to be trying to convince him he may be wrong in deciding against Slytherin, before it decided to put him in Gryffindor. The Sorting Hat is there to sort. To do the job that GG, SS, HH, RR, all did when they were at the school to do the choosing themselves. They didn't ask the kid what house they wanted to go to (I'm quite sure). OotP "For each of the four founders had a house in which they might take only those they wanted, so, for instance, Slytherin took only pure-blood wizards of great cunning, just like him, and only those of sharpest mind were taught by Ravenclaw while the bravest and the boldest went to daring Griffindor. Good Hufflepuff, she took the rest, and taught them all she knew." Now sorting and separating is the Sorting Hat's job. GoF "While still alive they did divide their favourites from the throng, yet how to pick the worthy ones when they were dead and gone? 'Twas Gryffindor who found the way, he whipped me off his head. The founders put some brains in me so *I* could choose instead! Now slip me snug about your ears, I've never yet been wrong, I'll have a look inside your mind and tell where you belong!" Why would the Sorting Hat need brains to simply sing out what house the student chose to be in? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 4 11:43:42 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 07:43:42 -0400 Subject: bee from OotP lodged in my bonnet Message-ID: <003101c47a18$4afffa30$2dc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108789 upulwan80 "In chapter 14 of OotP (Percy and Padfoot: page 268 in the hardback in Australia), after Ron's chucked Percy's mutilated sermon into the Gryffindor fire, Hermione holds her hand out for Ron's essay, with 'an odd expression on her face'. Any ideas what that expression might be? And yes I'm quite aware that this may turn into a shipping matter, but I think there is a good balance of all kinds of shippers and non-shippers out there for me to be able to glean a reasonable response??" DuffyPoo: I'm sure someone here will prove me wrong, but I think the odd expression came from sympathy for what Ron was just going through, the contents of Percy's letter, and weighing the decision to help these two with their homework again after telling them she would not. "How would it be, ' she asked them coldly, as they left the classroom for break 'if I refused to lend you my notes this year?' "Listen...shall we just ask Hermione if we can have a look at what's she's done?" "No," he [Harry] said heavily, "you know she won't let us." Then at half past eleven Hermione wanders over. "Nearly done?" "No," said Ron shortly. Then she corrects, over his shoulder, a mistake his has made about Jupiter's biggest moon. "Yeah, well, if you've just come over her to criticise ---" then Hermes shows up with the letter. They all read the letter and Ron rips it up and chucks it in the fire. "Come on, we've got to get this finished sometime before dawen," he [Ron] said briskly to Harry, pulling Professor Sinistra's essay back towards him. Then comes the look 'Hermine was looking at Ron with an odd expression on her face.' "oh, give them here, ' she said abruptly.....'Give them to me. I'll look through them and correct them." "Are you serious? Ah, Hermione, you're a life-saver,' said Ron, 'What can I ---?" "What you can say is, 'we promise we'll never leave our homework this late again."....but she looked slightly amused all the same. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 4 11:49:33 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 07:49:33 -0400 Subject: Hermione Granger's birthday Message-ID: <003a01c47a19$1c81dba0$2dc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108790 RM McDougal wrote: > Regarding Hermione Granger's birthday -- September 19th. > > Did you know that September is "the seventh month"? Inge: "In the very old days the year calender was different and September was in fact the 7th month. The last 4 months of the year have all been named after a number as in Sept = 7 Oct = 8 Nov = 9 Dec =10" DuffyPoo: Interesting. Is this pointing, RM McDougal, to the possiblity that Hermione may fulfill the prophecy? The problem comes in with the Prophecy: 'and the Dark Lord will mark *him* as his equal, but *he* will have powers the Dark Lord knows not.' So, unless the prophecy is even less specific that we have already been led to believe, can this part be fulfilled by a girl? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From drliss at comcast.net Wed Aug 4 12:05:10 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (drliss at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 12:05:10 +0000 Subject: bee from OotP lodged in my bonnet Message-ID: <080420041205.15711.4110D0F60000841F00003D5F22007623029C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 108791 Subject: "upulwan80" Hello everyone, First time poster here, so please pardon any transgressions, repetitions, redundancies etc.. if you point them out to me with compassion I promise I won't repeat them. I don't know if what I'm about to ask has already been discussed (yes I did read the OotP FAQ and it wasn't there), so if it has been please put me out of my misery and tell me where! In chapter 14 of OotP (Percy and Padfoot: page 268 in the hardback in Australia), after Ron's chucked Percy's mutilated sermon into the Gryffindor fire, Hermione holds her hand out for Ron's essay, with 'an odd expression on her face'. Any ideas what that expression might be? And yes I'm quite aware that this may turn into a shipping matter, but I think there is a good balance of all kinds of shippers and non-shippers out there for me to be able to glean a reasonable response?? Lissa: First off, welcome! I actually didn't take this as a romantic thing at all (although I fall into the Ron/Hermione camp). I took this as Hermione seeing through Ron and Harry's bravado and knowing just how badly Percy's letter upset them. I think Hermione doesn't know what to say after they get Percy's letter. And who can blame her? What CAN she say? "It's all right?" The boys know perfectly well he's not. "He doesn't know what he's saying?" Percy seems perfectly coherent in that message. "You don't need him?" She knows that's a lie too, and although Percy may drive Ron nuts, his defection hurts. "It'll all come right in the end?" Who knows if that's true? And as Mrs. Weasley's said earlier, with most of the family in the Order and Percy not speaking to them... what if one of them dies before they can make up? Hermione so often knows what to say, and is a pretty good judge of emotions. (See her analysis of Cho.) I think that odd expression was Hermione being at a complete loss- something Harry and Ron NEVER see! Lissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 4 12:13:07 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 08:13:07 -0400 Subject: Half-bloods, Pure-bloods, etc. (was Re: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry) Message-ID: <004b01c47a1c$673f4850$2dc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108792 Boolean "But but but...Harry *isn't* a half-blood is he??? James & Lily were witch and wizard, therefore Harry is pure-blood, no? I though half-blood only applied to the child of a couple made up of a witch/wizard and a Muggle? " DuffyPoo: There only seems to be three destinctions of blood purity, half-blood, pure-blood and Muggle-born. No quarter-blood, eigth-blood, etc. A person is either a pure-blood or Muggle born....everybody else is half-blood. Half-blood refers to, or seems to at least, anyone who is not pure-blood (from a Malfoy perspective) or Muggle-born. Lily was Muggle-born - two Muggle parents, James was a wizard (both magical parents as far as we know), so HP is half-blood. Mrs. Riddle was a witch, Mr. Riddle was a Muggle, Tom Riddle is a half-blood as well. I am assuming, only assuming, it would go back even farther as well. If there's a muggle in the ancestry anywhere, any resulting wizard/witch is half-blood. It all goes to the purity of blood issue. A person's opinion of 'pure-blood' comes from their own prejudice. This is my theory, at least. To Malfoy, Sr., or the Black family, a person can only be a pure-blood if they can trace their family back through generations upon generations and find nothing but magical ancestors. This would not be the same definition of pure-blood to a family like the Weasley's or to Dumbledore. Dumbledore considers the Weasleys "one of our most prominent pure-blood families." Yet when Sirius and HP are discussing the Black family tapestry he talks about being related to both Arthur and Molly, then he says "but there's no point looking for them on here - if ever a family was a bunch of blood traitors it's the Weasleys." (Blood traitors from the Black Family prejudice, I might add, not Sirius's own belief.) Why? He had just pointed out that "Andromeda's sisters are still here because they made lovely, respectable pure-blood mariages, but Andromeda married a Muggle-born, Ted Tonks, so " she and the whole family had been blasted off the tapestry. Why? Because they are blood traitors. Andromeda didn't have the sense to marry a pure-blood but brought Muggles into the family line. I can only surmise, then, that the Weasleys have done the same, married Muggle-borns or half-bloods at some point and are thereby considered blood traitors by people like the Blacks/Malfoys....but not by people who don't share that kind of prejudice, Dumbledore for example. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 12:17:48 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 12:17:48 -0000 Subject: OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108793 > Potioncat wrote:: > Two points. > I'm not sure, but I had the impression that hearing "Voldemort" > caused pain to the DEs. And along with that, possibly alerted LV. Alla: Oh, you mean that Dark mark is "programmed" to react to the name in the negative way? If that is the reason, I guess I can understand that. Potioncat: > Also, Snape isn't the only adult to tell Harry not to say Voldemort. > > I'm not saying Harry should't say Voldemort...just that I can see > why Snape doesn't want him to. Alla: But that is exactly the point. All other adults who don't want Harry to say Voldemort are afraid of him. Is Snape? From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Wed Aug 4 12:37:24 2004 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 12:37:24 -0000 Subject: Hermione Granger's birthday In-Reply-To: <003a01c47a19$1c81dba0$2dc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108794 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: >> RM McDougal wrote: Regarding Hermione Granger's birthday -- September 19th. Did you know that September is "the seventh month"?<< >>Inge: "In the very old days the year calender was different and September was in fact the 7th month. The last 4 months of the year have all been named after a number as in Sept = 7 Oct = 8 Nov = 9 Dec =10"<< >>DuffyPoo: Interesting. Is this pointing, RM McDougal, to the possiblity that Hermione may fulfill the prophecy? The problem comes in with the Prophecy: 'and the Dark Lord will mark *him* as his equal, but *he* will have powers the Dark Lord knows not.' So, unless the prophecy is even less specific that we have already been led to believe, can this part be fulfilled by a girl?<< Inge again: I do not for a second believe that Hermione is the one to fulfill the prophecy. For several reasons: 1) September being the 7th month was too long ago to have any meaning anymore. And even *if*.... Hermione is born on the 19th which is not at the end of the month. 2) The prophecy doesn't refer directly to a *she*. 3) There is no canon at all to support Hermiones parents to have been in a fight with Voldemort ever - nor that they would have defied him even once. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 4 12:38:51 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 08:38:51 -0400 Subject: To Where To When (TimeTurning that may make sense) Message-ID: <004f01c47a1f$ff8f9030$2dc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108795 Valky "1 Who broke into Gringotts in PS/SS and attempted to take the Stone. We are given to assume, that QuirrelMort was the culprit. However, what if he was aware the stone was being transported to Hogwarts, already? It might have taken him sometime to aquire the troll. And even if it was QuirrelMort after the stone in London, Who foiled them? Who might have known that they would be there? Certainly noone suspected them in these early chapters of the books. A peripheral event that *did* happen and as yet *no actual culprits*. Therefore if I were an experienced TimeMastering Wizard I might be inclined to suspect that something has happened in *time*. Such as if I were DD and didn't already know what had happened, which he might. Does everyone get what I mean here? The imperative is the identification, then you can say hmmm there *might* be 'time' there. DuffyPoo now: It was all in the Daily Prophet: "Investigations continue into the break-in at Gringotts on 31 July, widely believed to be the work of Dark wizards or witches unknown. Gringotts' goblins today insisted that nothing had been taken. The vault that was searched had in fact been emptied the same day." It would have to be Dark witches or wizards, who else would be able to get past the door "He stroked the door gently with one of his long fingers and it simply melted away. 'If anyone but a Gringotts goblin tried that, they'd be sucked through the door and trapped in there,' said Griphook." Quirrell is the one who broke into Gringotts because he says so, "When I failed to steal the stone from Gringotts, he (LV) was most displeased." No one 'foiled' them. Quirrel got in, opened the vault (Dark Magic, Quirrell is the DADA teacher after all), found the stone gone and left. What the Goblins had to go on was the open vault or some Dark Wizard Catcher device going off - a sneakoscope perhaps? Valky again: 2. How did it 'become clear' to Dumbledore to return to Hogwarts when he was in London at the end of PS/SS. It might have been an intuition or realisation of present facts, and ordinarily we could just dismiss it as one such. However since I have already placed time events in London in PS/SS I am beginning to suspect London in PS/SS is somewhere that the story may go. The short theory is that DD goes to London *because* something fishy *is* going down there, but when he arrives and realises that what's going on there is all future, he rushes back recognising that his place is in the present. DuffyPoo: DD is 'supposed' to be a bright man. Intuition is a great thing when it's followed. Or, look at it this way. DD arrives in London after being summoned "He received an urgent owl from the Ministry of Magic." However, once he gets to the MoM and finds the one who sent the 'urgent owl' they have no idea why DD is there because they never sent an owl. It 'became clear' to DD that he was sent to London by someone trying to lure him away from the castle and immediately head's back to Hogwarts. Josh "Again, the secret may lie in CoS. Harry's Hogwarts letter not only happens to find him at he Burrow, but it has been delivered by Errol (not the fastest owl in the world). Again, it might seem that Dumbledore has extra tabs on Harry, and thus realized the moral peril Harry was facing. He might have flown to London, but coming back was probably apparition or portkey." DuffyPoo: The Hogwarts letters weren't delivered by Errol that morning at the Burrow. Errol had Hermione's reply to Ron's letter. He had flown through the window (presumably before all were up) and flopped into the chair that Percy, later, nearly sat on. Hogwarts letters have always been delivered by school owls as far as we know. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Aug 4 12:39:31 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 12:39:31 -0000 Subject: OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108796 > Alla: > > But that is exactly the point. All other adults who don't want Harry > to say Voldemort are afraid of him. Is Snape? Potioncat: Oh, I would certainly think so! And I would think there is a bit of fear mixed in with Snape's respect for Dumbledore. Fear is too strong a word here, but I can't think of a better one. Potioncat From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Aug 4 13:01:40 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 13:01:40 -0000 Subject: OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108797 Alla: > > But that is exactly the point. All other adults who don't want Harry to say Voldemort are afraid of him. Is Snape?< All the adults, with the possible exception of Dumbledore, are afraid of Voldemort. The point is being willing to say Voldemort's name *even though* you're afraid of him. For most people it's their first act of defiance. But Snape is rather beyond that. Of course it might be the *last* act of defiance for him ::sobs:: Pippin From ladypensieve at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 13:03:20 2004 From: ladypensieve at yahoo.com (Lady Pensieve) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 13:03:20 -0000 Subject: Snape fears Dumbledore? (Was OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chapter 24: Occlumency) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108798 > > Alla:> > But that is exactly the point. All other adults who don't want Harry to say Voldemort are afraid of him. Is Snape? > > Potioncat: Oh, I would certainly think so! And I would think there is a bit of fear mixed in with Snape's respect for Dumbledore. Fear is too strong a word here, but I can't think of a better one. > Potioncat I don't think it's fear. I think somehow Snape is mixed up in the Potters demise and his punishment is that he'll never get to be the DADA teacher. It's not so much fear as, Dumbledore knows the truth. Snape may have come in out of the cold a bit too late, or because of the Potters deaths. Kathy From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 13:18:28 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 13:18:28 -0000 Subject: OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108800 > Pippin: > > All the adults, with the possible exception of Dumbledore, are > > afraid of Voldemort. The point is being willing to say Voldemort's > > name *even though* you're afraid of him. For most people it's > > their first act of defiance. But Snape is rather beyond that. Of > > course it might be the *last* act of defiance for him ::sobs:: > > > > > Alla: > > Actually, you are absolutely correct, Pippin. The point is to say the > name despite the fear. So, why Snape does not do that? He cannot > overcome his fear? I disagree though that for most people it is their > first act of defiance. > > For Snape his last one? LOL! From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 4 13:25:13 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 13:25:13 -0000 Subject: Why Voldemort is a fascist... (LONG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108801 Nora Renka wrote: > Why Voldemort is a Fascist, or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and > March in Step (LONG) > > Many an intrepid poster has made the casual invocation of Nazis > (and been toasted by Godwin), but I intend to go one further, being > a member of that class of people that dear Kneasy has so kindly > warned us all about, the academics. The purpose of this post is to > argue that Voldemort's ideal regime, as extrapolated from > information so far, lines up in a number of critical ways with the > theoretical bases of fascist ideology. Fascism is a system > notoriously difficult to define because of its sheer irrationality, > so this analysis posits a particular mutation for the circumstances > of the WW. > > > My gut has been telling me that the fascism analysis works out. > No, it's not exact, as we don't have a kind of solid state > established yet, but I think enough of the aspects correspond > closely enough to make this a theoretical system worth > considering. This could, of course, be utterly destroyed next > book. I hope it has a little more solidity than that. > > The more I think about it, though, the more it seems to me that the > blood ideology is really one of the major driving factors > generating the large-scale conflict that defines the series. It > seems to be a good portion of what attracted Voldemort's followers. > > The blood thing and the related issues are what CoS is really about. > Dumbledore is the guarantor of the Muggleborn students' right to > attend Hogwarts, and this freedom and openness is what Lucius > Malfoy is attempting to attack. It's the forces of reaction versus > the Open Society, a struggle for the public sector. Hogwarts is > the key into being someone and something in wizarding society for > those not born into name and money, and for those people with the > name and the money, these uppity folks are disrupting their > historical privilege, what they think they're entitled to. > > Entitlement is a very dangerous thing. Those who feel entitled to > something often feel entitled to take what they want--and force > seems to be part of what makes something Dark in JKR's world. Is > it any wonder that at least some of the old pureblood families are > connected with Dark Magic, when they already believe that they are > inherently better and are simply taking what is owed to them? The > same thing goes for the treatment of non-humans, particularly house- > elves. SSSusan: Main Entry: fas?cism Pronunciation: 'fa-"shi-z&m also 'fa-"si- Function: noun Etymology: Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces 1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition Well, Nora, I think this is quite an excellent analysis. From the "basic" definition alone (above) it's clear that the match is a good one. There are likely others here who will be more inclined to argue specific points with you because of their deeper knowledge (than mine, that is) of these issues, but I'd like to say I think you did a lovely job of making the topic accessible. It's clear to me that the DEs *are* all about blood ideology. I know that Diary!Tom in CoS claimed that killing mudbloods didn't matter any more, but is that really true? Did he say that simply because his immediate goal was to get Harry out of the way? If he had succeeded in eliminating Harry, what would have happened to the goal of ridding the WW of mudbloods [and the world of Muggles?]? I maintain that it would have popped right back up there to #1. I especially like your point about DD being the guarantor of the muggleborns' right to attend Hogwarts *and* how is seen as clear insubordination [for lack of a better word at the moment] to those who believe in their "right" to the historical privilege they've had due to their name & money. Clearly, you're also right that this is one of the dangers of entitlement: Voldy & the DEs DO feel entitled to their "historical privilege" and DD [and folks like the Weasleys who "waste" this privilege] surely enrage them. Siriusly Snapey Susan From j.balfour at leedsmet.ac.uk Wed Aug 4 13:28:09 2004 From: j.balfour at leedsmet.ac.uk (Boolean) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 13:28:09 -0000 Subject: Half-bloods, Pure-bloods, etc. (was Re: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry) In-Reply-To: <004b01c47a1c$673f4850$2dc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108802 I wrote: > "But but but...Harry *isn't* a half-blood is he??? > > James & Lily were witch and wizard, therefore Harry is pure-blood, > no? > > I though half-blood only applied to the child of a couple made up of > a witch/wizard and a Muggle? " > DuffyPoo replied: > > There only seems to be three destinctions of blood purity, half- blood, pure-blood and Muggle-born. No quarter-blood, eigth-blood, etc. A person is either a pure-blood or Muggle born....everybody else is half-blood. Half-blood refers to, or seems to at least, anyone who is not pure-blood (from a Malfoy perspective) or Muggle- born. Lily was Muggle-born - two Muggle parents, James was a wizard (both magical parents as far as we know), so HP is half-blood. Mrs. Riddle was a witch, Mr. Riddle was a Muggle, Tom Riddle is a half-blood as well. I am assuming, only assuming, it would go back even farther as well. If there's a muggle in the ancestry anywhere, any resulting wizard/witch is half-blood. > > It all goes to the purity of blood issue. A person's opinion of 'pure-blood' comes from their own prejudice. This is my theory, at least. To Malfoy, Sr., or the Black family, a person can only be a pure-blood if they can trace their family back through generations upon generations and find nothing but magical ancestors. This would not be the same definition of pure-blood to a family like the Weasley's or to Dumbledore. Dumbledore considers the Weasleys "one of our most prominent pure-blood families." Yet when Sirius and HP are discussing the Black family tapestry he talks about being related to both Arthur and Molly, then he says "but there's no point looking for them on here - if ever a family was a bunch of blood traitors it's the Weasleys." (Blood traitors from the Black Family prejudice, I might add, not Sirius's own belief.) Why? He had just pointed out that "Andromeda's sisters are still here because they made lovely, respectable pure-blood mariages, but Andromeda married a Muggle-born, Ted Tonks, so " she and the whole family had been blasted off the tapestry. Why? Because they are blood traitors. Andromeda didn't have the sense to marry a pure-blood but brought Muggles into the family line. I can only surmise, then, that the Weasleys have done the same, married Muggle-borns or half-bloods at some point and are thereby considered blood traitors by people like the Blacks/Malfoys....but not by people who don't share that kind of prejudice, Dumbledore for example. > OK, I'm completely with you now! I always found the half-/pure-blood issue confusing up til now, possibly because I didn't think it was relevant (to life in general, not the books!) But thanks for the explanation, and I completely agree with your take on things as far as the opposing views on the issue re the Weasleys. I've just remembered that Ron said something about an uncle being an accountant (IIRC) so that would of course indicate that there is some Muggle blood in the family somewhere along the line. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 4 13:32:18 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 13:32:18 -0000 Subject: Wizard/Muggle "Radar" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108803 Kristen wrote: > Earlier posts speculated about whether Molly might be a weakness in > the OOtP, so I was wondering where Arthur's vulnerabilities might > lie . . . > > This got me thinking: could a wizard "pass" as a muggle to fool > another wizard? (Without the use of some kind of "hiding" spell on > the one's part, or Legilimency on the other's.... > > In other words, if a (convincingly attired) witch or wizard walked > up to Arthur and said, "Hi, I'm Joe/Jane Muggle and I need your > help," would any magical "radar" alert the Arthur that things are > not what they seem? SSSusan: Yea!! Someone who at least believes it's possible Arthur could betray the Order...albeit accidentally. [I'm one of the ones whose pet peeve is people assuming MOLLY will likely betray the Order because of her love for her children...but who seem to believe Arthur is immune from this! I feel that *any* person who deeply loves another is susceptible to this kind of blackmail.] Anyway, to your question. That's interesting--IS there any kind of "wizard detecting" or "muggle detecting" ability inherent in witches & wizards? Not that I'm aware of. But did I miss something in the books? Is this something Aurors are capable of? Anybody have thoughts on this? Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 4 13:55:20 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 13:55:20 -0000 Subject: Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108804 >>2) Harry questions whether or not working with Snape is really helping to close off his mind. Harry believes that it may be making it more open. Is there any truth to Harry's thinking? Would his lessons have gone differently had someone else been in charge of them?<< Huntergreen: > Personally, I don't think another teacher would have had much more > luck than Snape unless they were able to convince Harry that he > *needed* the skill (which, after the Arthur/snake incident, I don't > blame Harry for having misgivings about blocking his mind). SSSusan: While I agree with you that Harry would have be greatly helped by having someone *fully* explain why he needed to block the visions he was having, I disagree with you somewhat about how it might have gone with another teacher. While I think Snape took some steps [for him!] towards being reasonable with Harry in that first lesson, things fell apart yet again. Harry's attitude, Snape's anger, blah blah blah. I think if DD had taught Harry, then 1) Harry would have been *slightly* more likely to have asked questions; and 2) he would have trusted DD more and so would have been calmer, more likely to work harder and thus have been more successful. Of course, I realize that this *couldn't* have happened w/o DD 'fessing up to all that he knew--the Prophecy, his concern about looking into Harry's eyes, etc.--and if that had happened, then Harry WOULD have had a more full explanation. So that fits with your point, Hunter. If DD wasn't ready to spill the beans, then he COULDN'T teach Harry. But still.... As far as we know, there's no one else on staff capable of teaching Harry, so it came to Snape. *If* Flitwick or McGonagall, for instance, had been able, though, I also think Harry would have been more successful simply because the build-up of angry emotion wouldn't have been there. Siriusly Snapey Susan From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 14:01:48 2004 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 14:01:48 -0000 Subject: Shared thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108805 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bex" wrote: > Julie wrote: > > > I still have the question of to whom is the prophecy > > referring? The persons of Tom Riddle and Harry Potter or the > > personas of Lord Voldemort and The Boy Who Lived. I don't have my > > books at work, so I cannot quote the prophecy, so please cut me a > > little canon slack. The one cannot survive while the other lives > > could be referring to the person and persona. Harry Potter cannot > > survive while he still has to be The Boy Who Lived. It may not be > > referring to LV vs HP. > > Yblitzka's turn: > Actually, IMO it is referring to the One vs. the Dark Lord > > text quote: > "The One with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches. Born to > those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies. And > the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have power that > the Dark Lord knows not, and either must die at the hand of the > other, for neither can live while the other survives." > > > It's an interesting thought, but I don't think it works. The prophecy > is worded such that if what you are arguing is true, then the Dark > Lord knows not of the power of his person, or Harry has a power > unknown to his persona. It just doesn't seem right. > > HOWEVER, you do have one point that I wholeheartedly agree with: the > prophecy does not mention persons, just personas. Many people are > taking this to mean that "The One" is really Neville, but that's not > an arguement for this particular thread. The words say Dark Lord and > The One, not Tom Riddle and Harry Potter. So it's possible that Tom > will be separated from LV (the Dark Lord), and that will play a role > in how he is defeated. Perhaps TR will not die. He was once a good > kid too, ya know... > > ~Yb I agree with your point about having the power and not knowing it, and how can that be logical. The one way this cold be possible, alhtough I don't know about plausible, is if the hypthesis regarding Tom Riddle's soul residing in Harry is accurate. I've read it; sounds interesting; just not bandwagon material for me. Julie From vmonte at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 14:06:37 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 14:06:37 -0000 Subject: Just a comment about Lupin's malady. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108806 HunterGreen: That just doesn't sit well with me. I can't see James and Sirius suddenly turning on Lupin based only on his condition which had never been an issue before. I especially can't see Lily doing that (I imagine she would be warmer to Lupin than she would to Peter, since Lupin was the least supportive of the behavior in the pensieve flashback that she was very much against). There had to be something *more* than just the werewolfness. Personally, I think it was ESE! Lupin acting a little odd, something that Sirius (and perhaps James and Lily as well), picked up on. Or, as it was suggested upthread, Sirius and Lupin had a splintered relationship following the prank so Sirius naturally suggested Peter over him (and we don't know *for sure* that Lily and James took Sirius' suggestion...). vmonte responds: I agree with you comments above HunterGreen. I wonder where Lupin was during the Godric's Hollow attack? I'm not convinced of the ESE Lupin theory, but something major must have happened to make Sirius distrustful of Lupin. I wonder if the reason they were suspicious was because Lupin disappeared a few days before the attack? Did James and Sirius find the remains of someone that looked they were killed by a werewolf attack? I keep wondering if Lupin is hiding something from the Order? Did he wake up during the week of the GH events with blood on his face and hands? Does/did he think that he killed James? (Didn't the movie say something about a werewolf will not recognize and/or will kill his best friend?) What if Lupin was framed to believe that he had a hand in James death? His comments to Harry during PoA: "You heard James?" would then mean: 'How could that be?' 'He was dead already?' He may have run away in fear of what he had done. None of this is based on canon. Just wondering... Vivian From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 4 14:31:00 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 10:31:00 -0400 Subject: Harry Potter vs. Lord of the Rings Message-ID: <000a01c47a2f$abbdc9d0$82c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108807 This is only my opinion if you're interested in reading the books. Harry Potter (HP to save myself typing) is by far the easier read for several reasons. Lord of the Rings (LOTR) is set in a completely made up fantasy world, in a completely different, long-ago time. The language is different, it's older style English, and some Elvish (an invented language, most of which is translated in the books). The main story of HP starts in 1991. It is a fantasy world, but it is a magical world within the normal world of the United Kingdom. The magical world is, for the most part, hidden from the normal world, but you see enough of the normal world to know it is there. The language, apart from magical words that you will learn the meaning of in the books, is the same language as we speak (apart from some Britishisms like jumper for sweater and fringe meaning bangs). Professor Tolkien (LOTR) could be a very, very wordy man. He could take several paragraphs to describe what J.K. Rowling (HP) describes in a few sentences. I know people who, when re-reading LOTR, don't read any of the descriptive stuff, just jump from dialogue to dialogue. LOTR is one long book. My single book edition is 1008 pages not including the Appendices (which are a very good read on their own). However, it is mostly published as three books called, in reading order: 'The Fellowship of the Ring', 'The Two Towers', and 'The Return of the King'. You cannot read any one of those books and have any idea of the whole story. (It is sometimes published as seven books, which makes it even worse. However, I've only ever seen this as a boxed set.) HP is one long story. It covers the seven years of magical education Harry Potter receives at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. However, each year of education has been broken into a single, stand-alone-story, book. So you could read, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (book three--year three at Hogwarts) and thoroughly enjoy the book without having read the first two or having any plan to read the next four (only two of which are yet published). The one big difference, as I see it, is this, and this to me, is why the HP books are a more enjoyable read. J.K. Rowling is writing seven mystery books all rolled into one big long mystery story. She drops hints in, say, book one, about something that won't be played out until, possibly, book four. It's the reader's job to find those hints and figure them out. She'll put in a red herring (a subject introduced to divert attention from the truth or matter at issue) to make readers think that bit of information is very important, and the reader has to figure out, for themselves, whether or not it is imortant. For example, a wizard named Dedalus Diggle has been seen or spoken of in the books four or five times. Nothing of any major importance so far. The question is, is he going to be important to the story in the two remaining books or is he a red herring....someone J.K. Rowling has put in the books to make readers stew and question, making them overlook something very important, when he is really no one? So, you have to pay attention to every word, every phrase, every person in the books no matter how small their part may seem. (A perfect example is, there was a person mentioned in the fifth chapter of the first HP book. It appears he is no one special. Someone just mentioned in passing. However, along in one of the other books, this person becomes extremely important as the story is played out.) HP isn't a book like Danielle Steel would write that you sit down, read it, and forget it. HP makes you think, and wonder, and theorize, and speculate, and sit on the edge of your seat waiting for the next book, so you can see if any of your theories and speculations have been realized. At least that's my view. Lots of people read them and never think about them again. Don't make connections that are meant to be made, don't go chasing red herrings. Read them like reading the Little House books. You can read them that way, but you miss a lot of the fun. Besides, if you're thinking of one for the train, I can get through the first HP book in 8-10 hours reading (217 pages). The LOTR takes me a good week. And you can buy the HP books with 'adult' covers, so people don't know you're reading HP books! ;-) In reading order, then: Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (217 pages) Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (245 pages) Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (311 pages) Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (630 pages) Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (760 pages) Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (not published yet) Harry Potter and ? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Wed Aug 4 14:33:57 2004 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 14:33:57 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Wizard/Muggle "Radar" Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108808 Siriusly Snapey Susan (I think) said: >[I'm one of the ones whose pet peeve is people assuming MOLLY will >likely betray the Order because of her love for her children...but >who seem to believe Arthur is immune from this! I feel that *any* >person who deeply loves another is susceptible to this kind of >blackmail.] Whereas, as I've mentioned elsewhere, I believe that *if* Molly were to betray the Order it would not simply be "because of her love for her children." It would be because her particular manifestation of "her love for her children" makes her take too narrow and limited a view. This is best exemplified by her insisting on protecting the children and denying them (and Harry) access to important information, even when it might be beneficial to the greater good, i.e. the Second Wizarding War. Remember, she didn't want Harry to know the (alleged) backstory about Sirius when they thought he was a deranged criminal who was stalking Harry! I believe it is possible that if her children were threatened by Voldemort, she wouldn't stop to consider things like the fact that Voldemort's word is worthless, that he's capable of kidnapping and killing someone and *then* demanding ransom or information, or even that "threatened men live long." She might just fold. The thing about Arthur is that he *does* see the big picture -- if he didn't, he wouldn't still be poor and working in an office the size of a broom closet, when he could improve his situation with a little short-term schmoozing around the Ministry of Magic and downplaying his pro-Muggle stance. He won't compromise, he won't fold, and he knows what evil is capable of. (Why, yes, I do admire Arthur. He reminds me of my own father.) Of course he has his own faults -- Ron didn't inherit that quick temper and prickly response to insults from thin air. The scene in the bookshop between Arthur and Lucius was all too similar to the many encounters between Ron and Draco. >Anyway, to your question. That's interesting--IS there any kind >of "wizard detecting" or "muggle detecting" ability inherent in >witches & wizards? Not that I'm aware of. But did I miss something >in the books? Is this something Aurors are capable of? Well, there's one case where muggle detecting seems to occur: when Harry does magic and gets nasty letters for it, one of the aggravating circumstances is that muggles are present. This is true not just when he's in the Dursley house, but when he's in a dark alley with Dudley. The letter in that case specified that a muggle being present made things worse. But I don't know how they could tell, any more than I understand the entire magic detection system that's in use with Harry. Janet Anderson _________________________________________________________________ Overwhelmed by debt? Find out how to Dig Yourself Out of Debt from MSN Money. http://special.msn.com/money/0407debt.armx From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Aug 4 14:40:02 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 14:40:02 -0000 Subject: Creating Identity (Re: Why Voldemort is a fascist... ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108809 First, Nora, excellent thoughts here. I'm just going to comment on a couple of your ideas, so there's snipping ): Nora: > 2) Voldemort has created an origin mythology for himself as the > Heir of Slytherin. For evidence that this has spread, witness > Bellatrix' freakout upon being told the truth about him by Harry: > she screams that it's lies from Harry's halfblood mouth. This > is the reaction of someone with a serious, actual, investment in > what she's been told. There is very little evidence for what the > DEs know about Voldemort's actual background, so this situation is > particularly important--one of his most loyal servants doesn't > know, so there's no reason to assume that this knowledge is wide- > spread. Jen: It never occurred to me Riddle may have created his identity, but you make it sound so obvious! I believed he pieced together his origin with half-truths & inaccuracies, yes, but some bits of truth as well. Growing up in a Muggle orphanage would make it extremely difficult to find out his true origins though, specifically his magical ancestry. And you make a good case for most of it being a fabrication. Wonder if he's even related to Slytherin on his mom's side? It seems fantastic that he could trace that. As Kneasy and Pippin have both commented, I think he became Heir of Slytherin through opening the chamber and not before, but it seemed plausible to me that he may have been descended from Slytherin as well. Now I wonder. Maybe when Riddle opened the chamber he *assumed* the idea that he was related to Slytherin by virtue of finding and opening the chamber. Circular justification. Nora: There is no question that Malfoy feels > challenged by someone like Hermione, Muggleborn and distressingly > competent. She disrupts the way things ought to be, in his ideal > system. Jen: Here's another reason I'd love to find out Dumbledore is half- blood and better yet the HBP--imagine the cognitive dissonance with *that* information--the most powerful wizard by many counts, "the only one he ever feared." How would Lucius, et al, come to terms with the most powerful wizard being a half-blood?!? Come to think of it, Riddle creating his identity would help me understand why he fears DD so much--DD *knows who he really is*. Perhaps DD tried and failed to spread the word about Riddle's origins in the First War, in hopes of making some people think twice before getting in line behind him--"he's not who he says he is, and if he's not, he may be telling you other lies as well." But people like Bella didn't buy it. From patientx3 at aol.com Wed Aug 4 14:44:30 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 14:44:30 -0000 Subject: Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108810 Huntergreen previously: > Personally, I don't think another teacher would have had much more > luck than Snape unless they were able to convince Harry that he > *needed* the skill (which, after the Arthur/snake incident, I don't > blame Harry for having misgivings about blocking his mind). SSSusan replied: >> While I agree with you that Harry would have be greatly helped by having someone *fully* explain why he needed to block the visions he was having, I disagree with you somewhat about how it might have gone with another teacher. [snip] As far as we know, there's no one else on staff capable of teaching Harry, so it came to Snape. *If* Flitwick or McGonagall, for instance, had been able, though, I also think Harry would have been more successful simply because the build-up of angry emotion wouldn't have been there. << HunterGreen: I definitely agree that teaching such a sensitive skill would have been better handled by a teacher who Harry didn't detest (and who didn't detest him better), but I don't think it would have made too much of a difference. Most of Harry's failure with Occulmency had to do with him not taking it seriously. We don't know if practicing outside of the lessons would have made a difference, but it could have for all we know since Harry never bothered. The emotional aspect of learning from Snape made Harry afraid for him to find out he wasn't practicing outside of class, but apparently that wasn't enough for him to actually work at it. Another teacher wouldn't even have that (although there's some evidence that guilt works better on Harry than fear). Snape doesn't really tell Harry what to do, and you're right in saying that Harry doesn't ask questions simply because its Snape and he was not really open to questions. However, that might have been because there wasn't anything more Snape could tell him. He does compare occulmency to throwing off the imperious curse. If you were trying to "teach" someone that, what could you tell them? Not much. Its really more of practice: having the curse put on over and over again until its possible to recoginize and ignore it. That's sort of what Snape was doing, he was using obvious legimency on Harry over and over until Harry learned how to block it. As for the build-up of angry emotion, I think that was necessary in *actually* teaching it to Harry. Otherwise there'd be no assurance he'd be able to do it outside of controlled conditions. The comparison I think of is Hermione and Cho learning how to do the patronus charm without learning how to do it when a dementor is around. Harry learned it against the boggart!dementor, which is much harder. IMO occulmency was doomed to fail. Harry is at an age where biologically he is prone to having far more emotions running through him than an adult. Not only that, in order for occulmency to be any good to him he needs to know how to block his mind at night when he's asleep (which would be a rather thorough mastery of the skill), which is quite different than doing it consciously. The better solution would have been for Dumbledore to have just told him the truth then. Then Harry could just ignore any dreams he might have that are calling him to the DoM. Asking a fifteen-year-old boy to master such a precise and difficult skill in a matter of months is just too much. Even if Harry had been mildly successful, I doubt he would have learned it well enough by the end of the term (which was only six after he started lessons in it) to block his mind while sleeping. He still would have had the dream calling him to the DoM in June. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 4 14:53:24 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 10:53:24 -0400 Subject: Just a comment about Lupin's malady. Message-ID: <002501c47a32$cb734860$82c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108812 HunterGreen: "That just doesn't sit well with me. I can't see James and Sirius suddenly turning on Lupin based only on his condition which had never been an issue before. I especially can't see Lily doing that (I imagine she would be warmer to Lupin than she would to Peter, since Lupin was the least supportive of the behavior in the pensieve flashback that she was very much against). There had to be something *more* than just the werewolfness." vmonte responds: " I wonder where Lupin was during the Godric's Hollow attack? I'm not convinced of the ESE Lupin theory, but something major must have happened to make Sirius distrustful of Lupin." DuffyPoo: Perhaps it is simply, as someone posted recently, that the Order was being picked off one by one (Marlene McKinnon killed two weeks after the 'picture' was taken, Benji Fenwick, Edgar Bones, they got him and his family, too, Caradoc Dearborn, vanished six months after the picture was taken, Gideon and Fabian Prewett, Dorcas Meadowes killed by LV himself), and, as DD suspected there was 'still' a spy, everyone was suspicious of everyone else. Lupin, and the others, had a reason to suspect Sirius - his brother Regulus was a DE at that time. Regulus and Sirius may not have been friends, but Regulus' connection to LV could be enough to raise suspicion. Lupin, casting suspicion on Sirius because of Regulus is enough for Sirius to suspect Lupin...Lupin is trying to cover his own furry backside, by casting suspicion on Sirius. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Aug 4 14:53:57 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 14:53:57 -0000 Subject: Sally's Spirit WAS Re: Shared thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108813 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" > wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" > > wrote: > > > > > Kneasy: > > > How certain is this timeline? > > > Yes, it was 50 years since the last opening of the Chamber, but my > > > understanding is that CoS was set in 1995 or maybe a year or so > > later. > > > > Geoff; > > Surely it's fairly well established that Harry was born in 1980 so > > his First Year at Hogwarts was 1991/2 and thus his Second Year was > > 1992/3. Harry hears the Basilisk's voice for the first time after > > doing his detention with Lockhart in September 1992 which dates the > > previous events as 1942, if it is exactly the 50th anniversary. > > Carolyn: > Alas, RL has temporarily interrupted the post I was writing in > response to Kneasy, but on timelines, may I respectfully refer you > gents to my post: Geoff: Which only underlines my own comments on dates. Mark you, looking at Pippin's analysis of what Voldemort had to do, I think that, from my own experience, the most substantive and most productive is item 9a. :-) From drliss at comcast.net Wed Aug 4 14:57:28 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (drliss at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 14:57:28 +0000 Subject: Just a comment about Lupin's malady Message-ID: <080420041457.13383.4110F957000DC4800000344722007511509C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 108815 -------------- Original message -------------- > > vmonte responds: > > I agree with you comments above HunterGreen. I wonder where Lupin was > during the Godric's Hollow attack? I'm not convinced of the ESE Lupin > theory, but something major must have happened to make Sirius > distrustful of Lupin. I wonder if the reason they were suspicious was > because Lupin disappeared a few days before the attack? Did James and > Sirius find the remains of someone that looked they were killed by a > werewolf attack? > > I keep wondering if Lupin is hiding something from the Order? Did he > wake up during the week of the GH events with blood on his face and > hands? Does/did he think that he killed James? (Didn't the movie say > something about a werewolf will not recognize and/or will kill his > best friend?) What if Lupin was framed to believe that he had a hand > in James death? His comments to Harry during PoA: "You heard James?" > would then mean: 'How could that be?' 'He was dead already?' > > He may have run away in fear of what he had done. > > None of this is based on canon. Just wondering... > > Vivian > Lissa: (BTW- I apologize if a non-answered email came through from me. Stupid puter.) Here's a thought I just had... What if Peter put the Imperius curse on Lupin to get him to do something? A lot of people were being controlled by the Imperius curse, and Peter obviously has no problems with some of these Unforgivable Curses... what if there was something the Order had that Voldemort needed, or information that was needed? The main problem, of course, is that people seem to be able to tell when they've had the curse placed on them. Wouldn't that have meant that Lupin knew that Peter was the spy? (Unless a.) he couldn't tell who'd done it, or b.) he thought Sirius did it?) Just a thought. Liss [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From snowwy54 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 15:03:44 2004 From: snowwy54 at yahoo.com (Susan Snow) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 08:03:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Wizard/Muggle "Radar" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040804150344.62482.qmail@web41313.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108816 --- cubfanbudwoman wrote: > Kristen wrote: > > help," would any magical "radar" alert the Arthur > that things are > > not what they seem? > > > SSSusan: That's interesting--IS > there any kind > of "wizard detecting" or "muggle detecting" ability > inherent in > witches & wizards? Not that I'm aware of. But did > I miss something > in the books? Is this something Aurors are capable > of? My thoughts: I have always sat up alittle straighter when reading [assages inthe bokks when JKR writes about the hair on the back of Harrys neck prickles etc. I have always thought it was some time of forewarning or radar. So maybe he can detect the magical presence of a person Snowwy 54 __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Aug 4 15:06:06 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 15:06:06 -0000 Subject: Hermione Granger's birthday In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108817 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Inge" wrote: > >>Inge: > "In the very old days the year calender was different and September > was in fact the 7th month. The last 4 months of the year have all > been named after a number as in > Sept = 7 > Oct = 8 > Nov = 9 > Dec =10"<< Geoff: If I might be allowed to be pedantic (cries of "What again!"), the numbers come from the Latin words for seven to ten - septem, octo, novem, decem. The calendar was different because it began in March - was this the Julian calendar? - as the corresponding Latin months are September, October, Novembris and December. IIRC,if you look at horoscopes, they ahve a similar structure, beginning somewhere about March. From patientx3 at aol.com Wed Aug 4 15:06:30 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 15:06:30 -0000 Subject: Wizard/Muggle "Radar" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108818 Siriusly Snapey Susan (I think) wrote: >[I'm one of the ones whose pet peeve is people assuming MOLLY will >likely betray the Order because of her love for her children...but >who seem to believe Arthur is immune from this! I feel that *any* >person who deeply loves another is susceptible to this kind of >blackmail.] Janet Anderson replied: >> Whereas, as I've mentioned elsewhere, I believe that *if* Molly were to betray the Order it would not simply be "because of her love for her children." It would be because her particular manifestation of "her love for her children" makes her take too narrow and limited a view. This is best exemplified by her insisting on protecting the children and denying them (and Harry) access to important information, even when it might be beneficial to the greater good, i.e. the Second Wizarding War. Remember, she didn't want Harry to know the (alleged) backstory about Sirius when they thought he was a deranged criminal who was stalking Harry!<< HunterGreen: But not only she was guilty of this. Dumbledore, McGonagal, Fudge (although not ESE!Fudge), and possibly Lupin all were aware of the situation and chose not to warn Harry as well. Arthur was the only one who had any sense. Janet continued: >>I believe it is possible that if her children were threatened by Voldemort, she wouldn't stop to consider things like the fact that Voldemort's word is worthless, that he's capable of kidnapping and killing someone and *then* demanding ransom or information, or even that "threatened men live long." She might just fold.<< HunterGreen: Having a narrow and overprotective stance of your children doesn't necessarily make you stupid though. In that situation I think its more likely that she would freak out and demand that her children stay in order headquarters (or under the watchful eye of her, Arthur or a capable adult wizard) 24 hours a day. I think her paranoia is extreme enough that if she did make some sort of deal for her children's lives she'd worry herself to death about it not working out. I don't think she's capable of trusting something like that. (my mother is actually a lot like Molly, and I know that nothing will make the worrying stop). >>The thing about Arthur is that he *does* see the big picture -- if he didn't, he wouldn't still be poor and working in an office the size of a broom closet, when he could improve his situation with a little short-term schmoozing around the Ministry of Magic and downplaying his pro-Muggle stance. He won't compromise, he won't fold, and he knows what evil is capable of. (Why, yes, I do admire Arthur. He reminds me of my own father.)<< I like Arthur a lot too (in fact he's one of my favorite characters), but all those things you say about him seeing the bigger picture and not trying to schmooze his way to the top by compromising his values can apply to Molly to (by implication). She supports all of those descisons, despite it making life a lot harder for her. SSSusan(?) wrote: >Anyway, to your question. That's interesting--IS there any kind >of "wizard detecting" or "muggle detecting" ability inherent in >witches & wizards? Not that I'm aware of. But did I miss something >in the books? Is this something Aurors are capable of? Janet replied: >>Well, there's one case where muggle detecting seems to occur: when Harry does magic and gets nasty letters for it [snip] But I don't know how they could tell, any more than I understand the entire magic detection system that's in use with Harry.<< HunterGreen: That seems to indicate there is some sort of magic 'radar', or perhaps wizards between the ages of 11 and 17 are 'flagged' somehow (because they can tell when children in wizarding families use magic, which would seem impossible if they are around adult wizards all the time....or maybe they can't tell, which is sort of unfair for muggleborns). That may be the reason that Fudge knew there were no other wizards living near Harry....they keep track of where wizarding families live. As for wizards being able to tell a muggle from a wizard, there's nothing in the books indicating either way. Personally, I think that if a wizard disguised themself as a muggle and strolled up to another wizard calling themselves such, that the wizard would be able to tell. They might be able to 'sense' magical ability (magic is something that is transmitted or 'in the air' somehow, since it causes electricity to not work correctly). I'm sure there's a spell or potion or something that would *prove* either way, but I wonder if they can just 'sense' if someone is magic... From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Aug 4 15:09:54 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 15:09:54 -0000 Subject: Why Voldemort is a fascist... (LONG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108819 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > It's clear to me that the DEs *are* all about blood ideology. I know that Diary!Tom in CoS claimed that killing mudbloods didn't matter any more, but is that really true? Did he say that simply because his immediate goal was to get Harry out of the way? If he had succeeded in eliminating Harry, what would have happened to the goal of ridding the WW of mudbloods [and the world of Muggles?]? < I think the DE movement is fascist and consciously modelled on RL fascism. But Voldemort himself seems more of an opportunist than a fascist. I think the social goals of his movement do not interest him at all. What drives him is his need for personal power, and if he had to wipe out all the purebloods to get it, he would gladly do so. Pureblood supremacy is only a means to an end. He doesn't really believe in it, or he would never have considered Harry a threat. Pippin From patientx3 at aol.com Wed Aug 4 15:14:25 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 15:14:25 -0000 Subject: Just a comment about Lupin's malady In-Reply-To: <080420041457.13383.4110F957000DC4800000344722007511509C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108820 Lissa: >>What if Peter put the Imperius curse on Lupin to get him to do something? A lot of people were being controlled by the Imperius curse, and Peter obviously has no problems with some of these Unforgivable Curses... what if there was something the Order had that Voldemort needed, or information that was needed? The main problem, of course, is that people seem to be able to tell when they've had the curse placed on them. Wouldn't that have meant that Lupin knew that Peter was the spy? (Unless a.) he couldn't tell who'd done it, or b.) he thought Sirius did it?)<< HunterGreen: I like that thought. He could have used a potion in conjunction with the imperious curse that made Lupin lose his memory (perhaps slipped to him right after a werewolf transformation, when Lupin was already confused). During this time Lupin could have done something strange or suspicious (perhaps something in the order that Lupin -- and others -- had access to disappeared) that wasn't enough on its own to prove he was a spy, but enough to make James and Lily and Sirius suspect him enough to not use him as a secret-keeper. I like this theory (aside from the ESE!Lupin one, of course) better than the others, because it would explain why James and Lily would suspect Lupin as well as Sirius. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 4 15:56:31 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 11:56:31 -0400 Subject: Hermione Granger's birthday Message-ID: <001001c47a3b$9cb456a0$59c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108821 RM McDougal wrote: > Regarding Hermione Granger's birthday -- September 19th. > > Did you know that September is "the seventh month"? Inge: "In the very old days the year calender was different and September was in fact the 7th month. The last 4 months of the year have all been named after a number as in Sept = 7 Oct = 8 Nov = 9 Dec =10" DuffyPoo: I apologise for posting to this again but something just dropped into my mind. I'm quite certain it is useless information, but I thought I would throw it out there, to muddy the prophecy waters even more. Every time I pick up a paper and read horoscopes (or horrorscopes, if you prefer) they start at Aries and work their way down, Taurus, Gemini, Cancer, Leo, Virgo to....Libra...which is the 7th sign in the list....Sep 23 to Oct 22. Do we know anyone who was born around the Oct 22? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk Wed Aug 4 15:55:56 2004 From: eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk (iamvine) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 15:55:56 -0000 Subject: Hermione Granger's birthday In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108822 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > If I might be allowed to be pedantic (cries of "What again!"), the > numbers come from the Latin words for seven to ten - septem, octo, > novem, decem. > > The calendar was different because it began in March - was this the > Julian calendar? - as the corresponding Latin months are September, > October, Novembris and December. IIRC,if you look at horoscopes, they > ahve a similar structure, beginning somewhere about March. This got me excited for a minute - Hermione's birthday is near the end of Virgo - but according to this page, the astrological year begins with Aries, making Virgo the sixth month. Ah well. http://www.kelsung.com/calendar/zodiac.htm Eleanor From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 4 15:59:53 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 15:59:53 -0000 Subject: Wizard/Muggle "Radar" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108823 Siriusly Snapey Susan (I think) wrote: [SSS: Yup, it was me!] >>>I'm one of the ones whose pet peeve is people assuming MOLLY will likely betray the Order because of her love for her children...but who seem to believe Arthur is immune from this! I feel that *any* person who deeply loves another is susceptible to this kind of blackmail.<<< Janet Anderson replied: >> Whereas, as I've mentioned elsewhere, I believe that *if* Molly were to betray the Order it would not simply be "because of her love for her children." It would be because her particular manifestation of "her love for her children" makes her take too narrow and limited a view. This is best exemplified by her insisting on protecting the children and denying them (and Harry) access to important information, even when it might be beneficial to the greater good, i.e. the Second Wizarding War. Remember, she didn't want Harry to know the (alleged) backstory about Sirius when they thought he was a deranged criminal who was stalking Harry!<< HunterGreen responded: > But not only she was guilty of this. Dumbledore, McGonagal, Fudge > (although not ESE!Fudge), and possibly Lupin all were aware of the > situation and chose not to warn Harry as well. Arthur was the only > one who had any sense. SSSusan: Janet, that helps to have you explain that it's the PARTICULAR manifestation of her love for her children/for others that makes her a point of vulnerability in your mind. And that's an interesting point, Hunter, that there were several who chose to not inform Harry, though I suspect that for Janet [eeek--speaking for you!] it's the combination of not wanting to tell him crucial information *combined* with her great love that speaks to her "style of love"... and that that style is the weakness? [Have I got that right?] Janet continued: >>I believe it is possible that if her children were threatened by Voldemort, she wouldn't stop to consider things like the fact that Voldemort's word is worthless, that he's capable of kidnapping and killing someone and *then* demanding ransom or information, or even that "threatened men live long." She might just fold.<< HunterGreen: > Having a narrow and overprotective stance of your children doesn't > necessarily make you stupid though. In that situation I think its > more likely that she would freak out and demand that her children > stay in order headquarters (or under the watchful eye of her, > Arthur or a capable adult wizard) 24 hours a day. I think her > paranoia is extreme enough that if she did make some sort of deal > for her children's lives she'd worry herself to death about it not > working out. I don't think she's capable of trusting something like > that. (my mother is actually a lot like Molly, and I know that > nothing will make the worrying stop). SSSusan: I guess it's all in how *rational* or *irrational* one takes Molly to be. WOULD she be capable of stopping to consider? WOULD she think ahead & decide to show her concern by imposing lock-down? Tough call. Janet: >>The thing about Arthur is that he *does* see the big picture -- if he didn't, he wouldn't still be poor and working in an office the size of a broom closet, when he could improve his situation with a little short-term schmoozing around the Ministry of Magic and downplaying his pro-Muggle stance. He won't compromise, he won't fold, and he knows what evil is capable of. (Why, yes, I do admire Arthur. He reminds me of my own father.)<< SSSusan: *THIS* is what I wanted to draw out of someone who feels Molly is different from Arthur! Up to this point, I'd seen no evidence, no canon anecdotes, presented which would demonstrate how they are different or how their reactions to a blackmail-by-threatening-loved- one situation might be different. I'm still not sure I agree, but I appreciate your explanation of why you believe Arthur wouldn't cave. Hunter had replied: > I like Arthur a lot too (in fact he's one of my favorite > characters), but all those things you say about him seeing the > bigger picture and not trying to schmooze his way to the top by > compromising his values can apply to Molly to (by implication). She > supports all of those descisons, despite it making life a lot > harder for her. SSSusan: Again, I think Hunter & Janet are looking at two characters and drawing two different pictures of them, seeing their motivations or actions somewhat differently. The difficulty for me is that imo we haven't seen ENOUGH of them--particularly of Arthur--for me to feel 100% confident in saying "he won't fold" or "she will fold" or "she won't fold" or.... Hunter says Molly supports all Arthur's decisions and so she might be able to see the bigger picture, too. I guess the question, though, is *in the heat of the moment* when a child has been taken, would she stop to consult Arthur & think about the bigger picture? I suspect that Janet is arguing that NO, she would not. Hunter is saying YES, she might well be able to. I'm saying, "She might not be able to...but I'm not yet convinced that Arthur would be able to either." SSSusan wrote: >>>Anyway, to your question. IS there any kind of "wizard detecting" or "muggle detecting" ability inherent in witches & wizards? Not that I'm aware of. But did I miss something in the books? Is this something Aurors are capable of?<<< Janet replied: >>Well, there's one case where muggle detecting seems to occur: when Harry does magic and gets nasty letters for it [snip] But I don't know how they could tell, any more than I understand the entire magic detection system that's in use with Harry.<< HunterGreen: > That seems to indicate there is some sort of magic 'radar', or > perhaps wizards between the ages of 11 and 17 are 'flagged' somehow > (because they can tell when children in wizarding families use > magic, which would seem impossible if they are around adult wizards > all the time....or maybe they can't tell, which is sort of unfair > for muggleborns). That may be the reason that Fudge knew there were > no other wizards living near Harry....they keep track of where > wizarding families live. SSSusan: All I can say to this is YUCK. Seems awfully Big Brotherish to me. Even if the Ministry has means of doing this, I still wonder whether an *individual* would have the ability/mechanism/device necessary. Hunter: > As for wizards being able to tell a muggle from a wizard, there's > nothing in the books indicating either way. Personally, I think > that if a wizard disguised themself as a muggle and strolled up to > another wizard calling themselves such, that the wizard would be > able to tell. They might be able to 'sense' magical ability .... SSSusan: And I tend to think the opposite. Isn't it fun?? :-) Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 4 16:14:34 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 16:14:34 -0000 Subject: Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108824 Huntergreen previously: >>> Personally, I don't think another teacher would have had much more luck than Snape unless they were able to convince Harry that he *needed* the skill (which, after the Arthur/snake incident, I don't blame Harry for having misgivings about blocking his mind).<<< SSSusan replied: >> While I agree with you that Harry would have be greatly helped by having someone *fully* explain why he needed to block the visions he was having, I disagree with you somewhat about how it might have gone with another teacher. [snip] As far as we know, there's no one else on staff capable of teaching Harry, so it came to Snape. *If* Flitwick or McGonagall, for instance, had been able, though, I also think Harry would have been more successful simply because the build- up of angry emotion wouldn't have been there. << HunterGreen again: > I definitely agree that teaching such a sensitive skill would have > been better handled by a teacher who Harry didn't detest (and who > didn't detest him better), but I don't think it would have made too > much of a difference. Most of Harry's failure with Occulmency had > to do with him not taking it seriously. > > Snape doesn't really tell Harry what to do, and you're right in > saying that Harry doesn't ask questions simply because its Snape > and he was not really open to questions. However, that might have > been because there wasn't anything more Snape could tell him. He > does compare occulmency to throwing off the imperious curse. If you > were trying to "teach" someone that, what could you tell them? Not > much. Its really more of practice: having the curse put on over and > over again until its possible to recoginize and ignore it. That's > sort of what Snape was doing, he was using obvious legimency on > Harry over and over until Harry learned how to block it. SSSusan now: But I think there *was* more that a teacher could have said/done, even if permission had not been granted to provide a full explanation (or if the teacher him/herself didn't know the full explanation). I think a different type of teacher might have taken some TIME to help Harry slow down, settle down. Snape explained THAT he needed to clear his mind, rid himself of emotion, but he provided no TIME to do this, nor [and believe me, I *can't* ever picture Snape doing this!] any instruction in HOW to do this. I just think a longer period of introduction & overview would have been the best. I just think that if a teacher saw Harry getting riled up or that he was emotionally charged when arriving [like after seeing Cho], then a period of silence or even chit-chat would have helped him. Again, *no way* I could picture this between Harry & Snape--it's just not "them"! But if it had been Harry & McGonagall? Harry & Flitwick? Harry & Lupin? Possibly, yes. [And, yes, I do know that this is all "what if" because they likely were not capable of teaching it.] HunterGreen: > As for the build-up of angry emotion, I think that was necessary in > *actually* teaching it to Harry. Otherwise there'd be no assurance > he'd be able to do it outside of controlled conditions. SSSusan: I argued this point a day or so ago. *Eventually* I think it would have been important for Harry to study under Snape for these precise reasons. But I'll argue long & hard that with a BEGINNING student, who doesn't even understand the "why" behind the lessons, a slow & gentle start works best. Give the kid a few basic skills, let him try things out in a calm setting, give him some confidence that he understands the process a little big. THEN bring on the big gun. :-) HunterGreen continued: > The better solution would have been for Dumbledore to have just > told him the truth then. SSSusan: And on *this* we reach an accord! Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 4 16:21:04 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 16:21:04 -0000 Subject: Wizard/Muggle "Radar" In-Reply-To: <20040804150344.62482.qmail@web41313.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108825 Kristen wrote: >>> ...would any magical "radar" alert the Arthur that things are not what they seem?<<< SSSusan: >> That's interesting--IS there any kind of "wizard detecting" or "muggle detecting" ability inherent in witches & wizards? Not that I'm aware of. But did I miss something in the books? Is this something Aurors are capable of?<< Susan Snow: > I have always sat up alittle straighter when reading > [assages inthe bokks when JKR writes about the hair on > the back of Harrys neck prickles etc. I have always > thought it was some time of forewarning or radar. So > maybe he can detect the magical presence of a person SSSusan again: Interesting possibility. I know this happened when Ollivander walked into the room. Harry does seem to be sensing SOMETHING and JKR does seem to be giving us a clue...but what is it that he's sensing? Some people have hypothesized that he senses the presence of evil and that Ollivander must be up to no good. I don't think it can be simply "magical presence" that he's sensing, because wouldn't he be having that prickling sensation all the time? Siriusly Snapey Susan From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Wed Aug 4 16:25:22 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (Jo Raggett) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 16:25:22 -0000 Subject: Just a comment about Lupin's malady In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108826 > Lissa: > >>What if Peter put the Imperius curse on Lupin to get him to do > something? >>>>> >>HunterGreen: > I like that thought. He could have used a potion in conjunction with the imperious curse that made Lupin lose his memory (perhaps slipped to him right after a werewolf transformation, when Lupin was already confused). >>>>>>>>> Aggie: I like this thought too! My reservation on it is that if this *had* happened, I doubt that the 2 minutes in the Shreiking Shack would have convinced Lupin to forgive Sirius. Sirius *knew* that Peter was the traitor as he had swapped secret-keeper places with him. Lupin (and why do we call him Lupin and the others by their first name?) wouldn't have known this *and* would have had the added insult of Sirius et al believing *him* to be the traitor. I suppose after 12 years of contemplation, this may have been worked out in Lupin's head already, but I do find it difficult to believe that he would have forgiven them that quickly. That said, it is my favouite theory on why Lupin was distrusted. I am *SO* against ESE!Lupin, yes siree Bob! ;o) From ms_melanie1999 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 16:29:31 2004 From: ms_melanie1999 at yahoo.com (Miss Melanie) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 09:29:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040804162931.78274.qmail@web53409.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108827 SSSusan: I argued this point a day or so ago. *Eventually* I think it would have been important for Harry to study under Snape for these precise reasons. But I'll argue long & hard that with a BEGINNING student, who doesn't even understand the "why" behind the lessons, a slow & gentle start works best. Give the kid a few basic skills, let him try things out in a calm setting, give him some confidence that he understands the process a little big. THEN bring on the big gun. :-) My reply: Which begs a question I should have thought to ask..why on Earth didn't Lupin or Sirius really sit down and have this chat with Harry? It is implied later in the book, that they realize that this is important but I think ultimately Harry would have listened to Sirius if he had come it from an angle of "You know you should learn this, Voldemort could use a connection to hurt someone you love. A friend, family member anyone." It wouldn't be neccessary for the person who explained that to Harry be the person who eventually taught Harry the skill. I think it lost it's effectiveness when Snape did the little intro speel. Just a thought. ~Melanie --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Wed Aug 4 16:32:02 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (Jo Raggett) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 16:32:02 -0000 Subject: Wizard/Muggle "Radar" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108828 -Kristen wrote: > >>> ...would any magical "radar" alert the Arthur that things are > not what they seem?<<< Aggie: If this *did* exist, would squibs show up on it? If they don't then this is one way that someone could trick Arthur! (Bless him!) From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Wed Aug 4 16:43:55 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (Jo Raggett) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 16:43:55 -0000 Subject: Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: <20040804162931.78274.qmail@web53409.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108829 > Melanie: > My reply: Which begs a question I should have thought to ask..why > on Earth didn't Lupin or Sirius really sit down and have this chat > with Harry? >>>>>>SNIP>>>>>> Aggie: My understanding was that everyone was following DD's orders. That he had informed them all that Harry *wasn't* to be told. It is my belief that Sirius *DID* want to tell Harry all about it, (the night he [Harry]arrived) but that Molly, acting on DD's orders, deemed it inappropriate. OotP UK version Ch 5, The Order of the Phoenix pp84-85 ..."The expression on her [Molly's]normally kind face looked dangerous. 'You haven't forgotten what Dumbledore said, I suppose?' 'I don't intend to tell him more than he 'needs to know' (in italics) Molly,' said Sirius. 'He's not a child!' said Sirius impatiently. ... From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Aug 4 17:08:21 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 17:08:21 -0000 Subject: Why Voldemort is a fascist... (LONG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108830 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Nora Renka" wrote: > Why Voldemort is a Fascist, or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and > March in Step (LONG) > Kneasy: Ah, conformity. Something to be encouraged in others since being out of step yourself affords wonderful opportunities to induce disgruntlement in those around you. Not that I'm about to dispute your analysis or it's conclusions, but my understanding is that posts expressing mere agreement are frowned upon by Admin and so the occasional interjection is not only acceptable but obligatory. > Nora: > Many an intrepid poster has made the casual invocation of Nazis (and > been toasted by Godwin), but I intend to go one further, being a > member of that class of people that dear Kneasy has so kindly warned > us all about, the academics. The purpose of this post is to argue > that Voldemort's ideal regime, as extrapolated from information so > far, lines up in a number of critical ways with the theoretical > bases of fascist ideology. Fascism is a system notoriously > difficult to define because of its sheer irrationality, so this > analysis posits a particular mutation for the circumstances of the > WW. > Kneasy: I don't disagree (except that Kneasy thinks academics are wonderful - without their copious output my hearth would be cold before December) except to wonder about the "theoretical bases" bit. It seems that the instigators of these lunacies develop them on a more or less ad hoc basis. The supporting philosophy, theory or whatever gets tacked on as they go along - they don't have a philosophy so much as an agenda. But deep in their rat-like brains lurks a realisation that a rationale will sooner or later become necessary; something to brandish before unthinking enthusiasts and as page-filler in the Glorious Leaders memoirs labelled "early influences" - otherwise, Heaven forfend! they're indistinguishable from opportunistic bandits. And that, IMO, is more or less what Voldy is. > Nora: > Common Characteristics of Fascism: > massive snip> > > My gut has been telling me that the fascism analysis works out. No, > it's not exact, as we don't have a kind of solid state established > yet, but I think enough of the aspects correspond closely enough to > make this a theoretical system worth considering. This could, of > course, be utterly destroyed next book. I hope it has a little more > solidity than that. > > The more I think about it, though, the more it seems to me that the > blood ideology is really one of the major driving factors generating > the large-scale conflict that defines the series. It seems to be a > good portion of what attracted Voldemort's followers. snip > Slytherin may well have felt that the Muggleborns were bad > primarily because they were a security risk--but there's something > inherently rather nasty about picking your students based on purity > of blood. > > The blood thing and the related issues are what CoS is really about. > Dumbledore is the guarantor of the Muggleborn students' right to > attend Hogwarts, and this freedom and openness is what Lucius Malfoy > is attempting to attack. It's the forces of reaction versus the > Open Society, a struggle for the public sector. Hogwarts is the key > into being someone and something in wizarding society for those not > born into name and money, and for those people with the name and the > money, these uppity folks are disrupting their historical privilege, > what they think they're entitled to. > snip > Kneasy: Lots of parallels highlighted, and very little to dispute in terms of what fascism is/was. The question is "does it apply to Voldy?" Does Voldy actually have a political philosophy or reasonable facsimile thereof? I doubt it. (I'm ignoring the DEs for the moment.) There used to be a notice stuck on my office wall - "The Rules". It started: 1. The Boss is always right, down to 10. The Boss is always the Boss, even in bathing togs. (Since I was the boss I thought it eminently reasonable.) Voldy would subscribe to it immediately and enthusiastically. But it wasn't a political creed or manifesto, it was a joke outline for despotism. There has never been a hint that Voldy wishes to change any of the structures in the WW in any fundamental way - he just wants to run it. True, there are likely to be a lot of bodies exiting feet-first, but it's highly unlikely that there will be systematic purges of entire classes or groups. Muggles he'll leave alone, except for perhaps sporting activities such as happened after the World Cup. There are too many of them to mess with, and though wizards mock technology Tom was brought up a Muggle; he knows that technology *works*. The few tens of thousands in the WW dare not challenge tens of millions with a history of witch-hunts and hope to maintain a laid-back existence. A bonfire might tickle - fine; try some napalm or VX. Eventually they'd have to isolate themselves again just to be sure of a decent nights sleep. Mudbloods are a different problem - they have power, magical power, just as much as his DEs do. And they too out-number the DEs massively. This isn't some docile crowd of unarmed peasants to be herded about. *If provoked sufficiently* they will fight back with exactly the same weapons as the DEs use. To sustain it's raison d'etre fascism needs a target minority to point to while whipping up public emotions. The problem is that Voldy supporters *are* the despised minority. Oops! What he would prefer is a decapitation; remove the current movers and shakers - the *individuals* not the system - change the name on the headed note-paper, and he's in business. He's a would-be despot, with all the inherent weaknesses of militaristic despotism. 1. He cannot (and anyway wouldn't dare to) delegate his personal power. It resides solely within and with him. Any major problem and he has to deal with it personally. 2. He cannot trust anyone. Ever. Any challenge to his rule is not to the Ministry or his 'government', it's to him as an individual. There is no such thing as a 'loyal opposition'. 3. There will be challenges and plots, mostly from within the ranks of his own 'supporters'. You may say that all of the above were evident in the fascist dictators of the last century. Of course they were. But that's because they were just a sub-set of a type that has recurred throughout history - The Dictator. >From Herod the Great, through Ivan the Terrible to Idi Amin the only thing that changes is "who's going to be for the chop this time?" Unfettered personal rule has a habit of becoming the same old thing, the label put on it is irrelevent. It's depressing; every few decades another example seems to crawl out of the woodwork. All in all, Voldy'd fit nicely into the pantheon of the Roman Emporers, though they went a step further and had themselves declared gods. "Oderint dum metuant" might have been made for him, because like Tiberius and unlike that lot last century, Voldy is not interested in the adulation of the crowd, the political education of the masses, the cries of "Our hero!" For make no mistake, in Italy, Germany, Spain, fascism or its equivalent was a *popular* movement. It had the support of the majority of the populace until it all went pear-shaped. It could not have survived and prospered for so long without that mass approval. Voldy doesn't have mass approval and never will have. He knows this; all he wants is total obedience. That's not a political stance - that's thuggery. And who does he have to help him? DEs and crypto-Voldyist purebloods. The purebloods themselves are split, only a fraction of which (how big a fraction is unclear) actually support him, so he can't expect to get a "purebloods vs the rest" fixture lined up. It won't wash. Too many purebloods recognise the distinction for the farce it is. And they seem to be a remarkably individualistic bunch, wizards. He'd need a DE at the front door of every house and even then he couldn't make it stick. His supporters are living in their own little dream-world. He doesn't care what they want or what they believe and the smarter amongst them (Malfoy for example) must know this. He's just an opportunistic jackal, sniffing out personal advantage. No potential martyr for the cause he; It's unlikely anyone is apart from the occasional nutter like Bella. The 'pureblood' mystique is a conceit, not a cause, and most of them know it. And it might not be too clever to push it hard when the Great Leader is himself one of the Great Unwashed. I see CoS differently, not so much an attack on the Hogwarts admission policy as the attempted neutralisation of DD and Harry. Sure, get DD out and Malfoys mob could run the school how they wanted, but that would be a bonus, not the main aim. Ginny was probably targeted for the same reason, a strike at DD's supporters (and purebloods too!) Of course a variation on this theme was tried again with rather more success under the reign of Umbridge, with DD and Harry once more the main target. Phew! Written more than I intended. But in conclusion - Voldy matches most of your criteria for consideration as a fascist, but I'd deny him any political underpinings at all. He's a murderous thug - plain and simple - and (unlike the DEs) never bothers to try and justify himself with some spurious philosophy. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 17:18:51 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 10:18:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why Voldemort is a fascist... (LONG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040804171851.61245.qmail@web50107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108831 --- Nora Renka wrote: > Why Voldemort is a Fascist, or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and > March in Step (LONG) > > 1) This is pretty clear. Voldemort aspires to be the greatest > sorcerer in the world, with an army, servants, bad devotional art, > etc. He was 'taking over everywhere', seizing power, looking for > immortality. The WW has strong tendencies towards absolutism, > as shown in the models of Barty Crouch and Fudge--Voldemort is not > fundamentally different at the base, but one-ups them. Voldemort > thinks of himself as an aristocrat, as opposed to his mortal > enemy: "that champion of commoners, of Mudbloods and Muggles, > Albus Dumbledore" (GoF, ch. 33). Good analysis and I'll buy almost all of it - but I don't think the WW "has strong tendencies towards absolutism". Their idea of government tends to be reactive rather than proactive and they view it as something that deals with specific problems (ie, thin cauldron bottoms that might prove hazardous to users). Voldemort's genius lay in using his outsider's vantage point to recognize the WW's weaknesses and exploit them in his first bid for ultimate power. It's clear from a number of characters - Dumbledore, Sirius, Hagrid, Arthur Weasley - that the MoM was totally out of its depth in dealing with Voldemort and turned in desperation to Barty Crouch Sr. the Man Who Had All The Answers to save them. Then when Voldemort was apparently gone for good, the WW threw a bunch of parties, toasted the Boy Who Lived and turned against Crouch Sr. That doesn't strike me as absolutism, even a tendency towards it. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now. http://messenger.yahoo.com From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 17:33:49 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 17:33:49 -0000 Subject: Why Voldemort is a fascist... (LONG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108832 >Pippin wrote: > > I think the DE movement is fascist and consciously modelled on > RL fascism. But Voldemort himself seems more of an > opportunist than a fascist. I think the social goals of his > movement do not interest him at all. What drives him is his need > for personal power, and if he had to wipe out all the purebloods > to get it, he would gladly do so. Pureblood supremacy is only a > means to an end. He doesn't really believe in it, or he would > never have considered Harry a threat. Neri: I don't have the books with me, but isn't it canon that Tom hated his father? We don't know of any opportunistic reason for killing his father and his muggle grandparents (although I guess you could think of some Dark Art that would require it). And we know Riddle the father left Tom's mother because he discovered she was a witch. Plus I assume Tom wasn't treated well in that orphanage he grew up in, especially if the superiors and the other children felt that there is something strange about him. Tom could easily decide that all muggles are scum and wizard haters, and once he was sorted to Slytherin it would be the easiest thing for him to ascribe these properties to their bad blood. I find it much more probable that he strongly believes it, even when he opportunistically uses the pureblood ethos to take over the WW. Neri From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 17:36:36 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 10:36:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040804173636.68910.qmail@web50101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108833 > Alla: > > But that is exactly the point. All other adults who don't want > Harry to say Voldemort are afraid of him. Is Snape? Of course he's afraid of him. Anyone with half a brain in the WW is afraid of him. And Snape has had the (dis)advantage of being up close and personal with Voldemort, unlike a lot of the other wizards and witches out there for whom he's more like the Bogey Man than a real, living, breathing threat. Another Snape/Harry link: the two Order members with the strongest experience of Voldemort. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From patientx3 at aol.com Wed Aug 4 17:52:59 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 17:52:59 -0000 Subject: Wizard/Muggle "Radar" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108834 Janet wrote: >>I believe it is possible that if her children were threatened by Voldemort, she wouldn't stop to consider things like the fact that Voldemort's word is worthless, that he's capable of kidnapping and killing someone and *then* demanding ransom or information, or even that "threatened men live long." She might just fold.<< HunterGreen previously: > Having a narrow and overprotective stance of your children doesn't > necessarily make you stupid though. In that situation I think its > more likely that she would freak out and demand that her children > stay in order headquarters (or under the watchful eye of her, > Arthur or a capable adult wizard) 24 hours a day. I think her > paranoia is extreme enough that if she did make some sort of deal > for her children's lives she'd worry herself to death about it not > working out. I don't think she's capable of trusting something like > that. SSSusan: I guess it's all in how *rational* or *irrational* one takes Molly to be. WOULD she be capable of stopping to consider? WOULD she think ahead & decide to show her concern by imposing lock-down? Tough call. HunterGreen: Let me clarify -- I don't think rationality has that much to do with it. I think Molly is an hysteric, so if something like that were to happen she would react hysterically. I don't think she's capable of covert action because of that. So whether or not she would betray the order because of of the love she has for her children comes down to the situation. Perhaps if *she* were kidnapped, and was going to be killed if she didn't give up information (with a promise they'd go after her kids next), perhaps then I can see her betraying the order (although I'm not sure I'd call that a cut-and-dry betrayal). On the other hand, if a DE were to contact her privately or if the children were put into direct danger, I think she'd be more likely to freak out and go to Dumbledore or Arthur than to quietly make a deal with Voldemort's side. Janet: >>The thing about Arthur is that he *does* see the big picture -- if he didn't, he wouldn't still be poor and working in an office the size of a broom closet, when he could improve his situation with a little short-term schmoozing around the Ministry of Magic and downplaying his pro-Muggle stance. He won't compromise, he won't fold, and he knows what evil is capable of. (Why, yes, I do admire Arthur. He reminds me of my own father.)<< SSSusan: >>I think Hunter & Janet are looking at two characters and drawing two different pictures of them, seeing their motivations or actions somewhat differently. The difficulty for me is that imo we haven't seen ENOUGH of them--particularly of Arthur--for me to feel 100% confident in saying "he won't fold" or "she will fold" or "she won't fold" or.... Hunter says Molly supports all Arthur's decisions and so she might be able to see the bigger picture, too. I guess the question, though, is *in the heat of the moment* when a child has been taken, would she stop to consult Arthur & think about the bigger picture? I suspect that Janet is arguing that NO, she would not. Hunter is saying YES, she might well be able to. I'm saying, "She might not be able to...but I'm not yet convinced that Arthur would be able to either."<< HunterGreen: Like I said, when it comes to the heat of the moment, it depends on the moment. She doesn't seem to be able to think clearly when she's upset, and I think her first instinct would be to go to someone for help, rather than make a deal on her own. Now if getting help was impossible, well, that's a different story. SSSusan previously: >>>Anyway, to your question. IS there any kind of "wizard detecting" or "muggle detecting" ability inherent in witches & wizards? Not that I'm aware of. But did I miss something in the books? Is this something Aurors are capable of?<<< Janet replied: >>Well, there's one case where muggle detecting seems to occur: when Harry does magic and gets nasty letters for it [snip] But I don't know how they could tell, any more than I understand the entire magic detection system that's in use with Harry.<< HunterGreen previously: > That seems to indicate there is some sort of magic 'radar', or > perhaps wizards between the ages of 11 and 17 are 'flagged' somehow SSSusan: >>All I can say to this is YUCK. Seems awfully Big Brotherish to me. Even if the Ministry has means of doing this, I still wonder whether an *individual* would have the ability/mechanism/device necessary.<< HunterGreen: Yeah, I agree. Its odd how this fantasy world where people can do magic and there's so many things they have access to that muggles don't can sometimes look so ugly and unpleasant. Their government is deeply corrupt and has too much power, eye-witness accounts mean NOTHING to law-enforcement, and their prison is quite sadistic. HunterGreen previously: > As for wizards being able to tell a muggle from a wizard, there's > nothing in the books indicating either way. Personally, I think > that if a wizard disguised themself as a muggle and strolled up to > another wizard calling themselves such, that the wizard would be > able to tell. They might be able to 'sense' magical ability .... SSSusan: >>And I tend to think the opposite. Isn't it fun?? :-)<< HunterGreen: Eh, like I said, there's nothing to prove it either way in the books. From ck32976 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 18:02:42 2004 From: ck32976 at yahoo.com (ck32976) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 18:02:42 -0000 Subject: Possible Katie Bell FLINT? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108836 I was just curious... In Book 5 Ginny Weasly says that she'd like to try out for Chaser, and that Angelina and Alicia are leaving next year. What about Katie? Maybe it was just an oversight, but if Katie is NOT leaving for book six, that must make her one year older than Harry. That would mean that she was a first year on the House Quidditch team. It has always been stressed that Harry is the youngest House player in about a hundred years. What do you all make of this? Carrie From gopotter2004 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 18:02:46 2004 From: gopotter2004 at yahoo.com (gopotter2004) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 18:02:46 -0000 Subject: Sneakoscope (was: Wizard/Muggle "Radar") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108837 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jo Raggett" wrote: > -Kristen wrote: > > >>> ...would any magical "radar" alert the Arthur that things are > > not what they seem?<<< Well, I kinda actually think that sneakoscopes would work... you rememember, the "toys" that tell you if something suspicious is around. I have a feeling that if the WW has toys of this nature, they have big kid versions, too! Becky, who bets Mad Eye Moody doesn't need one with that creepy eye of his... From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Aug 4 18:05:00 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 18:05:00 -0000 Subject: Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: <20040804162931.78274.qmail@web53409.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108838 Melanie wrote: > My reply: Which begs a question I should have thought to ask..why on Earth didn't Lupin or Sirius really sit down and have this chat with Harry? It is implied later in the book, that they realize that this is important but I think ultimately Harry would have listened to Sirius if he had come it from an angle of "You know you should learn this, Voldemort could use a connection to hurt someone you love. Potioncat: If anything, Sirius did the opposite! He set it up so that the animosity between Snape and Harry was even greater. And put it in Harry's mind that Snape might use the lessons to give him a hard time. From drliss at comcast.net Wed Aug 4 18:24:18 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (drliss at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 18:24:18 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Digest Number 5039 Message-ID: <080420041824.14722.411129D20007B2790000398222007589429C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 108840 >>HunterGreen: > I like that thought. He could have used a potion in conjunction with the imperious curse that made Lupin lose his memory (perhaps slipped to him right after a werewolf transformation, when Lupin was already confused). >>>>>>>>> Aggie: I like this thought too! My reservation on it is that if this *had* happened, I doubt that the 2 minutes in the Shreiking Shack would have convinced Lupin to forgive Sirius. Sirius *knew* that Peter was the traitor as he had swapped secret-keeper places with him. Lupin (and why do we call him Lupin and the others by their first name?) wouldn't have known this *and* would have had the added insult of Sirius et al believing *him* to be the traitor. I suppose after 12 years of contemplation, this may have been worked out in Lupin's head already, but I do find it difficult to believe that he would have forgiven them that quickly. That said, it is my favouite theory on why Lupin was distrusted. I am *SO* against ESE!Lupin, yes siree Bob! ;o) Lissa: YAY! Someone else against ESE!Lupin!!!!! :) Even a Confundus charm could have been effective, as I think of it (although I like the Imperious curse best.) And heck, just simple rumor and innuendo. The thing about the Shrieking Shack scene is I always got the impression Lupin never realized Sirius suspected him of being a spy. I don't think they had it out, to be honest. Remus (and I think we call him Lupin for the same reason Harry does- that's how we were introduced to him) has to ask Sirius to confirm that Sirius thought he was the spy. With the real traitor standing right there in front of them, it seems like it would be a little easier to brush off that Sirius was thinking he was the spy- especially if he hasn't been nursing that grudge for 12 years. We know Sirius knew for sure there was a spy. I assume Lupin figured it out too. But heck- maybe Lupin was suspecting Peter, or someone else within the Order. The thing I find interesting is that people seem to assume that there was a rift between Sirius and Remus in order for this to happen. I don't think that's the case. We see how quickly Sirius can make a decision and act on it. How long did he have to suspect Remus as the spy? Years? Months? Days? Hours? With this being Sirius, hours. Suspecting your best friend of treason must be a very, very hard thing to do, and I'll bet he couldn't handle doing it for long before acting on it. And even with James and Lily, they didn't have to suspect that Remus was the spy. All they needed to know was that there was a spy in the Order, and the switch made sense. Maybe they also suspected Remus, maybe they didn't, but since they knew SOMEONE was the spy they didn't argue with Sirius's plan of action. Maybe they thought Dumbledore was betraying them- after all, Dumbledore was never informed of the plan to switch secret keepers. (And why was that, by the way? Why did James INSIST on using Sirius, when Dumbledore- the general- offered to be Secret Keeper himself? Just to illustrate the trust between Sirius and James in a literary manner, to illustrate that James did have other trustworthy options?) So, I think that Sirius suspecting Remus was the spy was a pretty new concept to Remus in the Shrieking Shack, and that's why he was able to dismiss it so quickly. But then again, that scene was not the time nor the place for long drawn out discussions on the matter! Liss [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From manawydan at ntlworld.com Wed Aug 4 18:25:43 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 19:25:43 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Jobs References: <1091574188.27978.91760.m17@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <000c01c47a50$74a10ae0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 108841 Mandy wrote: >I just read some theories about how there seems to be an >extraordinarily disproportionate number of witches and wizards >working for the MoM (are you all impressed that I've got the hang of >abbreviations already?!) and I have another viewpoint on this >subject. >And there are loads of other examples of jobs, just because they >aren't explicitly mentioned does not mean they don't exist. For the >purpose of the stories it may be that the more attractive jobs have >been outlined, or just ones that fit in with the general plot. The question of "what else do wizarding folk do for a living" is one which comes up quite often and always leads to interesting perspectives on the bits of life that go on behind the scenes of the books. Here's another angle though which you might find interesting: just _why_ do we see so many wizards working for the MoM? First of all, I think it's because there _are_ a lot of wizards working for the Ministry. The WW is a perfectly realised example of a bureaucracy: the administration, the executive, the judiciary are all rolled into one. If you want to go into politics, you join the Ministry. And the burdens of the Statute of Separation mean that there's a large number of enforcers needed to stamp on anything at all, magical artefacts getting into Muggledom, magical creatures running amok, wizards being careless with magic, and so on. And that's on top of the normal functions of public administration, liaison with other countries, setting standards for quality, and so on. It's a very big employer, as the description of the wizards arriving for work in OoP makes clear. But the other perspective is that we are seeing the books from the point of view of students at Hogwarts. Where does the Ministry do its recruiting? Hogwarts. Where do a large proportion of Hogwarts students go to work? The Ministry. The school is turning out a large number of educated young wizards with a common mindset to be the bureaucracy of the future (in a not dissimilar way to the way that the English public schools turned out the administrators of the British Empire!) Meanwhile, for the rest of the WW (who many of us surmise do _not_ get a Hogwarts education), there is probably a huge mental and cultural gap from the Ministry wizards. Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 18:44:58 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 18:44:58 -0000 Subject: Possible Katie Bell FLINT? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108843 > Carrie wrote: > I was just curious... In Book 5 Ginny Weasly says that she'd like to try out for Chaser, and that Angelina and Alicia are leaving next year. What about Katie? Maybe it > was just an oversight, but if Katie is NOT leaving for book six, that must make her one year older than Harry. That would mean that she was a first year on the House > Quidditch team. It has always been stressed that Harry is the youngest House player in about a hundred years. What do you all make of this? Neri: This was discussed before, although I'm too lazy to brave Yahoomort and find the post now. Basically nobody has managed to find canon that Katie played in the team the year before Harry joined. She could have joined the team at the same time with Harry, when she was in her second (?) year. Neri From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 19:18:54 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 12:18:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Wizard/Muggle "Radar" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040804191854.8400.qmail@web50101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108844 > Siriusly Snapey Susan (I think) said: > > >[I'm one of the ones whose pet peeve is people assuming MOLLY will > >likely betray the Order because of her love for her children...but > >who seem to believe Arthur is immune from this! I feel that *any* > >person who deeply loves another is susceptible to this kind of > >blackmail.] I think Molly's weak point would be that she'd let her anxiety over her children's (and Harry's) safety blind her to reality. In other words, she'd be duck soup if Voldemort set up a particularly crafty masquerade (not the word I want to use but I'm blanking right now) to fool her. Had she seen a vision of Percy or Bill or Charley being tortured in the MoM she'd have broken the sound barrier getting there to rescue them. Molly's strident efforts to keep the kids ignorant of what was going on (Harry in POA, all the kids in OOTP) shows that she has a very limited understanding of what the Order is all about and what demands it might make on its members. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From oppen at mycns.net Wed Aug 4 19:53:19 2004 From: oppen at mycns.net (Eric Oppen) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 14:53:19 -0500 Subject: Snape and Hagrid have something in common... Message-ID: <002201c47a5c$bdd8d2e0$a4570043@technomad> No: HPFGUIDX 108845 If this has been discussed-to-death at one of the times when I wasn't able to access the list, please forgive me. Rereading PS/SS, it struck me that Hagrid and Snape have the same sort of eyes. Could they be...related? (On Hagrid's dad's side, I hasten to add!) We've seen that the WW tends to have a poor opinion of some of the other magical races, giants in particular. What _was_ the response Hagrid's dad got to his Cunning Plan, anyway? ("Oh, I've got this giantess, Fridwulfa, up the spout, so she'll have my baby and we'll raise it together...") And does Hagrid have any other relations---like, say, Snape's parents? If they are related, would this have shaped Snape's outlook in any way? _Particularly_ given Hagrid's talent for giant-size mess-ups? (Think about Hagrid in potions class...and shudder!) And just _how_ did Hagrid's dad do it, anyway? Could Dark Arts have been involved? Was Hagrid's dad not quite the benign figure Hagrid remembers? Hey, a new theory---Hagrid's Dad Was Ever So Evil! Whee! I'll end up suspecting everybody! From anmsmom333 at cox.net Wed Aug 4 20:02:28 2004 From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 20:02:28 -0000 Subject: Just a comment about Lupin's malady In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108846 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jo Raggett" wrote: > > Lissa: > > >>What if Peter put the Imperius curse on Lupin to get him to do > > something? >>>>> > > > >>HunterGreen: > > I like that thought. He could have used a potion in conjunction > with the imperious curse that made Lupin lose his memory (perhaps > slipped to him right after a werewolf transformation, when Lupin was > already confused). >>>>>>>>> > > Aggie: > I like this thought too! My reservation on it is that if this *had* > happened, I doubt that the 2 minutes in the Shreiking Shack would > have convinced Lupin to forgive Sirius. Sirius *knew* that Peter was > the traitor as he had swapped secret-keeper places with him. Lupin > (and why do we call him Lupin and the others by their first name?) > wouldn't have known this *and* would have had the added insult of > Sirius et al believing *him* to be the traitor. I suppose after 12 > years of contemplation, this may have been worked out in Lupin's head > already, but I do find it difficult to believe that he would have > forgiven them that quickly. > > That said, it is my favouite theory on why Lupin was distrusted. I > am *SO* against ESE!Lupin, yes siree Bob! ;o) I am with you. I just cannot buy the ESE!Lupin theory. I might be biased, as he is one of my favorite characters. I also don't buy the Lupin/Sirius ship theory either. I don't have canon proof but then again I don't see either of those theories when I read the books. But I digress. Personally, my opinion has always been that Peter was far more clever than folks gave him credit for. I think this is alluded to in the shack scene but I don't have my books with me at work so I cannot verify. It may just be my assumption. However, especially after rereading OotP recently (I got a British paperback in the mail from a friend who wanted the American hardback) I thought while reading the pensieve scene that it seems that Peter was always discounted by the other three. He was acting so serious after the OWL when the other three were joking about the werewolf question. He was giving he real answer. He strikes me as one who lacks confidence but is not really a stupid person. I think Dumbledore (once again sorry I don't have the books) stated that they knew the spy was someone close to the Order (and most likely in the Order) so naturally Peter being viewed the way he was in the pensieve scene no one would think it was him. So they would deduce - who could it be, well James and Sirius were like brothers so it was not either of them, it couldn't be Lily because she was James' wife, and I am sure they did more deductions. Remus most likely was being affect by all the anti-werewolf legislation and many werewolves were serving Voldermort so he probably was a bit moody. James and Sirius also (though I love the three good marauders) weren't exactly always sympathetic about Remus' condition (see pensieve scene) so they probably did not get why he would be moody about the anti-werewolf stuff. So I believe Remus just often distanced himself and though James and Sirius most likely didn't truly state they thought Remus was the spy, I think they were just not confident that he would not be tempted. And like I said Peter was just this weakling who wasn't too bright at least in their minds so they just picked him as the most likely NOT the spy. Anyway, that is my beliefs and it may not have too solid of canon proof but that is what I glean from reading the books. Theresa From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 4 20:05:49 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 20:05:49 -0000 Subject: Molly & others' vulnerability (was: Wizard/Muggle "Radar") In-Reply-To: <20040804191854.8400.qmail@web50101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108847 Siriusly Snapey Susan said: > >I'm one of the ones whose pet peeve is people assuming MOLLY will > >likely betray the Order because of her love for her children...but > >who seem to believe Arthur is immune from this! I feel that *any* > >person who deeply loves another is susceptible to this kind of > >blackmail.] Magda: > I think Molly's weak point would be that she'd let her anxiety over > her children's (and Harry's) safety blind her to reality. In other > words, she'd be duck soup if Voldemort set up a particularly crafty > masquerade (not the word I want to use but I'm blanking right now) > to fool her. Had she seen a vision of Percy or Bill or Charley > being tortured in the MoM she'd have broken the sound barrier > getting there to rescue them. > > Molly's strident efforts to keep the kids ignorant of what was going > on (Harry in POA, all the kids in OOTP) shows that she has a very > limited understanding of what the Order is all about and what > demands it might make on its members. SSSusan: Hi, Magda. HunterGreen, in 108818, addressed the fact that it wasn't just Molly who made efforts to keep the kids ignorant--Lupin, DD, McGonagall & Fudge also did this. So I'm not sure that this alone shows Molly has a very limited understanding of what the Order is about. I *don't* necessarily doubt that Molly might fall apart. My point originally, though, was to ask those people who think she would to explain why they *weren't* worried that others in the Order [Arthur, in particular] would also. I was fishing for some canon which would show why Molly alone would be susceptible to this kind of DE/Voldy manipulation, whereas Arthur [or anyone else who loves someone deeply] would not be. We did have the opportunity to see the form which Molly's Boggart took in OotP, so we know from that what her deepest fear is. We didn't have the opportunity to see Arthur's or Lupin's or Sirius' or DD's... so we don't really know whether they'd have been something in a similar vein. Janet explained her view that Molly's type of love makes her susceptible and also why she thinks Arthur isn't susceptible. I'd like to hear more views. When we don't hear the specific "why NOTs" about a character, only the "whys" about another, it's hard not to wonder if it's gender stereotyping going on. I know that JKR has portrayed Molly in a particular way, and that's no poster here's "fault." But is she the ONLY type of person who's susceptible to this kind of blackmail? It doesn't seem *to me* to be so. If Harry were kidnapped, would DD bargain w/ the DEs? If Fred & George were kidnapped, would Arthur "give something away" in order to get them back? I don't know if I'm making any sense; I suspect not! I would just love to hear more about the possibility & the "whys" or "why nots" of other characters being susceptible to DE/Voldy blackmail. Siriusly Snapey Susan From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Aug 4 20:29:56 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 20:29:56 -0000 Subject: Chapter 24: Occlumency and Ripper In-Reply-To: <20040803072949.98830.qmail@web53402.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108848 >Melanie wrote: > 5) Snape asked several questions about the images that were scene in his visions. For example, he asked about Aunt Marge's dog. What purpose did he have in asking those questions? Do they lead to something, stand out in his mind, or is he just merely curious about them? Potioncat: It is the first session and Harry sees: 5 years old watching Dudley on a bike; 9 years chased up a tree, while the family laughs; Sorting Hat speaking of Slytherin; Hermione with a cat face; 100 dementors; Cho and mistletoe. Harry asks if Snape saw it all and Snape says "flashes" then asks "to whom did the dog belong?" It's somewhat surprising he doesn't ask about the Sorting Hat or the dementors. It almost seems he chose a neutral memory to ask about. Almost like, "I saw the dog, but not the Sorting Hat and I certainly didn't see you under the mistletoe with Miss Chang." (My point being that he did see those things but did not mention them.) Harry is hating Snape at that point, but Snape is not smirking or making any remarks about the memories. In fact, in spite of the fact that he was firm about "sir" Snape doesn't correct him for most of the conversation after this episode. It is almost as if he is trying to put Harry at ease. In fact, it seems to me, Snape has explained a great deal in this session. As others have said in other posts, for Snape, he is positively nice. Back to the dog. I wonder if there is something about Ripper?(How old is he anyway?) There is a magical animal that looks like a Muggle dog, but it isn't the same breed as Ripper. But if this dog appears magical to Snape, is that why he wants to know who owns Ripper? I wonder if we'll learn something new about Marge in the next book. Like, Ripper is gone? Potioncat: who once again came up with more questions than answers. From BrwNeil at aol.com Wed Aug 4 20:43:37 2004 From: BrwNeil at aol.com (BrwNeil at aol.com) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 16:43:37 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Possible Katie Bell FLINT? Message-ID: <79.3016568e.2e42a479@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108849 In a message dated 8/4/2004 2:04:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time, ck32976 at yahoo.com writes: That would mean that she was a first year on the House Quidditch team. It has always been stressed that Harry is the youngest House player in about a hundred years. What do you all make of this? Carrie Not necessarily. Her first year playing could have been as a second year when Harry started. Neil [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Aug 4 20:46:02 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 20:46:02 -0000 Subject: Molly & others' vulnerability (was: Wizard/Muggle "Radar") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108850 SSSusan wrote: > > I don't know if I'm making any sense; I suspect not! I would just > love to hear more about the possibility & the "whys" or "why nots" of > other characters being susceptible to DE/Voldy blackmail. > Potioncat: I've darted in for an occasional look at this thread, from time to time, but haven't read too much because I have a weaknes for Molly and my blood boils more at anti-Molly comments than anti-Snape ones. (and you all know about that!!) But now that SSSusan has taken it along a new path, I'll toss this in. Look at how well Barty Jr. misled everyone. He had Snape doubting the extent of DD's trust. He had students accepting lessons about Unforgivables and even submitting to the curses. Don't you think that made it easier for Harry to attempt the Cruciatus Curse on Bellatrix? GoF chapter 35, p676 (US paperback) Crouch!Moody says to Harry, "Decent people are so easy to manipulate, Potter." So long as it wasn't Snake-face himself, it would be very possible for LV to mislead someone into doing some good action with a very bad outcome! Potioncat From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Aug 4 20:47:21 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 20:47:21 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter vs. Lord of the Rings In-Reply-To: <000a01c47a2f$abbdc9d0$82c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108851 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: Cathy Drolet: > This is only my opinion if you're interested in reading the books. > > Harry Potter (HP to save myself typing) is by far the easier read > for several reasons. Lord of the Rings (LOTR) is set in a > completely made up fantasy world, in a completely different, long- > ago time. The language is different, it's older style English, and > some Elvish (an invented language, most of which is translated in > the books). The main story of HP starts in 1991. It is a fantasy > world, but it is a magical world within the normal world of the > United Kingdom. The magical world is, for the most part, hidden > from the normal world, but you see enough of the normal world to > know it is there. The language, apart from magical words that you > will learn the meaning of in the books, is the same language as we > speak (apart from some Britishisms like jumper for sweater and > fringe meaning bangs). Geoff: Don't forget that it is a English book written in UK English and that the substitutions which you have mentioned along with things like the replacement of "s" by "z" and "ou" by "u" are external to the writer's output. Tolkien's world is meant to be our world many thousands of years ago. As he comments in the prologue to "FOTR": "Those days, the Third Age of Middle-Earth, are now long past and the shape of all lands has been changed; but the regions n which Hobbits then lived were doubtless the same as those in which they still linger: The North- West of the Old World, east of the Sea." So it is a fantasy world but within the normal world so there is a parallel with Harry's world. Cathy Drolet: > Professor Tolkien (LOTR) could be a very, very wordy man. He could > take several paragraphs to describe what J.K. Rowling (HP) > describes in a few sentences. I know people who, when re-reading > LOTR, don't read any of the descriptive stuff, just jump from > dialogue to dialogue. Geoff: I, for one, don't - because the wordiness is there for a purpose; to build a detailed picture of a world being changed, a world under threat. I find that his writing produces a superb mental picutre of a landscape or a scene. JKR doesn't need to do this because so often her story turns on the interaction of individuals and not the interplay of mighty armies. Cathy Drolet: > LOTR is one long book. My single book edition is 1008 pages not including the Appendices (which are a very good read on their own). However, it is mostly published as three books called, in reading order: 'The Fellowship of the Ring', 'The Two Towers', and 'The Return of the King'. You cannot read any one of those books and have any idea of the whole story. (It is sometimes published as seven books, which makes it even worse. However, I've only ever seen this as a boxed set.) Geoff: Yes but bear in mind why. The book was published in three volumes because of the paper shortages of the time and that the whole book in one would have carried a prohibitive price tag in thos days. It is, as you say, one story and the three volumes are divided into six books for structural purposes - an idea frequently used in writing. Finally, just to underline some of the points I have made, I repeat part of a posting I wrote last year on the group as message 76390: ***************** I first read Tolkien in 1955, a year after the last volume was published and it grabbed me straight away. For many years I read it annually and have now done so at least 25-30 times. Nowadays I don't go to it so regularly because of other JRRT stuff which has been published posthumously. To be realistic, there is a gulf between JRRT and JKR partly because of the style and perhaps the depth of the stories. Tolkien is a master wordsmith and was basing the epic on a baseload of "myth" which he had been amassing for 40 years (at the time when LOTR first appeared). His writing is very detailed and his word pictures conjure up incredibly vivid pictures in my mind. LOTR however was not a children's book on publication although it initially grew out of a children's book. I have gained more enjoyment out of the Potter books than any other juvenile fiction I have read. I think the way in which the books grow darker and tackle deeper problems (such as gratuitous killing in GOF) is a tribute to the writer's skill. If we are seeing it from Harry's POV, PS shows us a naive, gauche boy taking tentative steps into a strange, exciting and unsettling new world. We see him growing in confidence (sometimes unfounded!) and experience and the latest books are now tackling themes which would not be out of place in fiction written specifically for adults. Frankly, I would rather read something like the books I have mentioned or watch things like Star Trek than get involved in themes which mirror real life - family rows, affairs, terrorist violence etc. Escapist maybe, but the volume of traffic on this site shows that many of us can not only enjoy this material but let our own imaginations speculate how we might write the next book or how we would the characters to develop; we may disagree politely with each other over who is going to betray whom whether Petunia is a closet witch but it is all very stimulating stuff whether there are split infinitives or not. I can handle Tolkien and Rowling and enjoy them both absolutely without comparing which of the two worlds are better defined or described. ***************** From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Aug 4 20:56:16 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 20:56:16 -0000 Subject: Kisses and Hexes wasRe: Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108852 Potioncat wrote: It almost seems > he chose a neutral memory to ask about. Almost like, "I saw the > dog, but not the Sorting Hat and I certainly didn't see you under > the mistletoe with Miss Chang." (My point being that he did see > those things but did not mention them.) > > Potioncat: Sorry. Not sure what the opinion is about replying to your own post, but I have to share this thought as it made me laugh. Right after Cho began to appear in Harry's memory, he shouted for Snape to leave, fell and looked up to see Snape rubbing his wrist. Snape says something like "Did you intend to cast a stinging hex?" Think back to GoF, DD's Pensieve: Harry is watching DD's memories and sees Bertha saying something like: I saw him kissing Florence behind the greenhouse and he hexed me. Imagined scene, Snape reporting to DD after Occlumency: I saw him kissing Miss Chang under the mistletoe and he hexed me. Potioncat From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Aug 4 21:06:20 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 21:06:20 -0000 Subject: Why Voldemort is a fascist... (LONG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108853 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Nora Renka" wrote: > > As I understand this, and I'm not the practicing political scientist > in my house, fascism is notably difficult to define and deal with, > as I mentioned. >snip > In other words, I think there's an ideology at work behind what's > going on, and this is an attempt to understand why these people do > what they do. Yes, I think Voldemort and the DEs are not quite one- > and-the-same in purpose, but please check out my other reply to > Pippin's comments on this same thread. I think there's more going > on with Voldemort ideologically than just 'Hi, I want power and I > want all of it'. There is *certainly* more going on with the DEs > than that. > > Kneasy: Felt compelled to respond, if only in a futile attempt to keep you out of low dives and dubious bars. But more seriously - fascism is exceptionally difficult to define unless you go literal with "the political creed of an Italian Political Grouping founded by B. Mussolini after he got fed up with being a communist." Yep. That's our Benny - "the greatest politician of the 20th century" according to who? Lenin of course. It's enough to make the cat laugh. Now it's accepted as a portmanteau word to describe any number of horrors that blighted the last century. Fascism because Benny's gang was the first. Even that warped Austrian was in awe of him to begin with. Didn't last though - to use an English phrase Benny was all mouth and no trousers. But because it covered such disparate beliefs, it was in reality meaningless. 1.Benny - yearned to return Italy to the glories of Ancient Rome 2.Adolf - reckoned western values were corrupting the Germanic soul and wanted a 'spiritual renewal' - (historically that meant marching into Poland.) 3.Franco - determined to uphold 'traditional' standards as exemplified by Church and State. There is a commonality - all looked back to a golden past that never really existed (as opposed to communists who look forward to a golden future that will never arrive). Apart from that - nothing in common. Now the DE/purebloods might fit this conservative template, but not Voldy. The past, except for his personal one, holds no interest at all. Understandable; why should an immortal worry about the past? He's got one hell of a future instead. All he need do is get his feet under the table and he's set forever. Political agendas become very small beer when eternity stretches out before you. What matters, what really matters is that some bumbling do-gooder and his snotty little acolyte don't somehow cock it up. > Nora: > Do you mean right now, that being a DE is, well, pretty bad? The > thing is, we have canon that when he started out, a lot of people > thought *he had the right ideas* about dealing with the Mudbloods-- > *they* were the despised minority. > Kneasy: Yep. How many openly support Voldy? Damn few. When he started out his ideas seemed fine. Putting them into practice tended to cause a re-assessment. Even his supporters began to realise that each of them belonged to a minority - of one. Having pureblood ancestors did not give immunity or provoke mercy - which it should if Voldy had a pureblood philosophy to promote. > Nora: > But purging the Muggleborns is a real change in the system, too. > That's why I read the struggle for Hogwarts in its more broad > thematic meanings. It's over the right for free admission to > society versus admission based on heredity. Kneasy: Well, it's based on heredity at the moment. You have to be born a wizard. Seems pretty exclusive already. No place there for Mrs Figg, a natural denizen of the WW. Further restrictions could be emplaced but I bet they'd still learn somehow, somewhere. > Nora: > We've been told that we'll see more of his minions than of LV, > because of course, all evil despots like having minions do work > instead of having to get up off the couch, turn off the TV, and go > commit murder. But I do agree that there're things you have to do > yourself. > Kneasy: Ah. I think you missed half my point. Voldy can say to Lucius "Go and be Minister." No problem. He can't say "Go and be Minister and here's part of my personal magical powers to help you do it." His powers are personal and can only be used by him. He might be the second most powerful wizard in the world, but by being his supporter that does not raise Malfoys personal magic index. And the DEs do not seem quantitatively much stronger than non-DEs. Which gives them a problem. It'd be "Erm... Boss can you come and kill this one for us? We can't quite manage." > Nora: > Supporting a despotism doesn't take one in front of every house, > just enough. You kill enough people randomly, you can enforce the > idea of a Reign of Terror fairly functionally--and then people start > to fold. It is, however, also canon that the DEs were outnumbering > the OotP by the end of VW1. Of course, neither of these groups is > exactly the general population, but this is surely telling as well. > Kneasy: Random terror works for terrorists, it's a frost for rulers. Especially when every house contains wizards with wands. Random killings of the population by government just produces anarchy, and probably wand-wielding snipers targeting the rush-hour exodus from the Ministry. Society breaks down, any stranger is a target, communities break up, families apparate to who knows where - try ruling that. > Nora: > With Umbridge, it's the theme that one can help ideas that are evil > in more than one way. I admit that the theme behind her and Fudge > seems pretty transparent to me--you don't have to be a direct > supporter to end up helping Voldemort. Umbridge shares so many of > the same ideas as Voldemort--that's what's scary. > Kneasy: The 'useful fool' concept. Yes, I'll agree with that. > Nora: > In my reply elsewhere on this thread, I noted that he did attack > Harry as a baby because he felt some kind of connection to him, in > that they were both 'tainted' by Muggle blood. This indicates some > sort of belief in the blood thing as reality, rather than simple > political opportunism. I am hoping that we get more detail on this > next book. It seems to me that he's built a persona, a public > image, as the Heir of Slytherin, and that this is part of what gets > the followers. I suspect there are followers as well out of sheer > desire to get ahead. That is enough to consider it an ideological > underpinning--you don't have to make it overt to have one, after > all... Kneasy: The connection. I've other ideas about that that don't involve political conviction. I fear you may just be nudging Voldy's personal animosities due to the circumstances of his birth over the line into a sort of philosophical manifesto. Can't follow you there. He hates; that's his credo and it's a personal grudge writ large. Even so he was willing to let Lily live. His agenda might be more flexible than you think. From griffin782002 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 10:08:08 2004 From: griffin782002 at yahoo.com (sp. sot.) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 03:08:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione Granger's birthday In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040804100808.36264.qmail@web90004.mail.scd.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108854 RM McDougal wrote: > Regarding Hermione Granger's birthday -- September 19th. > > Did you know that September is "the seventh month"? gopotter2004 said: 1. January 2. February 3. March 4. April 5. May 6. June 7. July 8. August 9. September Now, counting that way, it's not the seventh month, and this isn't meant to be snide at all (I can't figure out how to type this in a way that doesn't sound mean) but how are you counting? If you actually have a way that makes september the seventh, I'm totally up for it! (Though I'll still think Harry's the one, as cool as Hermione is) Becky who hopes she isn't being mean because that isn't her intent and it's much to late to use diction to sound nicer Griffin782002: my turn Well...linguistically it is not wrong. September comes from the latin Septem, which actually means Seven. So Hermione's birthday in some way can be said that is on the seventh month. Griffin782002 From meidbh at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 11:33:15 2004 From: meidbh at yahoo.com (meidbh) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 11:33:15 -0000 Subject: Shared thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108855 Kneasy introduces: "All the really interesting stuff, the things that *really* matter, happen before the books start "We often concentrate more on trying to predict the end rather than worrying about what we've missed - a big mistake IMO. ... "the past of the books determines the future. "It's the things she doesn't tell us, the gaps in the history that scream out for explanation or exposition and yet even after 5 books are still shrouded in silence that catch our attention. There's only one reason for this resounding silence that I can think of - they would tell us too much." Meidbh: You've nailed it :-) Kneasy: "What *is* Harry, how did he get that way and what could this mean for the future? Harry too is a composite; he has some of the Voldy construct in his mind - but, and it's a very important but - he didn't accept it willingly; it was imposed. When he eventually comes to terms with the situation he'll have a choice - accept or reject. Anybody think he'll accept? No; but it'd be an interesting finale if he did. How this intrusion will be eliminated, or even if it *can* be eliminated, is up for grabs." Meidbh: Warning - many questions follow! If it's all been asked and answered before just point me in the right direction (I'm only beginning to skim the surface here). I have no strong opinions yet, just playing with ideas The transfer of Voldy construct, now this is interesting Before we wonder `how' are we sure about `whether? Is essence of Voldy really inside Harry? Why do we assume Harry didn't have his Voldyesque skills already and that they aren't part of his innate `power' and genetic history? Our evidence so far for a transfer of construct or essence: 1. Tom Riddle's sister wand chooses Harry. Perhaps this is simply because they both have potential for greatness (in different ways)? Or, and I prefer this one, it is a magical attempt at damage limitation. Wise to provide young Potter with a weapon equal to that of his future opponent. 2. Harry's ability to speak Parseltongue Just a magical genetic mutation or recessive gene? A Red herring! 3. Harry seems to have had a trace memory of the name Tom Riddle. Hmm. I have no answer to this one yet except that it may have a really simple explanation and it really isn't much to go on (but then why would JKR mention it at all?). 4. Harry's scar appears to function as a communication channel with VM. Is this any different from a Dark Mark ? we know they respond to VM. And if it is could its location so close to the brain be the key to its sensitivity? Does part of VM need to be inside Harry to read Harry's mind or is the scar a sort of magical webcam? Not a part of its operator, just a useful tool. I have to say the transfer (of something!) concept is intriguing, attractive and would explain a lot. The essay Bex/ Carolyn/ Kneasy pointed us to is definitely required reading (so I'll mention it again!) http://www.redhen-publications.com/Changeling.html But before looking for deliciously complex explanations it's always good to be sure that the simple explanations have been ruled out. Any more evidence out there to support an "unpossessed" Harry?! Meidbh :-) PS: Why do you guys use exclamation marks to name your theory characters (changeling!Harry etc)? From kcawte at ntlworld.com Wed Aug 4 21:16:39 2004 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 22:16:39 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione Granger's birthday References: <20040804100808.36264.qmail@web90004.mail.scd.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000901c47a68$54f7a600$bcde6251@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 108856 "The Loudest Noise Comes From The Electric Minerva." ----- Original Message ----- From: "sp. sot." To: Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 11:08 AM Subject: Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione Granger's birthday > > > RM McDougal wrote: > > Regarding Hermione Granger's birthday -- September 19th. > > > > Did you know that September is "the seventh month"? > > > gopotter2004 said: > > 1. January > 2. February > 3. March > 4. April > 5. May > 6. June > 7. July > 8. August > 9. September > > Now, counting that way, it's not the seventh month, and this isn't > meant to be snide at all (I can't figure out how to type this in a way > that doesn't sound mean) but how are you counting? If you actually > have a way that makes september the seventh, I'm totally up for it! > > (Though I'll still think Harry's the one, as cool as Hermione is) > K Historically (and I'm talking Ancient History here) September was the seventh month because July and August didn't exist (hence the name for goodness sake! Sept, meaning seven, followed by Oct, 8, Nov, 9 (OK I'm a little more shaky on that one - why not Non?) and Dec, 10). July and August being later 'inventions' named after Augustus and Julius Caesar. Since JKR seems to like her classical history/mythology/Latin I have to admit I wouldn't be *stunned* if it turned out to be September she was referring to. However since the books are the Harry Potter books it might be somewhat, hmm can't think of the right adjective there, disingenuous? cynical? irritating as heck? to find out that Hermione is our heroine after all and will kill Voldemort. Sort of 'ha ha, fooled you, you've been watching the wrong kid all along' ... Still Hermione kicks serious ass and since I used to complain like mad about the lack of fully fleshed females in the books I wouldn't exactly hate it if she did manage to kill Voldemort. Besides, if he's still alive, wouldn't you just love to see the look on Malfoy's face (any of them actually) of Voldemort was killed by a muggleborn? K From yahoogroups at catbirdco.us Wed Aug 4 17:10:23 2004 From: yahoogroups at catbirdco.us (Michal) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 10:10:23 -0700 Subject: blood types, Dudley Message-ID: <6.1.0.6.0.20040804100910.0356beb0@mail.catbirdco.us> No: HPFGUIDX 108857 At 05:10 PM 7/28/04, Snow wrote in The Founders Four message: >There are >four possible bloodlines that I can think of and it would be very >unique of JKR to have the four founders of each house as a >representative of each of the different blood lineage; pureblood, >half blood, magical person born to a squib, magical person born to a >muggle. Taking a tangent from your discussion of the school founders, I noticed that you seem to be mixing apples and oranges here, and there are more than four combinations if you add squibs and halfbloods to the discussion. Pretend I've got a matrix here; if you can't see it, put it in a monospace/typewriter font. Heritage | 100% Wizard | Mixed | 100% Muggle ------------------------------------------------------------ Ability | Magical | pureblood | half-blood | muggle-born Squashed | | Dudley? | No Magic | squib | muggle? | muggle The matrix puts heritage against usage. I don't think anyone should argue with the three types of heritage listed, but Squashed Ability is another story. I put it here because I suspect Lily's family had wizards in it other than her and I also suspect that Dudley is a wizard who's been "squashed" (he felt the dementors after all). And while we haven't run across any, there must be wizards who have denied their heritage/skill and refused to use it or who were never allowed to use it. As a formerly "excommunicated" wizard, Hagrid was "not allowed" to use magic for years (even though he did from time to time with his hidden, repaired wand). Surely there's a term for that sort of wizard? Regarding which types would be at wizard school, just the ones with magical ability would be my best guess. I supposed it would be possible for magical parents to force a magical kid in denial/revolt to attend wizard school, but is that really likely? Are there any reluctant Hogwarts students that I missed? Is it possible for the MoM or a powerful wizard to squash someone's use of magic? Or when they snap your wand, do they ask you nicely not to buy another one? Put you on a list so the wand-makers won't sell to you? Wand control laws? LOL Michal From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Wed Aug 4 18:05:43 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 18:05:43 -0000 Subject: Occlumency Lessons/ Harry as a Legilimens In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108858 Finwitch wondered: > Are Albus Dumbledore and Severus Snape truly the only ones who can > use a Legilimens spell? Hermione would learn, I'm sure. Why not > teach her (while she and Ron were at the HQ), and then let her > teach Harry if Dumbledore was so worried about Voldemort-possessed > Harry trying to kill him? Yblitzka's thoughts: I don't think being a Legilimens is a trait you can /learn/ really. Voldemort, Dumbledore, and Snape are seemingly the only ones who can do this, and Snape needs the spell; the other two do not. I can see it being like Parseltongue, but it has to be more intentional: both are rare, both are possibly "talents" you are born with, like a predetermination, or even inherited, and both don't seem to be something you can learn from a book. However, Parseltongue comes easy for Harry; he needs no training to talk to snakes. Legilimens is more so an accident, and he isn't trained in the art to be very good at it. More on this later. Perhaps Snape needs the spell because he is not as practiced, or he doesn't have the "gift." We never hear LV say "Legilimens," even in PS/SS when he knows Harry is lying (at the mirror, trying to get the stone). Dumbledore never says he uses the spell, and he doesn't say it when he seems to be looking right through Harry. Another point is a little while. I think Snape is an Occlumens (any canon support would be appreciated: I think he or DD says this in OotP), so he is not a /true/ legilimens, but he has the strength of mind and a similar trait that allow him to successfully use the Legilimens spell. My final point (mentioned above) is that /Harry/ is a Legilimens as well, probably the same way he became a Parseltongue: LV tranferred some of his power to Harry the night he got the scar. Harry doesn't know this because: 1) He never tried, since until OotP, he doesn't know about this power, and he has no clue he can do it. 2) He isn't trained to do it, so the power is unfocused, much like magic in general in "magical" children. Why do I think this? Well... First, and weakest, Parseltongue (we believe) was tranferred to Harry that night, so Legilimency may have been transferred as well. Weakness: Pure speculation here, plus we don't know for sure that Harry wasn't a Parselmouth before. DD told us he got the power from LV, which is like JKR telling us, but it may not be true. But I think it is. Second, much stronger: When Harry managed to fight Snape out of his head, he didn't just push him out, he pushed his way into /Snape's/ head. That's a big deal. Completely unintentional, yes, but also without a spell, like DD and LV. Snape was shocked, maybe even frightened a little when this happened. I sincerely doubt Snape (who blocks LV out of his head so he can lie) manages to get into LV's head in the process. Granted, Snape may have had his guard down at the time, but the truth be known, Harry's "breaking in" probably wasn't expected, and it probably shows us something that will play a key role in the future. Could this be another reason DD doesn't want to teach Harry Occlumency? ~Yb From romulus at hermionegranger.us Wed Aug 4 18:48:53 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 18:48:53 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108859 Has there been any discussion regarding the fact that Snape sees Dark Magic in the Marauder's Map (Ch. 14, PoA), Lupin putting it in his mind that Sirius Black was entering Hogwarts "using dark arts he learned from Voldemort," (Ch. 18, PoA), and that Voldemort always refers to Peter Pettigrew using his Marauder Nickname? Doesn't this all point to the fact that the Marauders were studying under Voldemort at one time, and that most of them decided to leave him? All except Pettigrew perhaps? RMMcDougal www.hermionegranger.us From eeyore6771 at comcast.net Wed Aug 4 19:24:59 2004 From: eeyore6771 at comcast.net (Pat) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 19:24:59 -0000 Subject: Harry's discoveries In-Reply-To: <20040801012942.43464.qmail@web21201.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108860 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, star fall wrote: > JKR posted on her site that something Harry disovers in CoS foreshadows something in HBP, but that HBP has nothing to do with Tom Riddle's Diary or the Basilick. Now here are a few of Harry's discoveries, if anyone know more please add them to the list. > > > Harry discovers House Elves (Dobby) and their magic > Harry discovers that Knockturn Alley is not a nice place > Harry discovers that Lucius Malfoy has many Dark Art things hidden in his house Harry discovers that Ginny Weasley has a major crush on him > Harry (and Ron) discover that the Whomping Willow hits back, HARD Harry (and Ron) discovers what can happen with a broken wand (LOL) > Harry discovers that the Sorting Hat can do more then just sort kids into houses > Harry discovers (learns about) Phoenixes (from Dumbledore) > Harry discovers that he is a 'true Gryffindor' and that the choices we make in life are what matter Pat: Good point, Mary. I've been trying to think what JKR means, too. Also add to the list: Harry discovers why Hagrid was expelled, even though it was a set-up by Riddle. And isn't this the one where many of the students say that they are muggle-borns? Anyone have a list of all of the ones mentioned? Some of them would be good candidates for the HBP. Pat From eeyore6771 at comcast.net Wed Aug 4 19:56:33 2004 From: eeyore6771 at comcast.net (Pat) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 19:56:33 -0000 Subject: Contacting Sirius In-Reply-To: <20040801141453.25282.qmail@web52205.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108861 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kelly Duhon wrote: > > > Magda Grantwich wrote: > > I think the broken mirror at the end of OOTP is yet another JKR > indication that Sirius is dead and gone and that there's no use > crying over wasted opportunities that won't come again. If we "see" > Sirius again, it will be as a pensieve memory or some other glimpse > of an earlier period but I strongly doubt that Harry will be able to > interact with him as he does with portraits. Sirius is gone and > that's that. > > > > Kelly: > > I hope Sirius becomes a ghost (as it seems many unhappy wizard souls do) and continues to be a guiding force in Harry's life. I think having a ghost in the Order could prove very useful. > Pat: When Harry finally thought to talk to Nick, Nick really dashed that hope that Sirius would be around as a friendly ghost for Harry to talk to. Sad as it is, I believe JKR means it when she says that the dead cannot come back. She feels that very acutely, because of the death of her mother, (as I know from my own experience) and has used the Mirror of Erised and Sirius's death to show the devastation of the early death of someone we love--and it's finality. Things are left unresolved by Sirius's death, but that is something we have to learn to handle as we continue to live. As for the mirror that is now in pieces at the bottom of Harry's trunk--I do think that he will use it in some way in the future, but not to contact Sirius. He could have thrown the broken mirror away-- that's what most of us would do with broken glass. But the mirror, broken, is still there. I thought he would probably repair it at some point, but I like the idea that the pieces could be used by all of them--Harry, Ron, Hermione, Ginny, Neville, and Luna--who now seem to be the inner circle. After Harry's disastrous forays into the Floo Network in OotP, I doublt that he will try that again. The mirror or it's pieces will give him the means of communicating with others whom he trusts. Pat From p0tterfan at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 20:01:51 2004 From: p0tterfan at yahoo.com (p0tterfan) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 20:01:51 -0000 Subject: Prophecy - Why Dumbledore didn't defeat Voldemort? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108862 Not sure if this has been discussed before, but while reading the prophecy again, the whole "in essence divided" comment made by Dumbledore in OotP made me think. Could it be that Harry and Voldemort are connected through the scar in a manner that if either one dies at the hand of another person (besides the other) they both die. Could this be the reason why Dumbledore doesn't try to kill Voldemort in the battle at the MoM? I think this would satisfy the prophecy in that if Voldemort kills Harry, he comes into his "full power" and vice-versa for Harry. Just a thought. Not sure if this has already been discussed or not, but I thought I'd ask anyways. I think this would explain why Harry has to be the one to 'vanquish' Voldemort and not anyone else, otherwise he would die as well? Cheers, -p From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Wed Aug 4 17:12:29 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 17:12:29 -0000 Subject: Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108863 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > I argued this point a day or so ago. *Eventually* I think it would > have been important for Harry to study under Snape for these precise > reasons. But I'll argue long & hard that with a BEGINNING student, > who doesn't even understand the "why" behind the lessons, a slow & > gentle start works best. Give the kid a few basic skills, let him > try things out in a calm setting, give him some confidence that he > understands the process a little big. THEN bring on the big gun. :- ) Yeah, imagine apparition taught this way... hmm? Now there's a lesson Harry doesn't need from Snape. Can't you see it now? ... Snape says, "Now, Potter, if your incompetant arse can, when I say go, apparate to the other side of the room..." Harry begins to object, "But, Professor, no one can apparate on Hog..." "...and I'll immediately afterward aim a painful curse where you currently stand," continue Snape without pause. "Crucio! Go!" heard Harry, but he wasn't particular sure if he heard the second word correctly over his own screams. "Oops..." sneered Snape dryly. ... Ok, that's just meant to be funny... but even given a fair chance to perform the apparation, without any explanation beyond "clear your mind" he'd splinch himself in an instant. What Harry should have done (although I'm _REALLY_ surprised Hermione didn't herself) is run to get a book on Occlumency as fast as he could. Josh From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Wed Aug 4 18:11:55 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 18:11:55 -0000 Subject: Possible Katie Bell FLINT? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108864 Carrie wrote: > I was just curious... In Book 5 Ginny Weasly says that she'd like > to try out for Chaser, and that Angelina and Alicia are leaving > next year. What about Katie? if Katie is NOT leaving for book six, > that must make her one year older than Harry. Yblitzka: Yep, sounds right... Carrie cont'd: > That would mean that she was a first year on the House Quidditch > team. Yblitzka again: I don't see where you make that leap. Please explain. ~Yb From crobocker at aol.com Wed Aug 4 13:07:06 2004 From: crobocker at aol.com (c_robocker) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 13:07:06 -0000 Subject: OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108865 > > Alla: > > > > But that is exactly the point. All other adults who don't want > Harry to say Voldemort are afraid of him. Is Snape? > I'm not sure I want to support Snape, but it may be part of a total and consistent coverup that he's still loyal to Voldie. If Harry's mind would be penetrated by Voldie, Snape can't leave any trace that he isn't loyal. CRobo. From meidbh at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 11:48:02 2004 From: meidbh at yahoo.com (meidbh) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 11:48:02 -0000 Subject: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108866 Boolean writes: "But but but...Harry *isn't* a half-blood is he??? James & Lily were witch and wizard, therefore Harry is pure-blood,no? I though half-blood only applied to the child of a couple made up of a witch/wizard and a Muggle?" I'm not 100% certain how this ugly racial analysis thing works (I do seem to remember JKR discussing it in more detail somewhere though) but I believe Lily like Hermione was what is known as a Mudblood because both parents were Muggles. I am assuming the child of a Pureblood and a Muggle would definitely be considered a Halfblood and it seems the same applies to the child of a Pureblood and a Mudblood. (does anyone else become really, really queasy when discussing this stuff? Ughhh!) If JKR says Harry is a halfblood - then i guess he is - she's designed the terminology! Meidbh :-) From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk Wed Aug 4 21:45:59 2004 From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 22:45:59 +0100 (BST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why is Hermione in Gryffindor? In-Reply-To: <20040804075838.2231.qmail@web25309.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040804214559.18532.qmail@web25303.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108867 >From Udderpd I posted a part of this as the answer to another question but I believe that it is a valid question in its own right. We know from the first train journey in HPatPS (SS) that Hermione would have been OK with either Ravenclaw or Gryffindor, (I hear that Gryffindor's the best....but I suppose that Ravenclaw wouldn't be too bad). So Hermione went to the sorting with no definate House fixed in her mind. She is the cleverest Witch in eons and the Sorting hat put her in Gryffindor Why? I can think of two reasons: Either she is braver than she is clever. No doubting that she is a very brave girl but she is also exceptionaly clever, still maybe it's this? Or the sorting hat put in Gryffindor because it knew that that would be where she would be needed. Was she put there to help Harry? We know that the Sorting Hat does a lot more than just sort First Years. She definately appears to be where she needs to be. Can someone else come up with any other ideas? Please! TTFN Udder Pen Dragon ________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! Yahoo! Groups Links --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________ Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/admin Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Yahoo! Groups Links --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Wed Aug 4 20:20:09 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 20:20:09 -0000 Subject: Possible Katie Bell FLINT? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108868 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > > Carrie wrote: > that must make her one year older than Harry. That would mean that > she was a first year on the House > > Quidditch team. It has always been stressed that Harry is the > youngest House player in about a hundred years. > Neri: > This was discussed before, although I'm too lazy to brave Yahoomort > and find the post now. Basically nobody has managed to find canon > that Katie played in the team the year before Harry joined. She could > have joined the team at the same time with Harry, when she was in her > second (?) year. And when were the tryouts for the team Harry's first year? He didn't try out, he was simply appointed. It's quite, quite possible that the team had already been put together (i.e. Katie added as the 3rd Chaser), but they still didn't have a Seeker because no one had tried out... why else would MM run after a first year (even if he is Harry) and then drag him off to pull Wood out of class? Desperation! :) Josh From nearlyheadlessryan at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 20:30:07 2004 From: nearlyheadlessryan at yahoo.com (nearlyheadlessryan) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 20:30:07 -0000 Subject: Snape, Quirellmort question... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108869 Forgive me if this has already been discussed but... For a lack of a social life I was re-reading SS and a thought/ question occured to me: Snape suspects Quirell of trying to get at the Sorcerer's Stone and keeps confronting him late at night in the halls and forest about it. As we come to find out, you-know-who has taken up residence under the turban and is controlling Quirell. Now, skip ahead to OOP, if Snape really is spying for The Order again, wouldn't Voldemort remember Snape's part in trying to stop him from getting ahold of the Stone? Wouldn't he know that Snape's loyalty lies with Dumbledore? and therefore want Snape disposed of? Surely, Quirell being destroyed didn't erase V's memory as well? I'd love any thoughts that anyone cares to share. Thanks, -NearlyheadlessRyan From omphale at onetel.com Wed Aug 4 21:49:10 2004 From: omphale at onetel.com (saraquel_omphale) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 21:49:10 -0000 Subject: Harry, Lily, DD & Draqons Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108870 wow, you go away for a few days on this list and there's no catching up, but I'm enjoying the Lupin/spy thread, some good stuff there to mull on.... However, what has been exciting my notice recently is dragons. A while ago on the list (sorry, have looked but can't find it) there was a good discussion around the charm Lily put on Harry and I am still puzzling over it. Reading PS and GF again there seems to be a lot of mention of dragons. Here's some dragon points which I find interesting: 1 JK has said that Harry's eyes are important and that they are his vulnerability. Dragon's eyes are their vulnerability. 2 On the back of the Chocolate Frog DD card, he is listed as having descovered the 12 uses of dragon blood. I think this is one of those points which JK will further elucidate at some point. It's listed as one of DD major achievements. Interestingly hermione is "reciting the 12 uses of dragon's blood" at the start of ch14 in PS. Did DD have anything to do with devising the charm Lily used to protect Harry? 3 Ch20 GoF (p295 British pb) "Dragons are extremely difficult to slay owing to the ANCIENT MAGIC that imbues their thick hides, which none but the most powerful spells can penetrate..." (my capitalisation) they have/are imbued with the same type of magic which protects Harry. Also, if we assume that Voldemort did give Harry his scar, then maybe it is the result of the charm being penetrated. 4 Evans is a Welsh name and of course there is the Common Welsh Green dragon. I can't say that I've come to any conclusions yet, but has anyone else mused along these lines? Saraquel From nearlyheadlessryan at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 20:37:36 2004 From: nearlyheadlessryan at yahoo.com (nearlyheadlessryan) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 20:37:36 -0000 Subject: Molly & others' vulnerability (was: Wizard/Muggle "Radar") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108871 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: If > Harry were kidnapped, would DD bargain w/ the DEs? If Fred & George > were kidnapped, would Arthur "give something away" in order to get > them back? I just want to say that I'd feel really sorry for who ever kidnapped the Weasley twins. They may joke around alot but I think that they are probably two of the most clever characters in the books. Just look at the way they stood up to that horrible Umbridge woman. I think whoever makes the mistake of kidnapping Fred and George will be begging Molly and Authur to take them back before long. Always, -NearlyheadlessRyan From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Wed Aug 4 21:15:10 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 21:15:10 -0000 Subject: Hermione Granger's birthday In-Reply-To: <20040804100808.36264.qmail@web90004.mail.scd.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108872 Griffin782002 wrote: > Well...linguistically it is not wrong. September comes from the > latin Septem, which actually means Seven. So Hermione's birthday in > some way can be said that is on the seventh month. Ybby says: This is true, and when I saw the original post to this thread, I realized the same thing. (The name September sprang from the Julian calendar, when September was the 7th month.) However, other posters and I don't think the prophecy refers to her because her parents are muggles (unless she was adopted, and we have absolutely no evidence of that anywhere), plus the prophecy refers to the One as "he," implying male. It may just be a generalization, like "mankind," but I don't think so. ~Yb From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Wed Aug 4 21:25:38 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 21:25:38 -0000 Subject: Occlumency Lessons/ Harry as a Legilimens In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108873 As a postscript to my rather long post: Yes, Snape is an Occlumens, not a Legilimens. In OotP, AmVer, p. 527, Lupin (on the Knight Bus with the kids) tells Harry (in a sort of whisper): "He [Snape] is a superb Occlumens." So Snape doesn't have the "gift" of Legilimency,, but he has a similar trait/talent, which allows him to use the spell successfully. ~Yb From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Wed Aug 4 13:23:59 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 13:23:59 -0000 Subject: To Where To When (TimeTurning that may make sense) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108874 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > Valky: > Now, if I am correct in this premise then there is evidence that he > *did* timeturn once and only once to get a little extra info on the > COS incedent. He comments twice that he knew who was setting the > Basilisk on the children and in both instances he admits he doesn't > know how. > > In 'the Rogue Bludger' he says: The Question is not who. The > Question is how... > Now of course we *can* take this exclusively to mean that he knows > it is Tom, but....... > In Dobby's Reward after Harry had 'so far avoided mentioning Ginny > or the Diary' DD says: What interests me most is How Lord Voldemort > managed to enchant Ginny. > > Nobody *told him* that Ginny was doing Toms dirty work he *knew* > already......... >From his description of TR/LV as the only remaining descendant (I'll skip the debate about the 'ancestor' debate) of Saly then he can be fairly certain that Tom is and was responsible; though yes, probably after LV's rise and a bit of research. However, knowing the lethal nature of the Basilisk's eyes (if he'd TTed for info, he'd have known it was a Basilisk first and foremost), then I feel he would have given more specific preventative advice, such as using mirrors around corners ala Hermy and Penelope. Not only does he care about the students' safety, but a death would have closed the school much sooner. Also, I seem to remember a look of delighted surprise when Harry and co. dragged into MM's office. Also, I thought he picked up on Ginny being the tool from Harry's obmission, and logical deduction: a TR up on current events would seek out Harry, no 3rd person was with them or described in the story, knew it was TR somehow, etc. It was just the method of enchantment, i.e. the diary, that was unknown to DD. Furthermore, on that vein, remember that Ginny dumped the diary in Myrtle's toilet... i.e. she had it with her in the bathroom no one uses. That tells me she was carrying it around with her when opening the chamber, so if DD saw her, he'd probably connect the diary to it. I also don't think she went with the Basilisk on its rounds, so for DD to have eyeballed Ginny, he would have to have known the location of the chamber (he could have sealed it up at that time). > Thanks Josh. > Now awaiting the next barrage of DD doesn't Timeturn. Ah, the more advanced debate it why I checked this group out, in fact. :) Much more enjoyable that debating ships. Here's one thought... perhaps he only turns when he can see evidence that he already has. For example, he makes the recommendation to Hermione to use hers in such a manner after seeing Buckbeak's disappearance that he knew wasn't accomplished by the trio on the first pass. However and contrarily to my above, to knock you off your raft entirely (evil laugh) :) ...while yes, I agree time turning his complicated, keep in mind that in PoA, Hermione was doing it once or twice a day every weekday (that's ~180 turns in the year, by an unexperienced student). Surely DD could do it more than once a year?? :) Josh From romulus at hermionegranger.us Wed Aug 4 14:52:45 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 14:52:45 -0000 Subject: Hermione Granger's birthday In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108875 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Inge" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" > wrote: > > >>DuffyPoo: > Interesting. Is this pointing, RM McDougal, to the possiblity that > Hermione may fulfill the prophecy? Yes, this is pointing to that very thing. > The problem comes in with the > Prophecy: 'and the Dark Lord will mark *him* as his equal, but *he* > will have powers the Dark Lord knows not.' So, unless the prophecy > is even less specific that we have already been led to believe, can > this part be fulfilled by a girl?<< Well, in the old days, the pronoun "he" was employed to refer to "a person" and not necessarily a "man". Only recently has the word "they" been used to refer to a he or a she. > > > Inge again: > I do not for a second believe that Hermione is the one to fulfill the > prophecy. For several reasons: > > 1) September being the 7th month was too long ago to have any meaning > anymore. And even *if*.... Hermione is born on the 19th which is not > at the end of the month. Well, "month" comes from the old English word "moonth" which means "lunar cycle". In 1979, counting March 1st and the first day of the year, the 7th lunar cycle "died" on September 20th. > > 2) The prophecy doesn't refer directly to a *she*. See above. > > 3) There is no canon at all to support Hermiones parents to have been > in a fight with Voldemort ever - nor that they would have defied him > even once. "born to those" may mean Hermione's parents, it may mean Hermione's family lineage, it may mean Hermione's social status, it may mean Muggles in general. We know, for instance, that Voldemort's father "defied" him by rejecting he and his mother. We also know that two other Muggles defied him -- his grandparents. He killed three Muggles in his own family. I can see him killing his father for his rejection, but why the grandparents, unless the grandparents "defied" (or rejected) him as well? RMM From omphale at onetel.com Wed Aug 4 22:16:57 2004 From: omphale at onetel.com (saraquel_omphale) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 22:16:57 -0000 Subject: Snape, Quirellmort question... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108876 NearlyheadlessRyan wrote >Snape suspects Quirell of trying to get at > the Sorcerer's Stone and keeps confronting him late at night in the > halls and forest about it. As we come to find out, you-know-who has > taken up residence under the turban and is controlling Quirell. Now, > skip ahead to OOP, if Snape really is spying for The Order again, > wouldn't Voldemort remember Snape's part in trying to stop him from > getting ahold of the Stone? Wouldn't he know that Snape's loyalty > lies with Dumbledore? and therefore want Snape disposed of? Surely, > Quirell being destroyed didn't erase V's memory as well? Saraquel adds In OotP graveyard scene, voldemort implies that the one who has left his service forever will be killed... Snape's job (if we believe what he tells Harry) is to find out what is happening with the DE's. There's a big question as to how he's doing that. I think he must have been rumbled by Voldemort and the other DEs. Not only is there the problem that nearlyheadlessRyan has pointed out, but also the fact that DD publicly outed him during the trial scenes in the pensieve. Also, Snape makes great play of favouring Draco Malfoy, but surely Lucious would have warned Draco off. So what is he doing? There's the legilimancy stuff, which could be useful in this connection. But Snape seems to imply that he's doing really personally life endangering stuff. JK is not explicit about what Snape is doing either, which if it was just straightforward spying there would be no reason not to say that. Saraquel From navarro198 at hotmail.com Wed Aug 4 22:19:12 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 22:19:12 -0000 Subject: Possible Katie Bell FLINT? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108877 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bex" wrote: > Carrie wrote: > > I was just curious... In Book 5 Ginny Weasly says that she'd like > > to try out for Chaser, and that Angelina and Alicia are leaving > > next year. What about Katie? if Katie is NOT leaving for book six, that must make her one year older than Harry. > > > Yblitzka: > Yep, sounds right... > > Carrie cont'd: > > That would mean that she was a first year on the House Quidditch > > team. > > Yblitzka again: > I don't see where you make that leap. Please explain. > > ~Yb Bookworm: IIRC (apologies for not checking - the book is *missing* in my daughter's room) when Oliver introduced Katie to Harry, Oliver said that Katie had been on the 'reserve' team the year before, so she was new to the 'varsity' team the same year Harry was. That's the only mention of the reserve team I remember, so what exactly that means is unclear. Ravenclaw Bookworm (who may break down this summer and buy a second set of books for herself) From navarro198 at hotmail.com Wed Aug 4 22:30:27 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 22:30:27 -0000 Subject: Harry, Lily, DD & Draqons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108878 saraquel wrote: Reading PS and GF again there seems to be a > lot of mention of dragons. Here's some dragon points which I find > interesting: > > 1 JK has said that Harry's eyes are important and that they are his vulnerability. Dragon's eyes are their vulnerability. > > 2 On the back of the Chocolate Frog DD card, he is listed as having descovered the 12 uses of dragon blood. I think this is one of those points which JK will further elucidate at some point. It's listed as one of DD major achievements. Interestingly hermione is "reciting the 12 uses of dragon's blood" at the start of ch14 in PS. Did DD have anything to do with devising the charm Lily used to protect Harry? > > 3 Ch20 GoF (p295 British pb) "Dragons are extremely difficult to slay owing to the ANCIENT MAGIC that imbues their thick hides, which none but the most powerful spells can penetrate..." (my capitalisation) they have/are imbued with the same type of magic which protects Harry. Also, if we assume that Voldemort did give Harry his scar, then maybe it is the result of the charm being penetrated. > > 4 Evans is a Welsh name and of course there is the Common Welsh Green dragon. > > I can't say that I've come to any conclusions yet, but has anyone > else mused along these lines? Bookworm: I have also noticed the mentions of dragons and dragons' blood but haven't come to any conclusions about it. I did post something about Dumbledore, the Ancient Magic and Lily several months ago (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/99076) and think there is something there. Lily was presumably good at charms, Voldemort didn't place value on Ancient Magic, Dumbledore appears to know a lot about it... Ravenclaw Bookworm From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Wed Aug 4 13:26:57 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 13:26:57 -0000 Subject: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108879 "Boolean" wrote: > But but but...Harry *isn't* a half-blood is he??? > > James & Lily were witch and wizard, therefore Harry is pure-blood, > no? > > I though half-blood only applied to the child of a couple made up > of a witch/wizard and a Muggle? False (couldn't resist the play on name) See jkrowling.com's faq. Half-blood is a term defined by those to whom it matters, which counts back generations... similar to Nazi Germany with Jewish ancestory (JKR's own comparison here). Josh From averyhaze at hotmail.com Wed Aug 4 16:30:14 2004 From: averyhaze at hotmail.com (onnanokata) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 16:30:14 -0000 Subject: F & G and the QWC bet (Re: another wacko theory) In-Reply-To: <20040803024227.2437.qmail@web52202.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108880 Meltowne: > Maybe the boys, following the match, used a regular > timeturner to go back and tell themselves what the outcome > would be - just like we saw in the second Back to the Future > movie. Kelly: > Unless I am remembering wrong, Ginny was with them, so I don't > think they could have gone back then. Dharma: You are both on to interesting ideas here. Initially to me, it seemed too risky for the twins to have Ginny with them while getting into serious shenanigans. I'm now questioning my initial reaction because, I remembered a few things from book 5. In OotP Ginny says, "The thing about growing up with Fred and George, is that you sort of start thinking anything's possible if you've got enough nerve." Has Ginny been involved in something with the twins that goes beyond jokes, Canary Creams and Nosebleed Nougat? Have they taken any substantial risks that Ginny knows of, other than testing their Wizard Wheezes products? The choice of the word `nerve' is striking to me. Also, George says to Harry during his first visit to Grimauld place, "Yeah, size is not guarantee of power. Look at Ginny." Then George completes this thought with, "You've never been on the receiving end of one of her Bat-Bogey hexes, have you?" Where would Fred and George encounter Ginny using that hex? Is the Burrow shielded from magic detection, or has she been getting into things that only Fred and George know about away from home? Could she have turned to the twins for tutelage at Hogwarts? Given that Ron often treated her as nuisance and Percy was so stringent, maybe the twins took up the task of looking after her and offering her advice. In my opinion, she could be more involved with the twins and by proxy their schemes, than it appears at first glance. Since Harry's knowledge of Ginny comes primarily through Ron and Hermione, we are probably missing quite a bit of information. It is only in the last book that Ginny has started to speak directly to Harry, thus limiting our information as well. From navarro198 at hotmail.com Wed Aug 4 22:34:52 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 22:34:52 -0000 Subject: Hermione Granger's birthday In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108881 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bex" wrote: > Griffin782002 wrote: > > Well...linguistically it is not wrong. September comes from the > > latin Septem, which actually means Seven. So Hermione's birthday in some way can be said that is on the seventh month. > > Ybby says: > This is true, and when I saw the original post to this thread, I > realized the same thing. (The name September sprang from the Julian calendar, when September was the 7th month.) However, other posters and I don't think the prophecy refers to her because her parents are muggles (unless she was adopted, and we have absolutely no evidence of that anywhere), plus the prophecy refers to the One as "he," implying male. It may just be a generalization, like "mankind," but I don't think so. Bookworm: It also says the One will be born to those who "thrice defied" the Dark Lord. I don't see how a couple of Muggle dentists could have done that. Ravenclaw Bookworm From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Wed Aug 4 16:33:57 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 16:33:57 -0000 Subject: Hermione Granger's birthday In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108882 "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: > > Regarding Hermione Granger's birthday -- September 19th. > > Did you know that September is "the seventh month"? "iamvine" wrote: > Trelawney tells Umbridge earlyish in OotP that she's been working > at Hogwarts for "nearly sixteen years", leading to the theory that > she was engaged the year before Harry's birth, but after the beginning > of the school year - i.e. just before Hermione was born. If it was exactly 16 years, the hiring would have been done on the same date, the calender year before Harry was born, Y-1, as OotP is calendar years Y15-Y16. However, the comment is "nearly" and if Trewalney was hired _after_ the date of her comment, but before Hermione's birthday, I don't have the book, but you're looking at a window of less than 18 days max (Express rolls on Sept 1). At that point, you'd round off to 16 years even. Not to mention, that if 7th month was referring to the current month, the prophecy could be coaxed that way... like the 2nd prophecy, referring to midnight of the current day. To me, nearly would imply either a little bit of self-promoting rounding (it was really just over 15 years, thinking early summer) or she was hired at some point in the middle of the school year... like around Christmas. Of course, if Hermione is younger than Harry (I think the majority assumption), being born Sept 19, Y0, not Y-1, then the theory could hold. However, iamvine's (what is that name, Krum's imitation of Harry?) other objections still hold, although if you're going to play with Roman numerology, anything after the 15th (the Ides) was labelled as the number of days before the start of the month (Kalens) and corresponded to the lunar calendar's waning of the moon from full to new (dying in a literal sense, just leaving open "as [it] dies" being the moment of death or the slower process leading up to it). While I could see JKR going goofy over the Sept=7 thing, the pre- Julian calendar introducing the 11th and 12th months is much older than Hogwarts itself (715BC versus ~1000 AD), and I think the modern numeration would hold, even in the archaic WW. :) ...oh, and there are evidently many other prophecies (aisles and aisles in the DoM), and I'm sure a few might have described Sept-Dec as the Nth month, providing further basis for DD to discount September. Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Wed Aug 4 16:45:02 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 16:45:02 -0000 Subject: Hermione in Gryffindor? In-Reply-To: <002401c47a14$db01cf40$2dc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108883 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > I only have one problem with the kid choosing the house theory. Only one? Don't forget that Draco didn't even have time to make conversation with the hat... he was essentially placed in Sytherin on smell alone. }:^] Josh From vidarfe at start.no Wed Aug 4 18:28:24 2004 From: vidarfe at start.no (vidar_fe) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 18:28:24 -0000 Subject: Will Harry learn? In-Reply-To: <20040801130225.1827.qmail@web41202.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108884 > Bill: > Remember when Dudley fell into the snake room and Harry spoke no words. vidar_fe: Dudley did not fell into the snake room! That only happened in the film, not in the book! From eeyore6771 at comcast.net Wed Aug 4 20:06:09 2004 From: eeyore6771 at comcast.net (Pat) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 20:06:09 -0000 Subject: Chamber of Secrets - The Unexplained In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108885 > Bonny: > 4) The use of the word "ancestor" as opposed to "descendant" > in regards to Riddle and Slytherin, in Harry's conversation > with Dumbledore. > > - On page 245 of the Canadian soft-cover edition, Dumbledore > tells Harry that Voldemort is the last remaining ancestor of > Salazar Slytherin. The last remaining ANCESTOR. Not DESCENDANT. > Is this a flint? Or could there be some strange reversal of time > at work? Because, of course, an ancestor is someone you are > descended from - so Tom should be Slytherin's DESCENDANT, not his > ancestor. Hmmm. > Geoff: > I'm quite sure that I have seen it mentioned on the group more > than once that it /has/ been acknowledged as a flint. > > Certainly, my UK edition (also p.245) has "descendant". Pat: It depends which version you are reading. In my hard back, it says ancestor. In the paperback, which naturally came out later, it was descendent. But then, I think I read somewhere that JKR said that she had intentionally used "ancestor". This one has always puzzled me, and I still don't know. Perhaps I should go to the book store and look for a newer version than either of mine, and see which way it is written. I'll let you know. Pat From nearlyheadlessryan at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 20:45:49 2004 From: nearlyheadlessryan at yahoo.com (nearlyheadlessryan) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 20:45:49 -0000 Subject: Just a comment about Lupin's malady In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108886 > > Aggie: > > (and why do we call him Lupin and the others by their first name?) I'd just like to point out that no one calls Hagrid by his first name (Rubeus), or Snape (Severus), and Draco is usually refered to as just Malfoy, etc... Anywho, -NearlyheadlessRyan From eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk Wed Aug 4 22:48:39 2004 From: eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk (iamvine) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 22:48:39 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108887 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: > Has there been any discussion regarding the fact that Snape sees Dark > Magic in the Marauder's Map (Ch. 14, PoA), Lupin putting it in his > mind that Sirius Black was entering Hogwarts "using dark arts he > learned from Voldemort," (Ch. 18, PoA), and that Voldemort always > refers to Peter Pettigrew using his Marauder Nickname? > > Doesn't this all point to the fact that the Marauders were studying > under Voldemort at one time, and that most of them decided to leave > him? All except Pettigrew perhaps? Well, it could be, but I doubt it. 1) Snape's comment about the map: Snape's seen the names Moony and Padfoot on the map and knows who they refer to. He believes Sirius is evil, which might lead him to think the map contains dark magic. Or it could just be an excuse to confiscate it. Snape would absolutely say something like that for that reason, especially if he got the opportunity to annoy Lupin at the same time. 2) Lupin's comment: When Lupin believed that, he thought Sirius had been in league with Voldemort and would have learned things from him. It implies absolutely nothing about whether any of the Marauders really had. 3) Voldemort's use of "Wormtail": It was Pettigrew's identity as Wormtail that enabled him to return to Voldemort, so Voldemort would know about it by book 4. And the name just suits him. Voldemort's use of it reflects the fact that JKR wanted to use it. She might have been thinking of Wormtongue, Saruman's lackey in The Lord Of The Rings. Eleanor From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Wed Aug 4 21:46:50 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 21:46:50 -0000 Subject: Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108888 Josh said: > What Harry should have done (although I'm _REALLY_ surprised Hermione > didn't herself) is run to get a book on Occlumency as fast as he > could. Yblitzka thinks: I'm almost certain she did, or at least tried. Snape said before that it is an obscure branch of magic, so I doubt many books were written on the subject. Plus, I think that it's a gift/skill that can't be effectively learned from a book, like flying, or Parseltongue. ~Yb From nearlyheadlessryan at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 21:53:03 2004 From: nearlyheadlessryan at yahoo.com (nearlyheadlessryan) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 21:53:03 -0000 Subject: Harry -- Pure-blood or Half-blood? (Re: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108889 > Boolean writes: > "But but but...Harry *isn't* a half-blood is he??? > James & Lily were witch and wizard, therefore Harry is pure- > blood, no? I though half-blood only applied to the child of > a couple made up of a witch/wizard and a Muggle?" Meidbh: > I am assuming the child of a Pureblood and a Muggle would definitely > be considered a Halfblood and it seems the same applies to the child > of a Pureblood and a Mudblood. Why do we all assume that James Potter was a full blood wizard and not a mudblood also? Has JKR discussed this in any interviews or in any of the 5 books so far and some how I managed to miss it? Any help in clearing this up would be appreciated. Thanks, -NearlyheadlessRyan From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Wed Aug 4 21:59:01 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 21:59:01 -0000 Subject: Why is Hermione in Gryffindor? In-Reply-To: <20040804214559.18532.qmail@web25303.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108890 Udderpd wrote: > I can think of two reasons: > > Either she is braver than she is clever. No doubting that she is a > very brave girl but she is also exceptionaly clever, still maybe it's > this? > > Or the sorting hat put in Gryffindor because it knew that that > would be where she would be needed. Was she put there to help Harry? > > We know that the Sorting Hat does a lot more than just sort First > Years. > > She definately appears to be where she needs to be. >From Yblitzka: Well, it is my belief that the Sorting Hat is *NEVER* wrong. EVER. If the hat put her in Gryffindor, then that is where she belongs. Her true "colors" are bravery, and a penchant for breaking the rules when she has to, so she is probably more suited for Gryffindor than Ravenclaw. I don't think the hat thought she needed to be in Gryffindor to help Harry. Remember, Harry hadn't been sorted yet, and the hat said he'd do well in Slytherin (even though I don't think the hat was *actually* going to put him there; his bravery in the books, plus not being concerned with merely saving his own neck, proves he belongs in Gryffindor, and not Slytherin). The hat sees whatever is in the student, even if the student doesn't see it. Otherwise, Neville would probably be in Hufflepuff. I think that at the proverbial moment of truth, each character will prove exactly /why/ the hat put him/her in the house he/she is in. ~Yb From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Wed Aug 4 22:12:00 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 22:12:00 -0000 Subject: Snape, Quirellmort question... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108891 NearlyheadlessRyan: > a thought/question occured to me: Snape suspects Quirell of trying > to get at the Sorcerer's Stone and keeps confronting him late at > night in the halls and forest about it. As we come to find out, > you-know-who has taken up residence under the turban and is > controlling Quirell. > > Now, skip ahead to OOP, if Snape really is spying for The Order again, > wouldn't Voldemort remember Snape's part in trying to stop him from > getting ahold of the Stone? Wouldn't he know that Snape's loyalty > lies with Dumbledore? and therefore want Snape disposed of? Surely, > Quirell being destroyed didn't erase V's memory as well? > I'd love any thoughts that anyone cares to share. Now Head-on-Shoulders Yblitzka: That's been bugging me too. It may be that Snape explained himself with "I was acting," and being an accomplished Occlumens, would have been able to lie to Voldemort, but I don't know how LV would buy that. That's one reason why I don't think Snape is the "deserting DE" mentioned at the end of GoF (the "one who... has left me forever"). LV says matter-of-factly that the deserter will be killed. If Snape is the deserting DE, how on earth can he be a spy working with the DEs? Wouldn't one of them, or LV, kill him on sight? Surely LV has made it known to them who he thinks the traitor is! If Voldemort does remember Snape's behavior in PS/SS, and Snape hasn't properly explained it, then it would make sense that he is the deserter, since LV would be almost certain he had defected to DD. Just some rambling thoughts, More Q's than A's, I'm afraid, ~Yb From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Wed Aug 4 22:37:04 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 22:37:04 -0000 Subject: Possible Katie Bell FLINT? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108892 Bookworm: > IIRC (apologies for not checking - the book is *missing* in my > daughter's room) when Oliver introduced Katie to Harry, Oliver said > that Katie had been on the 'reserve' team the year before, so she > was new to the 'varsity' team the same year Harry was. That's the > only mention of the reserve team I remember, so what exactly that > means is unclear. > > Ravenclaw Bookworm (who may break down this summer and buy a second > set of books for herself) Now Yblitzka: I've never heard of the reserve team either after that point, and Harry mentions (maybe in a different book) that he has to play for Gryffindor (endangering life and limb... it may have been PoA), since they have no reserve seeker. Maybe firsties are allowed to try out, and can only be put on the reserve team, or maybe McGonagall bent the rules the year before too. Seems like she's getting desperate since Slytherin has been winning the cup each year, so maybe she opened tryouts or whatever to first years so they can practice before going on the house team. Or it could be another FLINT, or maybe Ginny just wasn't thinking clearly. Anyway, trust me, there is /no shame/ in buying another set of books. Cross referencing in the same one becomes so much easier when you have two copies, plus you can scribble in one set and keep the other nice and neat for when visitors read them. ~Yb From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Wed Aug 4 22:45:29 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 22:45:29 -0000 Subject: Occlumency Lessons/ Harry as a Legilimens In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108893 ~Yb wrote: > Voldemort, Dumbledore, and Snape are seemingly the only ones who > can do this, and Snape needs the spell; the other two do not. You're supposing that there aren't multiple levels... skimming the surface vs digging in deep, and the spell is necessary for the latter? Harry doesn't have flashes of memories when DD twinkles him. > When Harry managed to fight Snape out of his head, he didn't just > push him out, he pushed his way into /Snape's/ head. That's a big > deal. Completely unintentional, yes, but also without a spell, like > DD and LV. Um, didn't Harry cast Protego, the reflective shield? Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Wed Aug 4 22:48:02 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 22:48:02 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108894 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: > Voldemort always > refers to Peter Pettigrew using his Marauder Nickname? > > Doesn't this all point to the fact that the Marauders were studying > under Voldemort at one time, and that most of them decided to leave > him? All except Pettigrew perhaps? It would make sense that someone presumed dead, and whose death keeps Sirius out of play, would prefer to go by a moniker unknown to the majority of the WW... why make LV switch back and forth? Josh From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Wed Aug 4 22:50:20 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 22:50:20 -0000 Subject: Chamber of Secrets - The Unexplained In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108895 Geoff said (about ancestor/descendant): > > I'm quite sure that I have seen it mentioned on the group more > > than once that it /has/ been acknowledged as a flint. > > > > Certainly, my UK edition (also p.245) has "descendant". And Pat replied: > > It depends which version you are reading. In my hard back, it says > ancestor. In the paperback, which naturally came out later, it was > descendent. But then, I think I read somewhere that JKR said that > she had intentionally used "ancestor". This one has always puzzled > me, and I still don't know. Perhaps I should go to the book store > and look for a newer version than either of mine, and see which way > it is written. I'll let you know. YTb thinks: I find the "Oops!" theory a little hard to swallow. Seems like JK wouldn't slip like that. */Supposedly/* it was an "accidently on purpose" thing, and it was corrected, but some later versions "un- corrected" it. I suppose if we don't get anything about it in the next two books, we'll have to write it off as a FLINT, but I think there's a little more to it than "Oops!" ~Yb From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Aug 4 23:14:37 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 23:14:37 -0000 Subject: Harry, Lily, DD & Draqons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108896 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "saraquel_omphale" wrote: > 1 JK has said that Harry's eyes are important and that they are his > vulnerability. Dragon's eyes are their vulnerability. > > 2 On the back of the Chocolate Frog DD card, he is listed as having > descovered the 12 uses of dragon blood. I think this is one of those > points which JK will further elucidate at some point. It's listed as > one of DD major achievements. Interestingly hermione is "reciting > the 12 uses of dragon's blood" at the start of ch14 in PS. Did DD > have anything to do with devising the charm Lily used to protect > Harry? > > 3 Ch20 GoF (p295 British pb) "Dragons are extremely difficult to slay > owing to the ANCIENT MAGIC that imbues their thick hides, which none > but the most powerful spells can penetrate..." (my capitalisation) > they have/are imbued with the same type of magic which protects > Harry. Also, if we assume that Voldemort did give Harry his scar, > then maybe it is the result of the charm being penetrated. > > 4 Evans is a Welsh name and of course there is the Common Welsh Green > dragon. > > I can't say that I've come to any conclusions yet, but has anyone > else mused along these lines? Jen: There was a thread last October that culminated in a TBAY called DRIBBLE: Dragon's Resistance In Blood Bestows Life-Saving Effects. In it the author theorizes that Snape and even Hagrid may have been involved with Dumbledore in providing Harry's protection. Here are the links to the thread and the TBAY (by grannybat): http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/83166 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/83354 From romulus at hermionegranger.us Wed Aug 4 22:55:33 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 22:55:33 -0000 Subject: Hermione Granger's birthday In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108897 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Josh Warren" < > If it was exactly 16 years, the hiring would have been done on the > same date, the calender year before Harry was born, Y-1, as OotP is > calendar years Y15-Y16. However, the comment is "nearly" and if > Trewalney was hired _after_ the date of her comment, but before > Hermione's birthday, I don't have the book, but you're looking at a > window of less than 18 days max (Express rolls on Sept 1). At that > point, you'd round off to 16 years even. Not to mention, that if 7th > month was referring to the current month, the prophecy could be > coaxed that way... like the 2nd prophecy, referring to midnight of > the current day. > > To me, nearly would imply either a little bit of self-promoting > rounding (it was really just over 15 years, thinking early summer) or > she was hired at some point in the middle of the school year... like > around Christmas. Josh, Later in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, the following occurs in Professor Trelawney's class: << The class stared perplexedly at her, then at each other. Harry, however, thought he knew what was the matter. As Professor Trelawney flounced back to the high-backed teacher's chair, her magnified eyes full of angry tears, he leaned his head closer to Ron's and muttered, 'I think she's got the results of her inspection back.' 'Professor?' said Parvati Patil in a hushed voice (she and Lavender had always rather admired Professor Trelawney). 'Professor, is there anything - er - wrong?' 'Wrong!' cried Professor Trelawney in a voice throbbing with emotion. 'Certainly not! I have been insulted, certainly... insinuations have been made against me... unfounded accusations levelled... but no, there is nothing wrong, certainly not!' She took a great shuddering breath and looked away from Parvati, angry tears spilling from under her glasses. 'I say nothing,' she choked, 'of sixteen years of devoted service... it has passed, apparently, unnoticed... but I shall not be insulted, no, I shall not!' 'But, Professor, who's insulting you?' asked Parvati timidly. The Establishment!' said Professor Trelawney, in a deep, dramatic, wavering voice. 'Yes, those with eyes too clouded by the mundane to See as I See, to Know as I Know... of course, we Seers have always been feared, always persecuted... it is - alas -our fate.'>> And the time frame Professor Trelawney makes these statements? Early to mid-October. Her words: "of sixteen years of devoted service... it has passed, apparently, unnoticed..." imply that her sixteenth anniversary as a teacher came and went without anyone apparently noticing. Thus, the 16th anniversary occurred sometime between the 1st week of September 1979 and early October 1979. RMM www.hermionegranger.us From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Wed Aug 4 22:58:10 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 22:58:10 -0000 Subject: Hermione Granger's birthday In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108898 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bex" wrote: > realized the same thing. (The name September sprang from the Julian > calendar, when September was the 7th month.) However, other posters Ugh, see my previous on this thread. The 12-month calendar featuring the months numbered 5 or 6-10 starting from march predates Julius Caesar by ~750 years. I don't know if the #5 was named numerically before being renamed for Julius, but Augustus' was named for #6 until the Senate honored him thus for correcting a misinterpretation of the Julian calendar by which leap years were happening every 3 instead of the 4 years Julius instructed. Go look this stuff up! :) Josh From romulus at hermionegranger.us Wed Aug 4 23:12:42 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 23:12:42 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108899 Eleanor "iamvine" wrote: > > 1) Snape's comment about the map: Snape's seen the names Moony and > Padfoot on the map and knows who they refer to. Does he though? Why would he bother asking Moony about the map then? And why would he let Moony take the map as well? > He believes Sirius is evil, which might lead him to think the map > contains dark magic. Or it could just be an excuse to confiscate > it. Snape would absolutely say something like that for that reason, > especially if he got the opportunity to annoy Lupin at the same time. > > 2) Lupin's comment: When Lupin believed that, he thought Sirius had > been in league with Voldemort and would have learned things from him. > It implies absolutely nothing about whether any of the Marauders > really had. We know that Sirius Black, i.e. Padfoot, in Moony's mind, learned dark arts from Voldemort; we also know that Pettigrew (Wormtail) -- another Marauder -- betrayed another Marauder -- James Potter (Prongs) and Padfoot to Voldemort. So, here we have at least two Marauders doing stuff with Voldemort. Sounds to me like the Marauders Map has Dark Magic, becoming illegal Animagi takes some dark magic, and it looks like some of these guys got in too deep with Voldemort to the point that they started mistrusting each other. RMM From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Wed Aug 4 23:14:57 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 23:14:57 -0000 Subject: Chamber of Secrets - The Unexplained In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108900 Geoff wrote: > I'm quite sure that I have seen it mentioned on the group more > than once that it /has/ been acknowledged as a flint. > > Certainly, my UK edition (also p.245) has "descendant". But no one posts which edition within Canada, US, UK. Didn't you all get a class about that little title page on the front, and what info is on the back of it? :) Post that info, and we can know for sure if it was corrected back, or if people are just timing it by when they buy the books in the stores... Josh From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Wed Aug 4 23:16:26 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 23:16:26 -0000 Subject: Occlumency Lessons/ Harry as a Legilimens In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108901 I wrote: > > When Harry managed to fight Snape out of his head, he didn't just > > push him out, he pushed his way into /Snape's/ head. That's a big > > deal. Completely unintentional, yes, but also without a spell, > > like DD and LV. And Josh answered: > Um, didn't Harry cast Protego, the reflective shield? Well: Protego is a Shield Charm. On p. 553, OotP, it says that the Shield Charm is for deflecting minor jinxes back at the attacker. "Legilimens" is almost certainly not a jinx, and it doesn't seem very minor. That may be the case, but I think there's more to it than that. I think JK started setting us up for this with the Parseltongue thing, and she's going to do this "Voldemort's powers tranferred" thing again in the next book or two. Good point though. And, now that I've come out and said it, Harry won't be a Legilimens after all, and I will be eating crow once again. JK has a habit of doing that. ~Yb From dontask2much at yahoo.com Wed Aug 4 23:44:01 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 19:44:01 -0400 Subject: TR's soul in Harry?/ Prophecy (Re: Shared thoughts) References: Message-ID: <010801c47a7c$ec8ea040$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 108902 Julie: > I agree with your point about having the power and not knowing it, > and how can that be logical. The one way this cold be possible, > although I don't know about plausible, is if the hypothesis regarding > Tom Riddle's soul residing in Harry is accurate. I've read it; > sounds interesting; just not bandwagon material for me. Charme: Just some random comments which might spark someone else thinking.... Tom Riddle's soul residing in Harry is not totally bandwagon worthy to me, either. I do think some of his powers were in fact transferred to Harry, but not his soul. JKR always refers to Tom Riddle/Lord Voldemort as one and the same, but I never see TR/LV/The Dark Lord mentioned all at once by her either, (which I think rather kind of weird.) "...and either must DIE at the HAND of the OTHER, for neither can live while the OTHER survives" (The only hand I've heard referred to is Wormtail's, and I firmly believe the rat is not what he seems. BUT LV has a new hand from Wormtail, doesn't he? How confusing...) "Other" is really an * interesting* word. See all the definitions below: Being the remaining one of two or more: the other ear. Being the remaining ones of several: His other books are still in storage. Different from that or those implied or specified: Any other person would tell the truth. Of a different character or quality: "a strange, other dimension... where his powers seemed to fail" (Lance Morrow). Of a different time or era either future or past: other centuries; other generations. Additional; extra: I have no other shoes. Opposite or contrary; reverse: the other side. Alternate; second: every other day. Of the recent past: just the other day. With those examples can you see where the "other" can mean any number of people or even perhaps ancestors? :) This is sooooooo a riddle. (pardon the pun) From vmonte at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 00:46:35 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 00:46:35 -0000 Subject: Creating Identity (Re: Why Voldemort is a fascist... ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108903 Jen wrote: It never occurred to me Riddle may have created his identity, but you make it sound so obvious! I believed he pieced together his origin with half-truths & inaccuracies, yes, but some bits of truth as well. Growing up in a Muggle orphanage would make it extremely difficult to find out his true origins though, specifically his magical ancestry. And you make a good case for most of it being a fabrication. Wonder if he's even related to Slytherin on his mom's side? It seems fantastic that he could trace that. As Kneasy and Pippin have both commented, I think he became Heir of Slytherin through opening the chamber and not before, but it seemed plausible to me that he may have been descended from Slytherin as well. Now I wonder. Maybe when Riddle opened the chamber he *assumed* the idea that he was related to Slytherin by virtue of finding and opening the chamber. Circular justification. vmonte responds: I have a question. An heir is someone who inherits but not necessarily a blood relative, right? And a descendant is a blood relative, right? Does DD say that Tom Riddle is the last remaining heir or descendant? Because if Tom is an heir, it may only mean that he was chosen to be heir by SS for the simple reason that he was able to get into the Chamber. Maybe SS was waiting for a female descendant to open the Chamber but Tom figured it out. Could Ginny be a descendant of SS? (I keep thinking about JKR's comment that Ginny is the first girl in several generations and that if she had died TR would have become very powerful.) Could Ginny have some power that she is not yet aware of? Did SS put the entrance to the chamber in the girl's bathroom on purpose? Maybe the Weasley's are actually blood relatives of SS but they choose not to accept this title? The family makes the choice to value what Gryffindor values. (I personally want the Weasley's to be descendants of GG.) vivian From romulus at hermionegranger.us Thu Aug 5 00:09:10 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 00:09:10 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108904 > RMM: > > Voldemort always refers to Peter Pettigrew using his Marauder > > Nickname? Doesn't this all point to the fact that the Marauders > > were studying under Voldemort at one time, and that most of them > > decided to leave him? All except Pettigrew perhaps? Josh: > It would make sense that someone presumed dead, and whose death > keeps Sirius out of play, would prefer to go by a moniker unknown > to the majority of the WW... why make LV switch back and forth? Josh, Pettigrew knew Voldemort BEFORE he betrayed Padfoot and Prongs. He was after all the double agent. Secondly, since when does his preference hold any water with the DL? Question: Does one have a choice of what form they take as animagi? RMM www.hermionegranger.us From romulus at hermionegranger.us Thu Aug 5 00:21:41 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 00:21:41 -0000 Subject: Snape, Quirellmort question... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108905 Saraquel wrote: > Snape's job (if we believe what he tells Harry) is to find out what > is happening with the DEs. There's a big question as to how he's > doing that. > > So what is he doing? There's the legilimency stuff, which could be > useful in this connection. But Snape seems to imply that he's doing > really personally life endangering stuff. JK is not explicit about > what Snape is doing either, which if it was just straightforward > spying there would be no reason not to say that. Well, we know this: 1. Voldemort must know Snape's allegiances. 2. Lucius Malfoy is still friendly to Snape. 3. Malfoy is a DE. 4. Malfoy must know that Snape is OoTP. This implies the following possibilities: 1. Snape is a double agent, convincing both Dumbledore and Voldemort that he is loyal. 2. Snape has a power over Malfoy and the DEs 3. Snape knows something, IS something, that both sides want on their side. (Remember James Potter torturing Snape because he existed?) Who is Severus Snape? And why does he remind me of Viktor Krum? RMM www.hermionegranger.us From lziner at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 00:56:58 2004 From: lziner at yahoo.com (lziner) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 00:56:58 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108906 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: > >>Josh, > Pettigrew knew Voldemort BEFORE he betrayed Padfoot and Prongs. > He was after all the double agent. > > Secondly, since when does his preference hold any water with the DL? > > Question: Does one have a choice of what form they take as animagi? > > RMM IMHO - I think VM calls him wormtail to remind him he betrayed his friends. Guilt..insult...nothing nice. As for the second question, JKR has said (I don't have the exact reference) that your animagus form represents part of your character. This leads me to believe that you don't have a choice of form - rather like a patronus. Lynn - who is usually a lurker - nice to take a stroll in the moonlight :) From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Aug 5 01:14:25 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 01:14:25 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108908 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: > > > RMM: > > > Voldemort always refers to Peter Pettigrew using his Marauder Nickname? Doesn't this all point to the fact that the Marauders were studying under Voldemort at one time, and that most of them decided to leave him? All except Pettigrew perhaps? > > Josh, > Pettigrew knew Voldemort BEFORE he betrayed Padfoot and Prongs. He was after all the double agent. > > Secondly, since when does his preference hold any water with the DL?< Consider: Voldemort knows Dumbledore has a spy in the DE's and so he picks a code name which deliberately taunts the Marauders and sets them to suspecting one another. The only person they don't suspect is the real Wormtail, cunningly disguised as himself--or was there also another Marauder masquerading under the same alias? I wouldn't be surprised to learn that there was a little Dark Magic in the map, acquired independently of Voldemort. James would not approve--but what he doesn't know won't hurt him, right? Interesting that Moony's name comes first in the legend, followed by Wormtail's...the chief cartographer and his assistant? Pippin forever champion of ESE!Lupin, but ESE!Everybody is kinda cool (the original ESE!Lupin post is 39362) From vmonte at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 01:16:02 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 01:16:02 -0000 Subject: Snape, Quirellmort question... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108909 NearlyheadlessRyan: a thought/question occured to me: Snape suspects Quirell of trying to get at the Sorcerer's Stone and keeps confronting him late at night in the halls and forest about it. As we come to find out, you-know-who has taken up residence under the turban and is controlling Quirell. Now, skip ahead to OOP, if Snape really is spying for The Order again, wouldn't Voldemort remember Snape's part in trying to stop him from getting ahold of the Stone? Wouldn't he know that Snape's loyalty lies with Dumbledore? and therefore want Snape disposed of? Surely, Quirell being destroyed didn't erase V's memory as well? I'd love any thoughts that anyone cares to share. vmonte responds: This really bothers me too. If you believe in ESE Snape then you could say that Quirrell was trying to fight against Voldemort's possesion, and Snape's job was to make him submissive (via potions) until Voldemort was strong enough to take complete control of Q's body. Then the scene with Snape cornering Q is really about Snape asking Q if he is loyal to Voldemort. There is also another scene during SS/PS where Harry hears Q crying in one of the classrooms, and later asks him (in the mirror of erised room) what that was all about. Quirrell says something to the effect of: 'sometimes I have trouble doing what my master asks of me.' (If I remember correctly Q is shaken/unnerved by Harry's question.) The classroom incident could have been one of the instances where Q realized that he was fighting a losing battle, and that Voldemort was taking complete control. (Maybe Fred & George were right and Q put garlic in his turban--but in an attempt to fight off Voldemort.) vivian From hexicon at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 01:35:14 2004 From: hexicon at yahoo.com (Kristen) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 01:35:14 -0000 Subject: Did Lily know about Lupin? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108911 Can anyone tell me if we have canon to tell us either way whether Lily knew Lupin was a werewolf? This came up indirectly in the discussion of suspicion among the first OOTP. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 02:05:09 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 02:05:09 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108912 > Eleanor wrote previously: > > > > 1) Snape's comment about the map: Snape's seen the names Moony and > > Padfoot on the map and knows who they refer to. RMM: > Does he though? Why would he bother asking Moony about the map then? > And why would he let Moony take the map as well? Alla: I have no doubt in my mind that Snape knew where the map came from (you don't think he got it right from manufactures - PoA, paraphrase) Why would Snape let the Moony take the map? I don't know - I am inclined to think that he did not have much choice in the matter - without exposing their past to Harry RMM: > We know that Sirius Black, i.e. Padfoot, in Moony's mind, learned > dark arts from Voldemort; we also know that Pettigrew (Wormtail) -- > another Marauder -- betrayed another Marauder -- James Potter > (Prongs) and Padfoot to Voldemort. > So, here we have at least two Marauders doing stuff with Voldemort. > Sounds to me like the Marauders Map has Dark Magic, becoming illegal > Animagi takes some dark magic, and it looks like some of these guys > got in too deep with Voldemort to the point that they started > mistrusting each other. > Alla: I am sorry? Two marauders doing stuff with Voldemort? You know, ESE! Lupin is not a canon yet , no matter how brilliantly Pippin defends this theory. :o) And Sirius , well, as far as we know was not doing any stuff with Voldemort. So, who is the second one? Animagi is a Dark Magic? Why? Is McGonagall doing Dark Magic too, in your opinion? Marauders indeed started mistrusting each other at one point, but I view it as falling in the general atmosphere of mistrust, which Voldemort created during the first war, not them being Evil. Alla From snow15145 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 02:15:11 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 02:15:11 -0000 Subject: Chamber of Secrets - The Unexplained In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108913 It depends which version you are reading. In my hard back, it says ancestor. In the paperback, which naturally came out later, it was descendent. But then, I think I read somewhere that JKR said that she had intentionally used "ancestor". This one has always puzzled me, and I still don't know. Perhaps I should go to the book store and look for a newer version than either of mine, and see which way it is written. I'll let you know. Pat Snow: This is JKR's answer in a Scholastic interview October 16, 2000 Harry Potter for grownups again! Is Voldemort the last remaining ancestor of Slytherin, or the last remaining descendent of Slytherin? "Ah, you spotted the deliberate error. Yes, it should read "descendent." That's been changed in subsequent editions. (Keep hold of the "ancestor" one, maybe it'll be valuable one day!)" Hope this helps! From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Aug 5 02:28:39 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 02:28:39 -0000 Subject: To Where To When (TimeTurning that may make sense) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108914 > > Valky: > > Now, if I am correct in this premise then there is evidence that he *did* timeturn once and only once to get a little extra info on the COS incedent. He comments twice that he knew who was setting the Basilisk on the children and in both instances he admits he doesn't > > know how. > > Josh: > > In 'the Rogue Bludger' he says: The Question is not who. The Question is how... > > Now of course we *can* take this exclusively to mean that he knows it is Tom, but....... > > In Dobby's Reward after Harry had 'so far avoided mentioning Ginny or the Diary' DD says: What interests me most is How Lord Voldemort managed to enchant Ginny. > > Nobody *told him* that Ginny was doing Toms dirty work he *knew* already......... > Josh: > From his description of TR/LV as the only remaining descendant (I'll skip the debate about the 'ancestor' debate) of Saly then he can be fairly certain that Tom is and was responsible; though yes, probably after LV's rise and a bit of research. > Valky: I agree with that entirely. And admittedly I only speculate that it could mean also that DD had seen Ginny with the Basilisk but didn't know how she was under Tom's control. Although, at face value you are right and that is all, the theory that DD had already known about Ginny at this time makes the plot sequence more interesting. I recall you don't have your books so I should do you the favour of the plot rundown from a to b there. a: the first attack; DD is a bit skeptical about the likelihood that the Chamber is open, he considers the evidence and attempts to countercurse Mrs Norris. The clues add up for him that the Basilisk is on the loose but perhaps not enough do because he doesn't actually confirm his conviction that the chamber is open until the second attack. a.1: The second attack; Curiously, I have investigated this one before quite recently, Dumbledore is the one who discovers Colin Creevey petrified. Colin is on his way up from the Great Hall to the third floor and DD is on his way down the staircases to the Kitchens from his office. MacGonagall comments that it was fortunate that DD was on his way for a Hot Chocolate refill then, or the attack may have been worse. We are given to assume here that *Colin* held the camera to his face and prevented his death, if we do not read carefully enough. But if we are cautiously reading MacGonagall insists that DD was there. DD *saw* this attack, and furthermore he magically made Colin put the camera to his face thereby preventing his death and getting the final piece of the puzzle to prove that the monster was indeed a *real* Basilisk. How did DD manage to be there in time save Colin? I'll leave the rough seas there to you, if you like. (The only niggling piece in there is the bunch of grapes. Darn them what do they have to do with anything! Red Herring I suppose.) Josh; > However, knowing the lethal nature of the Basilisk's eyes (if he'd > TTed for info, he'd have known it was a Basilisk first and foremost), then I feel he would have given more specific preventative advice, such as using mirrors around corners ala Hermy and Penelope. Not only does he care about the students' safety, but a death would have closed the school much sooner. > Valky: Again you are quite right. Which leads into the third attack. a.2: The Third attack. Justin Finch Fletchley and Nearly Headless Nick in a dark corridor on the way up some stairs to transfiguration. The corridor is dark due to the torches having been blown out by an icy wind. Justin is saved by the prescence of Nick between himself and the Basilisks eyes. Again, somehow the child was saved just aronud the corner from the stone gargoyle entrance to DD's office, and this is where DD is. Dumbledore was so close to this attack and the boy was protected, again. So far, I think that DD is protecting the school but cannot ascertain what is happening to Ginny. Whatever his reasons are he has allowed the school to continue as normal, while he protects the children. a.3: Ginny disposes of the diary. Just when Dumbledore has calculated that whatever Tom is using to control Ginny will soon appear and he will be able to end the scenario whilst not harming Ginny or inadvertantly causing Tom to do her harm in any way. She throws it away. Dumbledore's plan is fallen in. Now he could use a timeturner to follow Ginny and find it but he would be all over the school tailing the girl in the hope of finding her in possession of something but he doesn't know what. It could be anything that she is carrying from her pockets to in her socks. this sounds a lot messier than the carefully calculated plan for Hermione's timeturning. And in the end, even if DD did tail Ginny, I think he'd draw the line at the girls bathroom. In all cases DD did not know about the diary until Harry showed it to him at the end of the book so wether or not he balanced a bit of TT to try and find the object possessing Ginny he never found it. In the end his plan fell down. Josh: > Also, I seem to remember a look of delighted surprise when Harry and co. dragged into MM's office. Also, I thought he picked up on Ginny being the tool from Harry's obmission, and logical deduction: a TR up on current events would seek out Harry, no 3rd person was with them or described in the story, knew it was TR somehow, etc. It was just the method of enchantment, i.e. the diary, that was unknown to DD. > Furthermore, on that vein, remember that Ginny dumped the diary in > Myrtle's toilet... i.e. she had it with her in the bathroom no one > uses. That tells me she was carrying it around with her when opening the chamber, so if DD saw her, he'd probably connect the diary to it. I also don't think she went with the Basilisk on its rounds, so for DD to have eyeballed Ginny, he would have to have known the location of the chamber (he could have sealed it up at that time). > Valky: Yes I agree, all very valid statements, except that shortly after Ginny disposed of the diary Harry took it, and finally immediately following the Diary returning to Ginnys possesson DD was removed from Hogwarts. a.4: Ginny takes back the diary. It has been four months since the last attack, the school is calming down. DD has lost all trace of the object that possesses Ginny, because it is in Harry's keep. a.5: The Fourth attack. Dumbledore is not needed for this attack as Hermione saves both herself and Penelope alone. Dumbledore's investigation can begin again now as the object has come back into play. He doesn't need to bother with saving Hermione and Penelope so I suspect he definately goes after Ginny after this attack. Unfortunately for him fate has another thing in store. a.5: Dumbledore is taken off the case. Dumbledore up til that point was executing his own plan of action. Then by some coincedental strokes of fortune the investigation was taken out of his hands. Curiously DD did not put up a fight to this. He offered his advice to people that he trusted and went quietly. Weird but true. a.6: Ginny is taken. Days later Ginny is taken to the Chamber by Tom to die. MM knew who it was. And then the teachers curiously proceeded to tell Lockhart it was up to him to save her. None of them know where the chamber is, and I suspect that MM spoke with Dumbledore by some means just prior to her conference with the teachers. b. Harry finds the Chamber and the Diary. Now while I am sure the teachers were doing everything in their power to locate the chamber they couldn't. In the end Dumbledore learns what Harry finds out and finally discovers what the object is. You may be right that DD did not know it was Ginny, but then MM knew, so I strongly suspect that DD also knew. So perhaps DD couldn't seal up the Chamber, it does seem that he knew Harry could open it. It gets quite confusing here so perhaps another post is called for to deconstruct the finale in terms of Dumbledore POV. > Josh; > Ah, the more advanced debate it why I checked this group out, in > fact. :) Much more enjoyable that debating ships. Valky: LOL I agree. There is only so far you can go with a ship? Ironic those names aren't they? A raft is just so much more interesting. > Josh: > Here's one thought... perhaps he only turns when he can see evidence that he already has. For example, he makes the recommendation to Hermione to use hers in such a manner after seeing Buckbeak's disappearance that he knew wasn't accomplished by the trio on the first pass. > Valky: Vehemently YES! Josh: > However and contrarily to my above, to knock you off your raft > entirely (evil laugh) :) ...while yes, I agree time turning his > complicated, keep in mind that in PoA, Hermione was doing it once or twice a day every weekday (that's ~180 turns in the year, by an unexperienced student). Surely DD could do it more than once a year?? :) > Valky: You are of course absolutely right about that. The plan for Hermione was very simple and well executed, though. Of course if one was to go with my theory that DD does and will TT as part of his regular life it begs the question 'Is he already up to his proverbial neck in advanced time? '. The problems come when you need to crossover time turns on the same parrallel, for instance if you needed to be somewhere at a non specified moment within an timeframe of an hour you might timeturn *60 x 60* times before you found the specific moment. There is no real way to calculate what effect you have each failed attempt, and each failed attempt has an exponential degree of effect on the original timeline accordingly multiplied by the unsuccessful attempts coming before and after it. Basically saying that a wise person such as Dumbledore simply would not TT to anywhere with a plan involving guesswork especially not in a school full of children. Hermiones timetable plan didn't involve any guess work and so was safe enough, I suppose. On a lighter note I have found COS *very* interesting for a reference in this particular thread so thankyou for bringing it up. Best to You >From Valky From RowanGF at aol.com Thu Aug 5 00:28:44 2004 From: RowanGF at aol.com (Kirsten) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 00:28:44 -0000 Subject: Memory as a theme Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108915 New day, new theory. I have been thinking recently about the theme of *memory* and how it plays out in these books. Brief examples: Harry begins the story without any memories. He doesn't know anything about his parents or his history. The whole of PS/SS involves Harry discovering the past, concluding with the gift of a photo album. Here memories restore his identity. The Tom Riddle of CoS is himself is a memory, in the end unable to escape from a diary. Through their assumptions about Hagrid's involvement and the revelations about Tom, Harry and company should be learning that memory can be misleading; it's not necessarily a an accurate account. It can also be harmful. In PoA it is Harry's memory of the death of his parents that is his worst memory and therefore his greatest weakness in the face of the dementors. At the same time, Harry wants to see/hear more of this memory; it is seductive as well as debilitating because of its power to connect to the past. In GoF, Harry is introduced to the pensieve. Again, Harry and ourselves, the readers, are mislead by the memories we see (unless I am the only one that felt sympathy for Barty Crouch, jr.!) but as Dumbledore points out, it is only by examining our past that we can identify the patterns that reveal present and future. In OotP, there is the oh-so-debate-able scene involving Snape's 'worst memory'. When Ron is attacked by the brains, we learn once again that memory can be dangerous and that "thoughts could leave deeper scarring than anything else." The description from Sir Nicholas of ghosts could be interpreted as living memories. In Dumbledore's explanation of the prophecy we learn what we've always known, that Harry's future is inextricably linked to the past. Finally, as a sideline, there are all those altered memories when Muggles see things they shouldn't. Without any ethical qualms either, which I find interesting. I also wonder if mental health wizards go in and do a bit of altering on their patients. Guess what, the past *can* get better after all! I believe I remember reading that the series was begun JKR's mother's death. Given that kind of impactful experience it's not surprising that issues of memory, death, and losing one's parents come up so often. All of which is fodder for exploration, but on a lighter note, also leads me to my Theory of the Day. You may have noticed that I'll left one significant memory link to discuss last: Gilderoy Lockhart. When I read CoS I assumed we were done with his character at the end of the book. I was quite surprised (and delighted) to see his return in OotP. Lockhart's career was built on altering people's memories, essentially taking them for himself. It's only fitting that it backfired on him. But that also makes him a key thematic element. One that was introduced in CoS -- does anyone know where I'm going here yet? ;-) --and one whose name contains a direct reference to royalty *if* one happens to be a former French teacher (like JKR). Gilderoy = gilded king. Of course, something that is gilded isn't solid gold but it sometimes passes for it, kind of like, say, a Half-Blood Prince??? might pass for something more. So it's possible, given the importance of the memory theme in the series, that we have yet to see the last of Lockhart. 'Locked' inside his tiny brain may be information of great importance that he discovered during his various travels. After all, how on earth did Peter find Voldemort in Albania? Could be there's something in one of Lockhart's books even, that Scabbers would have seen while Ron was studying. On a less speculative note, I'm sure that we haven't seen the last of Ron's brain attack. It was just too odd. I'm betting there's some lingering effect: knowledge, memories, or ability, from his contact with the brains that will come into play in the future. From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Thu Aug 5 01:10:10 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 01:10:10 -0000 Subject: TR's soul in Harry?/ Prophecy (Re: Shared thoughts) In-Reply-To: <010801c47a7c$ec8ea040$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108916 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "charme" wrote: > "...and either must DIE at the HAND of the OTHER, for neither can live while > the OTHER survives" (The only hand I've heard referred to is Wormtail's, > and I firmly believe the rat is not what he seems. BUT LV has a new hand > from Wormtail, doesn't he? How confusing...) > So, your theory is that, for Harry to win and survive, Peter would have to kill LV, and then die before Harry does... as your theory of 'other' implies that Peter's life is contrary to both Harry and LV. The definitions of 'other' however are limited by the article 'the', meaning there is only one 'other' relative to whatever is excluded. One would then safely assume that the two 'others' are one and the same. However, if the second sentence means that if Peter doesn't die, then both Harry and LV would... why is the first sentence an either/or proposition? It's internally inconsistant with the Peter theory. While features such a capitalization are lost in a verbal prophesy, I'll still hold that the singlar pronouns (either and neither) standing opposite 'the other' refers to a pair... specifically the Dark Lord and the One. No 3rd parties. I'd more theorize that the 'hand' is simply limiting who can do the killing. (assuming LV and Harry), neither can order, direct, or request someone else to do it in their stead... they have to do it themselves. Perhaps more so, this isn't going to be some long- distance mind-zap thing... it's going to be close, it's going to be bloody... green eyes will look into red, and vice-versa. :) Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Thu Aug 5 01:19:19 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 01:19:19 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108917 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: > Josh: > > It would make sense that someone presumed dead, and whose death > > keeps Sirius out of play, would prefer to go by a moniker unknown > > to the majority of the WW... why make LV switch back and forth? > > > Pettigrew knew Voldemort BEFORE he betrayed Padfoot and Prongs. > He was after all the double agent. > > Secondly, since when does his preference hold any water with the DL? > > Question: Does one have a choice of what form they take as animagi? The same reasoning would still apply... the obvious nickname Wormtail would not have been reported by Snape or any other spy to the remaining Marauders, who would have recognized it. LV is supposed to be smart right? OotP shows he likes to maintain his secrets... and having an unknown spy in the order (assume Snape was pretending to be a double agent if LV knew of his role in the Order, and therefore possibly suspect within the Order) is a delicious secret to have. The negative answer to the choosing animagi form in a previous response was the World Book Day chat, I believe. She made some comment about working so hard for so long only to find that you most resemble some embarrassing creature. Look at the animagi you know: Prongs -> proud, big ego, Padfoot -> playful but loyal in the extreme, Wormtail -> sly and sneaky, Rita Skeeter -> a pest, Minerva - > prim and proper. Josh From dontask2much at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 01:14:40 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 21:14:40 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape, Quirellmort question... References: Message-ID: <035601c47a89$96095a00$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 108918 From: "romulusmmcdougal" > This implies the following possibilities: > 1. Snape is a double agent, convincing both Dumbledore and Voldemort > that he is loyal. > 2. Snape has a power over Malfoy and the DEs > 3. Snape knows something, IS something, that both sides want on > their > side. (Remember James Potter torturing Snape because he existed?) > Who is Severus Snape? And why does he remind me of Viktor Krum? > Ooooouuu. I like this, yes. I choose door # 3, please. And in answer to your question WRT Victor Krum, he's descibed in canon as having some of Snape's physical attributes, including a hooked nose (and sans greasy hair - I don't think I remember that being mentioned.) From meltowne at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 02:35:42 2004 From: meltowne at yahoo.com (meltowne) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 02:35:42 -0000 Subject: To Where To When (TimeTurning that may make sense) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108919 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Josh Warren" wrote: Josh: Here's one thought... perhaps he only turns when he can see evidence that he already has. For example, he makes the recommendation to Hermione to use hers in such a manner after seeing Buckbeak's disappearance that he knew wasn't accomplished by the trio on the first pass. Meltowne: That's precisely what I think - either he knows he must have timeturned (or somebody did) because different people's accounts differ too much. Thus he knew H&H must have saved Buckbeak, so he was comfortable in sending them back. He could probably accomplish much the same by reminding himself to turn back and tell himself something - and then waiting for his future self to do so. Or if he won't risk seeing himself, he could remind himself to turn back and tell someone else something which would cause them to "remind" him of it. The beginning of SS/PS we see the same thing - Hagrid apparently rescued baby Harry shortly after midnight (when Sirius arrived at the house). but DD & Hagrid would not have known where to go then. They would have had to wait until later until someone who had been told the location told them the Harry had disappeared (or told him the location and he discovered Harry was gone). Perhaps Hagrid went back, or more likely, DD went back and sent Hagrid. Because Harry had disappeared for several hourse, DD had Hagrid make that happen - only showing up at the Dursley's later that evening. Thus DD only changes those things he knows can be changed - either because he knows they were changed, or because he doesn't know the outcome, thus it's possible it was changed. When else do I think it happened? At Harry's Trial - He didn't just arrive early, planned to be there, and made sure somebody would tell him after the fact what time the hearing had been. Fred and George may have done it to go back and tell themselves the outcome of the World CUp match - and maybe naturnal law made sure they wouldn't benefit from doing so, getting their winnings in fool's gold. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 5 02:37:38 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 02:37:38 -0000 Subject: Why Voldemort is a fascist... (LONG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108920 Kneasy wrote: > He hates; that's his credo and it's a personal grudge writ large. > Even so he was willing to let Lily live. His agenda might be more > flexible than you think. SSSusan: I'm sure it's a bit disappointing after a lengthy post like this was that I'm going to just pull this little piece out. But, well, it's the part that interests me most just now. Can you flesh this out, Kneasy? Just what are you saying? Why *might* Voldy have been willing to let Lily live? I've some thoughts on this, too, but I'm always interested to hear multiple views. Siriusly Snapey Susan From owlery2003 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 03:06:22 2004 From: owlery2003 at yahoo.com (Scott Santangelo) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 20:06:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] re: Peeves In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040805030622.5803.qmail@web60109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108921 Lanthiriel: snip So why does Dumbledore, possibly the most powerful wizard alive,allow him to remain at Hogwarts to pester students, staff, and inanimate objects? Does Dumbledore just find him amusing or is it something deeper? And it would be nice also to finally find out why Peeves fears the Bloody Baron so much. owlery2003 comments: Filch, Snape, Hagrid, Peeves . . . Hogwarts is a vibrant, scary, off-center place to obtain a unique education. DD likes/tolerates/believes in the educational values inherent in "colorful" characters (werewolves, ex-aurors, part giants, centaurs, various monsters), and Hogwarts is full of them. Peeves is another, integral part of what makes Hogwarts that magical center of magic learning, and DD the eccentric genius Headmaster. While muggle children tell stories about (whatever), wizards recall their days at Britain's finest institution, and share the experiences for generations. There is an element of "random learning" in such activity, too. CONSTANT VIGILANCE!! --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 5 03:06:42 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 03:06:42 -0000 Subject: Snape, Quirellmort question... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108922 nearlyheadlessryan wrote: > Now, skip ahead to OOP, if Snape really is spying for The Order > again, wouldn't Voldemort remember Snape's part in trying to stop > him from getting ahold of the Stone? Wouldn't he know that Snape's > loyalty lies with Dumbledore? and therefore want Snape disposed > of? Surely, Quirell being destroyed didn't erase V's memory as > well? I'd love any thoughts that anyone cares to share. SSSusan: This one comes up about every month or so here at HPfGU. I'll summarize some thoughts I poste the last time it came up. Whatever Snape REALLY knew or suspected about Quirrell, he could say that he was just attempting to stop some evil *individual* wizard who wanted to attain immortal life. Since Voldy hadn't been seen or heard from for 12 years, Snape could *easily* plead "How could I have known you were involved??" if he'd been confronted by Voldy later. It could be that Snape's "where your loyalties lie" remark referred in *general terms* to "goodness" or "badness". Or it could be that it referred generally to supporting DD, since it was DD who brought the stone to Hogwarts to prevent its being used. That is, if DD wanted the stone left alone and Quirrell as a fellow Hogwarts staff member wasn't abiding by that, then Snape could have simply been pointing out that Quirrell wasn't being loyal to DD--no matter WHAT his intentions for the stone were. So I think Snape could have a ready answer for Voldy in this. He had no reason to know Voldy was on his way back, and he had no reason to know Quirrell wasn't a power-hungry wizard in search of immortality for himself. Or so that's what he could plead. Siriusly Snapey Susan From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Aug 5 03:09:53 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 03:09:53 -0000 Subject: The Recurring Challenges (Was Re: To Where To When ) In-Reply-To: <004f01c47a1f$ff8f9030$2dc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108923 > Valky > > "1 Who broke into Gringotts in PS/SS and attempted to take the Stone. > > DuffyPoo: Quirrell is the one who broke into Gringotts because he says so, "When I failed to steal the stone from Gringotts, he (LV) was most displeased." No one 'foiled' them. Quirrel got in, opened the vault (Dark Magic, Quirrell is the DADA teacher after all), found the stone gone and left. What the Goblins had to go on was the open vault or some Dark Wizard Catcher device going off - a sneakoscope perhaps? > Valky Now: Ahh yes of course, Thankyou Duffy I had forgotten Quirrels confession. Incedentally I had been thinking about this myself and I wonder if someone with Goblin Blood was actually involved in the attempted robbery. But thats entirely something different. I still wonder anyway about the goings on in London in PS/SS but most of my argument is put to bed here in your post so I guess Timeturning isnt it. I must confess that I had ulterior theories to feed in to this one if it had come back surviving. Which it didn't, but I would still like to put them up for scrutiny. The three recurring challenges (AKA my absolute sure bet prediction for the finale of the series): 1. Harry Flies Masterfully. As seen in the Key obstacle PS/SS, and the First Task GOF. 2. The Martyr. As seen in the Chess Game PS/SS, Hermiones most important Clue to the monster COS, and by Harry saving *everyone* in the second task GOF. 3. The Maze of Puzzles and Surprises: As seen in the final two obstacles PS/SS, The Final Task GOF and the Whomping Willow Timeturning sequence in POA. You might guess that Gringotts/London in PS/SS was my first pick for Harry Flies Masterfully. Now its back to the drawing board for all three. Best to You Duffy from Valky From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com Thu Aug 5 04:24:32 2004 From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 04:24:32 -0000 Subject: FILK: When We're Stealing The Stone Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108925 When We're Stealing The Stone To the tune of the Flintstones theme http://www.hamienet.com/midi13019.html THE SCENE: Defense Against Dark Art Class, taught by Prof. QUIRRELL. The factory whistle blows to indicate that it's 5 p.m. QUIRRELL dismisses his class, and then communes with the DARK LORD QUIRRELL & LORD VOLDEMORT (leaping out the window, sliding down the neck of a convenient 12-foot troll) Avada-Yaddo-Doo! When we're stealing the stone We've a shot at immortality >From the labs of Flamel And his research into alchemy Killing unicorns may drawn down wrath But if we the stone get, do the math When you're stealing the stone Have Avada-yadda-doo time Kedavra-doo time We'll stage a heinous crime! - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm (just updated two days ago) From mschelleau at yahoo.com.au Thu Aug 5 00:22:40 2004 From: mschelleau at yahoo.com.au (mschelleau) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 00:22:40 -0000 Subject: Snape, Quirellmort question... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108926 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bex" wrote: > NearlyheadlessRyan: > > a thought/question occured to me: Snape suspects Quirell of trying > > to get at the Sorcerer's Stone and keeps confronting him late at > > night in the halls and forest about it. As we come to find out, > > you-know-who has taken up residence under the turban and is > > controlling Quirell. > > > > Now, skip ahead to OOP, if Snape really is spying for The Order again, > > wouldn't Voldemort remember Snape's part in trying to stop him from > > getting ahold of the Stone? Wouldn't he know that Snape's loyalty > > lies with Dumbledore? and therefore want Snape disposed of? Surely, > > Quirell being destroyed didn't erase V's memory as well? > > I'd love any thoughts that anyone cares to share. > > > Now Head-on-Shoulders Yblitzka: > That's been bugging me too. It may be that Snape explained himself > with "I was acting," and being an accomplished Occlumens, would have > been able to lie to Voldemort, but I don't know how LV would buy > that. That's one reason why I don't think Snape is the "deserting DE" > mentioned at the end of GoF (the "one who... has left me forever"). > LV says matter-of-factly that the deserter will be killed. If Snape > is the deserting DE, how on earth can he be a spy working with the > DEs? Wouldn't one of them, or LV, kill him on sight? Surely LV has > made it known to them who he thinks the traitor is! > > If Voldemort does remember Snape's behavior in PS/SS, and Snape > hasn't properly explained it, then it would make sense that he is the > deserter, since LV would be almost certain he had defected to DD. There is another possibility, which is that LV does know Snape has betrayed him and is therefore the "one who ... has left me forever" but it is only LV who knows this, as he doesn't identify him by name to the other DEs, possibly because he wants that mystery to remain and keep others in fear by having them wonder "does he think it's me who is the traitor?" I think this is possible as it is likely it is only the main core of DE (Malfroy, Crabb, etc) who are known to other DEs but there are other unknown DEs who remain silent and masked, so it may be that no one DE knows who all the other DE are. So, you could assume that no DE, apart from LV, actually knows Snape has betrayed him. Snape therefore is re-establishing contact with no one knowing he is on the outer and treading a very fine line. However, I don't think it has been established that Snape was one of the unidentified DE at the end of GoF and so unless Harry via DD has shared that info Snape may not in fact know he's been rumbled (although he would suspect given the whole trial/Quirell carry on) so it may be more dangerous than Snape actually knows (assuming that he is truly with DD) Just a few more thoughts on the matter Mschelle in Au From sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com Thu Aug 5 04:55:25 2004 From: sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com (Amey Chinchorkar) Date: 5 Aug 2004 04:55:25 -0000 Subject: Maraudrers and Voldemort, Dragons, Draco's sorting Message-ID: <20040805045525.10904.qmail@webmail31.rediffmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108927 - From: "romulusmmcdougal" - Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort - Has there been any discussion regarding the fact that Snape sees Dark - Magic in the Marauder's Map (Ch. 14, PoA), Lupin putting it in his - mind that Sirius Black was entering Hogwarts "using dark arts he - learned from Voldemort," (Ch. 18, PoA), and that Voldemort always - refers to Peter Pettigrew using his Marauder Nickname? - Doesn't this all point to the fact that the Marauders were studying - under Voldemort at one time, and that most of them decided to leave - him? All except Pettigrew perhaps? Amey: As for wormtail, that?s a nice reminder to him that he ratted on his friends and also he is not important enough to be properly called. And as for Lupin saying that Sirius entered Hogwarts using Dark Arts, he and everybody else is thinking that Sirius learned dark arts, also Snape is implying that Lupin is helping Sirius and Lupin has to deny it. Also Lupin does not want to tell all that Sirius is animagus. That leaves only one option for him. But anybody wonder when (assuming Lupin was right), Sirius or for that matter Lupin had time to learn the Dark Arts without his friends noticing??? This means only wormtail was the person who could be spy as he was the only person who was not in the actual inner circle. (Aah... the luxury of hindsight ) - RMMcDougal - However, what has been exciting my notice recently is dragons. A - while ago on the list (sorry, have looked but can't find it) there - was a good discussion around the charm Lily put on Harry and I am - still puzzling over it. Reading PS and GF again there seems to be a - lot of mention of dragons. Here's some dragon points which I find - interesting: Amey: Thick hide??? You should give this to Snape, he would love this point Anyways, excellent points. I might also add one point which I raised earlier. In Chinese and eastern cultures, dragons are considered as symbol of Phoenix (and hence immortality and magic). Does Fawkes fit here??? - Josh - Only one? Don't forget that Draco didn't even have time to make - conversation with the hat... he was essentially placed in Sytherin on - smell alone. }:^] Amey: Yes, but then he was giving strong vibes and wishing too hard that he be placed in Slytherin so really there was no need to talk to him about it Amey [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From thekrenz at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 00:31:06 2004 From: thekrenz at yahoo.com (thekrenz) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 00:31:06 -0000 Subject: blood types, Dudley In-Reply-To: <6.1.0.6.0.20040804100910.0356beb0@mail.catbirdco.us> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108928 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Michal wrote: > Heritage | 100% Wizard | Mixed | 100% Muggle > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Ability | > Magical | pureblood | half-blood | muggle-born > Squashed | | Dudley? | > No Magic | squib | muggle? | muggle > > The matrix puts heritage against usage. I don't think anyone should argue > with the three types of heritage listed, but Squashed Ability is another > story. I put it here because I suspect Lily's family had wizards in it > other than her and I also suspect that Dudley is a wizard who's been > "squashed" (he felt the dementors after all). And while we haven't run > across any, there must be wizards who have denied their heritage/skill and > refused to use it or who were never allowed to use it. Cyndi asks; What about Seamus's mother? Didn't he say something in PS along the lines of "My dad's a muggle and mom's a witch. Nasty shock for him when he found out." This leads me to believe that Seamus's dad had no idea his wife was a witch. She either denied her heritage, or "squashed" it, but she had not openly used magic for at least 11 or 12 years. By the way, did you intentionally choose the word "squashed" because it was so similar to "squib", or was that a very happy accident? From romulus at hermionegranger.us Thu Aug 5 02:02:59 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 02:02:59 -0000 Subject: Snape, Quirellmort question... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108929 > NearlyheadlessRyan: > a thought/question occured to me: Snape suspects Quirrell of trying > to get at the Sorcerer's Stone and keeps confronting him ... about > it. As we come to find out, you-know-who has taken up residence > under the turban and is controlling Quirrell. > > Now, skip ahead to OOP, if Snape really is spying for The Order > again, wouldn't Voldemort remember Snape's part in trying to stop > him from getting ahold of the Stone? Wouldn't he know that Snape's > loyalty lies with Dumbledore? and therefore want Snape disposed of? > Surely, Quirrell being destroyed didn't erase V's memory as well? I'd > love any thoughts that anyone cares to share. > > vmonte responds: > > This really bothers me too. If you believe in ESE Snape then you > could say that Quirrell was trying to fight against Voldemort's > possesion, and Snape's job was to make him submissive (via potions) > until Voldemort was strong enough to take complete control of Q's > body. Then the scene with Snape cornering Q is really about Snape > asking Q if he is loyal to Voldemort. Good point. That would give Voldemort the impression that Snape was still loyal. But the danger in that approach would be Voldemort wanting to possess Snape at some point. What is "ESE Snape"? I am a fan of Snapes and I want to know what you are referring to here. Snape is a powerful wizard -- I say more powerful than everyone outside of Dumbledore and maybe perhaps Voldemort. He wants to teach Defense against the Dark Arts, but Dumbledore will not let him. I am sure that has been discussed before, but can you tell this person why that is? And thirdly, has the discussion about Snape being the heir of Gryffindor been discussed yet? RMM www.hermionegranger.us From colleengordon1 at msn.com Thu Aug 5 01:20:02 2004 From: colleengordon1 at msn.com (starlandcolleen) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 01:20:02 -0000 Subject: Jobs In-Reply-To: <000c01c47a50$74a10ae0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108930 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "manawydan" wrote: > Mandy wrote: > >I just read some theories about how there seems to be an > >extraordinarily disproportionate number of witches and wizards > >working for the MoM (are you all impressed that I've got the hang of > >abbreviations already?!) and I have another viewpoint on this > >subject. > First of all, I think it's because there _are_ a lot of wizards working for > the Ministry. > The school is turning out a large number of educated young wizards > with a common mindset to be the bureaucracy of the future (in a not > dissimilar way to the way that the English public schools turned out the > administrators of the British Empire!) starlandcolleen: I think it is pretty widely accepted that many wizards and witches perform jobs outside of the careers which Hogwart's seems to prepare it's students for. What I am wondering is; where do they train, if they do? I wonder if there are "vocational" schools for wizards...perhaps Hogwarts is the equivalent of an academic academy. (Boy, there's a redundant phrase!)I am thinking back to Molly's cookbooks i.e. "Charm your Own Cheese" Perhaps students at the vocational schools would use something like that for their texts. I can't see them going to muggle school until they are working. A somewhat related question; on another thread, somebody pointed out that J.K.R. confirmed in an interview that wizard kids do not have to go to muggle school before Hogwarts. Are their basic skills, i.e. reading, home-taught? Perhaps there are tutors for this? Any thoughts? From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Thu Aug 5 04:21:31 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 04:21:31 -0000 Subject: Snape, Quirrellmort question... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108931 > NearlyheadlessRyan: > a thought/question occured to me: Snape suspects Quirrell of trying > to get at the Sorcerer's Stone and keeps confronting him late ... > about it. As we come to find out, you-know-who has taken up residence > under the turban and is controlling Quirell. > > Now, skip ahead to OOP, if Snape really is spying for The Order again, > wouldn't Voldemort remember Snape's part in trying to stop him from > getting ahold of the Stone? > > vmonte responds: > > This really bothers me too. Actually, what bothers me most is that if Snape was really a good guy, how come Dumbledore didn't know about our turban-wearing friend? It would be funny if Harry would mention those conversations in defense of Snape at some point within earshot of an adult who'd realize what it really meant. }:^] However, if Snape really is a good guy, it would be quite easy to explain to LV (in between the frequent Crucios) that he couldn't know if he were being tested by the real Quirrell and Moody, or dealing with a true servant of LV, and to keep his hear in Dumbledore's lap, he has to play the part unerringly. Josh From jeopardy18 at comcast.net Thu Aug 5 02:50:25 2004 From: jeopardy18 at comcast.net (seanmulligan2000) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 02:50:25 -0000 Subject: Why Voldemort is a fascist... (LONG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108932 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Nora Renka" wrote: > Why Voldemort is a Fascist, or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and > March in Step (LONG) > 9) The DEs are Voldemort's Stasi/SS/Cheka. You aren't a follower, > or you're an opponent? The Cheka doesen't belong in the same category as the Ustasi or the SS. The Cheka was the communist group which was charged with defending the revolution against those who wanted to restore the czar. They were the good guys. "sean mulligan" From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Thu Aug 5 04:28:07 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 04:28:07 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108933 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > Alla: > > I have no doubt in my mind that Snape knew where the map came from If Snape knew so much, then why didn't he know the big black dog in the hospital wing with Harry at the end of GoF was Sirius until he transformed? The MWPP monikers on the map only make sense if you know multiple animagi forms. It's quite reasonable to assume that Snape (as a fake spy for Voldemort within the Order, evil or good) would not know about Wormtail also acting the spy, as compartmentalization is good security. Moony makes sense as Lupin, but only if you can put it in context with another Marauder so as to narrow the field to 1 werewolf amongst the world's population throughout recent-enough history. No, I seriously doubt Snape put the nicknames into play until he had the pleasure of dealing with Padfoot and Moony calling each other such in his presence in between Order business. Josh From gpregana at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 03:43:42 2004 From: gpregana at yahoo.com (gpregana) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 03:43:42 -0000 Subject: HPB guess - King Godric? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108934 > > Meidbh wonders: > > Has anyone worked the Godric Gryffindor idea through before? > > > > Godric Gryyfindor is the HBP. Harry is the Heir of Gryffindor. I bet > > Godric had green eyes (but then Petunia and Dudley would also be > > descendants... > > > > Any takers? I agree that Godric Gryffindor is the HBP. Reading back through all the HP books, JKR gives the following clues as to the identity of the HBP: 1) Gryffindor and Slytherin argued about who should be accepted into Hogwarts. Slytherin only wanted "purebloods." Gryffindor insisted that any child with magical abilities should be welcomed into Hogwarts. Why? Simply because Gryffindor is half-blood. 2) Gryffindor's colors are scarlet and gold. Scarlet is a color associated with royalty. Gold is also associated with royalty, for example, gold crowns, gold vestments, gold goblets. 3) Gryffindor's symbol is a lion. Think King Richard, the Lionheart. The male lion is usually called the king of the jungle. However, Gryffindor's symbol may be part of the family crest rather than his personal symbol. 4) Gryffindor also owned a jewel-encrusted sword. Only royalty could afford to have jewels adorn their swords. "gpregana" From smiller_92407 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 05:15:46 2004 From: smiller_92407 at yahoo.com (Susan Miller) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 05:15:46 -0000 Subject: Peeves In-Reply-To: <20040804005702.18297.qmail@web53501.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108935 --- Lanthiriel S wrote: > > You know, I've always wondered about Peeves (and > possibly I'm the only one). What purpose does he > serve, besides general mayhem and comic relief? That's > enough, of course, but he is a rather intriguing > character. > > Anyone have any thoughts on Peeves? > Actually, I have a theory about Peeves. He is the only one that we know of who has never been alive (as we know it) and is not currently dead. I think he is an excellent candidate to go through the veil because I think he could freely go in and out. What better way to communicate with those on the other side? ~ Constance Vigilance From romulus at hermionegranger.us Thu Aug 5 03:50:17 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 03:50:17 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108936 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Eleanor wrote previously: > > > > > > 1) Snape's comment about the map: Snape's seen the names Moony and > > > Padfoot on the map and knows who they refer to. > > > RMM: > > Does he though? Why would he bother asking Moony about the map then? > > And why would he let Moony take the map as well? > > > Alla: > > I have no doubt in my mind that Snape knew where the map came from > (you don't think he got it right from manufactures - PoA, paraphrase) Alla, Still that brings up the question, why bother acting as if he didn't know? If I came across it in Harry's possession, knew what it was, and took it from him, I would not have then carried on a charade pretending not to know about it. Secondly, by the message on it when Snape said "Reveal..." shows that a cover was planned by the Marauders for Snape if he was prying too closely. I simply do not think that those outside the Marauders were privy to the Marauders' nicknames. I believe I read that somewhere. > > RMM: > > We know that Sirius Black, i.e. Padfoot, in Moony's mind, learned > > dark arts from Voldemort; we also know that Pettigrew (Wormtail) -- > > another Marauder -- betrayed another Marauder -- James Potter > > (Prongs) and Padfoot to Voldemort. > > So, here we have at least two Marauders doing stuff with Voldemort. > > Sounds to me like the Marauders Map has Dark Magic, becoming illegal > > Animagi takes some dark magic, and it looks like some of these guys > > got in too deep with Voldemort to the point that they started > > mistrusting each other. > > > > > Alla: > > I am sorry? Two marauders doing stuff with Voldemort? You know, ESE! > Lupin is not a canon yet , no matter how brilliantly Pippin defends > this theory. :o) And Sirius , well, as far as we know was not doing > any stuff with Voldemort. So, who is the second one? Lupin was of the firm belief that Sirius was onto some dark arts "from Voldemort" in order to gain entrance to Hogwarts. Now, if there was no Black-Voldemort connection, and one can learn dark arts on ones own, why would Lupin think such a thing? Secondly, Peter Pettigrew also known as Wormtail, was a Marauder. > > Animagi is a Dark Magic? Why? Is McGonagall doing Dark Magic too, in > your opinion? It is obviously an advanced form of magic that is strictly regulated. How can a Rita Skeeter be so easily blackmailed by the threat of exposure for not being registered as a animagus if it was acceptable on a large scale? This heavily implies that it is questionable, if not openly dark magic. McGonagall is most likely a registered animagus. Let me ask you the question. Does a good person, who once delved heavily into the illegal drug scene, now become once and for all a BAD person? Can good people make bad mistakes? Can a bad person reform oneself? > > Marauders indeed started mistrusting each other at one point, but I > view it as falling in the general atmosphere of mistrust, which > Voldemort created during the first war, not them being Evil. My point was never that the Marauders were Evil people. My point has always been that the Marauders were playing with the dark arts under the tutelege of Voldemort. Some pulled back after it got nasty, and some did not. Some saw it for what it was, at least one did not. RMM From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Thu Aug 5 05:17:00 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 05:17:00 -0000 Subject: Halloween 81 [Re: To Where To When (TimeTurning that may make sense)] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108937 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "meltowne" wrote: > The beginning of SS/PS we see the same thing - Hagrid apparently > rescued baby Harry shortly after midnight (when Sirius arrived at the > house). but DD & Hagrid would not have known where to go then. They > would have had to wait until later until someone who had been told > the location told them the Harry had disappeared (or told him the > location and he discovered Harry was gone). Oh, it's quite possible that Dumbledore already knew the location, and in such a manner as to protect the identity of the secret keeper (a note, ala #12, but typed), which could be passed on to Hagrid. But question... Does it say anywhere that Sirius was there? I reread the first chapter of book 1, and Hagrid says he borrowed the bike, but not when. How did he get to Godric's Hollow in the first place? We still have to believe that Hagrid at that point hadn't put together that "young Sirius Black" must have been the traitor, but I need info that may or may not be in PoA. It was a full 24 hrs between the attack and Privet Drive, and the WW knew of the defeat of LV as of that morning. The collapse of other wards could certainly have alerted DD to going ons, and he sent Minerva to Privet Drive with no explanation and Hagrid to Godric's Hollow. DD himself most likely spent the day handling legal matters, et al. Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Thu Aug 5 05:01:14 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 05:01:14 -0000 Subject: To Where To When (TimeTurning that may make sense) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108938 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > Valky: > I agree with that entirely. And admittedly I only speculate that it > could mean also that DD had seen Ginny with the Basilisk but didn't > know how she was under Tom's control. Although, at face value you > are right and that is all, the theory that DD had already known > about Ginny at this time makes the plot sequence more interesting. > I recall you don't have your books so I should do you the favour of > the plot rundown from a to b there. > a.1: The second attack; Curiously, I have investigated this one > before quite recently, Dumbledore is the one who discovers Colin > Creevey petrified. Colin is on his way up from the Great Hall to the > third floor and DD is on his way down the staircases to the Kitchens > from his office. MacGonagall comments that it was fortunate that DD > was on his way for a Hot Chocolate refill then, or the attack may > have been worse. Ahh, but I still have my sources: ["Another attack," said Dumbledore. "Minerva found him on the stairs."] and ["But I shudder to think ... If Albus hadn't been on the way downstairs for hot chocolate - who knows what might have -"] and ["You don't think he managed to get a picture of his attacker?" said Professor McGonagall eagerly. Dumbledore didn't answer. He opened the back of the camera.] Minerva was first on the scene, and I'd say just worried about her own ability to survive this monster... what is her blood status I wonder? If Dumbledore had known anything, he wouldn't have needed the camera. Screw the object causing the possession, an unpossessed Ginny would have those memories intact (DD would know this having studies the Dark Arts, but being too noble to use them (according to MM in PS/SS)). > Josh; > > However, knowing the lethal nature of the Basilisk's eyes (if he'd > > TTed for info, he'd have known it was a Basilisk first and > foremost), then I feel he would have given more specific > preventative advice, such as using mirrors around corners ala Hermy > and Penelope. Not only does he care about the students' safety, but > a death would have closed the school much sooner. > > > > Valky: > You are of course absolutely right about that. The plan for Hermione > was very simple and well executed, though. Of course if one was to > go with my theory that DD does and will TT as part of his regular > life it begs the question 'Is he already up to his proverbial neck > in advanced time? '. > The problems come when you need to crossover time turns on the same > parrallel, for instance if you needed to be somewhere at a non > specified moment within an timeframe of an hour you might timeturn > *60 x 60* times before you found the specific moment. There is no > real way to calculate what effect you have each failed attempt, and > each failed attempt has an exponential degree of effect on the > original timeline accordingly multiplied by the unsuccessful > attempts coming before and after it. > > Basically saying that a wise person such as Dumbledore simply would > not TT to anywhere with a plan involving guesswork especially not in > a school full of children. Hermiones timetable plan didn't involve > any guess work and so was safe enough, I suppose. Umm, but DD doesn't need a Cloak to become invisible. Surely nothing was a complicated and full of danger as the PoA time trip for Harry and Hermione? Dementors all around, a werewolf going wild, and a D.E. running loose... and that's just the last 5 minutes! And yet, DD sent them back for a single 3 hr period... no worries, just follow your footsteps (now that's a clue that he has turned on occasion) and you must not be seen! and he shuts the door. DD wouldn't need to make multiple jumps, he'd just need to disillusion himself, or better if he knows how, and go back too far on purpose. He if knows the where... nothing else matters. If he'd guessed it was a Basilisk (G&F at least suspected it was a fanged something or 'nother while needling Percy), then all he had to do was go to the right spot, and close his eyes... then follow. Perhaps recruit Fawkes to help (he seemed immune)? Or better yet... go bring in some fresh roosters! Josh ...who still thinks that DD isn't turning in the modern day :) From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Thu Aug 5 05:20:35 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 05:20:35 -0000 Subject: Snape, Quirrellmort question... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108939 Mschelle wrote: > There is another possibility, which is that LV does know Snape has > betrayed him and is therefore the "one who ... has left me forever" > but it is only LV who knows this, as he doesn't identify him by > name to the other DEs, possibly because he wants that mystery to > remain and keep others in fear by having them wonder "does he think > it's me who is the traitor?" Only 3 were absent who weren't in Azkaban, and Snape's absence would be assumed as he would be on Hogwarts grounds and unable to apparate so immediately. Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Thu Aug 5 05:23:36 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 05:23:36 -0000 Subject: HPB guess - King Godric? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108940 gpregana wrote: > 4) Gryffindor also owned a jewel-encrusted sword. Only royalty > could afford to have jewels adorn their swords. But there is _nothing_ left of the HPB storyline in CoS. The links to CoS from the HPB (the book) are fully independant of the HPB (the person). See jkrowling.com :) Yeah yeah... I know... frustrating, isn't it? :) Josh From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Aug 5 06:51:32 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 06:51:32 -0000 Subject: Harry -- Pure-blood or Half-blood? (Re: Voldemort CHOSE to attack Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108941 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nearlyheadlessryan" wrote: NearlyheadlessRyan: > Why do we all assume that James Potter was a full blood wizard and > not a mudblood also? Has JKR discussed this in any interviews or in > any of the 5 books so far and some how I managed to miss it? > Any help in clearing this up would be appreciated. Geoff: It is implied in canon that James was not a mudblood. '"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. Mu common /Muggle-born/ mother," he added, shaking with suppressed rage.... "...Because there are strange likenesses between us, Harry Potter. Even you must have noticed. Both half-bloods....."' (COS "The Heir of Slytherin" p.233 UK edition) If these statements are accurate, then James has to be a wizard otherwise Harry would be, like Hermione, a mudblood. From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 07:28:38 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 07:28:38 -0000 Subject: Molly & others' vulnerability (was: Wizard/Muggle "Radar") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108942 > Magda: > > I think Molly's weak point would be that she'd let her anxiety over her children's (and Harry's) safety blind her to reality. [snip] > > Molly's strident efforts to keep the kids ignorant of what was going on (Harry in POA, all the kids in OOTP) shows that she has a very limited understanding of what the Order is all about and what > > demands it might make on its members. > > > SSSusan: > [snip] it wasn't just Molly who made efforts to keep the kids ignorant--Lupin, DD, McGonagall & Fudge also did this. So I'm not sure that this alone shows Molly has a very limited understanding of what the Order is about. > > [snip] I was fishing for some canon which would show why Molly alone would be susceptible to this kind of DE/Voldy manipulation, whereas Arthur [or anyone else who loves someone deeply] would not be. > > We did have the opportunity to see the form which Molly's Boggart > took in OotP, so we know from that what her deepest fear is. We > didn't have the opportunity to see Arthur's or Lupin's or Sirius' or DD's... so we don't really know whether they'd have been something in a similar vein. dcgmck: Sorry about all the snipping, but I just have a few thoughts here I wanted to offer: 1 - Arthur demonstrates in OotP that he can bear being snubbed by Percy (in the hall after Harry's Wizengamot hearing/trial), even though it hurts. He also trusts his older sons to do their duty for the Order and sides with the others when the younger sons insist on hearing some answers when Sirius invites Harry to ask questions. He may not accept the notion of pureblooded virtue, but he does seem to buy into the older stereotype of masculine roles and duty within society. His vulnerability seems to lie in the direction of overextending himself, of not knowing how to say 'no', as he did when he accepted "overtime" guard duty the night he nodded off and was attacked. 2 - Lupin's boggart, at least in PoA, is a full moon, which is partly how Hermione works out that he is a werewolf. His greatest fear, then, would seem to be his uncontrollable transformations. His dependence on a potion to restrain/contain his bestial impulses seems to be his point of vulnerability. 3 - It seems vain to discuss Sirius' vulnerable points, since he's been taken out of action. . . again. . . Of course, he wasn't really permanently out of action last time, so who's to say this time? (Yeah, yeah, JKR...) 4 - Dumbledore only seems to worry about Harry's feelings and welfare when Harry is actually in a sickbed or in Dumbledore's presence. The rest of the time he seems content to trust that Harry will be protected and/or be able to fend for himself. Even when Harry disappears from the maze in GoF, Dumbledore doesn't get proactive, preferring to wait and see how things will sort themselves out until he actually deduces that Moody is not the Mad Eye he knows and trusts. All of these males are too busy fighting on their own fronts to panic over hypothetical threats to their loved ones. If Molly is given something more to do than stay behind the lines and tend the home fires, she'll have more confidence in the ability of others to sort out their own predicaments as well, partly from her own experiences, partly because she'll be sufficiently involved in her own quandaries to succumb to threats of hypotheticals. Experience with one's own ability to give the lie to a blackmailer's threats can give one confidence in one's loved ones to work things out as well, though it won't stop that person from rallying others to mount a rescue attempt that doesn't involve capitulation. In short, (oops, too late...) I don't believe that Molly is innately hysterical and vulnerable; she just needs more to do than hang around wringing her hands. Look at the folly just such an existence led Sirius to commit. Why should Molly be any different. Give the woman something active to do (besides housecleaning) and she'll be fine. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Aug 5 07:37:53 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 07:37:53 -0000 Subject: To Where To When (TimeTurning that may make sense) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108943 Valky: > > a.1: The second attack; Dumbledore is the one who discovers Colin Creevey petrified. Colin is on his way up from the Great Hall to the third floor and DD is on his way down the staircases to the Kitchens from his office. > Josh: > ["Another attack," said Dumbledore. "Minerva found him on the > stairs."] Minerva was first on the scene, and I'd say just worried about her own ability to survive this monster... what is her blood status I wonder? Valky: Drats! Don't you just hate that! I misread those signs oops. I don't know about Macgonagalls Blood Status but that *is* a really good question. And do you suppose that DD coming down the stairs scared the Basilisk away? I thought of a use for the grapes however. I imagined DD floating them in the Hallway knowing that CC was coming and about to face the Basilisk. Colin sees the grapes floating in the Hallway and being of muggle descent is entirely fascinated so tries to take a picture to send home to the family. Basilisk comes round the corner and Colin looks up startled camera still shielding his eyes. LOL! Anyways DD was still in close proximity to the attack so I am not sunk yet, I think. Josh: If Dumbledore had known anything, he wouldn't have needed the > camera. Valky: But he *did* need the camera for some reason. He prised it from Colins hands, and opened it. Minerva asks him 'What does this mean', and he answers: 'it means that the Chamber of Secrets is indeed open'. So the burned out camera is confirmation of something that DD wasn't sure about. A camera is an ideal opportunity to find out if the basilisk is real or fake. If its fake there will be a photo of someone casting a spell on Colin in the camera, and if it is a real Basilisk then the camera will protect Colin. Yet still I see what you mean DD would not have seen the Basilisk attack because if he had he wouldn't need to look inside the camera. I trip myself thinking about it. Josh: Screw the object causing the possession, an unpossessed Ginny would have those memories intact (DD would know this having studies the Dark Arts, but being too noble to use them (according to MM in PS/SS)). > Valky: Yes I see what you mean here also. You're right of course DD probably didn't know about Ginny at this stage. and it does seem to confirm that Ginny is not beside the Basilisk when it attacks. Ohhh sigh its all unravelled again. Valky previously: > > Basically saying that a wise person such as Dumbledore simply would not TT to anywhere with a plan involving guesswork especially not in a school full of children. >Josh: > Umm, but DD doesn't need a Cloak to become invisible. Surely nothing was a complicated and full of danger as the PoA time trip for Harry and Hermione? Dementors all around, a werewolf going wild, and a D.E. running loose... and that's just the last 5 minutes! And yet, DD sent them back for a single 3 hr period... no worries, just follow your footsteps (now that's a clue that he has turned on occasion) Valky: Yeah, I'm aware of the obvious clues that he *has* timeturned I am just looking for context where it makes a great deal of sense that it has happened. Especially ones that look to us like Buckbeak dissappearing looked to Dumbledore. Somehow I managed to walk so far down COS lane instead.... sigh .... Josh: DD wouldn't need to make multiple jumps, he'd just need to disillusion himself, or better if he knows how, and go back too far on purpose. He if knows the where... nothing else matters. If he'd guessed it was a Basilisk (G&F at least suspected it was a fanged something or 'nother while needling Percy), then all he had to do was go to the right spot, and close his eyes... then follow. Perhaps recruit Fawkes to help (he seemed immune)? > > Or better yet... go bring in some fresh roosters! Valky: Pffffffft. The last of the air out of my balloon. Maybe...... Know any good hiding spots. ;P Incedentally since you *are* so observant any help on the signs that someone timeturns in the future books? Best to You Valky From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 5 08:07:36 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 04:07:36 -0400 Subject: RE HP vs LOTR Message-ID: <002901c47ac3$45500520$69c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108944 My sincerest apologies. You all must think I'm nuts. I was intending that e-mail for a friend who asked me, "Are Harry Potter and the Lord of the Rings all part of the same story." So, as you can tell, I was trying to explain that they are NOT. DuffyPoo (hiding her head in shame) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From vmonte at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 08:23:32 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 08:23:32 -0000 Subject: Snape, Quirellmort question... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108945 RMM wrote: Good point. That would give Voldemort the impression that Snape was still loyal. But the danger in that approach would be Voldemort wanting to possess Snape at some point. What is "ESE Snape"? I am a fan of Snapes and I want to know what you are referring to here. Snape is a powerful wizard -- I say more powerful than everyone outside of Dumbledore and maybe perhaps Voldemort. He wants to teach Defense against the Dark Arts, but Dumbledore will not let him. I am sure that has been discussed before, but can you tell this person why that is? And thirdly, has the discussion about Snape being the heir of Gryffindor been discussed yet? vmonte responds: ESE means: Ever So Evil. According to the HP books Dumbledore does not want Snape to teach DADA because he believes it may bring out the worst in him. I think that Dumbledore has to keep in mind that Snape used to be a death eater. Snape may no longer be a part of Voldemort's circle, but Dumbledore knows his weaknesses and is keeping temptation away. For example you probably shouldn't hire a recovering alcholic as a bartender. And as for Snape being an heir to Gryffindor? I have not seen that discussed yet, although it is a very interesting proposition. Why do you feel that he is? I'm very curious? vivian From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 08:34:59 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 08:34:59 -0000 Subject: Memory as a theme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108946 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kirsten" wrote: > New day, new theory. > > I have been thinking recently about the theme of *memory* and how it plays out in these books. Brief examples: > > Harry begins the story without any memories. He doesn't know anything about his parents or his history. The whole of PS/SS involves Harry discovering the past, concluding with the gift of a photo album. Here memories restore his identity. > > The Tom Riddle of CoS is himself is a memory, in the end unable to > escape from a diary. [huge snip; sorry] dcgmck: Kirsten, I very much enjoyed reading your enumerations. At the risk of sliding off-topic, I couldn't help noticing that your foregoing description of Harry and his memories parallels that which happens to the androids in Philip K. Dick's "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?", the basis for the movie, "Blade Runner." Dick's entire oeuvre debates what constitutes reality and what constitutes being "human". In Androids/BR, the mechanized constructs are given and collect photographs in order to provide themselves with believable backgrounds and families that match their implanted memories. These memories can be modified as necessity requires. Curiously, the androids have a built-in failsafe: they are designed to break down/die at the end of a finite time period. Harry Potter and Tom Riddle seem to be headed for a similar fate:the former is provided memories, the latter is a memory. If Rowling is echoing Dick's theme, (intentionally or otherwise,) is she questioning Riddle's and Potter's right or ability to be counted as true members of the wizarding community? Each has been and continues to be an outsider seeking both admittance and recognition in this closed community. Does either truly belong or are their respective memberships wishful thinking, a combination of memory and fantasy? As with Dick's tales, Rowling's characters who implant and/or manipulate memories clearly lack boundaries or certain scruples. (Lockhart, Voldemort, the Ministry of Magic) Where do Dumbledore and Snape fit into this picture? Each has used a pensieve to examine memories. Each has left those memories to be seen and interpreted by Harry. Memories, of course, are untrustworthy. (Dick demonstrated this in the short story "We Can Remember It for You Wholesale," which became the movie "Total Recall.") Can we as readers actually trust people who use memories for analysis and manipulation? I'm getting very impatient waiting for the publication of book 6 and really hope JKR's writing 6 & 7 pretty much simultaneously. (She did say they were two halves of a whole...) From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 5 08:36:57 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 04:36:57 -0400 Subject: Possible Katie Bell FLINT? Message-ID: <004101c47ac7$5ebe0ad0$69c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108947 > Carrie wrote: > > I was just curious... In Book 5 Ginny Weasly says that she'd like > > to try out for Chaser, and that Angelina and Alicia are leaving > > next year. What about Katie? if Katie is NOT leaving for book six, that must make her one year older than Harry. > > > Yblitzka: > Yep, sounds right... > > Carrie cont'd: > > That would mean that she was a first year on the House Quidditch > > team. > > Yblitzka again: > I don't see where you make that leap. Please explain. > > ~Yb Bookworm: "IIRC (apologies for not checking - the book is *missing* in my daughter's room) when Oliver introduced Katie to Harry, Oliver said that Katie had been on the 'reserve' team the year before, so she was new to the 'varsity' team the same year Harry was. That's the only mention of the reserve team I remember, so what exactly that means is unclear." DuffyPoo: While calling the Quidditch match in PS, Lee Jordan said, "And she's really belting along up there, a neat pass to Alicia Spinnet, a good find of Oliver Wood's, last year only a reserve..." but I don't see that Katie has been introduced, anywhere, as being on the reserve team. However, she is a chaser in HP's second year, and though we don't see it, they probably had try outs at some point as they did in OotP. Since Ginny doesn't mention that Katie is leaving, only Alicia and Angelina, Katie must be a year older that HP but a year younger than Alicia and Angela which, in HPB will make Katie a 7th year, and HP 6th. Isn't this right? It's early and my math skills have never been that great. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From vmonte at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 08:53:18 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 08:53:18 -0000 Subject: Halloween 81 [Re: To Where To When (TimeTurning that may make sense)] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108949 Josh wrote: It was a full 24 hrs between the attack and Privet Drive, and the WW knew of the defeat of LV as of that morning. The collapse of other wards could certainly have alerted DD to going ons, and he sent Minerva to Privet Drive with no explanation and Hagrid to Godric's Hollow. DD himself most likely spent the day handling legal matters, et al. vmonte responds: DD did not send Minerva to the Dursley's, she showed up on her own accord. DD states in SS/PS something to the effect of: 'I should've known you would be here.' The other interesting bit is that it was obvious that Minerva had never been to the Dursley residence because (in cat form) she was reading street signs and looking at a map. DD however did not. Was he at the Dursley's before, or was it preplanning of some kind? And why was Minerva there? Was she close to the Potter family? Or was she more concerned about Harry? Something is not right about this whole scene. Key information--and yes, even time is missing! vivian From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Aug 5 09:01:33 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 09:01:33 -0000 Subject: Shared thoughts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108950 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "meidbh" wrote: > > The transfer of Voldy construct, now this is interesting > > Before we wonder `how' are we sure about `whether? Is essence of > Voldy really inside Harry? Why do we assume Harry didn't have his > Voldyesque skills already and that they aren't part of his > innate `power' and genetic history? > > Our evidence so far for a transfer of construct or essence: > > 1. Tom Riddle's sister wand chooses Harry. > > 2. Harry's ability to speak Parseltongue > Just a magical genetic mutation or recessive gene? A Red herring! > > 3. Harry seems to have had a trace memory of the name Tom Riddle. > > 4. Harry's scar appears to function as a communication channel with > VM. > > I have to say the transfer (of something!) concept is intriguing, > attractive and would explain a lot. You missed out at least one. 5. "You can speak Parseltongue, Harry," said DD calmly, "because Lord Voldemort - who is the last remaining descendant* of Salazar Slytherin - can speak Parseltongue. Unless I'm much mistaken, he transferred some of his powers to you the night he gave you that scar. Not something he intended to do, I'm sure..." PS/SS chap 18. * - this read 'ancestor' in my book, but IIRC JKR issued a correction. Since a wizard's powers seem to be part of his 'persona' (to use a term that's been bandied about recently) a transfer of one would entail some of the other too. That's the theory, anyway. As for !, it's a very convenient shorthand so far as I'm concerned when used to describe some aspect of a character. Crouch!Moody is much easier than "Barty Crouch while pretending to be Moody." So ESE!Snape, Weapon!Harry, Puppetmaster!DD; everybody knows which facet of the character or theory about the character you're talking about. Dunno where it started though. Kneasy From severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk Thu Aug 5 09:01:04 2004 From: severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk (severelysigune) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 09:01:04 -0000 Subject: OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108951 > > Pippin: > > > All the adults, with the possible exception of Dumbledore, are afraid of Voldemort. The point is being willing to say Voldemort's name *even though* you're afraid of him. For most people it's their first act of defiance. But Snape is rather beyond that. Of course it might be the *last* act of defiance for him ::sobs:: <<< > > Alla: > > > > Actually, you are absolutely correct, Pippin. The point is to say the name despite the fear. So, why Snape does not do that? He cannot overcome his fear? I disagree though that for most people it is their first act of defiance. For Snape his last one? LOL! << Sigune (delurking for a moment): It always seemed to me that the Dark Mark on Snape's arm had something to do with it all. It seems to me that Death Eaters are even more in terror of Voldemort's name than other wizards and witches. It struck me that in CoS (and I sincerely apologise if this is movie contamination; I ought to reread the book), Malfoy was taken aback by Harry's speaking Voldy's name out loud, and so are, if I am not mistaken, the DE's at the DoM - as if it physically hurts them to hear it. I suspect that the Dark Mark is a rather powerful link with Voldemort, comparable in a way to Harry's scar; and old beliefs have it that when you speak, for example, the Devil's name, he might just come to you. So maybe, for DE's more than for others, speaking Voldemort's name kind of activates their bond, drawing his attention to them. Or at the very least, the DE's are in mortal fear of their own leader. I guess they know better than anyone else what he's capable of; they could ask Avery . I have to think this out further; sorry if it sounds a bit fuzzy right now. Are there other people around who feel the DE's are even more in fear of Voldy's name, or is it just me? Potioncat suggested in another part of this thread that Snape might be more or less afraid of Dumbledore. I think he certainly must be in great awe for him, but more in an admiring and respecting way than what he feels towards Voldy. Otherwise I think he wouldn't be so prepared to carry out DD's orders :). Alla has a point - conquering their fear of Voldy's name seems to be one of the last, rather than the first, steps for most people. McGonagall, for example, still doesn't manage it, and I think we can agree that she has been up against Voldy for some time now. And I'm with you Pippin: we don't want Snape saying Voldy's name to be the last thing he does. Let him keep wincing and live nastily ever after. Yours severely, Sigune From vmonte at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 09:11:54 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 09:11:54 -0000 Subject: HPB guess - King Godric? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108952 gpregana wrote: 4) Gryffindor also owned a jewel-encrusted sword. Only royalty could afford to have jewels adorn their swords. Josh wrote: But there is _nothing_ left of the HPB storyline in CoS. The links to CoS from the HPB (the book) are fully independant of the HPB (the person). See jkrowling.com :) vmonte now: Yes, but gpregana makes an interesting point. Perhaps JKR intended on doing a flashback scene in CoS. We still need some background information on the founding 4, and the split. Perhaps she was planning on explaining the split, and the how and whys of why SS built the Chamber. If she realized that this back story was taking too much away from the Harry story, she may have cut it out. So, in essence, we might have been told in a flashback that GG was the half blood prince, but since she cut this out, the name of the book also had to go. Maybe she has decided to put this flashback into book 6, but in a different way. She did add that strange brain attack in OOTP, maybe the brain belonged to GG and Ron will have memories of that backstory. vivian From vmonte at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 09:24:20 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 09:24:20 -0000 Subject: Penseive, Slytherin, Lily's Parents and Time Travel In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108953 Kneasy wrote: Yes, he did. (This was in response to post 80835 on Snape's memories.) The answer I gave then still applies : "In addition the contents of the Penseive '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." vmonte responds: Unless the penseive's job is to give the person who uses it the information he/she seeks. Is it possible the penseive was trying to give Harry the information it thought Harry would need to make "the connections?" vivian From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 5 09:54:47 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 05:54:47 -0400 Subject: Hermione Granger's birthday Message-ID: <008801c47ad2$3ed4f0c0$69c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108954 RMM "And the time frame Professor Trelawney makes these statements? Early to mid-October. Her words: "of sixteen years of devoted service... it has passed, apparently, unnoticed..." imply that her sixteenth anniversary as a teacher came and went without anyone apparently noticing. Thus, the 16th anniversary occurred sometime between the 1st week of September 1979 and early October 1979." DuffyPoo: Or, in her hysterical state, she said 'sixteen years' instead of the 'nearly sixteen' from when she was answering questions from Umbridge. I often say I've been married 20 years, when it is not yet 20 years. Just a generalization. DD states, when talking to HP later, that it was a 'cold, wet night sixteen years ago', that is in June after the mess at the MoM. Living in Canada, I know when it is cold and wet here, but I don't know when it would be most likely to be cold and wet in Northern Scotland. (Jump in here Geoff.) However, we do have reference to HP being wet and frozen ("whithin five minutes Harry was soaked to his skin and frozen hardly able to see his team-mates, let alone the tiny Snitch.) during the first Quidditch match of the year against Hufflepuff in PoA, the game would have been sometime in November (The Lexicon says the first Saturday of November I thought it was probably the 2nd Saturday). Umbridge wasn't made High Inquisitor until Educational Decree No. 23 is passed. The job begins on the Monday of the 2nd week of school. The Lexicon shows Sep 11 (Wed on their calendar) as the date of the Divination class inspection and Oct 5 as the day Trelawney announces she is on probation. However, I'm not certain this is correct. We know that Harry and Ron were doing their week's worth of homework on Sunday, after practicing Quidditch on Saturday. Ron receives an owl from Percy and Percy said there would be a special announcment in the "Daily Prophet" tomorrow. The Trio reads of the High Inquisitor post in the Daily Prophet on Monday morning. After they read the paper they went to History of Magic, Potions, had lunch then went to Divination, followed by DADA...their normal Monday schedule that year. We know it is their Monday schedule, as first class of the year has always been a Monday and "Look at today!" groaned Ron. "History of Magic, Double Potions, Divination and double Defence Against the Dark Arts....Binns, Snape, Trelawney and that Umbridge woman all in one day! I wish Fred and George'd hurry up and get those Skiving Snackboxes sorted..." According to the lexicon Wed is Divination class first thing n the morning. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mandyallen286 at fsmail.net Thu Aug 5 08:20:27 2004 From: mandyallen286 at fsmail.net (wapp13) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 08:20:27 -0000 Subject: Teaching wizards (was Re: Jobs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108955 starlandcolleen wrote: > A somewhat related question; on another thread, somebody pointed > out that J.K.R. confirmed in an interview that wizard kids do not > have go to muggle school before Hogwarts. Are their basic skills, > i.e. reading, home-taught? Perhaps there are tutors for this? Any > thoughts? Hmm. I go with the teaching at home theory because they are all so far apart they couldn't get together on a daily basis but maybe they do some kind of short courses for lots of students, a bit like summer schools. It could be that tutors go to the house to teach but how do families with little money afford this? It might be something that is provided for nothing and funded by the MoM. I would favour the teaching at home option and believe that different levels in ability are indicative of the quality of teaching they have received from their parents. Tutors would only be available to visit for certain subjects and for a certain amount of time during any given week, as with home taught muggles who have private tutors and irregular tutor groups. I also think there are apprenticeships rather than colleges and Unis. We must remember that the students stay at school for an extra two years if they choose to, and I think in this time they not only take lessons applicable to the type of job they want to do, but also have practical tasks to help them to get tp grips with the jobs they will be going for. We haven't really seen yet what happens during these next two years. I think there will be more focussed work instead of it being general teaching. We only have to look at Percy to realise that he went straight from Hogwarts into the MoM. Of course he could have attended a very brief summer school before Harry arrived at the Weasleys, we don't know that he didn't. Mandy From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 5 10:08:07 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 06:08:07 -0400 Subject: Did Lily know about Lupin? Message-ID: <009801c47ad4$1b607c20$69c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108956 Kristen "Can anyone tell me if we have canon to tell us either way whether Lily knew Lupin was a werewolf? This came up indirectly in the discussion of suspicion among the first OOTP." DuffyPoo: Interesting question! I don't believe there is canon though (I've only read the books a dozen times, somebody can correct me if I'm wrong.) Harry's conversation with Sirius and Lupin indicates that James and Lily started dating in their seventh year, after James deflated his head. She probably wasn't a big part of their group before that and it was a huge secret. I suppose she may have been told after she and James started dating. She'd want to know why they could never go on a date on a full moon! ;-) However, Lupin said they started dating after James stopped hexing people just for the fun of it..."Even Snape?" said Harry. Lupin continued that Snape was a special case and why, "And my mum was OK with that?" "She didn't know much about it, to tell you the truth," said Sirius, "I mean, James didn't take Snape along on dates with her and jinx him in front of her, did he?" So, James did keep some things from Lily, maybe she never did know Lupin was a werewolf. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 5 10:23:08 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 06:23:08 -0400 Subject: blood types, Dudley Message-ID: <00a101c47ad6$347d3f70$69c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108957 And while we haven't run > across any, there must be wizards who have denied their heritage/skill and > refused to use it or who were never allowed to use it. Cyndi asks; "What about Seamus's mother? Didn't he say something in PS along the lines of "My dad's a muggle and mom's a witch. Nasty shock for him when he found out." This leads me to believe that Seamus's dad had no idea his wife was a witch. She either denied her heritage, or "squashed" it, but she had not openly used magic for at least 11 or 12 years." DuffyPoo: Your line from Seamus is directly from the movie. In the book he says, "I'm half and half," said Seamus. "Me dad's a Muggle. Mam didn't tell him she was a witch 'til after they were married. Bit of a nasty shock for him." It doesn't indicate that she didn't openly use magic for 11 or 12 years, just for whatever time they were dating until after they were married. She could have told him on their honeymoon. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 5 10:29:34 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 06:29:34 -0400 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort Message-ID: <00ae01c47ad7$1a5a0140$69c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108958 > Alla: > > I have no doubt in my mind that Snape knew where the map came from Josh "If Snape knew so much, then why didn't he know the big black dog in the hospital wing with Harry at the end of GoF was Sirius until he transformed? The MWPP monikers on the map only make sense if you know multiple animagi forms. It's quite reasonable to assume that Snape (as a fake spy for Voldemort within the Order, evil or good) would not know about Wormtail also acting the spy, as compartmentalization is good security. Moony makes sense as Lupin, but only if you can put it in context with another Marauder so as to narrow the field to 1 werewolf amongst the world's population throughout recent-enough history. No, I seriously doubt Snape put the nicknames into play until he had the pleasure of dealing with Padfoot and Moony calling each other such in his presence in between Order business." DuffyPoo: In the "Snape's Worst Memory" scene we have the Marauders calling each other by their nicknames all the time. No one knew they were animagi, these could just be silly nicknames they sung out to each other in the halls. Names that meant something to them, but not to anyone else. Remember, the Trio were to call Sirius "Snuffles" when they were talking about him. Just a nickname. Snape could have, probably would have, heard them calling each other by these nicknames at school, then seeing all the names on the map, would instantly put two and two together and believe HP had gotten the map directly from the manufacturers as he knew one of the manufacturers was currently working at the school - Lupin/Moony. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 5 10:54:01 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 06:54:01 -0400 Subject: Halloween 81 [Re: To Where To When (TimeTurning that may make sense)] Message-ID: <00b701c47ada$85176a60$69c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108959 > The beginning of SS/PS we see the same thing - Hagrid apparently > rescued baby Harry shortly after midnight (when Sirius arrived at the > house). but DD & Hagrid would not have known where to go then. They > would have had to wait until later until someone who had been told > the location told them the Harry had disappeared (or told him the > location and he discovered Harry was gone). Josh "Oh, it's quite possible that Dumbledore already knew the location, and in such a manner as to protect the identity of the secret keeper (a note, ala #12, but typed), which could be passed on to Hagrid. "But question... Does it say anywhere that Sirius was there? I reread the first chapter of book 1, and Hagrid says he borrowed the bike, but not when. How did he get to Godric's Hollow in the first place? We still have to believe that Hagrid at that point hadn't put together that "young Sirius Black" must have been the traitor, but I need info that may or may not be in PoA." "It was a full 24 hrs between the attack and Privet Drive, and the WW knew of the defeat of LV as of that morning. The collapse of other wards could certainly have alerted DD to going ons, and he sent Minerva to Privet Drive with no explanation and Hagrid to Godric's Hollow. DD himself most likely spent the day handling legal matters, et al." DuffyPoo: McGonagall went to Privet Drive because of Hagrid. "Hagrid's late. I suppose it was he who told you I'd be here, by the way?" [DD] "Yes," said Professor McGonagall. "I met him [Sirius}!" growled Hgrid. "I musta bin the last ter see him before he killed all them people! It was me what rescued Harry from Lily an' James' house after they was killed! Jus' got him outta the ruins, poor little thing.....an' Sirius Black turns up, on that flyin' motorbike he used ter ride." As to how Hagrid got there, under these special circumstances, perhaps he was allowed to 'fly' as he 'flew' when he went to get HP. (HP & Hagrid didn't use the motorbike to 'fly' back to the mainland so, unless Hagrid left the bike on the island, he didn't use it to get to the island, either.) I'm beginning to think that the Fidelius Charm evaporates when the house in question is destroyed. As we've discussed before, even those who know the whereabouts of the house are blocked from entering by the Fidelius Charm. (The Malfoys, although they probably know where 12 Grimmauld Place is, cannot now enter unless DD, the Secret-Keeper, tells them where it is.) They have to be specifically told by the Secret-Keeper. Yet here we have Hagrid and Sirius both at the house only a short while after the attack: "Young Sirius Black lent it me. I've got him, sir." [Hagrid speaking] "No problems, were there?" "No, sir -- house was almost destroyed but I got him out all right before the Muggles started swarmin' around." Both Sirius and Hagrid were at the home, then, right shortly after the incident, before the Muggles in the neighbourhood, who would have heard the racket of the house being destroyed, could even get there. DD would have known where the house was because he suggested he be the Secret-Keeper himself, he would have 'forgotten' the address, once Wormtail was made Secret-Keeper, but once the house was destroyed, he would know the address again and therefore be alerted to the fact that something had happened there. Sirius would know by the same method (he was James' best friend, he would know where they lived, until the Fidelius Charm was performed), then DD only had to tell Hagrid so he could go and get Harry. We don't need DD - or anyone else - to find Wormtail and get the address out of him, DD already knew. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From idcre at imap2.asu.edu Thu Aug 5 10:54:47 2004 From: idcre at imap2.asu.edu (backstagemystic) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 10:54:47 -0000 Subject: OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108960 Sigune wrote: >>[edit] I suspect that the Dark Mark is a rather powerful link with Voldemort, comparable in a way to Harry's scar; and old beliefs have it that when you speak, for example, the Devil's name, he might just come to you. So maybe, for DE's more than for others, speaking Voldemort's name kind of activates their bond, drawing his attention to them.[edit]<< I concur that the fear of speaking Voldemort's name stems from the fear of attracting his attention (and incurring his wrath). The powerful psychic connection between Harry and Voldemort, made more dangerous in OotP by Harry's inability and unwillingness to shield his mind, put the safety of the Order at greater risk of being compromised (as tragically came to pass in the demise of Sirius). The LAST thing Snape needed was for Harry to needlessly risk attracting Voldemort's attention during Occlumency lessons (especially considering the great precautions Dumbledore himself took around Harry in normal circumstances). When Harry managed to mentally push back and into Snape's mind (and when he pried into Snape's memories in the Pensieve, for that matter), Voldemort could very well have been lurking and witnessing the events. Had something of a highly sensitive nature been uncovered, the results could have been disastrous for Snape and the Order. As it is, Harry may very well have handed Voldemort emotional weapons that he could potentially use to chip away at Snape's mental defenses in the future. BM From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 5 11:03:00 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 07:03:00 -0400 Subject: Snape, Quirellmort question... Message-ID: <00c001c47adb$c62ab290$69c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108961 RMM wrote: "He wants to teach Defense against the Dark Arts, but Dumbledore will not let him. I am sure that has been discussed before, but can you tell this person why that is?" vivian "According to the HP books Dumbledore does not want Snape to teach DADA because he believes it may bring out the worst in him. I think that Dumbledore has to keep in mind that Snape used to be a death eater. Snape may no longer be a part of Voldemort's circle, but Dumbledore knows his weaknesses and is keeping temptation away. For example you probably shouldn't hire a recovering alcholic as a bartender." DuffyPoo: I don't think it has ever been mentioned in the books why DD does not want Snape to teach DADA. I think that came up in a JKR interview or something. In the books we have, "Do you have any idea why Dumbledore has consistently refused to appoint you [to the DADA job]? asked Umbridge. "I suggest you ask him," said Snape jerkily. I have my own theory about Snape which I have not yet posted as it is very long-winded. However, from that theory, I think Snape has not been appointed to the DADA position because of what DD fears Snape may 'let slip.' (Nothing about Dark Arts, either. If you want to know my theory, just ask.) ;-) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Aug 5 11:04:41 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 11:04:41 -0000 Subject: Chamber of Secrets - The Unexplained In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108962 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Josh Warren" wrote: > Geoff wrote: > > I'm quite sure that I have seen it mentioned on the group more > > than once that it /has/ been acknowledged as a flint. > > > > Certainly, my UK edition (also p.245) has "descendant". Josh: > But no one posts which edition within Canada, US, UK. Didn't you all > get a class about that little title page on the front, and what info > is on the back of it? :) Post that info, and we can know for sure if > it was corrected back, or if people are just timing it by when they > buy the books in the stores... Geoff: (Sigh) You can't keep some people happy unless they're creating more work.... :-) I have two copies. Paperback - which I actually bought first in early 2003. This announced that this particular edition was published in 2002 (the original edition being 1998) and the numerical information under the ISBN reads 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1. Hardback - bought late 2003. This is listed as an edition first published in 1999 and the data under the ISBN reads 10 9. There you go, squire, see what you make of that. From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Thu Aug 5 11:45:07 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 11:45:07 -0000 Subject: What drives WW ? (was Chapter 24: Occlumency) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108963 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "severelysigune" wrote: > > Potioncat suggested in another part of this thread that Snape might > be more or less afraid of Dumbledore. I think he certainly must be in > great awe for him, but more in an admiring and respecting way than > what he feels towards Voldy. Otherwise I think he wouldn't be so > prepared to carry out DD's orders :). > Carolyn: Sigune your comment about Snape's awe of DD gives me an opportunity to post something I have been working on, originally prompted by Kneasy's 'Shared Thoughts' thread, but also by Nora's 'Voldy is a Fascist' thread. Basically, what intrigues me is *why* anyone is afraid of Voldy, let alone see him as the leader of a political movement. Nora wrote in one of her replies (sorry, forget which): >>>It seems to me that he's built a persona, a public image, as the Heir of Slytherin, and that this is part of what gets the followers. I suspect there are followers as well out of sheer desire to get ahead. That is enough to consider it an ideological underpinning--you don't have to make it overt to have one, after all...<< Kneasy began his post 108664 by listing the gaping holes in the back story, which by their very absence, suggests that what happened long ago between the founders of Hogwarts is key to the solution of the plot. I agree. The disagreement between the founders of Hogwarts must drive the whole story, but I think the reason we have been given, about Salazar storming off in a huff because he thought pure-blood wizards and witches were the only ones who were worth teaching magic, is something of a red herring. Not that I think that he didn't believe that. I am sure he did, with a great deal of passion and conviction. After all, he was prepared to destroy a great friendship for his beliefs. But what was so important, what was really at stake? It seems to me that we've missed the subtle clues as to what really drives the imagination of the WW. I think it is, put simply, the pursuit of `greatness', for example, as expressed by Ollivander when he said about Voldemort in PS/SS: `After all, He Who Must Not Be Named did great things ? terrible, yes, but great.' JKR also states it plainly in the opening chapter, in the exchange between McGonagall and DD: `But you are different. Everyone knows you're the only one You-Know ? oh, all right, Voldemort ? was frightened of.' `You flatter me,' said Dumbledore calmly. `Voldemort has powers I will never have.' `Only because you're too ? well ? noble to use them.' And, just in case we forget this, we are later treated to various set- piece demonstrations of DD's powers ? first when he storms through the door to save Harry from Fake!Moody; then his effortless escape from Fudge after the DA confrontation, and finally when he confronts Voldie at the MoM. It is also clear that because of his abilities DD is held in wide respect generally ? the Chocolate Frog card said `considered by many the greatest wizard of modern times.' Other examples of the way the WW thinks are Quirrell's excuses (about Voldy) in PS/SS: `He is a great wizard and I am weak there is no good and evil, there is only power, and those too weak to seek it.' In GOF, Sirius comments about Crouch Sr: `He's a great wizard, Barty Crouch, powerfully magical ? and power hungry'. At Harry's first Occlumency lesson, Snape uses almost the same words about DD with grudging respect: `Dumbledore is an extremely powerful wizard' (when Harry challenges Snape to speak Voldy's proper name). And the list goes on and on ? the WW's somewhat patronising, often contemptuous attitude to Muggles is rooted in the fact that Muggles have no magical powers to command respect. Their hierarchy of responses to non-human magical creatures is governed strictly by their magical abilities. On the whole, the WW doesn't muck about with toughs like centaurs or goblins. Weaker creatures like House Elves become enslaved. Dangerous dragons are so far subdued that they appear to be farmed for their meat, blood and every last particle of their carcasses. Between ordinary wizards, it is a rough and tumble of hex or be hexed (getting a satsuma stuffed up your nose at Christmas seems to be perfectly normal; no one blinks an eye at the Draco/Crabbe/Goyle heap on the train each year). No wonder it is so important to get into Hogwarts and get the best teaching on essential survival skills. And if you are born without magical ability, heaven help you. The anxiety in the whole Neville story is hedged about with is he/isn't he going to be a squib; both Filch and Mrs Figg eloquently convey their anger and shame at their condition. The Hogwart's founders' original obsession with discovering and nurturing magical ability has continued down the ages, and I would suggest that one of the things that's going on at the MoM are experiments on brains, to see if they can identify any physical characteristics that indicate absence or presence of magical ability. The contents of the locked room may well be something that they have managed to identify as the essence of this ability. So to bring this back to Voldy and agendas. I think Dumbledore is 100% committed to the nurturing of magical talent wherever it can be found [even in non-humans], and in this sense is the embodiment of the original wishes of all four founders, and in fact this *is* the role of the Headmaster of Hogwarts down the ages - to be the keeper of that faith, and Fawkes is a symbol of that continuity. [I don't know whether DD is actually continually re-born or a new individual is chosen when the old one dies,] but that is his job, and why Hogwarts is such a seat of power, and why the headmaster has no need to be Minister of Magic, yet commands a far greater influence. In this role, DD spotted Tom Riddle's abilities very early on [perhaps Ollivander alerted him to the immensely powerful wand which Tom Riddle chose, containing the feather from the headmaster's own phoenix], and with the support of the then rapidly-fading Headmaster of Hogwarts, Armando Dippet, encouraged him. But, alas something in Tom's psychological make up led him to make the wrong choice in his pursuit of power [remember 'it's our choices'..etc etc]. Perhaps it was the absence of parental love early in his life, who knows - it would be an appropriate reason for JKR to pick on, with her interest in children and orphans. All this would account for DD's ruthless, yet regretful dealings with Tom. He has to stop him, but is deeply aware that it might have been his mistake that created the monster in the first place. It would also account for Voldy!Tom's extremely erratic behaviour. We joke that he hasn't read the Evil Overlord rulebook properly, but his list of mistakes is really laughable. Essentially the problem is that he has gone off at a tangent, embraced the power apparently represented by Salazar, but failed to understand that it only ever was a quarter of the original line up, and must always be balanced by the skills and abilities represented by the other three founders if it is to lead to true power. The DE's and their supporters follow him only because at one time it looked like he was a bandwagon that might grab power - he appeared for a very short while [10-12 years] to have unassailable magical ability, and that's what really counts in the WW. The pureblood argument was only ever a useful prop - it is self-evident that purebloods do not necessarily have greater magical abilities than non- purebloods, or even non-humans. If the pursuit of 'greatness', ie over-arching magical ability is what fundamentally drives the WW, then Voldie is obviously going to fail because he has not understood his lessons. The more interesting question to me is whether Harry is also going to fail because he is so closely identified with Gryffindor talents. There is that ick- making line of Hermione's: 'Harry - you're a great wizard, you know' forewarning us of his abilities (and we all know she is the voice of the author), but would substituting Gryffindor values for Slytherin values really change much in the WW? Carolyn Who should have pondered on this more, but is posting it anyway. From sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com Thu Aug 5 12:15:46 2004 From: sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com (Amey Chinchorkar) Date: 5 Aug 2004 12:15:46 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort Message-ID: <20040805121546.3905.qmail@webmail30.rediffmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108964 - From: "romulusmmcdougal" - Secondly, by the message on it when Snape said "Reveal..." shows that - a cover was planned by the Marauders for Snape if he was prying too - closely. I simply do not think that those outside the Marauders were - privy to the Marauders' nicknames. I believe I read that somewhere. Amey: I agree that the names of marauders were a secret till wormtail divuldged them. But the defence against prying wasn?t only for Snape. After all Snape gave his name to the Map and in true Marauder tradition, map kept prying person out. "Professor Severus Snape, master of this school, commands you to yield the information you conceal!" Snape said, hitting the map with his wand. As though an invisible hand were writing upon it, words appeared on the smooth surface of the map. (PoA) - From: "romulusmmcdougal" - It is obviously an advanced form of magic that is strictly regulated. - How can a Rita Skeeter be so easily blackmailed by the threat of - exposure for not being registered as a animagus if it was acceptable - on a large scale? This heavily implies that it is questionable, if - not openly dark magic. - McGonagall is most likely a registered animagus. - Let me ask you the question. Does a good person, who once delved - heavily into the illegal drug scene, now become once and for all a BAD - person? Can good people make bad mistakes? Can a bad person reform - oneself? Amey: Rita could easily be blackmailed because she was using her form to get news illegally and she was not registered. And, "Because... because people would know if Peter Pettigrew had been an Animagus. We did Animagi in class with Professor McGonagall. And I looked them up when I did my homework -- the Ministry of Magic keeps tabs on witches and wizards who can become animals; there's a register showing what animal they become, and their markings and things... and I went and looked Professor McGonagall up on the register, and there have been only seven Animagi this century, and Pettigrew's name wasn't on the list." (PoA-Hermione in Shack) So, McGonall is registered. But "Really, what has got into you all today?" said Professor McGonagall, turning back into herself with a faint pop, and staring around at them all. "Not that it matters, but that's the first time my transformation's not got applause from a class." (PoA) Do you mean to say that *McGonall* did this piece of Dark or questionable magic every year in front of all students and also they have this part in their curriculum? I think she should be in Azkaban by now. "Yes, indeed," said Lupin. "It took them the best part of three years to work out how to do it. Your father and Sirius here were the cleverest students in the school, and lucky they were, because the Animagus transformation can go horribly wrong -- one reason the Ministry keeps a close watch on those attempting to do it.? (PoA) This shows that Animagi is not questionable magic but it is very adavanced (and can go wrong like Apparation), and of course it can be used for questionable purposes. That is why ministry keeps tab on it. Being an animagus doesn?t make you bad guy. - > From: "romulusmmcdougal" romulus at hermionegranger.us - Marauders indeed started mistrusting each other at one point, but I - view it as falling in the general atmosphere of mistrust, which - Voldemort created during the first war, not them being Evil. - My point was never that the Marauders were Evil people. My point has - always been that the Marauders were playing with the dark arts under - the tutelege of Voldemort. - Some pulled back after it got nasty, and some did not. Some saw it - for what it was, at least one did not Amey: Can you believe James with his famous hatred of Dark Arts playing with them? Map is not dark Arts (we have no canon, Snape accuses it of full of Dark Arts, but you cant take his word here). They can be doing some illegal things like becoming unregistered animagi (well they are forerunners of Gred and Forge), but Dark Arts, no way and under Voldemort, no chance. Amey [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Aug 5 12:32:17 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 12:32:17 -0000 Subject: Why Voldemort is a fascist... (LONG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108965 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > Kneasy wrote: > > He hates; that's his credo and it's a personal grudge writ large. > > Even so he was willing to let Lily live. His agenda might be more > > flexible than you think. > > SSSusan: > I'm sure it's a bit disappointing after a lengthy post like this was > that I'm going to just pull this little piece out. But, well, it's > the part that interests me most just now. > > Can you flesh this out, Kneasy? Just what are you saying? Why > *might* Voldy have been willing to let Lily live? I've some > thoughts on this, too, but I'm always interested to hear multiple > views. > It all depends on which level you want to look at it and how JKR has constructed the Voldy character. Firstly and most probably IMO, it's a wrinkle in the plot that will have/has had significance that we can't at the moment fathom. Secondly and in terms of the current thread *if* Voldy is an ideologically driven fanatic determined to instute the primacy of purebloods at any cost then one would expect him to wipe out Lily with absolutely no compunction. He didn't. So maybe he's not being ideologically driven; maybe he's a pragmatist doing what he sees as necessary to achieve his personal ends. Lily has defied him 3 times we're told. For a murdering ideologue this would be unforgivable and would merit the ultimate sanction. But Voldy isn't thinking along those lines - he wants to kill Harry, that seems to be his sole aim. James possibly and Lily for sure need not have died. But if they get in the way then die they will. That is a very cold pragmatic way of assessing the 'mission' - that it's a safeguard for his future security, not an aspect or reflection of a wider political agenda. You can bet your house that Bella would have viewed it differently - she would have killed Lily because of what Lily is and James because he's a 'blood-traitor'. (Assuming James is pureblood - not certain but quite likely.) There's a big difference between the two approaches IMO, though the results would have been the same. As I pointed out in my previous post unfettered personal rule always ends up the same. A dictator is a dictator is a dictator. *Nobody* is safe, it doesn't matter what class, creed or political grouping they belong to. The only means of survival is total and unthinking subservience to the Great Leader, nothing else will save them and even then it might not be enough. In such circumstances labels like fascist, marxist or nutcase become totally irrelevent to those suffering under them. It's solely of interest to those who come later, commentators with 20/20 hindsight. Kneasy From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Aug 5 12:59:33 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 12:59:33 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108966 Josh wrote: > > No, I seriously doubt Snape put the nicknames into play until he had > the pleasure of dealing with Padfoot and Moony calling each other > such in his presence in between Order business. > Potioncat: As it turns out, the Marauders kept their animagi skills secret. No one knew until after PoA. (and not all the characters knew then.) But, the boys did call each other by their nicknames very openly. When each of us read PoA for the first time, I'm sure none of us heard the 4 names and yes "Oh, Yes, a werewolf, a stag, a rat and a dog." Snape did not know the parchment was a map when he first found it on Potter. But he did recognise the names, and (IMHO) he called Lupin, using the excuse of Dark Arts and DADA teacher. And I think the conversation between Lupin and Snape was clearly understood by themselves, but not by us. REading it after the fact, with the understanding that they know exactly who they are talking about, changes the meaning very much. Potioncat From vmonte at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 13:03:39 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 13:03:39 -0000 Subject: Snape, Quirellmort question... In-Reply-To: <00c001c47adb$c62ab290$69c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108967 DuffyPoo: I don't think it has ever been mentioned in the books why DD does not want Snape to teach DADA. I think that came up in a JKR interview or something. In the books we have, "Do you have any idea why Dumbledore has consistently refused to appoint you [to the DADA job]? asked Umbridge. "I suggest you ask him," said Snape jerkily. I have my own theory about Snape which I have not yet posted as it is very long-winded. However, from that theory, I think Snape has not been appointed to the DADA position because of what DD fears Snape may 'let slip.' (Nothing about Dark Arts, either. If you want to know my theory, just ask.) ;-) vmonte responds: You're right! The Snape comment was from JKR. Royal Albert Hall Appearance June 26 2003: JKR: Hey Jackson SF: Hello Jackson, hurrah. And lets have a look and see what your question was shall we? JL: Prof Snape has always wanted to be the defence against the dark arts teacher. In book 5 he still doesn't get the job Why does Professor Dumbledore not allow him to be the defence against the dark arts teacher? SF: There JKR: That is an excellent question and the reason is that, I have to be careful what I say here, the reason is that to answer it fully would give and awful lot away about the remaining two books but when Professor Dumbledore took Professor Snape on to the staff and Professor Snape said I'd like to teach defence against the darks arts please and Professor Dumbledore felt that that might bring out the worst in Professor Snape Somewhat JKR: So he said I think we'll let you teach potions and see how you get along there. vivian From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Aug 5 13:11:57 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 13:11:57 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108968 RMM wrote: > > Marauders indeed started mistrusting each other at one point, but I > > view it as falling in the general atmosphere of mistrust, which > > Voldemort created during the first war, not them being Evil. > > My point was never that the Marauders were Evil people. My point has > always been that the Marauders were playing with the dark arts under > the tutelege of Voldemort. > > Some pulled back after it got nasty, and some did not. Some saw it > for what it was, at least one did not. > Potioncat: Major Snippage of several posts. Lupin believed, like the rest of the WW that Black had been the traitor. Therefore, he believed Black, as a DE would have learned Dark Magic from LV. I do not believe he was referring to a point in time where the 4 of them studied under LV together. There are most likely, lots of ways to learn Dark Arts. Polyjuice Potion, I believe is Dark Arts. It comes from a book in the restricted section and Hermione states, "This book is full of Dark Magic..." paraphrased. I am not convinced the map is not Dark Magic. Although we're told James hated Dark Arts, he liked to hex people. And it's very easy and very "human" to convince yourself that what you do is OK, but what the other guy (Snape?) does is not OK. And certainly, Black would have been exposed to Dark Magic at home. Would he really know where regular magic ended and Dark Magic began? Potioncat From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 5 13:13:26 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 13:13:26 -0000 Subject: Why Voldemort is a fascist/sparing Lily In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108969 Kneasy wrote: >>> He hates; that's his credo and it's a personal grudge writ large. Even so he was willing to let Lily live. His agenda might be more flexible than you think.<<< SSSusan enquired: >> I'm sure it's a bit disappointing after a lengthy post like this was that I'm going to just pull this little piece out. But, well, it's the part that interests me most just now. Can you flesh this out, Kneasy? Just what are you saying? Why *might* Voldy have been willing to let Lily live? I've some thoughts on this, too, but I'm always interested to hear multiple views.<< Kneasy responded: > It all depends on which level you want to look at it and how JKR > has constructed the Voldy character. > > Firstly and most probably IMO, it's a wrinkle in the plot that > will have/has had significance that we can't at the moment fathom. > > Secondly and in terms of the current thread *if* Voldy is an > ideologically driven fanatic determined to instute the primacy of > purebloods at any cost then one would expect him to wipe out > Lily with absolutely no compunction. He didn't. So maybe he's > not being ideologically driven; maybe he's a pragmatist doing > what he sees as necessary to achieve his personal ends. > > Lily has defied him 3 times we're told. For a murdering ideologue > this would be unforgivable and would merit the ultimate sanction. > But Voldy isn't thinking along those lines - he wants to kill Harry, > that seems to be his sole aim. James possibly and Lily for sure > need not have died. But if they get in the way then die they will. > That is a very cold pragmatic way of assessing the 'mission' - that > it's a safeguard for his future security, not an aspect or > reflection of a wider political agenda. > > You can bet your house that Bella would have viewed it differently > - she would have killed Lily because of what Lily is and James > because he's a 'blood-traitor'. (Assuming James is pureblood - > not certain but quite likely.) > > There's a big difference between the two approaches IMO, though > the results would have been the same. SSSusan again: Your discussion of the second point is what I suspected you were going to go for--and it *is* a strong argument for Voldy's being just that thug w/o a political ideology. It is especially convincing when you compare Voldy's actions to what you anticipate Bella would have done. (Nora, I shall enjoy reading your take on this. :-)) It was in your discussion of the first point that I was hoping you'd be able to give me some hypothesis/es. Since I don't think up things on my own very well, I was hoping for ideas, you see. While I'm convinced that Voldy had a *reason* for suggesting she didn't have to die--that he really did *mean* it when he said it--I can't come up with much in the way of WHY, beyond the rather tired ideas of his somehow being related to Lily or having promised to try to spare her for someone else, i.e., Severus. Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 5 13:27:38 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 13:27:38 -0000 Subject: Snape, Quirrellmort question... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108970 NearlyheadlessRyan: >>> a thought/question occured to me: Snape suspects Quirrell of trying to get at the Sorcerer's Stone and keeps confronting him late ... about it. As we come to find out, you-know-who has taken up residence under the turban and is controlling Quirell.<<< vmonte responds: >> This really bothers me too. << Josh: > Actually, what bothers me most is that if Snape was really a good > guy, how come Dumbledore didn't know about our turban-wearing > friend? SSSusan: I believe it was Pippin who pointed out a couple of weeks ago when this topic last came up that it's likely that Snape *did* tell DD about his suspicions concerning Quirrell. I don't think either Snape or DD knew that Voldy was barnacled to Quirrell's head--how could they know *that*?--but as Pippin pointed out, after Snape confronted Q., did we see him make any further attempts either on Harry's life or to retrieve the stone, until the very end of the school year when he was caught by Harry? I think she made a good point that Q. realized he'd better tone it down because he was being watched. Only when the school year was nearly over *and* DD had left Hogwarts did Q. make another move. Siriusly Snapey Susan From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com Thu Aug 5 13:30:43 2004 From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 13:30:43 -0000 Subject: Why Voldemort is a fascist/sparing Lily In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108971 > Kneasy wrote : > > Lily has defied him 3 times we're told. For a murdering ideologue > > this would be unforgivable and would merit the ultimate sanction. > > But Voldy isn't thinking along those lines - he wants to kill Harry, > > that seems to be his sole aim. James possibly and Lily for sure > > need not have died. But if they get in the way then die they will. > > That is a very cold pragmatic way of assessing the 'mission' - that > > it's a safeguard for his future security, not an aspect or > > reflection of a wider political agenda. > Then SSSusan wrote: > While I'm > convinced that Voldy had a *reason* for suggesting she didn't have to > die--that he really did *mean* it when he said it--I can't come up > with much in the way of WHY, beyond the rather tired ideas of his > somehow being related to Lily or having promised to try to spare her > for someone else, i.e., Severus. boyd: I hope this doesn't come across as pedantic, but my assumption was that JKR simply needed Lily's death to be a sacrifice for Harry. To make that clear to us, the readers, she wrote those troubling words of LV's to Lily. So does LV say she doesn't have to die because a) he's a powerhungry ductator-to-be who just needs to off Harry, or b) Lily's life has some importance to him? I choose c) because JKR made him say it. This is just one of those areas where JKR was expedient. Of course, there's always d) LV *couldn't* kill Lily due to some sort of protection that *she* had and relinquished to save Harry.... --boyd there is no e) because it's too early in the morning for LV/Petunia shipping From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 5 13:34:22 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 13:34:22 -0000 Subject: Snape, Quirrellmort question... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108972 Mschelle wrote: > > There is another possibility, which is that LV does know Snape > > has betrayed him and is therefore the "one who ... has left me > > forever" but it is only LV who knows this, as he doesn't identify > > him by name to the other DEs, possibly because he wants that > > mystery to remain and keep others in fear by having them > > wonder "does he think it's me who is the traitor?" Josh: > Only 3 were absent who weren't in Azkaban, and Snape's absence > would be assumed as he would be on Hogwarts grounds and unable to > apparate so immediately. SSSusan: I think you're right, Josh, that if Snape *isn't* one of the three Voldy mentions, it might be because he realizes Snape couldn't get away from Hogwarts immediately without arousing DD's suspicions. On the other issue--I'm away from my books, so I probably shouldn't take this on, but if I'm wrong, I'm sure someone will correct me. *Is* it true that there were only three who were missing who weren't in Azkaban? Weren't there several gaps around the circle? I thought that Voldy simply *discussed* three but that they didn't comprise all the missing DEs in toto. Can someone confirm or correct me? Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 5 13:54:15 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 13:54:15 -0000 Subject: Molly & others' vulnerability (was: Wizard/Muggle "Radar") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108973 Magda: >>> I think Molly's weak point would be that she'd let her anxiety over her children's (and Harry's) safety blind her to reality. [snip] Molly's strident efforts to keep the kids ignorant of what was going on (Harry in POA, all the kids in OOTP) shows that she has a very limited understanding of what the Order is all about and what demands it might make on its members. <<< SSSusan: >> [snip] it wasn't just Molly who made efforts to keep the kids ignorant--Lupin, DD, McGonagall & Fudge also did this. So I'm not sure that this alone shows Molly has a very limited understanding of what the Order is about. [snip] I was fishing for some canon which would show why Molly alone would be susceptible to this kind of DE/Voldy manipulation, whereas Arthur [or anyone else who loves someone deeply] would not be. We did have the opportunity to see the form which Molly's Boggart took in OotP, so we know from that what her deepest fear is. We didn't have the opportunity to see Arthur's or Lupin's or Sirius' or DD's... so we don't really know whether they'd have been something in a similar vein. << dcgmck: > 1 - Arthur demonstrates in OotP that he can bear being snubbed by > Percy (in the hall after Harry's Wizengamot hearing/trial), even > though it hurts. He also trusts his older sons to do their duty > for the Order and sides with the others when the younger sons > insist on hearing some answers when Sirius invites Harry to ask > questions. He may not accept the notion of pureblooded virtue, but > he does seem to buy into the older stereotype of masculine roles > and duty within society. His vulnerability seems to lie in the > direction of overextending himself, of not knowing how to say 'no', > as he did when he accepted "overtime" guard duty the night he > nodded off and was attacked. SSSusan: Thank you for this--canon explanation for a view that Arthur either isn't as susceptible as Molly or that he's vulnerable in a different way. Your point about his tendency to overextend is a good one. My only quibble would be that being snubbed by a child isn't quite the same as having a child taken hostage--would Arthur be able to bear that? Would *any* Order member be able to bear that? dcgmck: > 2 - Lupin's boggart, at least in PoA, is a full moon, which is > partly how Hermione works out that he is a werewolf. His greatest > fear, then, would seem to be his uncontrollable transformations. > His dependence on a potion to restrain/contain his bestial impulses > seems to be his point of vulnerability. SSSusan: Whoops, I did flub there, didn't I? I wonder if the DEs have ever thought about how to take advantage of this particular vulnerability? dcgmck: > 4 - Dumbledore only seems to worry about Harry's feelings and > welfare when Harry is actually in a sickbed or in Dumbledore's > presence. The rest of the time he seems content to trust that > Harry will be protected and/or be able to fend for himself. Even > when Harry disappears from the maze in GoF, Dumbledore doesn't get > proactive, preferring to wait and see how things will sort > themselves out until he actually deduces that Moody is not the Mad > Eye he knows and trusts. SSSusan: Good point. I myself have argued that DD has been willing to allow Harry a good deal of latitude to test and/or prove himself. I would argue, though, with the GoF example. Since Harry & Cedric carried the portkey with them to the graveyard, how could DD have been proactive in any way? He couldn't go after them, as he didn't know where they were. You're right that DD's been willing to stand back & allow Harry--and Ron & Hermione--to be in dangerous situations. What do you think that he would do if the DEs actually captured one of the Trio and, rather than killing them outright, attempted to use them to bargain for something? dcgmck: > All of these males are too busy fighting on their own fronts to > panic over hypothetical threats to their loved ones. If Molly is > given something more to do than stay behind the lines and tend the > home fires, she'll have more confidence in the ability of others to > sort out their own predicaments as well, partly from her own > experiences, partly because she'll be sufficiently involved in her > own quandaries to succumb to threats of hypotheticals. In > short, (oops, too late...) I don't believe that Molly is innately > hysterical and vulnerable; she just needs more to do than hang > around wringing her hands. Look at the folly just such an > existence led Sirius to commit. Why should Molly be any > different. Give the woman something active to do (besides > housecleaning) and she'll be fine. SSSusan: And *these* points I truly agree with! People have argued that Molly is doing real work, is assisting with the Order...and she IS...but her work keeps her bound to the house and bound to her traditional work [which probably leaves room for lots of mind-wandering to those awful, scary, hypothetical thoughts], rather than putting her out into new situations which would push her abilities. I'm NOT putting down Molly, either--I happen to think she's quite strong--but I would like to see her out there, in the field as it were, and as you say, developing confidence & experience along with the other Order members. You know, maybe that's the key to this discussion? That while we can't know for certaint how ANY of the Order members would react to a loved one's being held hostage, we CAN know how they react in general to the work of the Order and the hypothetical dangers they face. Because of Molly's situation and the nature of her Order work--and probably because of her personality style as well--she's going to be more "into" those hypothetical horrors than others. Siriusly Snapey Susan, who's enjoying the chance to think through this very much! From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 5 14:03:55 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 14:03:55 -0000 Subject: Snape not saying "Voldy" (was: OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chapter 24: Occlumency) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108974 Sigune wrote: >>[edit] I suspect that the Dark Mark is a rather powerful link with Voldemort, comparable in a way to Harry's scar; and old beliefs have it that when you speak, for example, the Devil's name, he might just come to you. So maybe, for DE's more than for others, speaking Voldemort's name kind of activates their bond, drawing his attention to them.[edit]<< backstagemystic: > I concur that the fear of speaking Voldemort's name stems from the > fear of attracting his attention (and incurring his wrath). > > The powerful psychic connection between Harry and Voldemort, made > more dangerous in OotP by Harry's inability and unwillingness to > shield his mind, put the safety of the Order at greater risk of > being compromised (as tragically came to pass in the demise of > Sirius). > > The LAST thing Snape needed was for Harry to needlessly risk > attracting Voldemort's attention during Occlumency lessons > (especially considering the great precautions Dumbledore himself > took around Harry in normal circumstances). SSSusan: These ideas are helpful in understanding why Snape might not be willing to say "Voldemort" and why he isn't comfortable with others around him doing so. I still have a question, though. If we agree that, for whatever reason, Snape won't say "Voldemort," why does he still continue to use the term "Dark Lord" instead of "He Who Must Not Be Named" or "You Know Who"? Doesn't "The Dark Lord" imply more respect or reverence for Voldy than we'd like to see Snape offering up? Siriusly Snapey Susan From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Aug 5 14:07:37 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 14:07:37 -0000 Subject: Why Voldemort is a fascist... (LONG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108975 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Nora Renka" wrote: > > First of all: did you *read* the list of nine principles set forward? > That's not any grand canonical list, but I'd love to know which of > these doesn't apply, being as I went to some care to compile > them in a formulation that was not historically specific and thus > limited to any one regime. There's also the dictionary definition > that Susan kindly posted... > Kneasy: Yep. And the 9 points aren't specific enough. It could describe any number of 'God-King' regimes throughout history - there's nothing unique in fascism except that the term is fairly recent. > > Here I am going to take the extraordinary step of saying out and out: > > That is not correct. > > First of all, all of these regimes feature dictators. More than > this,they all feature dictators with supporting ideologies, and > these ideologies have several features in common not mentioned by > your summaries. They all explicitly reject democracy in favor of > autocratic rule, and this autocratic rule is justified by the > purpose of the organic state. The most important person in this > organic state is, natch, the dictator--and he is always formulated > as an exceptional person, with some sort of nifty title (El > Caudillo, Il Duce, Der Fuehrer, The Dark Lord...). Combined with > the exceptional person of the leader is a conception of the *people* > as a unique and exceptional people with a particular destiny, which > of course, involves the leadership of their exceptional leader. The > focus on the glorified past is related to the idea that the people > are a people of destiny--and there's always some pesky opponent > trying to deny the people their proper place, be it the Jews or > simply the people who don't agree with fascism. *All* of these > systems also featured secret police (Blackshirts, Franco's street > thugs, the SS). Kneasy: I urge you to read more history. A dictator is a dictator is a dictator as I've said before. They all *end up* the same, but their beginnings are much more interesting. Benny - a marxist who saw nationalism as more fun than internationalism Adolf - a Vienna socialist with an agenda that included confiscation of land without compensation and the abolition of unearned income. It was also where he learned his anti-semitism - it was socialist dogma. The Jews were considered capitalists. Franco - a former royalist who hated what socialists were doing to Spain. When offered power Mussolini did not have secret police; parliament wasn't dissolved and he later had a massive majority even though the opposition was free and active. Hitler got his toe-hold into government via free elections too; and his supporters weren't the so-called elite but the dispossessed, the losers. It all changed later of course. All very different - at the start when 'fascism' or 'national socialism' meant something other than one man's whim. Now which one does Voldy equate to? Because he too is at the beginning, collecting supporters to topple the existing order. Of course, if he has his way he'll end up the same and the label will be just as meaningless. > Nora: > His past isn't just personal...because he's also interested, it > seems, in the composition of his society, you know, continuing > Salazar's noble work. He seems rather obsessed with how he, the > Heir, fits into this history, and he seems to have gone to great > lengths to create a historically founded persona for public > consumption. Immortality is up there too, but I seem to > remember that right now he's more interested in swatting the flies. > Waiting for some more info here on what Voldy himself actually > believes, I admit, but he does seem to have a general obsession with > the past. Kneasy: And what is Salazars 'noble work'? Has it been spelled out? And he hasn't 'created' an historical persona - he is one. No sleight of hand, no fraudulent claims, he is the heir of Slytherin. But I've never heard the DEs say so. Do they even know? Has he told them of his origins? I'd say not, judging by Bella's reactions in the Ministry. > > Nora: > I read your argument and raise you one Josef Stalin. Ever read 'The > Gulag Archipelago'? Random terror means that anyone can get nailed, > and has been proven remarkably effective at keeping a population > scared and in line. Not to mention that this is canonical: several > characters mention the atmosphere of terror that prevailed, the fear > for one's family, etc. Wormtail says 'he was taking over everywhere- > -why not join up?' Seems like for whatever reason, that random > terror was pretty effective; and also for whatever reason, people > weren't just up and leaving to get away from it. > Kneasy: Stalins victims weren't armed as his thugs were. The knock on the door has a different perspective when the first one through might get an Obliviate! or worse thrown at him. Yes, Voldy did instigate a 'reign of terror' - as a terrorist. And the idea works - for terrorists. JKR wants to make our blood crreep but she hasn't really thought through all the implications and ramifications of doing such a thing in a society based on magic. She too is thinking in terms of the KGB and Gestapo - but it's laughable to believe a whole magical society could be cowed by a government that acts like that. It couldn't work unless magic was denied to the population at large. Think about it. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 5 14:13:21 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 14:13:21 -0000 Subject: Why Voldemort is a fascist/sparing Lily In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108976 Kneasy wrote : >>> Lily has defied him 3 times we're told. For a murdering ideologue this would be unforgivable and would merit the ultimate sanction. But Voldy isn't thinking along those lines - he wants to kill Harry, that seems to be his sole aim. James possibly and Lily for sure need not have died. Then SSSusan wrote: >> While I'm convinced that Voldy had a *reason* for suggesting she didn't have to die--that he really did *mean* it when he said it--I can't come up with much in the way of WHY, beyond the rather tired ideas of his somehow being related to Lily or having promised to try to spare her for someone else, i.e., Severus. << boyd: > I hope this doesn't come across as pedantic, but my assumption was > that JKR simply needed Lily's death to be a sacrifice for Harry. To > make that clear to us, the readers, she wrote those troubling words > of LV's to Lily. > So does LV say she doesn't have to die because a) he's a > powerhungry ductator-to-be who just needs to off Harry, or b) > Lily's life has some importance to him? > > I choose c) because JKR made him say it. This is just one of those > areas where JKR was expedient. SSSusan: LOL. I guess this shows that I opt for b). Yes, it could be c) but does JKR do much "just because" when it comes to the words the key character speak? Hmmmm. Does she...? Siriusly Snapey Susan From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 14:25:54 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 14:25:54 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108978 > Potioncat: > I am not convinced the map is not Dark Magic. Although we're told > James hated Dark Arts, he liked to hex people. And it's very easy > and very "human" to convince yourself that what you do is OK, but > what the other guy (Snape?) does is not OK. And certainly, Black > would have been exposed to Dark Magic at home. Would he really know > where regular magic ended and Dark Magic began? Alla: OK, Potioncat, you know, I love your posts dearly, right? So, maybe you can help me out? When, when, when did Voldie tutor Marauders? :o) I am at the point of staring at my computer with very blank stare. "Marauders Map" may have Dark Magic, it may not. Judging by JKR attitude to Dark Arts, I am convinced that it does not, but of course for now it is just a metathinking argument. I am convinced though that Sirius would figure out when the Drak Magic begins exactly because he was exposed to it at home and rejected it eventually. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 14:27:09 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 14:27:09 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108979 > RMM: > > > Lupin was of the firm belief that Sirius was onto some dark > arts "from > > Voldemort" in order to gain entrance to Hogwarts. > > > > Now, if there was no Black-Voldemort connection, and one can learn > > dark arts on ones own, why would Lupin think such a thing? > > Alla: > > Eh, because EVERYBODY thought that Sirius betrayed Potters to > Voldemort? > > But that was really Peter's doing. I am afraid I still don't > understand. Sirius turned out to be innocent, remember? :o) > > > RMM: > > > My point was never that the Marauders were Evil people. My point > has > > always been that the Marauders were playing with the dark arts > under > > the tutelege of Voldemort. > > > > Some pulled back after it got nasty, and some did not. Some saw it > > for what it was, at least one did not. > > > Alla: > > I am incredibly confused. What are you talking about? Would you care > to give canonical evidence of ANY of the Marauders except Peter, of > course playing with Dark Arts with Voldemort being their TUTOR? > Thanks From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 5 14:27:16 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 10:27:16 -0400 Subject: Dumbledore VS. Voldemort Message-ID: <001801c47af8$4f93f070$75fbe2d1@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 108980 In trying to figure out why LV seems to despise DD so much, I came across this: Dumbledore is speaking here, "I was sure that if he [LV] realized that our relationship was - or ever had been - closer than that of headmaster and pupil, he would sieze his chance to use you as a means to spy on me," and later "Voldemort's aim in possessing you, as he demonstrated tonight, would not have been my destruction. It would have been yours." Yes, yes, we know LV was trying to get DD to kill HP for him. But why does DD feel that LV is wanting to spy on him or feel that LV wants him destroyed? If we believe that CoS took place in 1992 (500 years after Nick's deathday of 1492), and the CoS was opened exactly 50 years before, then Riddle is 16 in 1942 (he says he put his 16 year old self into the diary - and is therefore, probably in 6th year at Hogwarts.) DD would only have needed to be a teacher at Hogwarts for one more year, possibly two (1944), until Riddle graduated. We know that DD defeated the Dark Wizard Grindelwald in 1945 - would he have been too busy with this to teach or did he defeat Grindelwald during summer, Christmas, or Easter break? (Doesn't really matter.) Riddle would have been out of the school and off on his travelling far and wide and sinking himself into the Dark Arts by 1945. What if the reason LV is so anxious to get rid of DD is because Grindelwald was an ancestor of his, and, by the same token, a descendent of Salazar Slytherin? Riddle's maternal grandfather or great-grandfather, perhaps? Riddle may not have been aware of this at the time he left school, or even when Grindelwald was defeated, but learned the information while "consorting with the very worst of our kind." [DD] (CoS) If Riddle was around 17 when he finished school, his grandfather may have been around 50 and his great-grandfather around 70. Give or take a few years, of course. DD is currently around 150. As wizards appear to have a different lifespan than men, Grindelwald at 70 would just be getting nicely into his stride. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com Thu Aug 5 14:31:20 2004 From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 14:31:20 -0000 Subject: Why Voldemort is a fascist... (LONG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108981 > Kneasy wrote: > Stalins victims weren't armed as his thugs were. > The knock on the door has a different perspective when the first one > through might get an Obliviate! or worse thrown at him. > Yes, Voldy did instigate a 'reign of terror' - as a terrorist. And the > idea works - for terrorists. > JKR wants to make our blood crreep but she hasn't really thought through > all the implications and ramifications of doing such a thing in a society > based on magic. She too is thinking in terms of the KGB and Gestapo - > but it's laughable to believe a whole magical society could be cowed > by a government that acts like that. It couldn't work unless magic was > denied to the population at large. Think about it. boyd: While I don't personally care what name we label LV with, I do think it's possible that he and his DEs could have wrought terror on the WW populace fairly easily. How? Simply get some of the stronger wizards, then attack weaker wizards unexpectedly and in force. Who are these DEs? I think we all assume Lucius, Crabbe, Goyle, Barty Jr, Pettigrew, and the rest attended Hogwarts or another school of magic, schools which only take those with genuine magical ability. And the victims? While we have heard about some of the strong ones, if LV were present when each of those were ambushed, the victims would have little chance, it seems. So in a way, the situation might well have been very similar to Stalin's terror attacks. Which leads me to wonder, if these things can happen every time a powerful wizard decides to become a dictator, who's to stop it from happening again in another 100 years? Is there a yin to this eternal yang, or will wizards need to be robbed of their magic for their own protection? Or will JKR perhaps have us believe that wizards are basically good, and that these evil overlords are all caused by one bad thing, a thing that Harry can defeat forever in book 7? Or is this simply a story about a boy who must defeat one bad guy? --boyd feeling very querulous today From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Thu Aug 5 14:41:25 2004 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 14:41:25 -0000 Subject: Snape's choice of memories for the pensieve In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108982 Just a quick note on the Pensieve, since both Bex (#108540) and Potioncat (#108742) suggested it might not be Dumbledore's: The narrator tells us in Chapter 24 that Harry recognizes the Pensieve, not that he simply assumes it is Dumbledore's: "The shadowy room was lined with shelves bearing hundreds of glass jars in which slimy bits of animals and plants were suspended in variously coloured potions. In one corner stood the cupboard full of ingredients that Snape had once accused Harry -- not without reason -- of robbing. Harry's attention was drawn towards the desk, however, where a shallow stone basin engraved with runes and symbols lay in a pool of candlelight. Harry recognized it at once -- it was Dumbledore's Pensieve." The narrator also refers to the Pensieve at least once more as "Dumbledore's," without explicit reference to Harry's perspective (ch. 28). Finally, when Dumbledore takes out the Pensieve to show Harry his memory of the prophecy (ch. 37), Harry again recognizes it: "Dumbledore got to his feet and walked past Harry to the black cabinet that stood beside Fawkes's perch. He bent down, slid back a catch and took from inside it the shallow stone basin, carved with runes around the edges, in which Harry had seen his father tormenting Snape." While of course it is possible that Harry could be mistaken about the identity of the Pensieve in Snape's office, those passages certainly are not written in a way that allows for much doubt.... -- Matt From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 14:44:58 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 14:44:58 -0000 Subject: Why Voldemort is a fascist... (LONG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108983 > boyd: snip. > Which leads me to wonder, if these things can happen every time a > powerful wizard decides to become a dictator, who's to stop it from > happening again in another 100 years? Is there a yin to this eternal > yang, or will wizards need to be robbed of their magic for their own > protection? Or will JKR perhaps have us believe that wizards are > basically good, and that these evil overlords are all caused by one > bad thing, a thing that Harry can defeat forever in book 7? > > Or is this simply a story about a boy who must defeat one bad guy? > > --boyd > feeling very querulous today Alla: I am thoroughly convinced that this is not the story about a boy defeating one bad guy. I am convinced that this a story about a boy, who by his struggle forces all WW to be reborn. I am not a fan of earlier versions of Magic Dishwasher, but I am definitely a fan of its last version by Pip, which compares WW to a fenix and argues that in order to escape appearance of the new Dark Lords in the future all structure of WW has to change (apologies to Pip if the summary is incorrect) From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Thu Aug 5 14:52:15 2004 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 14:52:15 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape not saying "Voldy" (was: OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chapter 24: Occlumency) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108984 Siriusly Snapey Susan asked: >I still have a question, though. If we agree that, for whatever >reason, Snape won't say "Voldemort," why does he still continue to >use the term "Dark Lord" instead of "He Who Must Not Be Named" >or "You Know Who"? Doesn't "The Dark Lord" imply more respect or >reverence for Voldy than we'd like to see Snape offering up? I don't strongly believe in the Double Agent Snape theory. But if it's true, then the reason Snape still calls Voldemort "Dark Lord" and not by his name is because he does not want to get out of the habit of doing so -- as his first mistake of that kind at a Death Eater meeting (with or without Voldemort present) might be his last. Janet Anderson _________________________________________________________________ Dont just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ From severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk Thu Aug 5 14:56:15 2004 From: severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk (severelysigune) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 14:56:15 -0000 Subject: What drives WW ? (was Chapter 24: Occlumency) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108985 > Carolyn: > > The disagreement between the founders of Hogwarts must drive the whole story, but I think the reason we have been given, about Salazar storming off in a huff because he thought pure-blood wizards and witches were the only ones who were worth teaching magic, is something of a red herring. Not that I think that he didn't believe that. I am sure he did, with a great deal of passion and conviction. After all, he was prepared to destroy a great friendship for his beliefs. But what was so important, what was really at stake? It seems to me that we've missed the subtle clues as to what really drives the imagination of the WW. I think it is, put simply, the pursuit of `greatness', for example, as expressed by Ollivander when he said about Voldemort in PS/SS: `After all, He Who Must Not Be Named did great things ? terrible, yes, but great.' And, just in case we forget this, we are later treated to various set- piece demonstrations of DD's powers ? first when he storms through the door to save Harry from Fake!Moody; then his effortless escape from Fudge after the DA confrontation, and finally when he confronts Voldie at the MoM. It is also clear that because of his abilities DD is held in wide respect generally ? the Chocolate Frog card said `considered by many the greatest wizard of modern times.' Between ordinary wizards, it is a rough and tumble of hex or be hexed (getting a satsuma stuffed up your nose at Christmas seems to be perfectly normal; no one blinks an eye at the Draco/Crabbe/Goyle heap on the train each year). No wonder it is so important to get into Hogwarts and get the best teaching on essential survival skills. And if you are born without magical ability, heaven help you. The anxiety in the whole Neville story is hedged about with is he/isn't he going to be a squib; both Filch and Mrs Figg eloquently convey their anger and shame at their condition. So to bring this back to Voldy and agendas. I think Dumbledore is 100% committed to the nurturing of magical talent wherever it can be found [even in non-humans], and in this sense is the embodiment of the original wishes of all four founders, and in fact this *is* the role of the Headmaster of Hogwarts down the ages - to be the keeper of that faith, and Fawkes is a symbol of that continuity. [I don't know whether DD is actually continually re-born or a new individual is chosen when the old one dies,] but that is his job, and why Hogwarts is such a seat of power, and why the headmaster has no need to be Minister of Magic, yet commands a far greater influence. In this role, DD spotted Tom Riddle's abilities very early on [perhaps Ollivander alerted him to the immensely powerful wand which Tom Riddle chose, containing the feather from the headmaster's own phoenix], and with the support of the then rapidly-fading Headmaster of Hogwarts, Armando Dippet, encouraged him. But, alas something in Tom's psychological make up led him to make the wrong choice in his pursuit of power [remember 'it's our choices'..etc etc]. Perhaps it was the absence of parental love early in his life, who knows - it would be an appropriate reason for JKR to pick on, with her interest in children and orphans. All this would account for DD's ruthless, yet regretful dealings with Tom. He has to stop him, but is deeply aware that it might have been his mistake that created the monster in the first place. >> Sigune: That is a very interesting post indeed, Carolyn, and I apologise for snipping it - but my reply limits itself to only part of it, and I agree with everything you say. I had never quite considered the situation in that light, but it seems logical that wizards should be so obsessessed with magical ability and its (ab)uses, since it is really the only thing that sets them apart from 'ordinary' people. Anyway, the way you formulated it helped me make sense of a number of things. Snape-aholic that I am, I have lately been pondering the truly puzzling relationship between Snape and Dumbledore (yet again, triggered by everything that was NOT in the film, I suppose), and if Dumbledore is the 'guardian of greatness', the man who sort of has the responsibility to make sure that every wizard and witch makes the best of their talents when passing through his school, and to guide them in the right direction, then I think that explains why he is so strangely, and seemingly endlessly, tolerant of Snape. If the size of Snape's nose and the length of his fingers are anything to go by, the Potions Master has great magical ability - which, my sceptical self feels bound to add, apart from his obvious expertise in potion making, we have not witnessed yet. If this is so, then Dumbledore might think it better to let his disgracefully immature behaviour (I am thinking, in particular, of the PoA infirmary scene; but maybe also of the many, many posts that feel the urge to point out what a horrible teacher he is) pass than to chuck him out and take the risk of another powerful wizard with a worrisome psychological makeup running riot in the WW. I feel that Dumbledore is very much guiding Snape and setting him challenges - the Occlumency lessons, for example, were meant to be every bit as 'educational' for Snape as they were for Harry, but unfortunately /both/ failed miserably. Poor Dumbledore. It's lonely at the top. Hm. Is the problem of the painful division of the WW to be brought back to the quarreling founders? THEY failed to see the importance of the whole, and divided their school into four houses (and not only Slytherin is to blame here; only Helga Hufflepuff was prepared to teach each and every child - where is the Heir of Hufflepuff, in fact? Nobody ever talks about him/her, it's all Gryffindor and Slytherin, *hmph*); and now people need an Albus Dumbledore to point out to them that they should not think in terms of segregation. And even Dumbledore does not abort the house system. Which brings us back to a discussion we have had before, and makes me wonder if it is the WW's conservatism that might be its own undoing. Yours severely, Sigune From eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk Thu Aug 5 14:59:03 2004 From: eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk (iamvine) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 14:59:03 -0000 Subject: What counts as Dark Magic? (was: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108986 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > There are most likely, lots of ways to learn Dark Arts. Polyjuice > Potion, I believe is Dark Arts. It comes from a book in the > restricted section and Hermione states, "This book is full of Dark > Magic..." paraphrased. > > I am not convinced the map is not Dark Magic. Although we're told > James hated Dark Arts, he liked to hex people. And it's very easy > and very "human" to convince yourself that what you do is OK, but > what the other guy (Snape?) does is not OK. And certainly, Black > would have been exposed to Dark Magic at home. Would he really know > where regular magic ended and Dark Magic began? This brings up an interesting point. Does _anybody_ know where regular magic ends and Dark Magic begins? Is there a definite difference, e.g. you have to be thinking evil thoughts to perform Dark Magic? Does it involve different techniques from normal magic? Or is there a continuum, with (say) the Lumos Charm at one end and Avada Kedavra at the other, and a grey area in the middle? Lupin calls Boggarts, Kappas and the other creatures he teaches Harry's class about, Dark creatures. I guess a werewolf is one of those too. What does being a Dark creature mean? Is Hermione performing Dark Magic when she performs Petrificus Totalus (sp?) on Neville? Are Fred and George's Skiving Snackboxes Dark magic, since they make people ill? When is performing Dark Magic okay? Is Wilbert Slinkhard right to disapprove of counter-curses on the grounds that they are curses too? Can an otherwise good spell be used in such a way to make it Dark Magic? James turning Snape upside down might be one such. If there was a creature that could be killed by bright light, would performing Lumos in its presence count as Dark Magic? Arthur or Molly (can't remember which) at the end of CoS says that Riddle's diary was "clearly full of Dark Magic". Was it really? If the personality in the diary had belonged to someone good, and hadn't tried to possess people, would it still have been Dark? If the diary is Dark, does that mean the Marauder's Map is too (aside from what Snape says when it insults him)? I do not believe that Dark Magic is the same thing as illegal magic. Being an unregistered Animagus is illegal because it's dangerous, like Apparating without a license. Professor McGonagall didn't do anything Dark when she became an Animagus. People who Apparate aren't doing Dark Magic either, whether they have a license or not. In some fantasies, magic is magic, and whether it's good or evil depends only on how it is used. In others, there are two separate, mutually exclusive kinds of magic, labelled "light" and "dark" regardless of the intentions of the people who use them. Which is Harry Potter? The characters seem to think it's the second kind, but are they right? Any opinions? Eleanor From Meliss9900 at aol.com Thu Aug 5 15:02:22 2004 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 11:02:22 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Shared thoughts Message-ID: <154.3ba5665b.2e43a5fe@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108987 In a message dated 08/03/2004 21.43 Central Daylight Time, snow15145 at yahoo.com writes: > . Where this fore- > knowledge comes from, I'm none too sure, but I hope like hell it > ain't TT or I'll be banging on the bookshop counter demanding > my money back. > I think his foreknowledge is just nothing more than having planned, in exacting detail, ever bit of stuff that needs to happen to bring said plan to fruition. He's got an excellent squad of spies at his disposal (the previous headmasters). And as he said in PS/SS he didn't need an invisibilty cloak to become invisible. Granted he couldn't have planned out the tournament in GOF or the aftermath but he could insure that the deck was stacked before hand and them simply trust to Harry to react accordingly. Or maybe he has access to a really good seer. Melissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk Thu Aug 5 15:12:10 2004 From: severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk (severelysigune) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 15:12:10 -0000 Subject: Snape not saying "Voldy" (was: OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chapter 24: Occlumency) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108988 SSSusan: > I still have a question, though. If we agree that, for whatever > reason, Snape won't say "Voldemort," why does he still continue to > use the term "Dark Lord" instead of "He Who Must Not Be Named" > or "You Know Who"? Doesn't "The Dark Lord" imply more respect or > reverence for Voldy than we'd like to see Snape offering up? > Sigune: I'm not sure. Snape seems the kind of person who'd appreciate the way Voldy pulls some really powerful Dark magic out of his sleeve now and then, even if it were only from a point of scientific interest (but I think there's more - a real passion for Dark magic). I think he acknowledges the power of a wizard stronger than he is, much the same way as ha acknowledges Dumbledore's superiority. Also, I think, Snape might not be capable of pronouncing Voldy's name, but he still might think "You Know Who" sounds a bit silly :). And maybe old habits stick. Yours severely, Sigune From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 15:10:52 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 15:10:52 -0000 Subject: What counts as Dark Magic? (was: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108989 Eleanor: > I do not believe that Dark Magic is the same thing as illegal magic. > Being an unregistered Animagus is illegal because it's dangerous, like > Apparating without a license. Professor McGonagall didn't do anything > Dark when she became an Animagus. People who Apparate aren't doing > Dark Magic either, whether they have a license or not. > > In some fantasies, magic is magic, and whether it's good or evil > depends only on how it is used. In others, there are two separate, > mutually exclusive kinds of magic, labelled "light" and "dark" > regardless of the intentions of the people who use them. Which is > Harry Potter? The characters seem to think it's the second kind, but > are they right? Alla: Hi, Eleanor. here is the problem as I see it and I can be very very wrong. I think it would make for more complex story if whether magic was good or evil depended on intent of its user, but I think that in Rowling world dark and light magic are mutually exclusive and unless Dark magic is used in time of emergency or from provocation,self- defense,etc(Aurors using unforgivables in the time of War, Harry attempting to crucio bella, etc.), using Dark Magic is wrong. Hogwarts students do not even learn Dark Arts, only defense against Dark Arts. Snape cannot get DADA job, because supposedly Dumbledore is afraid that it will revert him to his old ways, right? So, even getting in contact with Dark Magic for someone who was overly exposed to it in the past can renew his addiction? Yes, I think that Rowling's message is that Dark Magic is Bad Magic. From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com Thu Aug 5 15:25:17 2004 From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 15:25:17 -0000 Subject: What counts as Dark Magic? (was: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108990 > Eleanor wrote: > This brings up an interesting point. Does _anybody_ know where > regular magic ends and Dark Magic begins? > > Is there a definite difference, e.g. you have to be thinking evil > thoughts to perform Dark Magic? Does it involve different techniques > from normal magic? > > Or is there a continuum, with (say) the Lumos Charm at one end and > Avada Kedavra at the other, and a grey area in the middle? > > In some fantasies, magic is magic, and whether it's good or evil > depends only on how it is used. In others, there are two separate, > mutually exclusive kinds of magic, labelled "light" and "dark" > regardless of the intentions of the people who use them. Which is > Harry Potter? The characters seem to think it's the second kind, but > are they right? boyd: IMO, seems that Jo believes that one's rights stop at the tip of another's nose. Dark Magic, as we know it, includes those spells that can only be used to impinge on others' personal rights. The diary and Imperio both can only be used to remove others' free will, while Crucio can only be used to hurt others. AK, of course, can only be used to kill others. So, while lots of magic has multiple uses, Dark Magic is purely useful against others. Which brings up the question, what about all of those other spells we've seen that are lesser offenses against others? Such as cheering charms, confundis charms, conjunctivitis curses, densaugeo, engorgio, expelliarmus, etc. (thanks to the glorious HP Lexicon)? Our heroes have used some of these spells, assumedly after being taught them in class. And while one can argue that expelliarmus is purely a defensive spell, it also enables the user to then attack a defenseless wizard. And what of the many novelties that Forge have dreamt up? Give them to an unsuspecting person, and they certainly cause a bit of a bother. Dark arts or pranks? Where is the line? Alternatively, the Dark Arts may be simply those magics that have only been pursued by wizards intent on taking over the WW. Note: assumes there have been others. --boyd who thinks Freg & George will either be a key part of the funny defense of Hogwarts or subverted by the Dark Arts they're obviously dallying in From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Aug 5 15:32:31 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 15:32:31 -0000 Subject: Why Voldemort is a fascist/sparing Lily In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108991 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" > > It was in your discussion of the first point that I was hoping you'd > be able to give me some hypothesis/es. Since I don't think up things > on my own very well, I was hoping for ideas, you see. While I'm > convinced that Voldy had a *reason* for suggesting she didn't have to > die--that he really did *mean* it when he said it--I can't come up > with much in the way of WHY, beyond the rather tired ideas of his > somehow being related to Lily or having promised to try to spare her > for someone else, i.e., Severus. > Hells teeth! You want jam on it, you do. It's all very flattering to be thought capable of producing theories at the drop of a hat, if that's what you're asking. But there's nothing very startling springing to mind. Yeah, I never went for that Snape dragging a resisting Lily down to his dungeon, chortling and drooling while envisioning practicing some superior wand-work through the long night either. Nor the 'blood relation' hypothesis. It could be an example of a DD-type choice - and Voldy chose wrongly thus setting up the protection. Or a way of setting up the 'magical contract' theory that I mentioned in the 'Shared Thoughts' post. Dunno. I brood on that scene - something's not right. There should be two green flashes for a start. Nope. Can't help, I'm afraid. I'm not certain of anything except that JKR's hiding something. Kneasy From bamf505 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 15:52:30 2004 From: bamf505 at yahoo.com (Metylda) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 08:52:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Marauders Map In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040805155230.35063.qmail@web12304.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108992 > > Potioncat: > > I am not convinced the map is not Dark Magic. > > Alla: > > "Marauders Map" may have Dark Magic, it may not. > Judging by JKR > attitude to Dark Arts, I am convinced that it does > not, but of course > for now it is just a metathinking argument. bamf here: The only problem I have with thinking that the map is 'evil' is that JK has Harry compare the map to Tom Riddle's Diary (which was evil) and comes to the conclucion that it isn't. While we see this from Harry's POV, I would still say that the map is not evil from that. From an author's standpoint, why would you compare two things, if not to show their differences? Riddle's diary over the course of a year nearly killed Ginny by taking over her 'life essence'. The worst the Marauder's Map has done is insult people. ===== "Why, you speak treason!" -Maid Marian "Fluently!" -Robin Hood -The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) Cub fans are not normal. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 5 16:02:15 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 16:02:15 -0000 Subject: Why Voldemort is a fascist/sparing Lily In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108993 SSSusan, previously: > > It was in your discussion of the first point that I was hoping > > you'd be able to give me some hypothesis/es. Since I don't think > > up things on my own very well, I was hoping for ideas, you see. > > While I'm convinced that Voldy had a *reason* for suggesting she > > didn't have to die--that he really did *mean* it when he said it-- > > I can't come up with much in the way of WHY, beyond the rather > > tired ideas of his somehow being related to Lily or having > > promised to try to spare her for someone else, i.e., Severus. Kneasy retorted: > Hells teeth! You want jam on it, you do. SSSusan: Hee--indeed, I do. Kneasy: > It's all very flattering to be thought capable of producing theories > at the drop of a hat, if that's what you're asking. But there's > nothing very startling springing to mind. SSSusan: Don't worry--I hope to hear views on this from any & all comers. *You* got the direct invitation because of your original statement about there having to be a reason for Voldy's flexibility concerning killing Lily. I was just hoping to pull out any thoughts you might have had already formulated on the topic. Kneasy: > Yeah, I never went for that Snape dragging a resisting Lily down > to his dungeon, chortling and drooling while envisioning practicing > some superior wand-work through the long night either. > > Nor the 'blood relation' hypothesis. > > It could be an example of a DD-type choice - and Voldy chose wrongly > thus setting up the protection. Or a way of setting up the 'magical > contract' theory that I mentioned in the 'Shared Thoughts' post. > > Dunno. I brood on that scene - something's not right. There should > be two green flashes for a start. Nope. Can't help, I'm afraid. > I'm not certain of anything except that JKR's hiding something. SSSusan: Shucks. That's where I sit, as well. ANYBODY ELSE have something besides "blood relation," "saving Lily for Snape," or "just a choice" which would fit with Voldy's having said--and truly meant--that Lily didn't have to die? :-) In other words, I've heard arguments that Voldy simply meant he didn't consider Lily important enough to have to kill or that he was lying, just taunting Harry, by reporting he'd said this to her. But I mean something which could explain the "why?" if he really HAD considered not killing her. Siriusly Snapey Susan From grapfnt at netscape.net Thu Aug 5 10:02:53 2004 From: grapfnt at netscape.net (mindy bindy) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 11:02:53 +0100 Subject: Dumbledore and Lupin Message-ID: <411205CD.5050904@netscape.net> No: HPFGUIDX 108995 Sorry if this has come up before, but I've become intrigued by Puppetmaster!DD and his involvement with Lupin's life. First, he is taken on as headmaster just in time to allow Lupin into school. He takes on the werecub (aww), who is now in the same year as Harry's dad. This gives Lupin a place in normal society and equips him to become a teacher, or at least have some standing in the world. Dumbledore may have done this as an experiment in rehabilitating werewolves. (who are constantly shuttling between being labelled as 'beasts' and 'beings', and so a re sometimes not considered people at all). This goes along with his general outlook, and inviting Lupin to school may have been unusual just because there are very few people bitten at such a young age. However, it starts to seem less coincidental when Dumbledore is the person who offers Lupin the powerful DADA post right after his old scool-friend escapes from prison. Not only that, but Lupin is teaching his *other* old school-friend's Very Important Son how to defend himself. I can't see it explained anywhere the reason why Lupin was hired to be the DADA teacher *that* year, and not, say, five years ago. heather (who is probably seeing patterns where there are none) From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 16:19:26 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 16:19:26 -0000 Subject: Snape not saying "Voldy" (was: OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chapter 24: Occlumency) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108996 Janet wrote: > I don't strongly believe in the Double Agent Snape theory. But if it's > true, then the reason Snape still calls Voldemort "Dark Lord" and not by his > name is because he does not want to get out of the habit of doing so -- as > his first mistake of that kind at a Death Eater meeting (with or without > Voldemort present) might be his last. > Now Cory: Also, remember that at this particular meeting, Snape was in the presence of Harry, and Snape thus knew that Voldemort might be "watching." This might also explain why Snape would call Voldemort the Dark Lord. For the same reason, Snape would not have expained this to Harry when Harry called him out on the matter. --Cory From Meliss9900 at aol.com Thu Aug 5 16:21:27 2004 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 12:21:27 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Half-bloods, Pure-bloods, etc. (was Re: Voldemort CHOSE t... Message-ID: <128.4803c8e8.2e43b887@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108997 In a message dated 08/04/2004 07.15 Central Daylight Time, cldrolet at sympatico.ca writes: > Andromeda didn't have the sense to marry a pure-blood but brought Muggles > into the family line. I can only surmise, then, that the Weasleys have done > the same, married Muggle-borns or half-bloods at some point and are thereby > considered blood traitors by people like the Blacks/Malfoys....but not by people > who don't share that kind of prejudice, Dumbledore for example. > Or perhaps the Weasley's were guilty of a worse crime. They betrayed their "blood" by choosing to fight on the side of the Half Bloods and Muggle borns. Melissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From xtremesk8ergurl2 at aol.com Thu Aug 5 13:01:52 2004 From: xtremesk8ergurl2 at aol.com (xtremesk8ergurl2 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 09:01:52 EDT Subject: Why is Hermione in Gryffindor Message-ID: <1d7.27ace4dc.2e4389c0@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 108998 From: Udderpd > She is the cleverest Witch in eons and the Sorting hat put her in > Gryffindor. Why? > > I can think of two reasons: > > Either she is braver than she is clever. No doubting that she is a very > brave girl but she is also exceptionally clever, still maybe it's this? > > Or the sorting hat put in Gryffindor because it knew that that would be > where she would be needed. Was she put there to help Harry? > > We know that the Sorting Hat does a lot more than just sort First Years. > > She definitely appears to be where she needs to be. > > Can someone else come up with any other ideas? Please! A few ideas I have..while she's obviously very smart, she's not quite the classic "nerd" that we'd picture. She is very brave and is always joining Harry and Ron on their little adventures. I've always gotten the impression that Ravenclaws were smart, intellectual, and clever, but also somewhat aloof and dry, where Hermione is very enthusiastic and adventurous. Looking at myself, I have traits to be in all 4 houses, I'm bold, smart, cunning, and loyal. Even though I'm a straight A student and have been accepted into schools like Brown and NYU and was in all AP classes, I wouldn't see myself as a Ravenclaw because even though I'm smart, I'm not nerdy or a bookworm and school isn't my life. I'd most likely be Slytherin or a Gryffindor even though I had the highest average in my class for Literature, Calculus 2, and Chemistry AP. The Slytherin in me is the person who never gives up until I get what I want and even commits fouls in soccer games. The Gryffindor in me is that I don't dumb myself down to fit in, stand up for what I believe in, participate in extreme sports, was the only girl on the soccer team last year, and got up and was the lead of our school play with no training (we have a huge audience, not a typical school play). I'd say the Hufflepuff in me is the person that spent 2 hours trying to learn to dive yesterday, and still only dive half-right. I also see Hufflepuff traits in Hermione, and probably a lot of Ravenclaws also have Hufflepuff traits. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Aug 5 16:24:41 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 16:24:41 -0000 Subject: What drives WW ? (was Chapter 24: Occlumency) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 108999 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003" w= rote: > > I think it is, put simply, the pursuit of `greatness', for example, > as expressed by Ollivander when he said about Voldemort in > PS/SS: `After all, He Who Must Not Be Named did great things ? > terrible, yes, but great.' > snip> > And the list goes on and on ? the WW's somewhat patronising, often > contemptuous attitude to Muggles is rooted in the fact that Muggles > have no magical powers to command respect. Their hierarchy of > responses to non-human magical creatures is governed strictly by > their magical abilities. On the whole, the WW doesn't muck about with > toughs like centaurs or goblins. Weaker creatures like House Elves > become enslaved. Dangerous dragons are so far subdued that they > appear to be farmed for their meat, blood and every last particle of > their carcasses. > > Between ordinary wizards, it is a rough and tumble of hex or be hexed > (getting a satsuma stuffed up your nose at Christmas seems to be > perfectly normal; no one blinks an eye at the Draco/Crabbe/Goyle heap > on the train each year). No wonder it is so important to get into > Hogwarts and get the best teaching on essential survival skills. And > if you are born without magical ability, heaven help you. The anxiety > in the whole Neville story is hedged about with is he/isn't he going > to be a squib; both Filch and Mrs Figg eloquently convey their anger > and shame at their condition. > Um. Interesting. Let me get this straight (this is putting it crudely) - are you wondering /observing if the WW is in effect one big league table with the inhabitants= magical expertise as a critical factor? And that power grows from the end of a wand? And that HP is a morality tale woven around the use/mis-use of power and ambition? Logical, reasonable and not something I'd find it easy to dispute. Of course wizards aren't all that powerful without their wands, are they? And a wand would be a great boon to Goblins or Centaurs or other beings; it would probably boost their power and standing enormously. But only humans are allowed wands. How very convenient - for humans. Who passed that law? Wizards. What a surprise. Not taking any chances, are they? And a wizard gets his wand when he enters Hogwarts. Why not before? Youngsters practice with broom-sticks, why not wands? Under elevens are taught at home. With no wand what do they learn? What can they learn? Hmm. I'll think on this some more. Kneasy From Meliss9900 at aol.com Thu Aug 5 16:29:32 2004 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 12:29:32 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Half-bloods, Pure-bloods, etc. (was Re: Voldemort CHOSE t... Message-ID: <145.300fd3a3.2e43ba6c@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109000 In a message dated 08/04/2004 08.29 Central Daylight Time, j.balfour at leedsmet.ac.uk writes: > I've just remembered that Ron said something about an uncle being an > accountant (IIRC) so that would of course indicate that there is > some Muggle blood in the family somewhere along the line. > I've always thought that Ron's accountant comment had more to do with squibs than muggles it was made, afterall, in reply a question Harry had asked about Squibs. Maybe a Squib Weasley cousin realised that he'd be able to make a better life for himself in the Muggle world as an accountant than he'd ever be able to do in the WW. Where squibs would be very low on the totem pole. Melissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Aug 5 16:34:54 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 16:34:54 -0000 Subject: Why Voldemort is a fascist/sparing Lily In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109001 > Kneasy: > > Yeah, I never went for that Snape dragging a resisting Lily down > > to his dungeon, chortling and drooling while envisioning practicing > > some superior wand-work through the long night either. > > > > Nor the 'blood relation' hypothesis. > SSSusan: > Shucks. That's where I sit, as well. ANYBODY ELSE have something > besides "blood relation," "saving Lily for Snape," or "just a choice" > which would fit with Voldy's having said--and truly meant--that Lily > didn't have to die? :-) > > In other words, I've heard arguments that Voldy simply meant he > didn't consider Lily important enough to have to kill or that he was > lying, just taunting Harry, by reporting he'd said this to her. But > I mean something which could explain the "why?" if he really HAD > considered not killing her. Jen: I kept Kneasy's quote in here because it was too funny to snip-- thanks for making my day. OK, you asked for any and all comers Susan--beware! I think Voldemort not only didn't look down on Lily as merely a "silly girl", but that he was actually *afraid to kill her*. We know there's something about Lily, something special signified by her eyes, and that is linked to something deeper which LV was aware of and chose to ignore in his quest to kill Harry. To his detriment of course--isn't that his fallback position, always? "Oh, hell, I'll do it anyway." Whether he suspected Lily had done some fancy wandwork on her own to protect Harry, or he knows something about her origins to make him suspect his plan might backfire--whatever it is, LV chose to ignore his initial plan *not* to kill Lily. I'll repeat myself here (don't we all) that JKR uses Unicorn imagery around Lily--pure, innocent, strong--and we know from Book 1 what slaying a Unicorn does! Dumbledore said in OOTP that Voldemort *shed Lily's blood* which he may have been using metaphorically, but it reminds me of Quirrellmort slaying the defenseless unicorn to drink its blood--Voldemort slayed the innocent at Godric's Hollow in hopes of finally drinking from the cup of immortality, and it cursed him. Jen, happy to have another opportunity to delve into that night at Godric's Hollow. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 5 16:39:00 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 16:39:00 -0000 Subject: Weasley Accountant (was: Half-bloods, Pure-bloods, etc.) In-Reply-To: <145.300fd3a3.2e43ba6c@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109002 j.balfour at l... writes: > > I've just remembered that Ron said something about an uncle being > > an accountant (IIRC) so that would of course indicate that there > > is some Muggle blood in the family somewhere along the line. Melissa: > I've always thought that Ron's accountant comment had more to do > with squibs than muggles it was made, afterall, in reply a question > Harry had asked about Squibs. > > Maybe a Squib Weasley cousin realised that he'd be able to make a > better life for himself in the Muggle world as an accountant than > he'd ever be able to do in the WW. SSSusan: I seem to be on a rather pathetic streak of "denseness" today. [Stop sniggering, anyone who's saying, "TODAY??"] But why doesn't the WW need accountants, too? Siriusly Snapey Susan From karen at dacafe.com Thu Aug 5 16:08:55 2004 From: karen at dacafe.com (karen at dacafe.com) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 09:08:55 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <25030.192.35.35.36.1091722135.squirrel@cafemail.edacafe.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109003 RMM: > < Lupin was of the firm belief that Sirius was onto some dark > < arts "from Voldemort" in order to gain entrance to Hogwarts. > < > < Now, if there was no Black-Voldemort connection, and one can > < learn dark arts on ones own, why would Lupin think such a thing? > < > < My point was never that the Marauders were Evil people. My point > < has always been that the Marauders were playing with the dark arts > < under the tutelege of Voldemort. > < > < Some pulled back after it got nasty, and some did not. Some saw > < it for what it was, at least one did not. Alla: > < Would you care to give canonical evidence of ANY of the Marauders > < except Peter, of course playing with Dark Arts with Voldemort being > < their TUTOR? >From kmc: In OOTP, when Harry questions Sirius and Lupin about Snape's memory, it is stated that James hated the dark arts. Since James was one of the creators of the Marauder's Map, I do not believe that the map was created using the Dark Arts. I think we are going to find out that Peter did a lot of ground work setting up Lupin as a traitor. Once James and Sirius believed Lupin was the cause of the leaks, it was probably very easy to move the blame on Sirius. Sirius and Remus each blamed the other and did not compare notes until after the events in the shrieking shack in POA. Sometimes I wish JKR would show us more than just what Harry sees and hears. I would have really liked to been a fly on the wall to conversations between Sirius and Remus as they compared notes. Dumbledore's talk at the end of GOF and the sorting hat's song at the start of OOTP are all about trusting each other and standing together to defeat Voldemort. The Marauders allowed one of their members to seed the group with mistrust probably by using Dark Arts but that occurred after they left Hogwarts, not when they created the map. Did Filch get the map from the creators or was the map passed down to fifth or sixth year Gryffindor? From nadinesaintamour at hotmail.com Thu Aug 5 16:46:26 2004 From: nadinesaintamour at hotmail.com (catimini15) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 16:46:26 -0000 Subject: Snape, Quirellmort question... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109004 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: (snip) > It could be that Snape's "where your loyalties lie" remark referred > in *general terms* to "goodness" or "badness". Or it could be that > it referred generally to supporting DD, since it was DD who brought > the stone to Hogwarts to prevent its being used. That is, if DD > wanted the stone left alone and Quirrell as a fellow Hogwarts staff > member wasn't abiding by that, then Snape could have simply been > pointing out that Quirrell wasn't being loyal to DD--no matter WHAT > his intentions for the stone were. > > So I think Snape could have a ready answer for Voldy in this. He > had no reason to know Voldy was on his way back, and he had no > reason to know Quirrell wasn't a power-hungry wizard in search of > immortality for himself. Or so that's what he could plead. Now me (Nadine) : Hello SSSusan ! I have often thought about Snape's ?where your loyalties lie? comment as well. And I have to say that I am almost tempted to conclude that Snape very well knew that Quirrell was posessed by Vapormort and that he told DD about it. Why ? Because of his Dark Mark tattoo. Of course, we, the readers, did not know anything about DEs and Dark Mark back in PS/SS but JKR knew and it only seems logical that if Harry's scar hurted him when facing Quirrel!Mort, Snape's ugly mark must have been tickling him a bit too. I am sure that Snape was not remotly surprised by that even considering the fact that Voldy was reported to be far away... The Stone was a magnet for any evil lord with immortality fixation. It was wise of DD to move the Stone to Hogwarts in the first place. I sometimes think it was some kind of lure. For all this, I think that Voldy now knows where Snape's loyalties lie. I am afraid he is the one refered to as ?the one who has left me forever.? I would also like to add that IIRC, we have no confirmation whatsoever about Snape whereabouts and doings for the Order. If he is, indeed, spying like we are all supposed to think he is (which I doubt), I certainly hope his duties don't bring him close to Voldy. An encouter with his old master would, I am afraid, end up with a well cast AK and our Snape at the receiving end of it. Vodly does not seemed to be the kind of guy to wait for any excuses, justifications, explanations, etc. his opponent could present him. Kill first and talk after seems to be Voldy's style. Nadine From sherriola at earthlink.net Thu Aug 5 16:54:15 2004 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 10:54:15 -0600 Subject: JKR's comments about the "halkf blood prince" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <009701c47b0c$d7ecc960$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 109005 Hi all, I haven't read every message in the discussions about the identity of the half blood prince. However, I just went to the JKR web site, to read for myself her exact comments. In the FAQ section under about the books, then the subject Is Tom Riddle the Half Blood Prince, she made an interesting comment, that I haven't seen quoted here yet. She says: "'The Half-Blood Prince' might be described as a strand of the overall plot. That strand could be used in a whole variety of ways and back in 1997 I considered weaving it into the story of 'Chamber'. It really didn't fit there, though; it was not part of the story of the basilisk and Riddle's diary, and before long I accepted that it would be better to do it justice in book six. ..." So, she says that "half blood prince" could be described as a strand of the overall plot. I found that interesting, and now I am trying to figure out which particular strand it could be. What does anyone think? Sherry G From eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk Thu Aug 5 17:13:42 2004 From: eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk (iamvine) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 17:13:42 -0000 Subject: Marauders Map In-Reply-To: <20040805155230.35063.qmail@web12304.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109006 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Metylda wrote: > > > > Potioncat: > > > I am not convinced the map is not Dark Magic. > > > > Alla: > > > > "Marauders Map" may have Dark Magic, it may not. > > Judging by JKR > > attitude to Dark Arts, I am convinced that it does > > not, but of course > > for now it is just a metathinking argument. > > bamf here: > > The only problem I have with thinking that the map is > 'evil' is that JK has Harry compare the map to Tom > Riddle's Diary (which was evil) and comes to the > conclucion that it isn't. While we see this from > Harry's POV, I would still say that the map is not > evil from that. From an author's standpoint, why > would you compare two things, if not to show their > differences? Riddle's diary over the course of a year > nearly killed Ginny by taking over her 'life essence'. > The worst the Marauder's Map has done is insult > people. Eleanor replies: I got the feeling she might have put that in because her editor said, "But it's another piece of paper with a mind of its own! Surely Harry would compare it to Riddle's diary!" Spells that make a piece of parchment intelligent are one thing, and are not necessarily evil. A map that helps you spy is naughty, but think of all the really useful and benign things that spell could be made to do, like giving you directions if you were lost. I think to get the diary's ability to possess people, Riddle must have used some other spell as well, and that's the Dark Magic part. So then it would have nothing to do with the artifact being able to think for itself, or where it keeps its brain. Really, why should it? Having said that, I'm not convinced that the map really can think for itself. It could well have been programmed. It can insult people, but we have no evidence that it can hold a proper conversation. (If it could, maybe Harry could use it to talk to Sirius.) It would be much less likely to pass a Turing test than the diary. Eleanor From eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk Thu Aug 5 17:15:15 2004 From: eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk (iamvine) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 17:15:15 -0000 Subject: JKR's comments about the "halkf blood prince" In-Reply-To: <009701c47b0c$d7ecc960$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109007 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sherry Gomes" wrote: > "'The Half-Blood Prince' might be described as a strand of the overall plot. > That strand could be used in a whole variety of ways and back in 1997 I > considered > weaving it into the story of 'Chamber'. It really didn't fit there, though; > it was not part of the story of the basilisk and Riddle's diary, and before > long I accepted that it would be better to do it justice in book six. ..." > > So, she says that "half blood prince" could be described as a strand of the > overall plot. I found that interesting, and now I am trying to figure out > which particular strand it could be. What does anyone think? I think she was saying that it's no strand we've seen yet, because she took it out. Eleanor From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Thu Aug 5 17:16:28 2004 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 17:16:28 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Weasley Accountant (was: Half-bloods, Pure-bloods, etc.) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109008 Siriusly Snapey Susan wants to know: >But why doesn't the WW need accountants, too? And so do I. They have banks and stores. People spend money, save money, donate money (Lucius Malfoy). Of course they must have accountants. If nothing else, remember all those rows of goblins in Gringotts? That's an image straight out of a Dickens-era counting house. I agree that the Weasley relative is probably a Squib, and that is the reason they don't discuss him very often. But you don't need magic to be an accountant. It might help with things like self-sharpening quills and making inkblots vanish, but whether you're a wizard or not, you have to do the calculations yourself. On that level, wizards, squibs, and muggles are equal. (Of course, muggles have calculators and computers ...) Janet Anderson _________________________________________________________________ Dont just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 17:17:26 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 17:17:26 -0000 Subject: Molly & others' vulnerability (DD specifically) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109009 > Magda: > >>> I think Molly's weak point would be that she'd let her anxiety > over her children's (and Harry's) safety blind her to reality. > [snip] > dcgmck: > > 4 - Dumbledore only seems to worry about Harry's feelings and > > welfare when Harry is actually in a sickbed or in Dumbledore's > > presence. The rest of the time he seems content to trust that > > Harry will be protected and/or be able to fend for himself. Even > > when Harry disappears from the maze in GoF, Dumbledore doesn't get proactive, preferring to wait and see how things will sort > > themselves out until he actually deduces that Moody is not the Mad Eye he knows and trusts. > > SSSusan: > Good point. I myself have argued that DD has been willing to allow > Harry a good deal of latitude to test and/or prove himself. I would argue, though, with the GoF example. Since Harry & Cedric carried the portkey with them to the graveyard, how could DD have been proactive in any way? He couldn't go after them, as he didn't know where they were. > > You're right that DD's been willing to stand back & allow Harry-- and Ron & Hermione--to be in dangerous situations. What do you think > that he would do if the DEs actually captured one of the Trio and, > rather than killing them outright, attempted to use them to bargain > for something? > [snip, sorry] dcgmck: Actually, I think Dumbledore has already shown what he would and will do if and when Harry et al are in serious danger: witness the MoM duel between DD and LV/TR. I'd call that seriously proactive. Without more than inference to support me, I'd like to suggest that Dumbledore has no trouble knowing at any given moment where anyone who interests him is. His only real challenge seems to be the ever present time/distance factor, which I assume is why he was too late at Godric's Hollow, if he even tried to get there. Of course, he also didn't know that GH was the place to be because of the charm whose name is currently eluding me... grrr... {My inference is based on the MoM's ability to detect Harry's every underaged wizard infraction, DD's numerous cool tools in his office, and the fact that HP seems to have been watched from both near and far all his life, even before the corporeal return of LV.) From suzchiles at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 15:35:00 2004 From: suzchiles at yahoo.com (suzchiles at yahoo.com) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 08:35:00 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Will Harry learn? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c47b01$c6404120$0400a8c0@domain.actdsltmp> No: HPFGUIDX 109010 > vidar_fe: > Dudley did not fell into the snake room! That only happened in the > film, not in the book! Excellent point. I have just undertaken a nice, slow reread of the entire series and am currently halfway through PS/SS. Even though I have prided myself on being able to separate the films from the books, I was surprised to find out how much movie contamination had crept into understanding. For example, I had completely forgotten that Neville was with the trio when they first met Fluffy. I am thoroughly enjoying the slow reread of the series and look forward to reading the rest of the books. I've read them many, many times over the years, but this time I'm going to concentrate on pure canon and rejecting films, theories, interviews, and everything else. So far, it's been quite interesting. Suzanne From kelleythompson at gbronline.com Thu Aug 5 17:34:41 2004 From: kelleythompson at gbronline.com (Kelley) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 17:34:41 -0000 Subject: "!" and "ESE" (was Re: Shared thoughts) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109011 Meidbh: > Why do you guys use exclamation marks to name your theory > characters (changeling!Harry etc)? Kneasy: > As for !, it's a very convenient shorthand so far as I'm concerned > when used to describe some aspect of a character. Crouch!Moody > is much easier than "Barty Crouch while pretending to be Moody." > So ESE!Snape, Weapon!Harry, Puppetmaster!DD; everybody knows > which facet of the character or theory about the character you're > talking about. > Dunno where it started though. Yep, what he said. Since a few folks have asked about "!" and "ESE" lately, will take this opportunity to explain and also to plug the "Abbreviations and Shorthands" file found here in the Files section in the "Admin_Files" folder. In fact, this file has recently been rearranged a bit, with "!", "ESE", and "Flint" given right at the top, since those are the ones people ask about most often. >From the file: "! as in Evil!Draco, Dead!Ron, Clever!Neville: From the early days of the Internet, the exclamation mark is sometimes pronounced "bang", and used to attribute a characteristic to a character. Evil!Draco is evil, Dead!Ron is, surprisingly, dead." and "ESE: Ever So Evil -- used with a character that appears 'good' in canon, but some list members think might be secretly 'evil', e.g., Pippin's ESE!Lupin theory." --Kelley From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Thu Aug 5 17:24:09 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 17:24:09 -0000 Subject: Marauders Map In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109012 Alla commented: > > > "Marauders Map" may have Dark Magic, it may not. > > bamf then replied: > > JK has Harry compare the map to Tom > > Riddle's Diary (which was evil) and comes to the > > conclucion that it isn't. While we see this from > > Harry's POV, I would still say that the map is not > > evil from that. From an author's standpoint, why > > would you compare two things, if not to show their > > differences? > And then Eleanor answered: > > I got the feeling she might have put that in because her editor said, > "But it's another piece of paper with a mind of its own! Surely Harry > would compare it to Riddle's diary!" Yb thinks (but not very hard, it's still morning here): I really don't see the editor having the gall (or something that sounds like it) to demand that JK put an explanation in, illustrating the differences between the diary and the map. I think that quote was certainly put in intentionally, whether to throw us off the trail or to give us a hint about future allegiances. ~Yb From Batchevra at aol.com Thu Aug 5 17:47:31 2004 From: Batchevra at aol.com (Batchevra at aol.com) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 13:47:31 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's choice of memories for the pensieve Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109013 In a message dated 8/5/04 10:43:52 AM Eastern Daylight Time, hpfanmatt at gmx.net writes: >The narrator also refers to the Pensieve at least once more as "Dumbledore's," without explicit reference to Harry's perspective (ch. 28). Finally, when Dumbledore takes out the Pensieve to show Harry his memory of the prophecy (ch. 37), Harry again recognizes it: "Dumbledore got to his feet and walked past Harry to the black cabinet that stood beside Fawkes's perch. He bent down, slid back a catch and took from inside it the shallow stone basin, carved with runes around the edges, in which Harry had seen his father tormenting Snape." While of course it is possible that Harry could be mistaken about the identity of the Pensieve in Snape's office, those passages certainly are not written in a way that allows for much doubt.... -- Matt< While it is possible that Snape borrowed Dumbledore's Pensieve, IMHO, Snape could have his own. I ask you how many Pensieves has Harry seen before he has Occlumency lessons? We don't know how many Pensieves there are nor if they are rare items. Until I am told differently by JKR in an interview or in the books, I will think that there could be more than one Pensieve at Hogwarts. Batchevra [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Meliss9900 at aol.com Thu Aug 5 17:48:01 2004 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 13:48:01 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Weasley Accountant (was: Half-bloods, Pure-bloods, etc.) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109014 In a message dated 08/05/2004 12.17 Central Daylight Time, norek_archives2 at hotmail.com writes: > I agree that the Weasley relative is probably a Squib, and that is the > reason they don't discuss him very often. But you don't need magic to be an > > accountant. It might help with things like self-sharpening quills and > making inkblots vanish, but whether you're a wizard or not, you have to do > the calculations yourself. On that level, wizards, squibs, and muggles are > equal. (Of course, muggles have calculators and computers ...) > > > Janet Anderson > Just because they have (or would have use for) accountants doesn't mean that a squib would be able to make a decent living at it in the WW. Using the limited view of the lives of the only 2 Squibs we've met to date as a basis for judgement, I'd say not. We can use how Lupin is treated to see how the WW treats those that are "different". I doubt a squib -- even if he was a whiz with numbers -- would be treated any differently in the WW. Melissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Thu Aug 5 17:31:40 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 17:31:40 -0000 Subject: JKR's comments about the "half blood prince" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109015 Sherry wrote: > > So, she [JK] says that "half blood prince" could be described as > > a strand of the overall plot. I found that interesting, and I am > > trying to figure out which particular strand it could be. What > > does anyone think? Eleanor answered: > I think she was saying that it's no strand we've seen yet, because > she took it out. Now Yblitzka, for clarification: JK has commented on her site that the HBP title was the original title for CoS, but she removed the HBP storyline from that book, saving it for a later book when it would be more relevant. There is no HBP storyline in CoS, but the HBP title /does/ relate to something Harry discovers in CoS. In short, we /have/ seen a "strand" of the HBP, in that when we read Book 6, we will all go running for CoS at some point and yell: */AHA!!!!! THAT'S WHAT SHE MEANT!!! /* (or something similar.) ~Yb From manawydan at ntlworld.com Thu Aug 5 17:50:45 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 18:50:45 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why Voldemort is a fascist... References: <1091654229.8853.50826.m22@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <000b01c47b14$bcc66ee0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 109016 Nora wrote: >The WW seems to be a far way from having any strongly functioning >democratic (small d) institutions, and that is nothing but help for >a would-be dictator. Of course, they could BE there, and just not >have been mentioned yet... :) It certainly isn't a democracy, that's true enough. The bureaucracy sucks in anyone who wants to become involved in politics as well as those who just want to administrate, and folk like Fudge float to the top after negotiating its murky waters and serpentine inner workings. What that means, of course, is that any sort of oppositional politics can only be done through conspiratorial means. So whatever else you can condemn Voldemort for doing and being, running a secret organisation isn't one of them. That's the only way that he'd be able to do it. As to whether he's a fascist, I thought the analysis was actually very good in placing the DEs politically, though I'd probably agree with Kneasy that Voldemort sees himself as an Evil Overlord rather than the Great Saviour of a corrupt society. Another difficulty with the theory would be the apparent nature of the DEs as an elite conspiratorial group rather than having any sort of populist basis. It is perhaps the "pureblood aristocracy" who are Voldemort's natural audience, perhaps looking for some sort of return to some sort of former glory. Interested to see how you feel about this angle on things Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From iris4475 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 17:46:26 2004 From: iris4475 at yahoo.com (Liz Harrell) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 10:46:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: JKR's comments about the "halkf blood prince" ("strand of CoS") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040805174626.71859.qmail@web21207.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109017 Sherry wrote: > "'The Half-Blood Prince' might be described as a strand of the > overall plot. That strand could be used in a whole variety of > ways and back in 1997 I considered weaving it into the story of > 'Chamber'. It really didn't fit there, though; it was not part > of the story of the basilisk and Riddle's diary, and before long > I accepted that it would be better to do it justice in book six." > > So, she says that "half blood prince" could be described as a strand > of the overall plot. I found that interesting, and now I am trying > to figure out which particular strand it could be. What does anyone > think? Eleanor wrote: > I think she was saying that it's no strand we've seen yet, because > she took it out. Liz Harrell: I think there still is a strand of the HBP line somewhere in CoS. Characters have popped in briefly before making their "big debut". For example, Sirius Black was mentioned in SS once and then we all know his role in PoA. In CoS, Lucius Malfoy came into the mix (now reoccuring in books 2-5...and we more than likely haven't seen the last of him). I've heard every spectulation from Colin Creevey to Hagrid as far as the Prince's identity, but evidence would seem to suggest that we already have the name of the HBP just not details. After all, we didn't know the details on Sirius until book 3. Then again, it may just be Ms. Rowling's way of keeping us pouring over the books day after day until book 6 is finally published. :) From Meliss9900 at aol.com Thu Aug 5 17:56:56 2004 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 13:56:56 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Weasley Accountant (was: Half-bloods, Pure-bloods, etc.) Message-ID: <67.2fb79ab1.2e43cee8@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109018 In a message dated 08/05/2004 11.41 Central Daylight Time, susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net writes: > SSSusan: > I seem to be on a rather pathetic streak of "denseness" today. [Stop > sniggering, anyone who's saying, "TODAY??"] But why doesn't the WW > need accountants, too? > > Siriusly Snapey Susan > No one says that they don't. Its just a matter of how Squibs would be seen in the WW. The WW is very mistrustful of those that are different. Lupin is proof of that. I just don't how a squib would fare any better. The cousin just happens to possess a talent that would afford him a good living in the wider Muggle world. Melissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk Thu Aug 5 17:58:51 2004 From: eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk (iamvine) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 17:58:51 -0000 Subject: Marauders Map In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109019 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bex" wrote: > Alla commented: > > > > "Marauders Map" may have Dark Magic, it may not. > > > > bamf then replied: > > > JK has Harry compare the map to Tom > > > Riddle's Diary (which was evil) and comes to the > > > conclucion that it isn't. While we see this from > > > Harry's POV, I would still say that the map is not > > > evil from that. From an author's standpoint, why > > > would you compare two things, if not to show their > > > differences? > > > And then Eleanor answered: > > > > I got the feeling she might have put that in because her editor > said, > > "But it's another piece of paper with a mind of its own! Surely > Harry > > would compare it to Riddle's diary!" > > Yb thinks (but not very hard, it's still morning here): > I really don't see the editor having the gall (or something that > sounds like it) to demand that JK put an explanation in, illustrating > the differences between the diary and the map. I think that quote was > certainly put in intentionally, whether to throw us off the trail or > to give us a hint about future allegiances. Eleanor again: I said that because it's the sort of thing my critiquers used to tell me all the time. ("Used to" because I am not in a critique group at the moment.) They'd see connections in the story that I hadn't. I would have said "beta reader" not "editor" but I don't know whether JKR would have had any. Eleanor From romulus at hermionegranger.us Thu Aug 5 17:54:25 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 17:54:25 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109020 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" > > Alla: > > > > I am incredibly confused. What are you talking about? Would you > care > > to give canonical evidence of ANY of the Marauders except Peter, of > > course playing with Dark Arts with Voldemort being their TUTOR? > > Thanks Alla, Okay let me build my case on circumstantial evidence. Most of it appears in the Shrieking Shack scene (in PoA) with Moony, Padfoot, and Wormtail in attendance. Put yourself in their shoes at that moment. [Note: The Marauders at one time were a VERY TIGHT KNIT group.] Each is saying some things about the others, and please note....none of the others are denying outright was is being spoken. Now, let me give examples. 1. <> Note: Lupin says that Black was using dark arts learned from Voldemort. What does Black respond with? "NO NO NO, I had nothing to do with Voldemort!!!!" No. He responds with "what does Snape have to do with it?" This implies that Black has been doing something with Voldemort, for he does not deny it. 2. <> Black and Pettigrew are friends at this point, for Black is able to have Pettigrew become Secret-Keeper and convince the Potters of that arrangement. Now, see this: <<"You knew Sirius was going to break out of Azkaban?" said Lupin, his brow furrowed. "When nobody has ever done it before?" "He's got dark powers the rest of us can only dream of!" Pettigrew shouted shrilly. "How else did he get out of there? I suppose He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named taught him a few tricks!" Black started to laugh, a horrible, mirthless laugh that filled the whole room. "Voldemort, teach me tricks?" he said. Pettigrew flinched as though Black had brandished a whip at him. "What, scared to hear your old master's name?" said Black. I don't blame you, Peter. His lot aren't very happy with you, are they?">> Again, Black does not deny an association with Voldemort, he only snorts at the term "tricks". And: <<"Sirius, Sirius, what could I have done? The Dark Lord... you have no idea... he has weapons you can't imagine.... I was scared, Sirius, I was never brave like you and Remus and James. I never meant it to happen.... He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named forced me --" "DON'T LIE!" bellowed Black. "YOU'D BEEN PASSING INFORMATION TO HIM FOR A YEAR BEFORE LILY AND JAMES DIED! YOU WERE HIS SPY!">> Pettigrew had been spying for Voldemort for at least a year before the Potters died. Yet, he was on good terms with Black and the Potters. So, what does this lead us to? Sirius Black had an association with Voldemort, Pettigrew had an association with Voldemort, Lupin had a relationship with Voldemort [see 3. below], and maybe Potter had a relationship with Voldemort. See what Wormtail states above: "The Dark Lord... you have no idea... he has weapons you can't imagine.... I was scared, Sirius, I was never brave like you and Remus and James." Wormtail puts the other Marauders all in the same group as being brave, as if they were able to stand up to Voldemort where Wormtail was not. This implies heavily that the Marauders, either collectively or individually had some sort of relationship with Voldemort, and we see from the narration that that relationship involved "learning" and "teaching". Hence, the idea that Voldemort was tutoring some or all of them comes into one's head. Now, maybe James Potter rejected the idea outright, but we see that Black did not, Pettigrew did not..., and Lupin did not because: 3. <<"Not if he thought I was the spy, Peter," said Lupin. "I assume that's why you didn't tell me, Sirius?" he said casually over Pettigrews head. "Forgive me, Remus," said Black. "Not at all, Padfoot, old friend," said Lupin, who was now rolling up his sleeves. "And will you, in turn, forgive me for believing you were the spy?">> Black believed Lupin was spying for Voldemort!!! Why would he unless he knew Lupin was involved with Voldemort in some fashion?? Conclusion: All of the Marauders were involved with Voldemort. Some of the Marauders more than the others. All the Marauders can use Voldemort's name with ease, implying that they are not under Voldemort's sway or afraid of him -- that is, all except Wormtail. Also, Voldemort was doing some kind of instruction with them as the nature of the relationship revolved around "learning" and "teaching". Heck, who knows? Maybe Voldemort was teaching at Hogwarts for a time! RMM From lorelei3dg at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 18:01:03 2004 From: lorelei3dg at yahoo.com (lorelei3dg) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 18:01:03 -0000 Subject: Halloween 81 [Re: To Where To When (TimeTurning that may make sense)] In-Reply-To: <00b701c47ada$85176a60$69c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109021 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: DD & Hagrid would not have known where to go then. They would have had to wait until later until someone who had been told the location told them the Harry had disappeared (or told him the location and he discovered Harry was gone). I'm beginning to think that the Fidelius Charm evaporates when the house in question is destroyed. As we've discussed before, even those who know the whereabouts of the house are blocked from entering by the Fidelius Charm. They have to be specifically told by the Secret-Keeper. Yet here we have Hagrid and Sirius both at the house only a short while after the attack... DD would have known where the house was because he suggested he be the Secret-Keeper himself, he would have 'forgotten' the address, once Wormtail was made Secret-Keeper, but once the house was destroyed, he would know the address again and therefore be alerted to the fact that something had happened there. Sirius would know by the same method (he was James' best friend, he would know where they lived, until the Fidelius Charm was performed), then DD only had to tell Hagrid so he could go and get Harry. We don't need DD - or anyone else - to find Wormtail and get the address out of him, DD already knew. > Lorel: It might be simpler than this. Isn't there some comment in OotP that even though Harry knew the address of the Order, he would be restricted by magic so that he would not be able to mention it to people outside the Order? Also, even though DD is the Secret Keeper for 12 GP, others know of the address. My hunch is that others (DD, Sirius, and Hagrid, at least) did know where the Potters were staying in Godric's Hollow, but would not have been able to pass that information to anyone who was not "in on" that secret - just like the members of the Order in OotP. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 18:17:44 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 18:17:44 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109022 RMM: > Alla, Okay let me build my case on circumstantial evidence. > Most of it appears in the Shrieking Shack scene (in PoA) with Moony, > Padfoot, and Wormtail in attendance. Put yourself in their shoes at > that moment. > [Note: The Marauders at one time were a VERY TIGHT KNIT group.] > > Each is saying some things about the others, and please note....none > of the others are denying outright was is being spoken. Now, let me > give examples. Alla: OK, thanks. Now I am at least able to follow your line of argument. Needless to say I strongly disagree with it, but at least you don't have me scratching my head anymore. :o) RMM: snip. > Note: Lupin says that Black was using dark arts learned from > Voldemort. What does Black respond with? "NO NO NO, I had nothing > to do with Voldemort!!!!" No. He responds with "what does Snape > have to do with it?" Alla: Sirius responded to the part of the wentence which begged for response. He KNOWS that Remus KNOWS now that he is not a traytor, Peter is. I don't see why he has to defend himself against association with Voldemort. Remus talks about his past state of mind, not the present one. RMM: > This implies that Black has been doing something with Voldemort, for > he does not deny it. Alla: Not necessarily. See above. RMM: snip. > Now, see this: > <<"You knew Sirius was going to break out of Azkaban?" said Lupin, his > brow furrowed. "When nobody has ever done it before?" > "He's got dark powers the rest of us can only dream of!" Pettigrew > shouted shrilly. "How else did he get out of there? I suppose > He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named taught him a few tricks!" > Black started to laugh, a horrible, mirthless laugh that filled the > whole room. > "Voldemort, teach me tricks?" he said. > Pettigrew flinched as though Black had brandished a whip at him. > "What, scared to hear your old master's name?" said Black. I don't > blame you, Peter. His lot aren't very happy with you, are they?">> > > Again, Black does not deny an association with Voldemort, he only > snorts at the term "tricks". Alla: But in that sentence Sirius did deny his association with Vodemort. He again responds very directly to what Peter says. Peter accused him that Voldemort taught him tricks and Sirius negates that. Why did he have to say more than was asked? RMM: > Pettigrew had been spying for Voldemort for at least a year before > the Potters died. Yet, he was on good terms with Black and the > Potters. Alla: Yes, of course he was. Because they DID NOT KNOW that he was a spy at the moment. As you said, Marauders were very tight group at one point.Why exactly they were supposed to stop associating with Peter? RMM: > This implies heavily that the Marauders, either collectively or > individually had some sort of relationship with Voldemort, and we see > from the narration that that relationship involved "learning" > and "teaching". Hence, the idea that Voldemort was tutoring some or > all of them comes into one's head. Alla: Well, I appreciate you showing me what your reasoning was, but I still find you case to be a weak one. Sorry! :o) RMM: > Black believed Lupin was spying for Voldemort!!! Why would he unless > he knew Lupin was involved with Voldemort in some fashion?? Alla: That is a VERY INTERESTING question. We all want to know what caused Sirius to doubt Lupin and vice versa. What reasons did Sirius have to mistrust one of his best friends? I don't know. I think that peter had a hand in it. You know, to detect suspicion from himself as a real spy. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 5 18:18:33 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 18:18:33 -0000 Subject: Molly & others' vulnerability (DD specifically) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109023 dcgmck: >>> 4 - Dumbledore only seems to worry about Harry's feelings and welfare when Harry is actually in a sickbed or in Dumbledore's presence. The rest of the time he seems content to trust that Harry will be protected and/or be able to fend for himself. Even when Harry disappears from the maze in GoF, Dumbledore doesn't get proactive, preferring to wait and see how things will sort themselves out until he actually deduces that Moody is not the Mad Eye he knows and trusts.<<< SSSusan: >> Good point. I myself have argued that DD has been willing to allow Harry a good deal of latitude to test and/or prove himself. I would argue, though, with the GoF example. Since Harry & Cedric carried the portkey with them to the graveyard, how could DD have been proactive in any way? He couldn't go after them, as he didn't know where they were. You're right that DD's been willing to stand back & allow Harry-- and Ron & Hermione--to be in dangerous situations. What do you think that he would do if the DEs actually captured one of the Trio and, rather than killing them outright, attempted to use them to bargain for something?<< dcgmck: > Actually, I think Dumbledore has already shown what he would and > will do if and when Harry et al are in serious danger: witness the > MoM duel between DD and LV/TR. I'd call that seriously proactive. > Without more than inference to support me, I'd like to suggest that > Dumbledore has no trouble knowing at any given moment where anyone > who interests him is. His only real challenge seems to be the ever > present time/distance factor, which I assume is why he was too late > at Godric's Hollow, if he even tried to get there. Of course, he > also didn't know that GH was the place to be because of the charm > whose name is currently eluding me... grrr... SSSusan: Fidelius. :-) So your belief is that DD would GO AFTER Harry (or Ron or Hermione), as he did in the MoM and duke it out. Yes. It does seem more "DD'ish" to take action rather than to be forced into negotiations of any kind. On your other point, it does seem that DD frequently knows where people who interest him are/when he needs to return from wherever he is, etc. Does it hold true for knowing where VOLDY is, too, do you think? It seems to me that it must not. In particular I'm thinking of Quirrell!Mort. DD may have suspected Voldy was near to returning and may have suspected--with Snape's help--that Q. was in on it, but I can't imagine that he knew he was under Q.'s turban.... Siriusly Snapey Susan From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Thu Aug 5 18:33:15 2004 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 18:33:15 -0000 Subject: Hermione Granger's birthday In-Reply-To: <000901c47a68$54f7a600$bcde6251@kathryn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109024 --- Kathryn Cawte wrote: > > Historically (and I'm talking Ancient History here) > September was the seventh month because July and > August didn't exist (hence the name for goodness > sake! Sept, meaning seven, followed by Oct, 8, Nov, 9 > (OK I'm a little more shaky on that one - why not > Non?) and Dec, 10). July and August being later > 'inventions' named after Augustus and Julius Caesar. Actually, "novem" is Latin for nine; the "non-" root comes from Greek (e.g. "nonagon" is a nine-sided polygon, just as a seven-sided polygon is a "heptagon," from the Greek root, not a "septagon," as it would be using the Latin root). Also, the two months that were added to the ten-month ancient Roman calendar were January and February. July and August were part of the original calendar as "Quintilis" and "Sextilis"; the names were later changed in honor of Julius and Augustus. > Since JKR seems to like her classical history/ > mythology/Latin I have to admit I wouldn't be *stunned* > if it turned out to be September she was referring to. > However since the books are the Harry Potter books it > might be somewhat, hmm can't think of the right adjective > there, disingenuous? cynical? irritating as heck? to find > out that Hermione is our heroine after all and will kill > Voldemort. I agree. Also, more specifically, to the extent that Rowling has thought about the issue at all, it appears that the WW has fully adopted muggle calendar and time conventions. Viz. the thread a couple of days ago about time zones/daylight savings time, and the use of muggle conventions in all sorts of historical dates (founding of Ollivander's; dates on Chocolate Frog cards; etc.). -- Matt From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Aug 5 18:48:15 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 18:48:15 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109025 > Alla: > > OK, Potioncat, you know, I love your posts dearly, right? So, maybe > you can help me out? When, when, when did Voldie tutor Marauders? :o) snip > > Potioncat: Hi Alla! Oops! The post I was replying to (sorry, don't recall the author) had suggested that LV had tutored the Marauders at some point, using a quote from Lupin as the basis. I do not think LV ever taught the Marauders. But I have long thought that they may have dabbled in Dark Arts themselves. I'm not sure if the map is completely harmless/Regular Magic or if it has Dark Arts in it, but I do suspect the latter. Now, along the idea of the original post. Any of the Marauders who betrayed the Order and turned to LV would have most likely learned some new skills. So far we only have canon for Pettigrew doing that. Potioncat who replied to this post without reading the other replies and probably just pre-said that was already said... From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Aug 5 19:10:52 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 19:10:52 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109026 > RMM: > > Black believed Lupin was spying for Voldemort!!! Why would he > unless > > he knew Lupin was involved with Voldemort in some fashion?? > > > > Alla: > > > That is a VERY INTERESTING question. We all want to know what caused > Sirius to doubt Lupin and vice versa. Potioncat: RMM whether anyone turns out to agree with you, you've brought up a whole new way of looking at this. :-) I do think the logic above is circular. To think Black must have suspected Lupin because Lupin had known LV... Rather I think the Order knew there was a spy in their midst and had been for about a year. We know it had become a suspicious time. So, Lupin had suspected Black had gone to LV. Black thought Lupin had gone to LV. But, actually neither one had. ...now however, if you believe in ESE!Black or ESE!Lupin, that changes the picture! Potioncat who really needs to stop now. From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Aug 5 19:13:28 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 19:13:28 -0000 Subject: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 (Was Re: Dumbledore VS. Voldemort) In-Reply-To: <001801c47af8$4f93f070$75fbe2d1@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109027 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: Cathy: > If we believe that CoS took place in 1992 (500 years after Nick's deathday of 1492), and the CoS was opened exactly 50 years before, then Riddle is 16 in 1942 (he says he put his 16 year old self into the diary - and is therefore, probably in 6th year at Hogwarts.) DD would only have needed to be a teacher at Hogwarts for one more year, possibly two (1944), until Riddle graduated. Geoff: Just for confirmation and completeness, we know that Riddle was in the Fifth Year when the Chamber was opened... 'His heart was hammering. Riddle's reply came quickly, his writing becoming untidier as though he was hurrying to tell all he knew. "Of course I know about the Chamber of Secrets. In my day, they told us it was a legend, that it did not exist. But this was a lie. In my fifth year, the Chamber was opened and the monster attacked several students,finally killing one...."' (COS "The Very Secret Diary" p.180 UK edition) It is normal for a student to turn 16 during their Fifth Year (current Year Eleven), which raises an interesting point of information. The Chamber was re-opened in the autumn of 1992, Harry first hearing the Basilisk in September and the first petrification being on Hallowe'en night. If the 50th anniversary is spot-on accurate, then the previous opening was in the autumn of 1942; hence Riddle was in the Fifth Year in 1942/43. So, if he went on into the Sixth Form, he would have been in the Lower Sixth in 1943/44 and the Upper Sixth in 1944/45 so he would be just be on the point of finishing at Hogwarts or would have just finished when Grindelwald was defeated. Bearing in mind that we've tended to speculate on the group that this happened perhaps a year or so after he left Hogwarts, it's only just clicked with me when I started working the timescale out that the events could have been concurrent. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 19:33:09 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 19:33:09 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109029 > Potioncat: snip. > Rather I think the Order knew there was a spy in their midst and had > been for about a year. We know it had become a suspicious time. So, > Lupin had suspected Black had gone to LV. Black thought Lupin had > gone to LV. But, actually neither one had. Alla: I think this is exactly what happened, but of course it needs to be confirmed. I also think that Lupin's 12 years before he started teaching need to be accounted for. I think it is very possible that he was one of the Dumbledore's spies. Potioncat: > ...now however, if you believe in ESE!Black or ESE!Lupin, that > changes the picture! > > Potioncat who really needs to stop now. Alla: LOL! Please not you too. :o) From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Thu Aug 5 19:47:30 2004 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 19:47:30 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why Voldemort is a fascist... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109030 "Nora Renka" suggested: >I would posit, and boy will I do a little dance of glee if THIS one >comes out right, that Voldemort also offers an ascent to glory for >the poor but pureblooded and ambitious...Snape? Percy. :/ If he gets thrown out of the Ministry in the wake of the Fudge fiasco, and has too much pride or too little sense to either go back to his family or get another job (preferably both), he may think he might as well try an "alternative lifestyle." I'd like to believe he wouldn't sink as low as working for Voldemort *knowingly* -- but my opinion of him has been at rock bottom ever since he failed to get in touch with any member of his family during the time when his father might have been dying. Janet Anderson _________________________________________________________________ Planning a family vacation? Check out the MSN Family Travel guide! http://dollar.msn.com From omphale at onetel.com Thu Aug 5 19:53:21 2004 From: omphale at onetel.com (saraquel_omphale) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 19:53:21 -0000 Subject: Lily as double agent (was Why Voldemort is a fascist/sparing Lily) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109031 > > SSSusan: > > Shucks. That's where I sit, as well. ANYBODY ELSE have something > > besides "blood relation," "saving Lily for Snape," or "just a > choice" > > which would fit with Voldy's having said--and truly meant--that > Lily > > didn't have to die? :-) > > OK folks, this is one of those cross polinating posts, because soemwhere else there are conversations about who is the spy round here. How about Lily as a double agent? (I hesitate to do a ESE!Lily for fear of AV curses on my doorstep tomorrow morning!) LV would then not think that she needed to be killed. And there is that curious thing that Hagrid says in PS (p45) "suppose the myst'ry is why You-Know-Who never tried to get 'em on his side before ... probably knew they were too close ter Dumbledore ter want anythin ter do with the Dark Side. Maybe he thought he could persuade em ..." Now this indicates that Hagrid is not aware of the prophecy, but it also makes it sound as though Hagrid thought that Lily and James were obvious targets for LV to recruit - why is that I ask myself? I could understand it if Wormtail were speaking, as in LV had gained his allegiance and was trying to pull the other marauders in. Getting a bit too far down the wine glass to take this further tonight. It just occured to me when reading the thread, so I haven't thought it out any further. Maybe this one has already been thrashed out. I've recently taken to exploring the magical posts and where to find them - highly recommended reading, they say history repeats. Is there anything that hasn't been said before? Saraquel From ms_melanie1999 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 20:01:13 2004 From: ms_melanie1999 at yahoo.com (Miss Melanie) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 13:01:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape not saying "Voldy" (was: OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chapter 24: Occlumency) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040805200113.96324.qmail@web53409.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109032 SSSusan: These ideas are helpful in understanding why Snape might not be willing to say "Voldemort" and why he isn't comfortable with others around him doing so. I still have a question, though. If we agree that, for whatever reason, Snape won't say "Voldemort," why does he still continue to use the term "Dark Lord" instead of "He Who Must Not Be Named" or "You Know Who"? Doesn't "The Dark Lord" imply more respect or reverence for Voldy than we'd like to see Snape offering up? Siriusly Snapey Susan My reply: Which is why I originally asked the question about the Dark Lord. I mean to me it makes Harry suddenly suspicious of Snape, I mean after all the only other people Harry has really heard call him that are Voldemort's followers. I'm not saying that I don't trust Snape, I'm just saying there is a great deal more to him than what we are assuming. But the other question that I have to ask in relation to the whole calling Voldemort by his name is...Why does Draco cringe? He doesn't have a dark mark..so what explains his reaction? ~Melanie --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Aug 5 20:19:52 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 20:19:52 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: <25030.192.35.35.36.1091722135.squirrel@cafemail.edacafe.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109033 Karen: > I think we are going to find out that Peter did a lot of ground work > setting up Lupin as a traitor. Once James and Sirius believed Lupin was > the cause of the leaks, it was probably very easy to move the blame on > Sirius. Sirius and Remus each blamed the other and did not compare notes > until after the events in the shrieking shack in POA. Jen: I've always wondered what turned Sirius/James against Lupin, and your comment explains it, Karen! James & Sirius would no doubt trust each other, but be casting a wary eye at both Pettigrew & Lupin. Peter, sensing this, picked that opportunity to save his own skin and shift suspicion to Lupin (he would know better than to try to get James to suspect Sirius). I suspect Lupin was involved in trying to find work or some activity with the Order, so he was spending less & less time with his friends. In a time of high suspicion, any change in activity is viewed negatively. And like you said, with the death of the Potters, Peter just shifted the blame to Sirius, with 'evidence' to back it up. Karen: > Dumbledore's talk at the end of GOF and the sorting hat's song at the > start of OOTP are all about trusting each other and standing together to > defeat Voldemort. > The Marauders allowed one of their members to seed the group with > mistrust probably by using Dark Arts but that occurred after they left > Hogwarts, not when they created the map. > > Did Filch get the map from the creators or was the map passed down to > fifth or sixth year Gryffindor? Jen: I supposed Filch got the Map from the Marauders (maybe after the Prank?) and it never saw the light of day until Fred & George discovered it many years later. It would make sense the map got passed from one infamous set of troublemakers to another!! I think the Marauders would hang onto the map otherwise, if it wasn't confiscated from them at Hogwarts. From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Aug 5 20:25:24 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 20:25:24 -0000 Subject: Why Voldemort is a fascist... (LONG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109034 > Kneasy: > And what is Salazars 'noble work'? Has it been spelled out? And he hasn't 'created' an historical persona - he is one. No sleight of hand, no fraudulent claims, he is the heir of Slytherin. But I've never heard the DEs say so. Do they even know? Has he told them of his origins? I'd say not, judging by Bella's reactions in the Ministry. < Pippin: The Heir of Slytherin is a shadow identity. Neither Voldemort nor Riddle dare claim it, the problem being that those who would be impressed by the title would regard Riddle's claim to it as irretrievably tainted by his father's blood. So the Heir does his work in secret, and there is always someone no pureblood would accept as the heir conveniently placed to take the blame. To be consistent, Lucius could never regard Riddle as the true heir of Slytherin, but, slippery as he is, he would have no problem with perpetrating an Heir of Slytherin hoax, either on his own or as an agent of present day Voldemort. IMO, Tom must hate purebloods as much he does Muggles, and Halfbloods most of all, for they are most like him. If the DE's think that they are bound to their master by a shared bloodline or ideology, they are kidding themselves. The true bond is their sense of rejection. Nora did an excellent job of pointing out how the purebloods, who would seem to have the Ministry on a string, nonetheless feel disowned. It is a sense of rejection that made Ginny vulnerable--"how her brothers *tease* her, how she had to come to school with second hand robes and books, how"--Riddle's eyes glinted--"how she didn't think famous, good, great Harry Potter would *ever* like her...." --CoS ch 17 There's Kreacher, held in contempt by Sirius, there's Crouch Jr, whose father was too busy for him, Wormtail, always the tagalong, and Quirrell, who sought "first hand experience" fighting the Dark Arts. Could it be that he felt snubbed without it? If Voldemort looked into the Mirror of Erised would he see himself standing on a balcony, accepting the cheers of the throng? Or kissing pureblood babies? I don't think so. The Teutonic parallel for Voldemort is less Hitler than Wagner's Alberich, who renounced all love for the sake of wealth and power. > Kneasy: > Stalins victims weren't armed as his thugs were.< Ah, Kneasy, it's not enough to be armed. Most people have to be trained to kill. And AK is no machine gun. It takes eye contact with your intended victim and a fair amount of magic behind it--more than most wizards can manage if the fight at the MOM is any guide. Pippin From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 20:29:55 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 13:29:55 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Molly & others' vulnerability (was: Wizard/Muggle "Radar") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040805202955.49907.qmail@web50106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109035 > SSSusan: > Hi, Magda. HunterGreen, in 108818, addressed the fact that it > wasn't just Molly who made efforts to keep the kids ignorant-- > Lupin, DD, McGonagall & Fudge also did this. So I'm not sure that > this alone shows Molly has a very limited understanding of what the > Order is about. > Hi, SSSusan. Yes, that's true but of all the adults Molly was the only one who personalized it, who made it sound that she was the only one who cared about the kids/Harry, who got emotional when she got voted down by the others and who took Arthur's disagreeing with her almost as a personal betrayal. Perhaps I'm biased since I haven't liked Molly since the dress robes incident in GoF but I really think she's one of those people who prefers to deny unplesantness until she can't anymore and then never has a backup plan to deal with the consequences. Okay, if she lost two brothers to Voldemort, she obviously doesn't want to lose any more family; completely understandable. But she's not realistic in the way she deals with things and Harry was prevented from spending a lot of time with Sirius - important, guy-bonding, tell-me-about-my-parents- time - because she kept interupting them or would insist on Harry helping clean. The woman just has no sensitivity at all. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 20:35:03 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 20:35:03 -0000 Subject: Molly & others' vulnerability (DD specifically) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109036 > SSSusan: > Fidelius. :-) dcgmck: Thanks. :-) > Siriusly Snapey Susan: > So your belief is that DD would GO AFTER Harry (or Ron or Hermione), as he did in the MoM and duke it out. Yes. It does seem > more "DD'ish" to take action rather than to be forced into > negotiations of any kind. dcgmck: I also believe that Molly would do the same. Though I lack canonical proof, she seems to be Gryffindor material as much as any of the others. Given the opportunity, I don't see her falling apart; rather, she's far more likely to accept reality and deal with it pragmatically than she has hypothetical situations. It's the fear of possibilities, not reality that daunts her. > SSiriusly Snapey Susan: > On your other point, it does seem that DD frequently knows where > people who interest him are/when he needs to return from wherever he is, etc. Does it hold true for knowing where VOLDY is, too, do you think? It seems to me that it must not. In particular I'm thinking of Quirrell!Mort. DD may have suspected Voldy was near to returning and may have suspected--with Snape's help--that Q. was in on it, but I can't imagine that he knew he was under Q.'s turban.... > > dcgmck: While I'm reluctant to credit DD with omniscience, he wouldn't be the first person to ever present that appearance to the world. As far as LV is concerned, I think that there's the whole irresistible force vs. immovable object thing going on there. LV, when fully charged, is quite capable of putting up the same kinds of magical defenses against detection that others use. (Note: same kind is not 'same'.) However... an uncharged or discharged current is as difficult to discern as a shielded one, so I think that DD's failure to detect LV catching a ride with Quirrel is not beyond plausibility. DD was clearly aware as soon as LV made a move on HP in the chamber below the seventh floor. Say, do you suppose GG also had a chamber built? From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 20:42:24 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 13:42:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040805204224.93821.qmail@web50107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109037 --- romulusmmcdougal wrote: > Does he though? Why would he bother asking Moony about the map > then? And why would he let Moony take the map as well? I think that Snape's testing Lupin here, daring him to show confusion in front of Harry. Instead of course Lupin responds with "Dark Magic? Come on, Severus, it's just some regular magic." And then beetles out of there with Harry in tow. Snape doesn't really believe it's dark magic; he's playing with Lupin's head and trying to trip him up. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Thu Aug 5 20:45:32 2004 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 20:45:32 -0000 Subject: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109038 --- Geoff Bannister wrote: > The Chamber was re-opened in the autumn of 1992, Harry > first hearing the Basilisk in September and the first > petrification being on Hallowe'en night. If the 50th > anniversary is spot-on accurate, then the previous > opening was in the autumn of 1942; hence Riddle was in > the Fifth Year in 1942/43. So, if he went on into the > Sixth Form, he would have been in the Lower Sixth in > 1943/44 and the Upper Sixth in 1944/45 so he would be > just be on the point of finishing at Hogwarts or would > have just finished when Grindelwald was defeated. The Lexicon has Riddle opening the chamber in 1941/42 and graduating in June, 1944, based on the "official timeline" that appeared on the CoS DVD and apparently was vetted by JKR. Previously, the Lexicon showed the later dates, based on the same calculation you used. There are a lot of "50 year" references in CoS, including at least one that appears intended to be precise: "The little book lay on the floor, nondescript and soggy. 'Well, we won't find out unless we look at it,' [Harry] said, and he ducked around Ron and picked it up off the floor. Harry saw at once that it was a diary, and the faded year on the cover told him it was fifty years old." (from Chapter 17, after they find the diary in Myrtle's bathroom). Since it is a calendar year -- not academic year -- diary (Hermione later flips it opens to January 1 when she is testing for invisible ink), and they find it after the beginning of the spring term 1993, that passage would appear to indicate that the diary was from 1943, a date which supports your version of the timeline. In order to be consistent with the earlier dates, one would have to assume that Riddle did not begin creating the diary until late 1942 (during his sixth year), at which time he could have purchased (or been given) a 1943 datebook. Then again, given that JKR has not always been absolutely precise around dates and class years, it may be futile to look for perfect consistency on this point. -- Matt From sherriola at earthlink.net Thu Aug 5 21:20:05 2004 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 15:20:05 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Molly & others' vulnerability (was: Wizard/Muggle "Radar") In-Reply-To: <20040805202955.49907.qmail@web50106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <00c001c47b31$fb358860$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 109039 Magda said Yes, that's true but of all the adults Molly was the only one who personalized it, who made it sound that she was the only one who cared about the kids/Harry, who got emotional when she got voted down by the others and who took Arthur's disagreeing with her almost as a personal betrayal. Perhaps I'm biased since I haven't liked Molly since the dress robes incident in GoF but I really think she's one of those people who prefers to deny unplesantness until she can't anymore and then never has a backup plan to deal with the consequences. Okay, if she lost two brothers to Voldemort, she obviously doesn't want to lose any more family; completely understandable. But she's not realistic in the way she deals with things and Harry was prevented from spending a lot of time with Sirius - important, guy-bonding, tell-me-about-my-parents- time - because she kept interupting them or would insist on Harry helping clean. The woman just has no sensitivity at all. Magda Sherry replies I actually think Molly is incredibly sensitive. I especially loved her in the hospital scene in GOF, after the 3rd task. She didn't lecture and fuss, she just comforted Harry. He couldn't remember ever being hugged like that. I see Molly as the type of person, who fusses and worries and nags, till the real emergency comes along. I believe that she will prove to be one of the strongest of all. I'm the sort of person, who worries a lot about daily things, but when there's a crisis or emergency, I'm calm as can be till it's over and know exactly what to do if action is needed. I guess I use all the fear and worry when it isn't necessary, so I can be calm for the crisis. That's how I think molly will be. Right now, she doesn't have anything to do but keep house and cook. That's her role and that's ok, but it gives her far too much time to think and worry. She'll be strong, when she needs to be. sherry G From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Aug 5 21:31:28 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 21:31:28 -0000 Subject: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109040 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Matt" wrote: Matt: > Then again, given that JKR has not always been absolutely precise > around dates and class years, it may be futile to look for perfect > consistency on this point. Geoff: I take your point. Examples of weak spots like the day of the week of Harry's 11th birthday spring to mind..... It's just that in this case, I have previously speculated on which school year Riddle could be in being 16 and had overlooked the Diary reply that he was in the Fifth Year; that possible timeline brought his exit from the school into close juxtaposition with the defeat of Grindelwald and there has been some contemplation of a Riddle- Grindelwald link in past posts. From sopraniste at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 18:50:16 2004 From: sopraniste at yahoo.com (Maria Holub) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 11:50:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Intro and Lucius Message-ID: <20040805185016.9508.qmail@web41208.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109041 Halloo, the List! My name is Maria, and I am known in some circles as The Artist Formerly Known as Flop (that's a rather long story, but if you'd like to hear it, feel free to mail me offlist.) For list purposes, I will go by Flop, for the sake of brevity. I am 23 years old, and I have written two post-secondary papers on Harry Potter, one for a children's literature course, and the other for religious studies. I am currently in the process of combining them into a (hopefully) incredibly comprehensive papter, I just need to do a bit more back-reading (you know, Tom Brown's Schooldays, Le Morte Darthur....) Now, for my requisite substantive post. Since so many of the characters' names are significant, I'd wondered why she chose Lucius (of all things!) for Mr. Malfoy (um... Light Bad-Faith?... That's a LITTLE odd!) Then a friend of mine pointed out that in the musical Camelot there's a character named Lucius... and he's evil. Now I had always expected a final pairing of Malfoy and Snape for the hypothetical future epic wizard-battle, but if there's an Arthurian Legend parallel in there, then I will gladly predict that I was WRONG! Now, upon reading Book 5 of Le Morte Darthur (Thomas Malory, 1475) I discovered that Lucius is actually the Roman Emperor at the time of Arthur. To paraphrase a rather long and EXTREMELY archaically worded passage, Lucius sends emissaries to Arthur, demanding that Britain pay Rome tribute. Arthur tells Lucius' emissaries exactly where to stick their demands, musters his armies and allies, and proceeds to conquer Lucius' Roman arse. Okay, then there's the fact that (according to the Lexicon) JKR has said that there will be a new Minister for Magic in HBP. Here's my theory: Lucius Malfoy will be the next Minister for Magic (I know that's awkward, since he finished OotP in Azkaban, but bear with me and ignore that for the moment) this will, of course, prolong the schism between the MoM and the OotP, and ultimately ARTHUR (Weasley, of course) will muster the Order and conquer Lucius' Death Eater arse! Any thoughts? Flop __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From cmw652 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 19:01:00 2004 From: cmw652 at yahoo.com (cmw652) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 19:01:00 -0000 Subject: Both Spies... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109042 Okay. You are all allowed to hate me if this has been discussed about a 1000 times- I did look through the archives, but I am a little dense on occasion (as you will all see below ). Now, we know that Snape was once a DE?he's got the scar to prove it. We also know that he switched sides somewhere down the line and became a "double agent," feeding info to the Order while still appearing to be loyal to VM. Okay. Here is what I don't get. Presumably, around this same time Peter was betraying the Order, becoming a spy for VM. A double agent like Snape, but on the opposite side. Now, how is it that these two wouldn't have spotted each other? If Peter were waltzing up to VM with Order info, wouldn't Snape, as a trusted DE, be privy to this inside information? And wouldn't he then turn around and inform the Order that they had a spy on their hands? Possibly Snape /is/ where DD's "Spy Theory" initially came from. But why wouldn't Snape have known it was Peter? Why would VM have kept that a secret? In the same light, why would Peter, being a member of the Order, not tell VM that Snape was spying for DD? This just hurts my head. I will buy that maybe VM had no reason for Snape to know about Peter. However, there is no way that Peter wouldn't have known about Snape. We know more about how the Order runs, and it appears to me that everyone is kept well informed. Of course. I could be completely wrong. Especially since DD suspected a traitor, he may have kept Snape's status to himself. I guess it is also possible Peter only became a traitor that very night he was made the Potter's secret keeper (and this would suggest that someone else in the order had been the spy all along but the ESE!Lupin theory breaks my heart, sorry Pippin). Still. This seems to leave some unanswered questions in my mind. How did both spies never cross paths? Sorry for the devil's advocate game?this is why I never post. I haven't got a clear, stubborn idea for anything. Also, sorry for the English- my Pig Latin is better. :D CMW From romulus at hermionegranger.us Thu Aug 5 20:16:42 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 20:16:42 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109043 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > Potioncat: > RMM whether anyone turns out to agree with you, you've brought up a > whole new way of looking at this. :-) > > I do think the logic above is circular. To think Black must have > suspected Lupin because Lupin had known LV... Black is not LV so the logic is not circular. It only shows an association, not denied by any of the Marauders, with Voldemort at some level. > > Rather I think the Order knew there was a spy in their midst and had > been for about a year. We know it had become a suspicious time. Okay, I am missing something here. What does the "Order" have to do with the Marauders? I am talking only about the Marauders. > Lupin had suspected Black had gone to LV. Black thought Lupin had > gone to LV. But, actually neither one had. > > ...now however, if you believe in ESE!Black or ESE!Lupin, that > changes the picture! I do not believe in ESE!Black nor do I believe in ESE!Lupin. I believe that good people can make bad decisions and pay for it with differing degrees of consequence. I believe Black was reckless, I believe James Potter was reckless, I believe that Pettigrew was reckless, and I believe Lupin was reckless. I believe all of the Marauders were reckless. I believe they all dabbled in the Dark Arts. Heck, Hermione, Harry and Ron are in their second year and they are already dabbling in the dark arts (Polyjuice Potion). Your turn of phrase "gone to LV" that you use above is interesting. Are you suggesting that Lord Voldemort was openly THE DARK LORD all the time since leaving school many years before? So that everyone knew who he was and made their choice to ally themselves with him or not? I don't believe that is how Tom Riddle did it. I believe he only showed himself to those that came under his power. He became more bold only after he had a strong following. See for instance the Black family's support of Tom's pure-blood policy. Where was Tom preaching this policy from? A ministry of Magic position? A teaching position at Hogwarts? A soapbox in Hyde Park? >From where was he attracting his followers? I think he may have been teaching for a time at Hogwarts! The very place that loved him. He was Head Boy after all. Now, put in that light, the Marauders may have been attracted to Tom by his level of knowledge in the dark arts. After all, the dark arts do attract, do they not? The Marauders are daring, are they not? Tom Riddle makes their acquaintance at some point -- either before they leave school -- say even in their sixth or seventh years at Hogwarts where Tom is teaching, or even after school. This brings up more speculation. Perhaps Tom was teaching them the Defense against the dark arts. And while he was teaching the class ostensibly "defense against" the dark arts, perhaps he was bringing in some dark arts itself to use as part of the class. Remember, this class is a dynamite subject as it surely attracts one by its subject matter. Some of the students say got involved more than was good for them. Note that most if not all of the DeathEaters are of the same age as Harry's father. This implies heavily that Tom, who is another generation before James Potter, would be recruiting from his students, his students being the same age group as James Potter, Sirius Black, Peter Pettigrew, Remus Lupin, Lucius Malfoy, Crabbe, Goyle, Bellatrix Lestrange, etc. etc. So, that is all I have to say for now. RMM www.hermionegranger.us From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com Thu Aug 5 21:46:01 2004 From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 21:46:01 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109044 > RMM wrote in his !fantastic! post: > Conclusion: All of the Marauders were involved with Voldemort. Some > of the Marauders more than the others. All the Marauders can use > Voldemort's name with ease, implying that they are not under > Voldemort's sway or afraid of him -- that is, all except Wormtail. > Also, Voldemort was doing some kind of instruction with them as the > nature of the relationship revolved around "learning" and "teaching". > > Heck, who knows? Maybe Voldemort was teaching at Hogwarts for a time! boyd: That's one heck of a post, RMM! Love the analysis. After a moment's reflection, it made me think again about the GH incident. All we know is that, somehow, LV found out that Peter was the secret-keeper. Then LV killed James. Then he killed Lily, who protected baby!Harry. I maintain that, if any of the other Marauders besides Peter was likely to have a strong relationship with Voldie, it was James. Why? 1. We Don't know anything about him except that he was a mischievous Marauder who suspected his friends of being spies for LV, he was a git (at least to Snape), LV killed him at GH, and he's Harry's dad. What part of this makes us think he wouldn't be in league with LV? LV might have needed to kill FriendToLV!James for a number of reasons, and being Harry's dad doesn't guartantee he was all good. 2. Who better to tell LV who the secret-keeper was? LV found out somehow, and I think James told him. 3. James led a betraying, deceitful group in the Marauders. There's the Prank, which one could view as a betrayal of the entire group; they would all have paid dearly if Snape had encountered Lupin in the Shack--nice job, Sirius. Also, there's the way that James thought one of his friends was a spy for LV. That speaks to the lack of close-knit friendship, IMO. Then there's the fact that the remaining Marauders are apparently professionals at deceit: they all became animagus (unregistered, of course), Peter hid as Scabbers for years, Lupin has been hiding his werewolf-ness since enrolling at Hogwarts, and Sirius deceived the Dementors to escape. Why are they all so good at such deceit? Must have had plenty of practice within their group. And that starts at the top: James. With all the pranks and deceit within the group, it makes me think it all started with James himself. 4. JKR has set us up to *not* suspect James. He's Harry's dad, so we don't want to, we love Harry so much. And he dies in GH. But those don't actually prove anything, do they? And we never find out much about him, either. Must be a reason.... 5. Some big and bangy news must await Harry's discovery about GH, given the level of secrecy JKR has given it. James consorting with LV would fit that quite well. So was James ESE? Maybe not, but consorting with the enemy? Why not? --boyd From romulus at hermionegranger.us Thu Aug 5 20:30:17 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 20:30:17 -0000 Subject: JKR's comments about the "halkf blood prince" ("strand of CoS") In-Reply-To: <20040805174626.71859.qmail@web21207.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109046 Liz Harrell wrote: > I think there still is a strand of the HBP line somewhere in CoS. > Characters have popped in briefly before making their "big debut". > For example, Sirius Black was mentioned in SS once and then we all > know his role in PoA. > I've heard every spectulation from Colin Creevey to Hagrid as far > as the Prince's identity, but evidence would seem to suggest that > we already have the name of the HBP just not details. After all, we > didn't know the details on Sirius until book 3. Well we know a couple of things, thanks to etymology studies on Harry Potter characters and Jo's interviews. 1. We know the name Krum is a name that harkens back to the establishment of the first Bulgarian Empire. 2. We know Krum will be back because Jo stated, prior to book 5's release: "Yes he will be back but not soon." Of course, we at hermionegranger.us believe that Hermione is descended from royal blood as well, explaining in great detail the Krum-Granger association. RMM www.hermionegranger.us From kcawte at ntlworld.com Thu Aug 5 21:48:35 2004 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 22:48:35 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Both Spies... References: Message-ID: <006a01c47b35$f5d49790$bcde6251@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 109047 CMW Presumably, around this same time Peter was betraying the Order, becoming a spy for VM. A double agent like Snape, but on the opposite side. Now, how is it that these two wouldn't have spotted each other? If Peter were waltzing up to VM with Order info, wouldn't Snape, as a trusted DE, be privy to this inside information? And wouldn't he then turn around and inform the Order that they had a spy on their hands? Possibly Snape /is/ where DD's "Spy Theory" initially came from. But why wouldn't Snape have known it was Peter? Why would VM have kept that a secret? In the same light, why would Peter, being a member of the Order, not tell VM that Snape was spying for DD? This just hurts my head. I will buy that maybe VM had no reason for Snape to know about Peter. K Voldemort is not going to let anyone know about his little spy, for very good reasons. I mean OK Voldemort is evil, but we have plenty of evidence that he's not stupid (well pre-1981 anyway, he needs a refresher course on the evil overlord list nowadays). If you have someone whose main asset is that no one knows about them - you keep it that way. Replace the name Voldemort with the name Dumbledore and it answers your question about Snape too. I seriously doubt Snape was turning up at Order meetings. I don't get the impression in PoA that Sirius and Remus even knew he was a DE let alone Dumbledore's spy amongst the DEs. K From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Aug 5 21:49:09 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 21:49:09 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109048 > Jen: I supposed Filch got the Map from the Marauders (maybe after > the Prank?) and it never saw the light of day until Fred & George > discovered it many years later. It would make sense the map got > passed from one infamous set of troublemakers to another!! I think > the Marauders would hang onto the map otherwise, if it wasn't > confiscated from them at Hogwarts. Potionat: Lupin says the map was confiscated by Filch while he was a student. Fred and George say they "nicked" it from a cabinet in Filch's office. From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Thu Aug 5 20:36:09 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 20:36:09 -0000 Subject: Halloween 81 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109049 Lorel said: > Isn't there some comment in OotP that > even though Harry knew the address of the Order, he would be > restricted by magic so that he would not be able to mention it to > people outside the Order? Also, even though DD is the Secret Keeper > for 12 GP, others know of the address. Ybby's turn: I don't entirely agree. I think others know of the /address/. Certainly Narcissa and Lucius Malfoy do, since they're family. Maybe they didn't "forget" the address or where it was located, but unless Dumbledore (the secret-keeper) told them by mouth or writing, they wouldn't be able to "find" the house. I am led to believe this because Lucius knew Sirius was in Narcissa's family, so he may have checked the old Black house on occasion. If he had any clue that someone was living there (besides Kreacher, who would most certainly say so), (because he had found the house, not the HQ), he would immediately become suspicious. So I think no one who hasn't been told the "secret" can find the building, similar to being unplottable. Another speculation is that the building would be found, but not what's hiding in it. Maybe in the scenario above, Lucy could find the house and even go in it, but he wouldn't see the Order members. I find this a little harder to believe, though a quote in PoA seems to sort-of support this thought: I think Flitwick mentions this in the 3 Broomsticks [paraphrased]: "He [LV] could be looking right in the window, but still not be able to find the Potters if the SK didn't tell him they were there." Yes it's true that only the SK can tell an "uninformed" person the secret: he little slip of paper in OotP is in DD's handwriting (we can check that from past books). That means that the SK (secret- keeper) and /only/ the SK can give the information to someone, before that information is/can be validated. Otherwise, Moody could have told Harry, or Tonks. Once someone has been told the secret, I don't think it matters who that person tells: if their listener doesn't know the secret, he/she can't see the building/hiding spot, etc. I find it hard to believe that magic would restrict someone from speaking the information. Example: Moody tells Harry "The location of the Order of the Phoenix is..." Harry knows this: Moody just told him. But Harry can't see the building, since Moody isn't the SK. (I likes the description of the houses jumping apart for #12 to squeeze in. It just seemed funny.) Now, DD tells Harry, "The location of..." Now Harry knows the information, and he can find the house, because DD is the SK, so the fact that the house exists is validated, and the fact that the OotP is there can be validated. With the Potters and Halloween '81, Sirius and James were best friends, and they both knew about the Peter/Sirius switch. Sirius would want to see his godchild at times, etc., so I suppose that when the Potters performed the Fidelius Charm, Peter immediately told Sirius the "secret." Sirius knew the Potter's address, but if he went there without Peter telling him the secret, he wouldn't be able to find the building. Telling Sirius was a safe move because even if he did tell someone where the Potters were hiding, no one could /find/ the place unless Peter told them. This is supported by my example above. The Potters' whereabouts could be common knowledge (though I doubt it), but as long as Peter kept his rat-trap shut, no one would be able to find them. Back to Lorel: > My hunch is that others (DD, Sirius, and Hagrid, at least) did know > where the Potters were staying in Godric's Hollow, but would not have > been able to pass that information to anyone who was not "in on" that > secret - just like the members of the Order in OotP. Back to Ybby: I agree with a former poster in this thread, that perhaps when the building is destroyed, the Charm is broken. That is the only explanation I have for DD and Hagrid being able to find the last Potter (he would be protected by the Fidelius Charm as well, unless it had been broken.) Otherwise, DD would have known that Peter was the SK, and /he/ (Peter) betrayed the Potters to LV, as would Hagrid (since DD couldn't have told him himself.) ~Yb, on a post that wasn't supposed to be so long. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 5 21:55:47 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 17:55:47 -0400 Subject: Half-bloods, Pure-bloods, etc. Message-ID: <002101c47b36$f74aa050$85c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109050 Melissa "I've always thought that Ron's accountant comment had more to do with squibs than muggles it was made, afterall, in reply a question Harry had asked about Squibs. Maybe a Squib Weasley cousin realised that he'd be able to make a better life for himself in the Muggle world as an accountant than he'd ever be able to do in the WW. Where squibs would be very low on the totem pole." DuffyPoo: Ron's answer was to the question from Harry, "Are all your family wizards?" to which Ron said "Er - yes, I think so. I think Mum's got a second cousin who's an accountant, but we never talk about him." Which is not to say that the second cousin isn't a squib, but it wasn't a reply in relation to a question about Squibs. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 22:04:03 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 22:04:03 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109051 > > boyd: snip. > I maintain that, if any of the other Marauders besides Peter was > likely to have a strong relationship with Voldie, it was James. Why? > > 1. We Don't know anything about him except that he was a > mischievous Marauder who suspected his friends of being spies for LV, > he was a git (at least to Snape), LV killed him at GH, and he's > Harry's dad. What part of this makes us think he wouldn't be in league > with LV? LV might have needed to kill FriendToLV!James for a number of > reasons, and being Harry's dad doesn't guartantee he was all good. Alla: Well, I don't know. James and Lily defied Voldemort three times, did not they? If at the same time James maintained close relationship with Voldie, that will look a little strange for me. Then we have that "and James hated Dark Arts" , but I suspect that you don't trust marauders words much... :o) Boyd: > 2. Who better to tell LV who the secret-keeper was? LV found out > somehow, and I think James told him. Alla: Why? To get him to kill his wife and son and himself? I mean, yes, the possibilities are endless, but don't you think you are overrreaching just a little bit? :o) Boyd: > 5. Some big and bangy news must await Harry's discovery about GH, > given the level of secrecy JKR has given it. James consorting with LV > would fit that quite well. > > So was James ESE? Maybe not, but consorting with the enemy? Why not? > Alla: Care to take a bet? I will bet anything that James was not consorting with Voldemort. :o) Snape, on the other hand....:o) (I don't know if I put anything on the con for Lupin - I mean I don't really believe it, but Pippin is just too convincing, so I will reserve the possibility to be proven wrong on this one) From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Thu Aug 5 22:10:23 2004 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 22:10:23 -0000 Subject: JKR's comments about the "halkf blood prince" ("strand of CoS") In-Reply-To: <20040805174626.71859.qmail@web21207.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109052 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Liz Harrell wrote: > Liz Harrell: >>>I think there still is a strand of the HBP line somewhere in CoS. Characters have popped in briefly before making their "big debut". For example, Sirius Black was mentioned in SS once and then we all know his role in PoA. In CoS, Lucius Malfoy came into the mix (now reoccuring in books 2- 5...and we more than likely haven't seen the last of him). I've heard every spectulation from Colin Creevey to Hagrid as far as the Prince's identity, but evidence would seem to suggest that we already have the name of the HBP just not details. After all, we didn't know the details on Sirius until book 3. Then again, it may just be Ms. Rowling's way of keeping us pouring over the books day after day until book 6 is finally published. :)<<< ------------- Inge: Ah yes - went to JKR's site. Did read that young Mark is a nobody. Chosing not belive it - wanting him to definitely be somebody - and somebody important - as the HBP for example. He's a kid with a name and too much potential to simply not be anybody of significance. Don't even care if JKR lied about it on her site and won't blame her if it turns out he is someone special after all - and not just forgotten in books 6 - 7 ........ :-) From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 5 22:11:25 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 18:11:25 -0400 Subject: Halloween 81 Message-ID: <003601c47b39$269d6ca0$85c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109053 DuffyPoo said: "DD would have known where the house was because he suggested he be the Secret-Keeper himself, he would have 'forgotten' the address, once Wormtail was made Secret-Keeper, but once the house was destroyed, he would know the address again and therefore be alerted to the fact that something had happened there. Sirius would know by the same method (he was James' best friend, he would know where they lived, until the Fidelius Charm was performed), then DD only had to tell Hagrid so he could go and get Harry. We don't need DD - or anyone else - to find Wormtail and get the address out of him, DD already knew." > Lorel replied: "It might be simpler than this. Isn't there some comment in OotP that even though Harry knew the address of the Order, he would be restricted by magic so that he would not be able to mention it to people outside the Order? Also, even though DD is the Secret Keeper for 12 GP, others know of the address." DuffyPoo again: I don't recall ever reading that Harry was prevented by magic from telling someone the address of the Order, (not that it's not in there, I just don't recall it), but if they did, the person couldn't find GP anyway because Harry is not the Secret-Keeper. Only the Secret-Keeper can tell anyone the address and have them find the place. The only people who can get into 12 GP, now that DD is the Secret-Keeper are the people DD himself tells (either words or writing, I presume). So, now that DD is the S-K of 12 GP, the Malfoys will not be able to enter it, even if they had visited there frequently before. At least that is how I understand it (which I admit, means nothing.) The only concern I have regarding S-K and GP in particular is Kreacher. Did DD tell him the address? If not, how does he manage to go between GP and the Malfoy residence? Is it just more House-Elf brand magic? Who are the others that know the address? Do you mean the Malfoys, Tonks' parents, and the Lestranges? If that is who you do mean, I would expect, as stated above, that unless DD tells them the address himself, they can no longer find the place. Even though Nymphadora (what a name!) Tonks knows where 12 GP is, she cannot bring Andromeda or Ted to GP because she is not the Secret-Keeper. As above, at least this is my understanding of how it works. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 5 22:26:38 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 18:26:38 -0400 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort Message-ID: <004401c47b3b$46e583b0$85c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109055 Karen: > Did Filch get the map from the creators or was the map passed down to > fifth or sixth year Gryffindor? Jen: "I supposed Filch got the Map from the Marauders (maybe after the Prank?) and it never saw the light of day until Fred & George discovered it many years later. It would make sense the map got passed from one infamous set of troublemakers to another!! I think the Marauders would hang onto the map otherwise, if it wasn't confiscated from them at Hogwarts." DuffyPoo: Lupin says, "I happen to *know* that this map was confiscated by Mr FIlch many years ago. Yes, I know it's a map. I don't want to know how it fell into your possession." (emphasis mine). Sounds like Lupin knew *exactly* how Filch came by the map but wasn't about to tell. The explanation was too long and perhaps would compromise his secret. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Thu Aug 5 22:28:02 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (Jo Raggett) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 23:28:02 +0100 Subject: Molly & others' vulnerability (was: Wizard/Muggle "Radar") References: <1091716319.8870.29513.m21@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <002001c47b3b$7ac2f320$a3d086d9@oemcomputer> No: HPFGUIDX 109056 SSSusan: <<<<<<<>>>>>>>> >>>>>>And *these* points I truly agree with! People have argued that Molly is doing real work, is assisting with the Order...and she IS...but her work keeps her bound to the house and bound to her traditional work [which probably leaves room for lots of mind-wandering to those awful, scary, hypothetical thoughts], rather than putting her out into new situations which would push her abilities. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>snip>>>>>>>> Aggie: Whilst I agree that Molly's role seems to be that of a 'traditionally female' one, she *has* done some spy stuff! When Sirius is talking to the Trio via floo (in OotP) and he mentions them setting up the DA, he says that he has a message for Ron from Molly. She was unable to give it herself as she was 'on duty tonight'. UK vers Ch 17 Pp330. I always assumed that this 'duty' was guarding the prophecy. This means that she *does* participate in the more 'exciting' areas of the Order, but probably not as much as the others. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 5 22:38:27 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 18:38:27 -0400 Subject: Both Spies... Message-ID: <004d01c47b3c$ed3f9d80$85c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109057 CMW "If Peter were waltzing up to VM with Order info, wouldn't Snape, as a trusted DE, be privy to this inside information? And wouldn't he then turn around and inform the Order that they had a spy on their hands? Possibly Snape /is/ where DD's "Spy Theory" initially came from. But why wouldn't Snape have known it was Peter? Why would VM have kept that a secret? Presumably, around this same time Peter was betraying the Order, becoming a spy for VM. A double agent like Snape, but on the opposite side. Now, how is it that these two wouldn't have spotted each other? If Peter were waltzing up to VM with Order info, wouldn't Snape, as a trusted DE, be privy to this inside information? And wouldn't he then turn around and inform the Order that they had a spy on their hands? Possibly Snape /is/ where DD's "Spy Theory" initially came from. But why wouldn't Snape have known it was Peter? Why would VM have kept that a secret? " DuffyPoo: Cleared up by Karkaroff, "You must understand that He Who Must Not Be Named operated always in the greatest secrecy ... he preferred that we -- I mean to say, his supporters --- and I regret now, very deeply that I ever counted myself among them --- we never knew the names of every one of our fellows -- he alone knew exactly who we all were." If LV had a reason to keep Snape secret from Wormtail, or vice versa, they wouldn't have known of each others' existence in the DEs. Also, we're told that Snape left the order before LV's downfall, how much before, I don't think is ever stated. He may have been 'out' before Wormtail got 'in.' [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Thu Aug 5 22:47:36 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (Jo Raggett) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 23:47:36 +0100 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin References: <1091728661.29177.78353.m24@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <003c01c47b3e$349b5380$a3d086d9@oemcomputer> No: HPFGUIDX 109058 Heather: <<<>>>>>>>>> Aggie: I hadn't thought of it from this angle before! That's very intersting! Do you believe that DD hired Lupin *because* Sirius had escaped from Azkaban? It certainly seems like something he would do! Did Sirius escape *before* Lupin was hired though? I would imagine it would take time for DD to go through the process of hiring a DADA teacher. Although Sirius had escaped BEFORE the beginning of term as Harry heard it on the news at Privet Drive. Would this have been enough time for DD to find Lupin and persuade him to come to Hogwarts? I'm sure that if DD thought Lupin could control his friends once (by making him prefect) then maybe he thought it would be beneficial to have him do it again! Although he (Lupin) wasn't very good at it first time around! I think this is whsat happened! It makes perfect sense to me! If this is the case then I wonder who DD would have chosen for the DADA position if Sirius hadn't escaped!! From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 5 22:48:22 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 18:48:22 -0400 Subject: Half-bloods, Pure-bloods, etc Message-ID: <006a01c47b3e$4fe1bf80$85c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109059 DuffyPoo: > Andromeda didn't have the sense to marry a pure-blood but brought Muggles > into the family line. I can only surmise, then, that the Weasleys have done > the same, married Muggle-borns or half-bloods at some point and are thereby > considered blood traitors by people like the Blacks/Malfoys....but not by people > who don't share that kind of prejudice, Dumbledore for example. > Melissa: "Or perhaps the Weasley's were guilty of a worse crime. They betrayed their "blood" by choosing to fight on the side of the Half Bloods and Muggle borns." DuffyPoo: Ok, I know I'm sometimes as thick as Crabbe and Goyle together, but I'm just not sure what you're saying here. The Weasleys, Arthur and Molly, were not a part of the Order during the first go round with LV. Molly is, according to JKR, related to the Prewetts - Fabian and Gideon, who were a part of the Order back then - Prewett is Molly's maiden name. But there is no mention of Prewetts on this tapestry (not that they're not there). Mrs. Black died in 1985 so any tapestry blasting had to be done before that time. The Weasleys participating in this LV war and OotP is well after Mrs. B's time. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Thu Aug 5 22:54:06 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (Jo Raggett) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 23:54:06 +0100 Subject: Lily and unicorns Message-ID: <004001c47b3f$1d5ff300$a3d086d9@oemcomputer> No: HPFGUIDX 109060 Jen <<<<>>>>>>>>>>>> Aggie: Whilst I understand the similarities that you have pointed out, may I just ask, *how* is there unicorn blood in Lily's blood line? Unless we are getting into issues which *really* are not mentioned in polite society (and which *surely* would be more heinous than killing one) then HOW is it possible? I'm not trying to be obtuse, just curious. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tzakis1225 at netzero.com Thu Aug 5 23:00:07 2004 From: tzakis1225 at netzero.com (demetra1225) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 23:00:07 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109061 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: Major snippage: > Black believed Lupin was spying for Voldemort!!! Why would he unless > he knew Lupin was involved with Voldemort in some fashion?? Demetra: I'm going to make myself unpopular, but here's my take on this. I think that Sirius and James were the tight-knit friends of the group and the major mischief-makers. McGonnagall compares them to Fred and George, and Sirius admits to Harry that he and James were often in detention. What is it about studious, nose in his book Lupin that would make James & Sirius take notice? I think that the fact that Lupin is a werewolf and that they saw the potential for fun cavorting with a werewolf was what made them want to befriend Lupin -not that they befriended him first, then accepted him being a werewolf. So, why does Sirius think that Lupin is the spy? Well, he knows Lupin is a werewolf. I think that in a time of war, where members of the order are being picked off one by one and his best friend is forced into hiding, Sirius reverts back to his upbringing and the WW's general prejudice against werewolves. He suspects the known 'dark creature'. It is just like Ron (who has known Lupin as a kind, friendly teacher for an entire school year) reacts in the Shreiking Shack by telling Lupin "get away from me, werewolf". Or just like Snape reverts to calling Lily a "mudblood" when he is being humiliated. It's an ugly part of human nature that in times of stress the old prejudices rear their ugly heads. Why, then, does Lupin suspect Sirius? Well, for one thing, he knows that Sirius used him in the prank episode, with total disregard for what could have happened to Lupin. Is it so hard to imagine why Lupin would believe that Sirius could have put another friend in harm's way? From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Thu Aug 5 23:08:07 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (Jo Raggett) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 00:08:07 +0100 Subject: DD knows where they are Message-ID: <005001c47b41$1233eca0$a3d086d9@oemcomputer> No: HPFGUIDX 109062 SSSusan: <<<<>> >>>>On your other point, it does seem that DD frequently knows where people who interest him are/when he needs to return from wherever he is, etc.>>>>>>>>> <<<<<>> Aggie: This comment of yours made me wonder if DD had one of those clocks like the Weasley's. He could 'programme' it to show whoever he liked. Once I started writing this though, I was hit by an inspirational bolt of lightening!! What about his *watch*? It is mentioned several times and it is never explained how it works, AND it's on JKR's web site (when Peeves comes)!! OOOH I'm all excited! I've had a brainwave! (It doesn't happen very often!) I'm sure that this has been discussed thousands of times and someone will be along shortly and burst my bubble!! IMO it would solve some of the mysteries as how DD KNOWS so much. He has a list, (12 hands I do believe the watch has) of the 12 people he wants to keep tabs on and then he just has to look at his watch to know where they are. It would explain how he knew he should be a Hogwarts in PS/SS, and how he knew to be early at Harry's hearing in OotP and I'm sure there are loads of other times that this would explain, WITHOUT reverting to Time Travel! Who do you think the 12 are? Any thoughts on this? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From snow15145 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 23:11:52 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 23:11:52 -0000 Subject: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109063 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Matt" wrote: > > Matt: > > Then again, given that JKR has not always been absolutely precise > > around dates and class years, it may be futile to look for perfect > > consistency on this point. > > Geoff: > I take your point. Examples of weak spots like the day of the week of > Harry's 11th birthday spring to mind..... > > It's just that in this case, I have previously speculated on which > school year Riddle could be in being 16 and had overlooked the Diary > reply that he was in the Fifth Year; that possible timeline brought > his exit from the school into close juxtaposition with the defeat of > Grindelwald and there has been some contemplation of a Riddle- > Grindelwald link in past posts. Snow: We don't know when Voldemort's birthday is though and that Does matter. Harry is in year five in OOP and is 15; he doesn't turn 16 until July after his fifth school year ends but before the 6th begins. This would mean that Harry will be 17 when he graduates Hogwarts but 18 in that same year. Voldemort said the chamber was opened in his fifth year. All that is implied is that Riddle preserved himself in a diary 50 years ago when he was 16. The diary was actually after the events of the chamber opening in 1942. The Very Secret Diary COS "I mean that this diary holds memories of terrible things. Things that were covered up. Things that happened at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry." Geoff quotes that: "The Chamber was re-opened in the autumn of 1992, Harry first hearing the Basilisk in September and the first petrification being on Hallowe'en night." So then Riddle's 5th school year would be `42/'43. The diary was found and said to be 50 years ago also but in February of '43: The Very Secret Diary COS "Hermione left the hospital wing, de- whiskered, tail-less and furfree, at the beginning of February. On her first evening back in Gryffindor Tower, Harry showed her T. M. Riddle's diary " This is where they notice that it had been written 50 years previous. Also: COS "She rubbed hard on January first. (January first is written in italics) Riddle preserved himself in a diary when he was 16 and the year was 1943 but there is no proof that it was in his 5th year. Riddle shows Harry the month of June when he framed Hagrid but that doesn't mean that is the month that he preserved himself in the diary. Riddle was 16 in 1943 but most likely in his 6th year. When did Riddle write in the diary (if he actually did) as apposed to when did he preserve himself depends solely on when his birthday is. Riddle's 6th school year would be `43/'44 and his 7th year would be `44/'45, Riddle would be 17 when he graduates Hogwarts but turn 18 that same year. My personal preference for Riddle's birthday is December because of Trelawney's prediction that she saw Harry to be born in the winter months. I really like the idea that Trelawney sees past Harry to the Tom Riddle part within and that is what she bases her weird predictions on. From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Thu Aug 5 23:17:58 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (Jo Raggett) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 23:17:58 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109064 > Jen: > > I think > > the Marauders would hang onto the map otherwise, if it wasn't > > confiscated from them at Hogwarts. Aggie: Why would they keep it after they left Hogwarts? It only shows the school doesn't it? They wouldn't need it after they had left. I imagined they would have passed it to another student/gang who would have made use of it. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Aug 5 23:32:56 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 23:32:56 -0000 Subject: Lily and unicorns In-Reply-To: <004001c47b3f$1d5ff300$a3d086d9@oemcomputer> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109065 > Jen > <<<< Lily's blood* which he may have been using metaphorically, but it reminds me of Quirrellmort slaying the defenseless unicorn to drink its blood--Voldemort slayed the innocent at Godric's Hollow in hopes > of finally drinking from the cup of immortality, and it cursed him. >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > Aggie: > Whilst I understand the similarities that you have pointed out, may I just ask, *how* is there unicorn blood in Lily's blood line? > > Unless we are getting into issues which *really* are not mentioned in polite society (and which *surely* would be more heinous than killing one) then HOW is it possible? > > I'm not trying to be obtuse, just curious. Jen: Sorry--didn't intend that Lily has unicorn blood, just that symbolically she's like a unicorn and thus to slay her, especially when she was wandless, would be a similar offense to slaying a unicorn--a cursed life. I meant the cup of immortality symbolically too-if LV had killed Harry that night, he would have removed the last block to immortality. He's willing to slay a defenseless woman and baby to gain that immortality, and I think that will be his downfall in the end somehow. I do think there may be something revealed about Lily, a power she has or something about her origin, that might be important for the night at Godric's Hollow, to explain why Voldemort didn't *want* to kill her initially. Jen From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 23:34:53 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 16:34:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040805233453.69146.qmail@web50105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109066 > Pippin > forever champion of ESE!Lupin, but ESE!Everybody is kinda cool > (the original ESE!Lupin post is 39362) Any chance of getting a post-OOTP update on that ESE!Lupin theory? I've heard theories that Kreacher was drugging Sirius at 12GP but maybe it was Lupin? Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Thu Aug 5 23:35:22 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (Jo Raggett) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 23:35:22 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109067 > Demetra: > I'm going to make myself unpopular, but here's my take on this. > I think that Sirius and James were the tight-knit friends of the > group and the major mischief-makers. McGonnagall compares them to > Fred and George, and Sirius admits to Harry that he and James were > often in detention. What is it about studious, nose in his book > Lupin that would make James & Sirius take notice? I think that the > fact that Lupin is a werewolf and that they saw the potential for > fun cavorting with a werewolf was what made them want to befriend > Lupin -not that they befriended him first, then accepted him being > a werewolf. >>>>>>>>>snip>>>>>>>>> Aggie: I'm afriad I'm gonna have to rain on your parade! We have canon to say that they were friends first. PoA Uk vers Ch 18 P259. ..."Now, my three friends could harldy fail to notice that I disappeared once a month. I made up all sorts of stories..." [Lupin talking] Phew! The Marauders are getting their 15 minutes today!! From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 5 23:53:31 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 19:53:31 -0400 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin Message-ID: <00b901c47b47$69f70f70$85c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109068 Aggie: " Although Sirius had escaped BEFORE the beginning of term as Harry heard it on the news at Privet Drive. Would this have been enough time for DD to find Lupin and persuade him to come to Hogwarts? I'm sure that if DD thought Lupin could control his friends once (by making him prefect) then maybe he thought it would be beneficial to have him do it again! Although he (Lupin) wasn't very good at it first time around! I think this is whsat happened! It makes perfect sense to me! If this is the case then I wonder who DD would have chosen for the DADA position if Sirius hadn't escaped!!" DuffyPoo: Just adding fuel to the fire...Harry first heard of Black's escape on the Muggle news the morning of his 13th birthday. That gives DD the whole month of August to find Lupin and hire him. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 6 00:03:19 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 20:03:19 -0400 Subject: DD knows where they are Message-ID: <00c201c47b48$c8685900$85c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109069 SSSusan: <<<<>> >>>>On your other point, it does seem that DD frequently knows where people who interest him are/when he needs to return from wherever he is, etc.>>>>>>>>> <<<<<>> Aggie: "This comment of yours made me wonder if DD had one of those clocks like the Weasley's. He could 'programme' it to show whoever he liked. Once I started writing this though, I was hit by an inspirational bolt of lightening!! What about his *watch*? It is mentioned several times and it is never explained how it works, AND it's on JKR's web site (when Peeves comes)!! OOOH I'm all excited! I've had a brainwave! (It doesn't happen very often!) I'm sure that this has been discussed thousands of times and someone will be along shortly and burst my bubble!! IMO it would solve some of the mysteries as how DD KNOWS so much. He has a list, (12 hands I do believe the watch has) of the 12 people he wants to keep tabs on and then he just has to look at his watch to know where they are." DuffyPoo: Ack! Not bursting your bubble at all. This is a wonderful idea (as one who hates the thought that DD is time-turning his life away.). I knew that watch of his had to figure into the story somehow. Maybe he can change the hands to fit the people he wants to keep tabs on. Lily and James, back in the day, Harry & Co. now? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From snow15145 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 00:45:54 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 00:45:54 -0000 Subject: DD knows where they are In-Reply-To: <005001c47b41$1233eca0$a3d086d9@oemcomputer> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109070 Aggie: This comment of yours made me wonder if DD had one of those clocks like the Weasley's. He could 'programme' it to show whoever he liked. Once I started writing this though, I was hit by an inspirational bolt of lightening!! What about his *watch*? It is mentioned several times and it is never explained how it works, AND it's on JKR's web site (when Peeves comes)!! OOOH I'm all excited! I've had a brainwave! (It doesn't happen very often!) I'm sure that this has been discussed thousands of times and someone will be along shortly and burst my bubble!! IMO it would solve some of the mysteries as how DD KNOWS so much. He has a list, (12 hands I do believe the watch has) of the 12 people he wants to keep tabs on and then he just has to look at his watch to know where they are. It would explain how he knew he should be a Hogwarts in PS/SS, and how he knew to be early at Harry's hearing in OotP and I'm sure there are loads of other times that this would explain, WITHOUT reverting to Time Travel! Who do you think the 12 are? Any thoughts on this? Snow: I like your idea Aggie! Dumbledore even comments about how much he likes Molly's fascinating clock. As for the twelve people he watches over, I can think of a few right off. Clock Hands and excuse as to why they were "chosen": 1st-Harry (of course) 2nd-Fudge (keep your friends close but your enemies closer) 3rd and 4th- James and Lily Potter (at least at some point they were, that's how he possibly knew about the attack) 5th-Neville (how else did Dumbledore know that he was brave against his friends? Specifically Harry) 6th-Ron (same applies to Ron, how did DD know about the sacrifice of Ron's chess piece? Also that he is Harry's best friend) 7th-Hermione (again DD knows about Hermione's knowledge of Herbology and I suspect talks to her in a double talk manner in his speeches so that she can enlighten her best friend Harry) 8th- Lucius Malfoy (DD pretty much telling Lucius I know you got more stuff like the diary at home, if you do it again there will be consequences) 9th-? (someone who either was friend or foe to Harry and the quest) 10th-? (ditto to no. 9) 11th-Tom Riddle/Voldemort (how else would DD have concluded that Riddle was Voldemort?) 12th-Snape (this one I saved specifically for twelve o'clock! Over Harry or Riddle/Voldemort because he spies on both Harry and Voldemort for DD. Snape was spying on what Voldemort was doing through his occlumency teaching with Harry. Snape's hesitation in answering Harry's question of "I guess that's your job, to spy, is it" can possibly construed as well yes in a way I am spying on Voldemort through you silly boy) My question to you Aggie is what possible perils or safe zones (like Weasley's clock at home, at work, in mortal danger) appear on the watch? From sopraniste at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 20:24:36 2004 From: sopraniste at yahoo.com (Maria Holub) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 13:24:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Possible Katie Bell FLINT? Message-ID: <20040805202436.93373.qmail@web41211.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109071 Carrie wrote: > > In Book 5 Ginny Weasly says that she'd like to try > > out for Chaser, and that Angelina and Alicia are > > leaving next year. What about Katie? If Katie is > > NOT leaving for book six, that must make her one > > year older than Harry. > > > > That would mean that she was a first year on the > > House Quidditch team. Bookworm: when Oliver introduced Katie to Harry, Oliver said that Katie had been on the 'reserve' team the year before, so she was new to the 'varsity' team the same year Harry was. That's the only mention of the reserve team I remember, so what exactly that means is unclear. Flop: Um... the only mention I can find of the reserve team is in Lee Jordan's commentary on the first Quidditch match, and it was ALICIA, not Katie, who was a reserve the previous year. (SS 186) Now, I'm only skimming at this point, looking for specific references, but I havent' been able to find any evidence that Katie was on the team the year before Harry joined. Flop From sopraniste at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 20:36:20 2004 From: sopraniste at yahoo.com (Maria Holub) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 13:36:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Naming Voldemort (Chapter 24: Occlumency) Message-ID: <20040805203620.99318.qmail@web41201.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109072 Melanie said: 6) Snape tells Harry many times in this chapter not to say the name "Voldemort." Why is it that even Voldemort's own followers cannot say his name? Is their significance in calling him the Dark Lord? (this is just something that I have always been curious about..love to know what you guys think about it). << I say: This has already been touched on a bit by a few people, but I wanted to add my two cents to the "speak of the devil" angle. I am very into comparative literature, so even if JKR has NOT been influenced by the books I'm going to refer to, there's a rather interesting thing that crops up in a couple of fantasy series that I can think of off the top of my head. There is often a hesitation to name extreme Evil Overlord-types, and similar to "speak of the devil" it often seems to involve the fear of attracting said Evil Overlord's attention. In Robert Jordan's The Wheel of Time, you don't name The Dark One, because it attracts his attention and bad things happen. In David Eddings' Belgariad, you don't name the God of Angarak, because he's listening for it. But Eddings' heroes manage to get around this, and I THINK this may be what Dumbledore is trying to do by encouraging people to use Voldemort's name. Because, if EVERYBODY used Voldemort's name, it would be being used so often that he couldn't possibly pay attention to it all, and he may even start ignoring it completely. That is my theory. Flop From queenoelle at tds.net Thu Aug 5 21:50:02 2004 From: queenoelle at tds.net (Noelle) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 16:50:02 -0500 Subject: newbie intro/Snape vs THE NAME/Muggle detecting In-Reply-To: <1091654229.8853.50826.m22@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109073 Hullo all - I'd jump on the Voldy-ism/Fascism argument wagon, but I'm inclined to just agree with and dismiss it :) Anyway - the things I do have opinions on: Snape vs. THE NAME: >Potioncat: > Also, Snape isn't the only adult to tell Harry not to say Voldemort. > > I'm not saying Harry should't say Voldemort...just that I can see > why Snape doesn't want him to. >Alla: > >But that is exactly the point. All other adults who don't want Harry >to say Voldemort are afraid of him. Is Snape? I'd say that Snape is afraid of Voldemort in a much more rational panic-less way than those who flutter around and try to make Harry say 'You-Know-Who'. First of all, 'YKW' seems like a superstitious 'speak of the devil' kind of thing, that may/may not have been encouraged by the DE's/VM to promote fear and hysteria. Snape doesn't say YKW because it's _childish_, the kind of thing one does when giving someone the 'silent treatment'. DD encourages Harry and others to say 'Voldemort' in an attempt to eradicate the irrational YKW panic. It probably seems irresponsible to Snape - as if DD is minimalizing the threat that VM really is. Like the fan appellations 'Voldie' 'Voldie-Pants' etc. "Dark Lord" is a decent compromise - suitably respectful/fearful (hence 'Lord') also putting VM on the bad side (Dark) but just Snapeishly ambiguous enough (Dark Lord, not Evil Lord or Really Bad Mean Lord) And on Muggle Detection: >sssusan >That's interesting--IS there any kind >of "wizard detecting" or "muggle detecting" ability inherent in >witches & wizards? Not that I'm aware of. But did I miss something >i the books? Is this something Aurors are capable of? > >Anybody have thoughts on this? I really subscribe to this http://www.redhen-publications.com/WizChildren.html view of WW childhood (summarized: children are such a tiny part of WW population and childhood such a tiny part of wizard life, that not nearly so much time/money/attention is spent on children, childhood is a necessary not particularily pleasant phase one must go through before starting their 'real' adult life) So the idea of a "big-brother-y" watch system which appears to be in place to catch/protect underage wizards from doing magic unsupervised or around muggles doesn't really bother me, in the context of the WW.(As a muggle, it does, a bit, but I don't have to deal with Wizard social systems IRL, now do I?) The thing is, unless Arthur (who seems to be the resident Muggle Expert) has his eye on the 'security cameras' keeping track of where all wizards are, he probably couldn't tell a wizard from a non-wizard on sight. Even the wizard prejudices rely on a bit of reasearch - put Hermione in Muggle clothes next to Dudley in Hogwarts robes, who could tell which was which, if they didn't know either? I frankly don't think this 'spider sense' exists. ~ Jenny Greenteeth From xochilt1999 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 22:02:36 2004 From: xochilt1999 at yahoo.com (xochilt1999) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 22:02:36 -0000 Subject: PT's Prediction Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109074 I have heard a lot of different theories about HP and LV, and on if HP will have to die in order to kill LV, however I have been thinking that since HP's blood was used to give LV a body again, wouldn't that also mean that if LV dies HP will, in a sense, die as well. And Harry need not sacrifice himself? "xochilt1999" From romulus at hermionegranger.us Thu Aug 5 22:42:22 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 22:42:22 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109075 > > RMM: > > Conclusion: All of the Marauders were involved with Voldemort. > > Some of the Marauders more than the others. All the Marauders > > can use Voldemort's name with ease, implying that they are not > > under Voldemort's sway or afraid of him -- that is, all except > > Wormtail. Also, Voldemort was doing some kind of instruction > > with them as the nature of the relationship revolved around > > "learning" and "teaching". > > > > Heck, who knows? Maybe Voldemort was teaching at Hogwarts for a > > time! Nora wrote: > One major problem with this; Dumbledore has been at Hogwarts the > whole time, right? He was Transfiguration teacher back when Tom > Riddle was at school, and he became Headmaster some time around > when Lupin would be heading off to school, because he let him in. > Now, Dumbledore *knows* who and what Tom Riddle/Lord Voldemort is-- Truly? Dumbledore suspected Riddle, but if Riddle has not shown himself as Lord Voldemort until he gains a greater following, how is Dumbledore to know what his DADA teacher is doing? Lupin has shown that he keeps things from Dumbledore, just like the rest of the Marauders. Malfoy and the other Slytherins like the pure- blood talk of Riddle and so are they going to mention anything to that muggle-loving Dumbledore? I will grant that if you take each one of my statements above you can remove the context I was building by having them together. All of the quotes I provided point, circumstantially, at various forms of relationships between Riddle and the Marauders. BTW, THE DARK LORD wasn't walking around bellowing to the world -- join up or die -- or ONLY BAD GUYS WANTED HERE -- or I WANT TO KILL ALL MUD-BLOODS - JOIN UP OR ELSE! Evil does not work that way. This Tom Riddle is a BRILLIANT man, and folks here tend to make him a caricature and a simpleton. Want to start a movement? Go to the youth and train them. Who is in the best position to train them? TEACHERS. > In addition to Voldie, well, just not seeming the > type to want to spend his time teachin' the kids... So what did Voldie do then...... Put a running ad in the Daily Prophet? JOIN THE DARK SIDE and TAKE OVER No, that is not how he did it....he advertised confections, you know the kind that Fred and George like to make. Only Voldie's confections were much more mind-altering! RMM From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Thu Aug 5 23:02:29 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 23:02:29 -0000 Subject: Lily and unicorns In-Reply-To: <004001c47b3f$1d5ff300$a3d086d9@oemcomputer> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109076 Jen wrote: > <<<<>>>>>>>>>>>> And Aggie commented: > Whilst I understand the similarities that you have pointed out, may > I just ask, *how* is there unicorn blood in Lily's blood line? Yb's turn: I think what Jen is implying is that perhaps a unicorn (or it's blood) was used in a charm on Lily and Harry so that if someone tried to kill them both, killing the second would backfire horrendously. Since Unicorn blood is hard to come by without getting cursed, I would say this is a bit farfetched, using the blood of something innocent for pretty much any purposes at all, even if the unicorn would sacrifice it willingly. I personally am much more inclined to go with the same theory but using Dragon's blood instead. ~Yb From silvr23dragon at yahoo.com Thu Aug 5 23:31:13 2004 From: silvr23dragon at yahoo.com (Mary Olearchik) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 16:31:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Both Spies... In-Reply-To: <004d01c47b3c$ed3f9d80$85c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: <20040805233113.41925.qmail@web42004.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109077 CMW: "If Peter were waltzing up to VM with Order info, wouldn't Snape, as a trusted DE..." snip Mary: Also, and I may just be forgetting something, but he didn't really have any very big important information until the Secret Keeper position became his. And for Snape to have done anything about it, if he knew, it would have had to been to go right to the Potters home, since I have always been under the impression that once the Potters were in hiding, the attack was practically instantaeous. If I forgot something an important detail somewhere that would put my foot in my mouth, forgive me. Mary --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From karen at dacafe.com Fri Aug 6 00:02:42 2004 From: karen at dacafe.com (karen at dacafe.com) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 17:02:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <62034.68.34.189.212.1091750562.squirrel@cafemail.mcadcafe.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109078 > < Demetra: > < I'm going to make myself unpopular, but here's my take on this. > < I think that Sirius and James were the tight-knit friends of the > < group and the major mischief-makers. McGonnagall compares them to > < Fred and George, and Sirius admits to Harry that he and James were > < often in detention. What is it about studious, nose in his book > < Lupin that would make James & Sirius take notice? I think that the > < fact that Lupin is a werewolf and that they saw the potential for > < fun cavorting with a werewolf was what made them want to befriend > < Lupin -not that they befriended him first, then accepted him being > < a werewolf. > >From Karen: I think they became friends originally because like Dean, Seamus, Neville, Ron and Harry they were all sorted into the same house at age 11. It is obvious from Snape's memory that school came easy for James and Sirius. I think Lupin like Hermione enjoys books, reading and studying. I don't have the books in front of me but I seem to remember reading that Sirius and James were curious where their friend went once a month. And so set out to discover Lupin's secret. Since James and Sirius had to help Peter transform at first, I think they may have initially left Peter behind on the first few adventures. This leads me to some more thoughts on the motives of the Rat: In Snape's memory, it is shown that Peter idolizes James. 15 year old James still enjoys this hero worship. But we do not know how 17 year old, courting Lily, reacts to Peter's following his every move? Did he follow them on their dates? Get stuck spending the evening with less tolerant Sirius? Somehow I don't think Sirius was dateless. I can see where Sirius and James would possibly double date. Lupin would be content to read (possibly not happy but understanding that his friends need time with their girls.) I think Peter was jealous of Lily and Sirius. I also don't think he was very bright. (He spent time with a werewolf but could not remember the ways to identify a werewolf during his OWLs). So Peter meets with LV and makes a deal, he'll spy on the Order if LV can provide the means to split the Marauder's and thereby giving Peter sole friendship with his idol. Lupin was first to be separated. This may have happened before the first prophesy. Sometime around Harry's birth or soon after LV learns of the prophesy. He now needs to destroy Harry. SS/PS indicates that the Dursley's are Harry's only relatives. The Potter family have been killed - In my theory, by LV, either while James was at school (remember the 1st war was going on while James and Lily were at school) or during the few years James and Lily were escaping LV. Peter is jealous of anything that takes James' attention away from him. He must have hated Harry from birth. (I know the my husband was captivated by our first child. James had a son who except for Lily's eyes was his double.) James, Lily and Harry have the Fidelius Charm performed and Peter is their secret keeper. I don't really think LV had to do much persauding to get Peter to tell him where Harry was. In my opinion, Peter saw this as a chance to get rid of the main to rivals for James' attention and place the blame on Sirius. Therefore, leaving Peter as James only friend. LV is a master at deception. He knows Peter's motive and promises that James will not be hurt. Sirius and Lupin, by mistrusting each other, played right into Voldemort's hand. I will save my opinion on Lily's role in this senerio for a later discussion since I have rambled on long enough. ----------------------------------------- Stay ahead of the information curve. Receive MCAD news and jobs on your desktop daily. Subscribe today to the MCAD CafeNews newsletter. [ http://www10.mcadcafe.com/nl/newsletter_subscribe.php ] It's informative and essential. From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Fri Aug 6 00:22:15 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 00:22:15 -0000 Subject: To Where To When (TimeTurning that may make sense) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109079 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > Valky: > Pffffffft. The last of the air out of my balloon. Maybe...... > Know any good hiding spots. ;P > > Incedentally since you *are* so observant any help on the signs that > someone timeturns in the future books? Now I feel bad. :) I dunno... it would be helpful if HP wasn't JKR's first set of writings... we'd have more of a basis on her ideas. If I may stomp on the deflated baloon for a quick second *wince* on seeing Buckbeak gone, and if Dumbledore had his own TT availible, why would he have needed to send back the kids? He could have done it all (or most, not sure if Harry'd mentioned that he thought he saw his Dad by that point) himself, one would presume, unless he didn't have his own TT (anymore), and only Hermione was licensed to use hers. I think the comments about how complicated TT can get are the real clue. JKR isn't going to bring them back willy-nilly, although the time room in the DoM does kick that thought in the shin a bit. I agree with others that time travel is usually a cop out, but... I can see various reasons for having it in PoA: 1) show Hermione as a work a holic and give her an object lesson in the need to smell the roses 2) we hadn't seen the death of a good guy... it was one way to make us and our heros think that Buckbeak was dead, yet our heros get to save him after all! Now we're ready for real death in GoF. 3) it ended up giving Harry confidence for his Patronus... he really is as powerful as everyone thinks he is when he believes in himself! I don't know... it might come up again at somepoint, but other things such as animagi training seem more likely, and have more hints. I was contemplating that Hermione might take baby-head as inspiration for dialing LV back to mere-mortal days, but the time room was not behind the locked door at the DoM, so that's not the power Harry needs. :) Josh From macfotuk at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 00:37:43 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 00:37:43 -0000 Subject: HP Birthday & the Hallowe'en theme Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109080 This is my first post and although I have tried to read through recent posts to get a 'gist' of topics (there are FAR too many!) and what may have been discussed so far (as well as searched this subject in the archive) I wanted to know what people have said about Harry's birthday and its significance if any. S'cuse me if my ideas/thoughts are 'old hat' or sound plagiarised (they genuinely are not intended to be). JKR specified on her website the exact day of Harry's birthday, namely July 31st (at least on July 31st the 'wizard of the month' calender was labelled HP's birthday)- she may well have said this in one or more books too. This means that Harry would have been exactly fifteen months old on the night he became 'the boy who lived' - namely Hallowe'en. JKR has always stated that the most significant aspects of the entire 7-book story are known, start to finish. It may simply be that for LV to attempt killing the 'one' who will be his eventual comeuppance (I don't think there's doubt on this, even if HP doesn't himself survive the encounter) on hallowe'en of all nights was for dramatic/literary impact alone, or else hallowe'en is the night a dark wizard's power would be strongest (was Lily killed at midnight?) or hallowe'en might be the only night such a threat might be vanquishable, but I suspect there may be more in this that is revealed by the end of the series. Most interestingly though, IMO, is that Harry would also (assuming wizards have standardly human gestation periods of 9 months) have been conceived on Hallowe'en and I'm not aware of anyone having made anything of this. This could perhaps be especially portentous of a powerful wizard and/or that specially strong magic might have been associated with his conception. the same might be true of neville (Longbottom) who was born around the same time - I am not aware of his exact birth date being known since he would have his birthday in the summer vac away from Hogwart's. In all the HP books something very significant occurs on Hallowe'en and I do not believe this is simply because Hallowe'en has obvious witch/wizard significance. "macfotuk" From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Aug 6 01:30:55 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 01:30:55 -0000 Subject: Lily and unicorns In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109081 > Yb's turn: > I think what Jen is implying is that perhaps a unicorn (or it's > blood) was used in a charm on Lily and Harry so that if someone tried > to kill them both, killing the second would backfire horrendously. > > Since Unicorn blood is hard to come by without getting cursed, I > would say this is a bit farfetched, using the blood of something > innocent for pretty much any purposes at all, even if the unicorn > would sacrifice it willingly. I personally am much more inclined to > go with the same theory but using Dragon's blood instead. Jen: No, I didn't mean my comment upthread literally. As I said in post 109065, I was comparing a wandless, defenseless Lily at the moment Voldemort killed her with the unicorn in the forest that was slayed for its blood. Voldemort believed by killing Harry he would remove his last obstacle to immortality & instead he cursed himself. My images were just meant to be symbolic. If anything, I agree that dragon's blood may have possibly been used for protecting Harry. From navarro198 at hotmail.com Fri Aug 6 01:34:01 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 01:34:01 -0000 Subject: Ideology and ideologues (connected to: Why Voldemort is a fascist...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109082 -Nora: And I think it's pretty clear that Voldie has an ideology; where I'm willing to concede ground is that there are two strains in it that don't really always merge so nicely. 1: Power is the only thing important in life, and I want more of it. This is what makes him amoral, and I think the recent discussion on 'greatness' has a lot to say. (snip) 2: Muggles are inferior to wizards, and all who bear Muggle blood are tainted and inferior. Include in this the whole complex of DE ideas I posted about earlier, please. And note that the two are not *wholly* disconnected, but do go rather at cross-purposes at times. I would argue that Voldy's language speaks of a certain sense of entitlement. There's a *reason* that he calls himself 'Lord', and calls Dumbledore 'that champion of Muggles, Mudbloods, commoners' (paraphrasing--my books are 957 miles away at present...). He's speaking the language of a would-be aristocrat, to the pureblooded members of a would-be true aristocracy. Add in what I think is a pretty likely obsession with his descent from Salazar Slytherin, and you have a very particular combination of factors: A naturally rather talented wizard (who is going to be powerful) with the convictions that he is also destined and entitled to a position of power by his heritage. Now, having an allegiance to Numbah One up there, he's willing to be flexible in the pursuit of what he wants. Doesn't mean that he's ditched Numbah Two completely. Dictators may be dictators, but it's reductionist to stop at that, because they don't all behave the same way and for the same reasons. I think that the purebloods who are ideologues and do follow LV do it for a combination of reasons that are more closely entwined: We deserve power *because* of our heritage and he's going to restore us to our rightful position. Again, any wonder that a lot of these kind are mixed up with Dark Magic? It's the way to get what you want when you don't care so much about how you get it... As always, all thoughts are eagerly appreciated. Bookworm: The only thing I would add is the idea that TR/LV has a serious insecurity problem. "If I'm powerful enough, no one will realize I am really have very low self-esteem. Here I am, descended from the great Salazar himself, and what would the other Slytherins think if they found out his blood had been contaminated by my muggle father." Remember Bellatrix's reaction when Harry told her? That's enough pop-psychology for me tonight. Ravenclaw Bookworm From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 01:47:31 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 01:47:31 -0000 Subject: Secret Keepter (Was Halloween 81) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109083 DuffyPoo again: I don't recall ever reading that Harry was prevented by magic from telling someone the address of the Order, (not that it's not in there, I just don't recall it), but if they did, the person couldn't find GP anyway because Harry is not the Secret-Keeper. Only the Secret-Keeper can tell anyone the address and have them find the place. The only people who can get into 12 GP, now that DD is the Secret-Keeper are the people DD himself tells (either words or writing, I presume). So, now that DD is the S-K of 12 GP, the Malfoys will not be able to enter it, even if they had visited there frequently before. At least that is how I understand it (which I admit, means nothing.) The only concern I have regarding S-K and GP in particular is Kreacher. Did DD tell him the address? If not, how does he manage to go between GP and the Malfoy residence? Is it just more House-Elf brand magic? Who are the others that know the address? Do you mean the Malfoys, Tonks' parents, and the Lestranges? If that is who you do mean, I would expect, as stated above, that unless DD tells them the address himself, they can no longer find the place. Even though Nymphadora (what a name!) Tonks knows where 12 GP is, she cannot bring Andromeda or Ted to GP because she is not the Secret-Keeper. As above, at least this is my understanding of how it works. mhbobbin: Remember that 12 Grimauld Place seems to disappear after the gang walks out the door. The Malfoys etc. may inherit Grimauld Place, may even know the address but they wouldn't be able to see it--it is absorbed by the buildings around it. The Order of the Phoenix, Harry and friends, seem to be the most vulnerable when they exit Grimauld Place as the DEs could actually see them then but Grimauld Place itself seems to be swallowed up by the buildings around it. mhbobbin mhbobbin From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 6 02:01:51 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 02:01:51 -0000 Subject: Molly & others' vulnerability (DD specifically) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109084 Siriusly Snapey Susan: > > So your belief is that DD would GO AFTER Harry (or Ron or > > Hermione), as he did in the MoM and duke it out. Yes. It does > > seem more "DD'ish" to take action rather than to be forced into > > negotiations of any kind. Magda [responding not to this comment but in the previous post, also in the same thread]: > Perhaps I'm biased since I haven't liked Molly since the dress > robes incident in GoF but I really think she's one of those people > who prefers to deny unplesantness until she can't anymore and then > never has a backup plan to deal with the consequences. Okay, if > she lost two brothers to Voldemort, she obviously doesn't want to > lose any more family; completely understandable. But she's not > realistic in the way she deals with things and Harry was prevented > from spending a lot of time with Sirius - important, guy-bonding, > tell-me-about-my-parents- time - because she kept interupting them > or would insist on Harry helping clean. The woman just has no > sensitivity at all. While "dcgmck" responded to my above snippet with: > I also believe that Molly would do the same [as DD--that is, go > after Harry]. Though I lack canonical proof, she seems to be > Gryffindor material as much as any of the others. Given the > opportunity, I don't see her falling apart; rather, she's far more > likely to accept reality and deal with it pragmatically than she > has hypothetical situations. It's the fear of possibilities, not > reality that daunts her. SSSusan: Isn't that fascinating?? I love this board! Here are two people looking at the same character and considering some of the same scenes, and they're arriving at polar opposite positions on Molly. Magda was frank enough to admit that she doesn't like Molly much, not since GoF. I can't speak for dcgmck, but I will also be frank and say that I, by & large, really DO like Molly. Maybe my liking her makes me lean towards the conclusion that dcgmck draws. Whether it's bias or not, I think dcgmck makes a strong point that Molly is awful in hypothetical situations--worrying about the "what ifs"--but that perhaps she'd be as strong & capable as the other Order members if she were out there "dealing with it." I tend to agree. As for the comment "the woman has no sensitivity at all", again, this speaks to our different interpretations & reactions to Molly. You haven't cared for her since GoF. Whereas probably the most poignant moment in the books so far for me was one in GoF, and it took place between Molly & Harry. It occurs in the hospital wing, after the TriWizard tourney & graveyard horrors are over, and Molly envelopes Harry in a hug, holding him the way *every* child deserves to be held by someone who loves him. I saw that as extremely sensitive. I could be cynical and say that's what MOLLY needed at that moment, but I don't think that's all that was behind it. I think she loves Harry very much, and she knew that he needed to feel parental love at that moment. Back to the thread that was at hand... SSiriusly Snapey Susan previously: > > On your other point, it does seem that DD frequently knows where > > people who interest him are/when he needs to return from > > wherever he is, etc. Does it hold true for knowing where VOLDY > > is, too, do you think? It seems to me that it must not. dcgmck: > As far as LV is concerned, I think that there's the whole > irresistible force vs. immovable object thing going on there. LV, > when fully charged, is quite capable of putting up the same kinds > of magical defenses against detection that others use. (Note: > same kind is not 'same'.) However... an uncharged or discharged > current is as difficult to discern as a shielded one, so I think > that DD's failure to detect LV catching a ride with Quirrel is not > beyond plausibility. SSSusan: Definitely sounds plausible to me. dcgmck: > Say, do you suppose GG also had a chamber built? SSSusan: Not a chance. :-) Siriusly Snapey Susan From navarro198 at hotmail.com Fri Aug 6 02:08:40 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 02:08:40 -0000 Subject: Intro and Lucius In-Reply-To: <20040805185016.9508.qmail@web41208.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109085 Welcome, Flop! I really like the connection between Lucius and Arthur. I had forgotten that. Flop wrote: >Here's my theory: Lucius Malfoy will be the next Minister for Magic (I know that's awkward, since he finished OotP in Azkaban, but bear with me and ignore that for the moment) this will, of course, prolong the schism between the MoM and the OotP, and ultimately ARTHUR (Weasley, of course) will muster the Order and conquer Lucius' Death Eater arse! Any thoughts? Bookworm: There was thread last spring that started with: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/96436 I made the same argument about Lucius, then Arthur becoming Minister, in my reply to that post: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/96440 Jim Ferer and I kept a discussion of strategy and tactics going for awhile. We left it agreeing on some things and disagreeing on others. Feel free to add your comments. Ravenclaw Bookworm From meltowne at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 02:23:04 2004 From: meltowne at yahoo.com (meltowne) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 02:23:04 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin In-Reply-To: <00b901c47b47$69f70f70$85c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109086 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: Just adding fuel to the fire...Harry first heard of Black's escape on the Muggle news the morning of his 13th birthday. That gives DD the whole month of August to find Lupin and hire him. Meltowne: Yes, plus he may not have done it to have Lupin to contol him, but to protect Lupin. As far as they knew, he had killed 2 of his best friends, so perhaps DD felt the third was also at risk. From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Aug 6 02:23:02 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 02:23:02 -0000 Subject: HP Birthday & the Hallowe'en theme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109087 macfotuk wrote: > > Most interestingly though, IMO, is that Harry would also (assuming > wizards have standardly human gestation periods of 9 months) have > been conceived on Hallowe'en and I'm not aware of anyone having made > anything of this. snip the same might be true of neville > (Longbottom) who was born around the same time - I am not aware of > his exact birth date being known since he would have his birthday in > the summer vac away from Hogwart's. snip Potioncat: His birthday is 29 or 30 July (I forget what was decided) based on the JKR website calendar this July. Neville and Harry both conceived on Oct 31? That must have been one hell of a Halloween party! Potioncat From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 02:24:05 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 02:24:05 -0000 Subject: Snape's avoidance of Voldemort' s name (Was:OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chap 24) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109088 Potioncat wrote: > I'm not sure, but I had the impression that hearing "Voldemort" > caused pain to the DEs. And along with that, possibly alerted LV. > > Also, Snape isn't the only adult to tell Harry not to say Voldemort. > > I'm not saying Harry should't say Voldemort...just that I can see > why Snape doesn't want him to. Carol responds: The name clearly causes pain to Snape: I'm not sure that it does so for loyal DEs. In fact, my impression is that both Voldemort's name and the presence of a loyal DE (Barty Jr. in disguise) caused Snape's Dark Mark to burn because he's *dis*loyal to Voldemort and the Mark senses that disloyalty. Doesn't Crouch!Moody use the name "Voldemort" (as the real Moody would do)? He seems quite comfortable using it--even secretly proud to do so, at a guess. Anyway, I don't think Snape is *afraid* of either Voldemort or Voldemort's name (we've seen his courage demonstrated many times), but he certainly wouldn't want to endure the pain of hearing the name spoken if he could avoid doing so. And he probably does see Harry's use of the name when powerful adult wizards (e.g., McGonagall) avoid it as a form of arrogance. IMO, he is trying to make Harry realize that, scar or no scar, he is not yet Voldmort's equal. Carol From EyeMelodius at hotmail.com Fri Aug 6 02:30:55 2004 From: EyeMelodius at hotmail.com (annunathradien) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 02:30:55 -0000 Subject: HPB guess - King Godric? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109089 > Josh: > > In further support, if LV 'chose' Harry because of knowing he was > the/a heir, and therefore knew Lily was the link That's where we have a discrepency. Per my original theory, Voldemort *didn't* know Lily was an heir, but assumed it was James, possibly with feasible reason (likely due to James' own distant family connections). I proposed this "heirdom" - the muggle heir - was unknown to the majority of the Wizarding World and sent in hiding into the muggle world at a very early age. This (muggle world) Heir came about due to a tryst GG had, a child hidden in the muggle world (possibly believed to have died in the WW) and/or an Heir GG may have never known about. > However, I won't discount the Weasley-Evans theory so quickly >because > DD himself might not realize the family connection. Not to mention, I do think there is room in the way Dumbledore explains things to Harry. DD tends to tell Harry things in a way as he's telling him something, but at the same time concealing some aspects he doesn't want Harry to know, not yet anyway. Such is the way he graced over the explanations for four years in every end chapter prior finally telling Harry the Prophecy in OOTP. DD can tell Harry the truth, but not quite *all* the truth and do this in a way as not to make Harry suspicious. Dumbledore makes it clear he didn't want Harry to live in the Wizarding World. If I'm not mistaken, DD says it was because he was afraid Harry would turn out a "pampered little prince". More likely and more importantly, DD was possibly afraid Harry - raised in the WW - might not be able to face his inevitable responsabilities. Although, I do have a feeling it's A LOT more than the mentioned. DD's full gamet of reasons we probably still have yet to learn. Harry after all, isn't some normal boy, not since Voldemort "marked him as his equal". Harry basically became the WW's last defense against Voldemort. DD has already shown to do things for Harry's ultimate good, but it's not just for Harry's sake, but for the WW's in a whole as well. Harry is the first to make sacrifices, not even to his knowledge. In this case, DD may simply be choosing not to tell Harry of any family (allbeit distant) he has left in the WW, because DD already nixed the WW as an option, so DD feels no point in tormenting Harry with the truth of his family and where he *could have* lived. If Harry's family were the Weasleys, all the more reason for DD to be secretive. DD needs Harry to trust him right now... and how would Harry react if he found out he could have been raised by the Weasleys instead of the Dursleys? I've also never thought it was some coincidence Harry seemed to lead a rather unfortunately similar childhood as Tom Riddle. That always seemed far too convenient to be just some tragic coincidence to me. Voldemort "marked" Harry "as his equal", but it's my opinion it was DD who actually *made* Harry into said equal and this started with how DD believed Harry had to be raised. DD could be excusing this lie and/or concealment due to the protection possibly stronger with Petunia (a closer blood relative to Lily than the Weasleys) and believing Harry needed to be raised in a similar environment as Tom - his prophecied "equal" - to really *understand* where he's coming from (eventually anyway). However, I doubt that will fly with Harry when/if he should discover this theoretical truth. > Also, one might > assume that the blood might be so diluted as to not afford the > protection that Petunia can. I can see this too. However, Harry may be able to stay with the Weasleys part of the summer because there is still *some* of the blood protection there, but whatever they lack in this protection magic ... the Weasleys are also all wizards. They can defend themselves if things came to that. I do still strongly suspect there is a Weasley-Evans connection, otherwise I have my doubts DD would ever let Harry leave Petunia's protection for such a long period of time. With how important Harry is and what Harry has gone through so far for this protection? DD couldn't risk it. annunathradien From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Aug 6 02:32:55 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 02:32:55 -0000 Subject: OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109090 > Sigune (delurking for a moment): > > It always seemed to me that the Dark Mark on Snape's arm had > something to do with it all. It seems to me that Death Eaters are > even more in terror of Voldemort's name than other wizards and > witches. It struck me that in CoS (and I sincerely apologise if this > is movie contamination; I ought to reread the book), Malfoy was taken > aback by Harry's speaking Voldy's name out loud, and so are, if I am > not mistaken, the DE's at the DoM - as if it physically hurts them to > hear it. I suspect that the Dark Mark is a rather powerful link with > Voldemort, comparable in a way to Harry's scar; and old beliefs have > it that when you speak, for example, the Devil's name, he might just > come to you. Potioncat: In GoF in particular (perhaps because I'm reading it now) it seems that the Dark Mark on the wrist can be made to hurt. Snape seems to be in pain when Crouch!Moody is making comments about DEs and marks. So Sigune's comment, "...comparable in a way to Harry's scar;..." made me think of DD and his Pensieve. He has the thought of Snape talking about his mark growing darker, and he has (IIRC) Harry's scar hurting more, and he says "A connection I could make by myself." There also seems to be an emphasis on the scar hurting or the dark mark hurting when Harry, a DE and/or a third person is around. What if LV is aware on some level of certain things his DEs are doing/thinking, with the dark mark as the connector? Potioncat From vmonte at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 02:41:21 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 02:41:21 -0000 Subject: Molly & others' vulnerability (DD specifically) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109091 SSSusan wrote: As for the comment "the woman has no sensitivity at all", again, this speaks to our different interpretations & reactions to Molly. You haven't cared for her since GoF. Whereas probably the most poignant moment in the books so far for me was one in GoF, and it took place between Molly & Harry. It occurs in the hospital wing, after the TriWizard tourney & graveyard horrors are over, and Molly envelopes Harry in a hug, holding him the way *every* child deserves to be held by someone who loves him. I saw that as extremely sensitive. I could be cynical and say that's what MOLLY needed at that moment, but I don't think that's all that was behind it. I think she loves Harry very much, and she knew that he needed to feel parental love at that moment. vmonte responds: I like this scene in GoF as well. I really like Molly, so I guess that makes me prejudiced too. Molly has reason to be worried, don't you think? I'm sure she realizes that chances are that at least one person (or several people) in her immediate family are probably going to die--and soon. Some mother's just worry a lot, it's part of their nature. And I know from my experience (I'm a mother that worries a lot) and my friends, that worrying can be a common trait for mothers-- and I'm not in the middle of the WWW (wizarding world war). The first thing I thought when I read the OOTP scene where Molly sees all of her loved ones dying (at GP), was that Molly will probably be the next to die. And I do not see her dying like a coward or traitor. Unfortunately, Molly's death may be the necessary push the Weasley kids need to begin a more active role in the war. I think that like Sirius, JKR may kill Molly as a means to move her story forward. I'm certain that once she is gone the children will be allowed into the Order. vivian From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 02:42:35 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 02:42:35 -0000 Subject: Wizard/Muggle "Radar" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109092 > Kristen wrote: > In other words, if a (convincingly attired) witch or wizard walked > up to Arthur and said, "Hi, I'm Joe/Jane Muggle and I need your > help," would any magical "radar" alert the Arthur that things are > not what they seem? > > > SSSusan responded: That's interesting--IS there any kind > of "wizard detecting" or "muggle detecting" ability inherent in > witches & wizards? Not that I'm aware of. But did I miss something > in the books? Is this something Aurors are capable of? > > Anybody have thoughts on this? Carol adds: Draco seems certain in GoF that the DEs who are tormenting the Muggle Roberts family will instantly recognize Hermione as a Muggleborn and subject her to the same treatment, so I think some such "radar" does exist, only maybe in the opposite way to what Kristen is suggesting. If that's the case, Arthur (or any pureblood) could presumably detect a Muggle posing as a witch or wizard (not that such a thing is likely to happen) because his "Muggle sensor" would be activated. If a witch or wizard were posing as a Muggle, he'd be suspicious because he *didn't* sense the presence of a Muggle. It also seems that Tom Riddle could identify the Muggleborns at Hogwarts even in Diary!Tom form, and evidently the basilisk could, too. And yet it seems likely that this radar doesn't extend to Half-bloods, since Tom himself probably passed as a pureblood at Hogwarts, making sure that his Slytherin friends knew nothing of the Muggle orphanage he returned to every summer. Carol, who has wondered how the DEs would know that Hermione is a Muggleborn and is glad that Kristen raised this point From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Aug 6 02:44:59 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 02:44:59 -0000 Subject: What drives WW ? (was Chapter 24: Occlumency) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109093 Major Snippage > Sigune: snip > ... and if Dumbledore is the 'guardian of greatness', the man who sort of has the responsibility to make sure that every wizard and witch makes the best of their talents when passing through his school, and to guide them in the right direction, then I think that explains why he is so strangely, and seemingly endlessly, tolerant of Snape. Potioncat: I think this idea explains a lot. Harry and the reader meet Snape at one moment of time and follow him in brief snatches for 7 years. Seeing him as a student sees him. But DD has known Snape for over 20 years. And he may have known Snape's parents as students as well. DD knows this man far better than we do. In fact, so do McGonagall, Flitwick and to lessor extents the other teachers. So while we see a cruel teacher, they see a man who is sometimes sharp tongued to the students. But they know his good points, his battles, the person. And just as many us can forgive James or Sirius their faults, DD, MM and others can forgive Snape, his. Sigune: > > If the size of Snape's nose and the length of his fingers are > anything to go by, the Potions Master has great magical ability - > which, my sceptical self feels bound to add, apart from his obvious > expertise in potion making, we have not witnessed yet. snip I feel that Dumbledore is very much guiding Snape and setting him challenges - the Occlumency lessons, for example, were meant to be every bit as 'educational' for Snape as they were for Harry, but > unfortunately /both/ failed miserably. Poor Dumbledore. It's lonely at the top. Potioncat: This makes a lot of sense. Snape is just as much one of DD's students as Harry is and as James was. From miranda_mcgonagall37 at yahoo.ca Fri Aug 6 02:59:02 2004 From: miranda_mcgonagall37 at yahoo.ca (Nicole Lewis) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 22:59:02 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Snape's reaction to Harry's assumption that he is a spy Message-ID: <20040806025902.65895.qmail@web53310.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109094 As a constant lurker, I haven't seen any recent discussions of this moment between Harry and Snape, so I decided to post and see what everyone else thinks. I am curious about Snape's reaction to Harry assuming that he is a DE spy in OotP. What does this mean in regards to Snape's work for the Order? (page 521, Canadian Hardcover OotP): "That is just as well, Potter," Snape said coldly, "because you are neither special nor important, and 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. He had not meant to say it; it had burst out of him in temper. For a long moment they stared at each other, Harry convinced he had gone too far. But 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, if you are ready, we will start again. Why would Snape be satisfied if Harry guessed right and he is a spy? I have always assumed that this reaction means Harry is wrong, but what else could Snape be doing for the Order? Any ideas? Or is this satisfaction because Harry has figured things out? I've heard some theories that perhaps Snape is satisfied to gloat over Harry how much he risks for the Order, and that he knows more than Harry does. I like the idea, but is it too obvious? Any suggestions or directions to an earlier discussion on this topic would be appreciated. Miranda PS - I tried to send this a few days ago but don't think it worked. So if it did and this is a repeat, many apologies and please ignore this message! --------------------------------- Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 6 03:00:43 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 03:00:43 -0000 Subject: Wizard/Muggle "Radar" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109095 Carol adds: > It also seems that Tom Riddle could identify the Muggleborns at > Hogwarts even in Diary!Tom form, and evidently the basilisk could, > too. And yet it seems likely that this radar doesn't extend to > Half-bloods, since Tom himself probably passed as a pureblood at > Hogwarts, making sure that his Slytherin friends knew nothing of > the Muggle orphanage he returned to every summer. SSSusan: I always figured Diary!Tom just asked Ginny who SHE knew to be Muggle-born and that they directed the basilisk. > Carol, who has wondered how the DEs would know that Hermione is a > Muggleborn and is glad that Kristen raised this point SSSusan: And with this, I guess I figured it was more "family talk," e.g., Draco coming home & telling his daddy about "the worst of the Mudbloods" at Hogwarts, which would be sure to include Hermione. But there MIGHT be some kind of detection device! :-) Siriusly Snapey Susan From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Aug 6 03:09:11 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 03:09:11 -0000 Subject: Snape, Quirrellmort question... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109096 -snip SSSusan wrote: > > On the other issue--I'm away from my books, so I probably shouldn't take this on, but if I'm wrong, I'm sure someone will correct me. *Is* it true that there were only three who were missing who weren't in Azkaban? Weren't there several gaps around the circle? I thought that Voldy simply *discussed* three but that they didn't comprise all the missing DEs in toto. Can someone confirm or correct me? > > Potioncat: As I recall, sorry, I can't get to books either, There were about 30 or so DEs in the group with gaps between them. LV passed by without speaking to some. And passed by gaps (IIRC) without speaking. But he did pause at one gap and made comments. So here is my thought. Some DEs knew the names of the missing ones. Some did not. I'm saying that because no one knew everybody, but you might know the guys close by. I think the one who has left me forever, (Didn't he say the one I think has left me forever..) is Snape. And I think another way of saying it is, "If he has left me forever, he will be killed." so LV at that point is not sure if that person has left him. And that leaves the opening for Snape to assert his loyalty. LV's feeling that Snape has left forever, could be based on his experience during SS/PS and reports from Crouch!Moody. Potioncat (who will soon be in the Magic Kingdom with 2 teens, a tween and a senior...)EXPECTO PATRONUM! From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Aug 6 03:14:13 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 03:14:13 -0000 Subject: Snape's avoidance of Voldemort' s name (Was:OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chap 24) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109097 Carol wrote: snip And he probably does see Harry's > use of the name when powerful adult wizards (e.g., McGonagall) avoid > it as a form of arrogance. IMO, he is trying to make Harry realize > that, scar or no scar, he is not yet Voldmort's equal. > Potioncat: Good point. Much has been made of Snape's comment "you are neither special nor important." but I am not sure it steems from a negative motive. It was only recently that adults strove to promote self esteem in children. In the past, adults discouraged pride, particularly a false sense of pride in children. And I think Snape sees Harry as being at risk for becomming cocky and careless. From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 03:14:49 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 03:14:49 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?JKR=92s_giant_mistake=3F?= Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109098 Well, not THAT giant (sorry, couldn't resist borrowing Rita's headline). Not on the scale of the Priori Incantatem's order, perhaps, but I suspect another significant mistake in GoF, and maybe in PoA as well. Either that, or we have a rather curious finding. But let me start at the beginning. Other than LV himself, only five characters in canon pronounce Voldemort's name regularly: DD, Harry, Lupin, Sirius and Hermione (who has only started in OotP). Two other characters pronounces it with great reluctance: McGonagall, when challenged to do so by DD, pronounces it several times in SS/PS, Ch. 1, but reverts to "You-Know- Who" for the rest of the series. Hagrid utters it once, when he has to explain to Harry who killed his parents (SS/PS, Ch. 4). JKR usually makes sure to highlight it when we find out for the first time one of the characters above does use the V-word: ------------------------------------------- Dumbledore (SS/PS, Ch. 1): "My dear Professor, surely a sensible person like yourself can call him by his name? All this `You-Know-Who' nonsense ? for eleven years I have been trying to persuade people to call him by his proper name: Voldemort." Professor McGonagall flinched, but Dumbledore, who was unsticking two sherbet lemons, seemed not to notice. "It all gets so confusing if we keep saying `You-Know-Who'. I have never seen any reason to be frightened of saying Voldemort's name." ------------------------------------------- Harry (SS/PS, Ch. 6): " and until Hagrid told me, I didn't know anything about being a wizard or about my parents or Voldemort ?" Ron gasped. "What?" said Harry. "You said You-Know-Who's name!" said Ron, sounding both shocked and impressed. "I'd have thought you, of all people ?" -------------------------------------------- Lupin (PoA, Ch. 8): "Well," said Lupin, frowning slightly, "I assumed that if the Boggart faced you, it would assume the shape of Lord Voldemort." Harry stared. Not only was this the last answer he'd expected, but Lupin had said Voldemort's name. The only person Harry had ever heard say the name aloud (apart from himself) was Professor Dumbledore. -------------------------------------------- Sirius (PoA, Ch. 10): Black started to laugh, a horrible, mirthless laugh that filled the whole room. "Voldemort, teach me tricks?" he said. Pettigrew flinched as though Black had brandished a whip at him. "What, scared to hear your old master's name?" said Black. --------------------------------------------- Hermione (OotP, Ch. 15): He looked helplessly at Hermione, whose face was stricken. "Harry," she said timidly, "don't you see? This . . . this is exactly why we need you . . . we need to know what it's r-really like . . . facing him . . . facing V-Voldemort." It was the first time she had ever said Voldemort's name and it was this, more than anything else, that calmed Harry. -------------------------------------------- Other wizards and witches almost never fail to shudder and/or protest whenever one of the characters above utters the name. Snape and Bellatrix are especially horrified when Harry pronounces it. So it's no wonder that Valky (#104274) recently came up with a nice theory about LV's magic power growing from this collective fear in the WW (the post that started me really thinking about the subject). Even if this theory is not technically true, I'm personally sure that saying/not saying the V-word is a strong metaphor in HP for people's courage to challenge a regime of terror. But here several members (for example, Pippin in #104465) were quick to point out that saying "Voldemort" is not that simple a touchstone for knowing who the Really Good Guys are, because Crouch!Moody does utter it in GoF: ----------------------------- (GoF, Ch. 35, pp. 673-674 US): Moody helped tip the stuff down Harry's throat; he coughed, a peppery taste burning his throat. Moody's office came into sharper focus, and so did Moody himself. He looked as white as Fudge had looked, and both eyes were fixed unblinkingly upon Harry's face. "Voldemort's back, Harry? You're sure he's back? How did he do it?" "He took stuff from his father's grave, and from Wormtail, and me," said Harry. ------------------------------- Now, I always had the strong suspicion that Crouch!Moody using the V- word here is simply an editing mistake. To see why, let's look at the dialog between Harry and Crouch Jr here. Note that Crouch Jr is using "the Dark Lord" both before and after that single "Voldemort", while Harry is using "Voldemort". Unlike the cases I cited above, JKR does not highlight Crouch Jr's single use of "Voldemort" in any way. I emphasized the words "Voldemort" and "Dark Lord" in capital letters so you can see the pattern better: ------------------------------------------------------ Crouch Jr: "What happened. Harry?" Harry: "Cup was a Portkey. Took me and Cedric to a graveyard and VOLDEMORT was there Lord VOLDEMORT Crouch Jr: "The DARK LORD was there? What happened then?" Harry: "Killed Cedric they killed Cedric " Crouch Jr: "And then?" Harry: "Made a potion got his body back " Crouch Jr: "The DARK LORD got his body back? He's returned?" Harry: "And the Death Eaters came and then we dueled " Crouch Jr: "You dueled with the DARK LORD?" Harry: "Got away my wand did something funny I saw my mum and dad they came out of his wand " Crouch Jr: "In here. Harry in here, and sit down You'll be all right now drink this Drink it you'll feel better come on, now. Harry, I need to know exactly what happened " Crouch Jr: "VOLDEMORT's (<---exception!!!) back, Harry? You're sure he's back? How did he do it?" Harry: "He took stuff from his father's grave, and from Wormtail, and me," Crouch Jr: "What did the DARK LORD take from you?" Harry: "Blood," Crouch Jr: "And the Death Eaters? They returned?" Harry: "Yes. Loads of them " Crouch Jr: "How did he treat them?" Did he forgive them?" Harry: "There's a Death Eater at Hogwarts! There's a Death Eater here - they put my name in the Goblet of Fire, they made sure I got through to the end -" Crouch Jr: "I know who the Death Eater is," he said quietly. Harry: "Karkaroff? Where is he? Have you got him? Is he locked up?" Crouch Jr: "Karkaroff? Karkaroff fled tonight, when he felt the Dark Mark burn upon his arm. He betrayed too many faithful supporters of the DARK LORD to wish to meet them but I doubt he will get far. The DARK LORD has ways of tracking his enemies." Crouch Jr: "The DARK LORD didn't manage to kill you. Potter, and he so wanted to. Imagine how he will reward me when he finds I have done it for him. I gave you to him - the thing he needed above all to regenerate - and then I killed you for him. I will be honored beyond all other Death Eaters. I will be his dearest, his closest supporter closer than a son " Crouch Jr: "The DARK LORD and I have much in common. Both of us, for instance, had very disappointing fathers very disappointing indeed. Both of us suffered the indignity, Harry, of being named after those fathers. And both of us had the pleasure the very great pleasure of killing our fathers to ensure the continued rise of the Dark Order!" Harry: "You're mad," Harry said - he couldn't stop himself- "you're mad!" Crouch Jr: "Mad, am I? We'll see! We'll see who's mad, now that the DARK LORD has returned, with me at his side! He is back, Harry Potter, you did not conquer him - and now - I conquer you!" --------------------------------------- At this point DD stuns Crouch. In the following Veritaserum confession, Crouch refers to LV always as "my master". You can see how this single "Voldemort" doesn't seem to belong in there, among all the "Dark Lord"s, and it is not highlighted in any way. So I scanned through GoF again, to see how Crouch Jr refers to LV in all the other chapters. Well, very conveniently he doesn't refer to LV at all in other chapters, but I did stumble upon another highly suspicious "Voldemort", uttered not by Crouch Jr but by his father, Crouch Sr (it's in the family, I guess). This is in the Pensieve scene, during Bagman's trial: ------------------------------------------------ (GoF Ch. 30, p. 592 US): "Ludovic Bagman, you were caught passing information to Lord Voldemort's supporters," said Mr. Crouch. "For this, I suggest a term of imprisonment in Azkaban lasting no less than -" But there was an angry outcry from the surrounding benches. Several of the witches and wizards around the walls stood up, shaking their heads, and even their fists, at Mr. Crouch. "But I've told you, I had no idea!" Bagman called earnestly over the crowd's babble, his round blue eyes widening. ----------------------------------------------- This case is even more absurd, IMO, than Crouch Jr's case. There are many Wizards present, and they indeed protest, but NOT over Crouch using the V-word. They protest over Crouch trying to convict the popular Quidditch beater Bagman. Crouch refers to LV twice again in the Pensieve scene, during the trial of Bellatrix et al., and in both cases he calls him "He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named". A bit funny since he had just named him. At this point I became really suspicious. Not suspicious enough to post, however, especially since just recently I myself chided another list member for assuming that a piece of canon she didn't like was JKR's mistake (erm... sorry Potioncat. Just goes to show that the best of us must sometimes eat our words ;-) ). so I went to search all the other books. It turned out that Quirrell mentions the V-word twice: ------------------------------- (SS/PS, Ch. 17, pp. 290-291): All Harry could think of doing was to keep Quirrell talking and stop him concentrating on the Mirror. "I saw you and Snape in the Forest ?" he blurted out. "Yes," said Quirrell idly, walking around the Mirror to look at the back. "He was on to me by that time, trying to find out how far I'd got. He suspected me all along. Tried to frighten me ? as though he could, when I had Lord Voldemort on my side " "He is with me wherever I go," said Quirrell quietly. "I met him when I travelled around the world. A foolish young man I was then, full of ridiculous ideas about good and evil. Lord Voldemort showed me how wrong I was. There is no good and evil, there is only power, and those too weak to seek it -------------------------------- However, since Quirrell at that time is possessed by Voldy, I guess this is not much stranger than Voldy himself saying his own name, which he does many times with great relish. In CoS I didn't find any "Voldemort" that is not uttered by Harry, DD or Tom Riddle. But then I arrived at PoA, and what did I find there? Peter Pettigrew, at the Shack, says Voldemort's name ONCE: ------------------------------------ (PoA, Ch. 19, p. 369 US): "I must admit, Peter, I have difficulty in understanding why an innocent man would want to spend twelve years as a rat," said Lupin evenly. "Innocent, but scared!" squealed Pettigrew. "If Voldemort's supporters were after me, it was because I put one of their best men in Azkaban ? the spy, Sirius Black!" ------------------------------------ This is IMO the most suspicious "Voldemort". This is only one page after Pettigrew himself flinches from Sirius saying the V-word (as cited in the beginning of this post). In all other cases in the Shack, Pettifrew refers to LV twice as "He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named" and once as "the Dark Lord". That single "Voldemort" is not highlighted in any way. But what caps it all for me is this: Pettigrew, Crouch Sr and Crouch Jr actually DON'T use the word "Voldemort". No, they don't. All three of them use "Voldemort's". Pettigrew: "If Voldemort's supporters were after me" Crouch Sr: "you were caught passing information to Lord Voldemort's supporters". Crouch Jr: ""Voldemort's back, Harry?" Now, I'm sure you can build a very interesting theory on this amazing coincidence, but I have a horrible suspicion that the explanation is rather mundane: JKR or one of her editors run a computerized search over all occurrences of the word "Voldemort" in the manuscripts, when editing them, to make sure this word is not spoken by any character who shouldn't speak it. Unfortunately they have the option "find whole words only" checked, and so they miss the "Voldemort's" cases. Hyperbole? JKR gives this excuse for the mistake of the incorrect Priori Incantatem order in her website: "Lily first, then James. That's how it appears in my original manuscript but we were under enormous pressure to edit it very fast and my American editor thought that was the wrong way around, and he is so good at catching small errors I changed it without thinking, then realised it had been right in the first place. We were all very sleep-deprived at the time." Of course, I might have missed other interesting Voldemorts in the books. Also, the books I have are the US hardcovers. I'd be very interested to know if the three "Voldemort's" above exist in all other editions, especially the more recent. If even one of them was corrected, this means that all three of them were probably mistakes. However, even if they were not corrected yet, I still tend towards the mistake explanation, unless someone can come up with a nice theory (reminds you of the Priori Incantatem story again?) And finally, I resubmit for your consideration the old hypothesis: Wizards who pronounce the word "Voldemort" are either Voldemort himself, or possessed by him, or are really brave guys. Neri (who squirms when thinking about some of his own recent embarrassing mistakes. It was that darn spell checker again, I swear!) From drliss at comcast.net Fri Aug 6 03:18:27 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (Lissa Hess) Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 23:18:27 -0400 Subject: [The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin In-Reply-To: <1091760180.22233.23386.m20@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.2.20040805231256.0171b6f8@mail.comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 109099 > > >Meltowne: >Yes, plus he may not have done it to have Lupin to contol him, but to >protect Lupin. As far as they knew, he had killed 2 of his best >friends, so perhaps DD felt the third was also at risk. Lissa: Whoohoo! thank you! I've been thinking that too; that Dumbledore was as concerned for Lupin as he was for Harry. And it makes sense. Three out of four of Sirius Black's best friends are dead... he's probably after the fourth as well. I also wonder just how long Dumbledore's wanted Lupin to teach at Hogwarts. Lupin is a competent and gifted teacher, despite the lycanthropy, and especially now that the Wolfsbane's Potion is around (and if it wasn't there was the Shrieking Shack), that's controllable. Maybe he's been trying to get Lupin for ages, but first has to convince Lupin himself (I have a feeling- although it could easily be from reading too much fanfic- that Lupin took some dragging), and going through all the paperwork with the Ministry and arguing with Fudge to let him hire a werewolf. Perhaps Sirius Black escaping was the kick in someone's (Lupin's, Fudge's, both...) pants to actually get Lupin in the gates again. Is anyone clear on what happened at the end of PoA? Lupin says he resigned, Harry later (in OotP) says he was sacked. So did Dumbledore request Lupin's resignation, or did Lupin give it voluntarily? I didn't get the impression that Dumbledore was fighting Lupin to stay at the end of PoA, but I didn't get the impression he was pushing him out the door, either. (Coughs and mutters something about Sirius.) Just curious. Liss From vmonte at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 03:31:25 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 03:31:25 -0000 Subject: Human transfiguration is taught in 6th year... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109101 vmonte: In every book the kids learn some skill, meet an animal, learn spells, and receive important items that become important (often in their survival) later in the books. I think in GoF (was it?) Hermione mentions that human transfiguration is taught in 6th year. It's about time the transfiguration teacher became more important. (I mean this is DD & MM's specialty!) And MM did say that she was going to help Harry become an Auror--and so perhaps she will be able to get him to start seriously focusing on his studies. Aside from this, how do you think transfiguration will be worked into the story line? vivian From aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 03:32:19 2004 From: aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com (aboutthe1910s) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 03:32:19 -0000 Subject: DD knows where they are In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109102 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "snow15145" wrote: > My question to you Aggie is what possible perils or safe zones (like > Weasley's clock at home, at work, in mortal danger) appear on the > watch? Okay, the only passage I know of describing Dumbledore's watch says this: "It had twelve hands but not numbers; instead, little planets were moving around the edge." ...Maybe the watch shows "what's in the stars" for the people (if it is people) that the hands represent--thus explaining not only how Dumbledore knows things about things, but also how he so often *pre-empts* what is going to happen to them. Plus, it could still be vague enough to explain why he doesn't know *everything* and can even be wrong sometimes. aboutthe1910s From hexicon at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 03:36:12 2004 From: hexicon at yahoo.com (Kristen) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 03:36:12 -0000 Subject: Lily and unicorns In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109103 > > Jen: No, I didn't mean my comment upthread literally. As I said in > post 109065, I was comparing a wandless, defenseless Lily at the > moment Voldemort killed her with the unicorn in the forest that was > slayed for its blood. Do we know for certain from the books that Lily was wandless? (On re-viewing the movie of SS I was struck how curiously passive she is in the flashback.) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 04:02:05 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 04:02:05 -0000 Subject: Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109104 Melanie (I think) asked: > > why > > on Earth didn't Lupin or Sirius really sit down and have this chat > > with Harry? > >>>>>>SNIP>>>>>> > > Aggie: > My understanding was that everyone was following DD's orders. That > he had informed them all that Harry *wasn't* to be told. It is my > belief that Sirius *DID* want to tell Harry all about it, (the night > he [Harry]arrived) but that Molly, acting on DD's orders, deemed it > inappropriate. Carol responds: But these comments and quotes relate to an earlier point in the story, before the occlumency lessons have been proposed. Molly wasn't involved in the occlumency discussions, which began at a later point (near the end of the Christmas holiday) with a conflict between Sirius and Snape. If that weren't bad enough, Sirius undermined any trust Harry might have placed in Snape and the Occlumency lessons by giving him the two-way mirror--*to use to contact him if Snape gave Harry a hard time!* (The fact that Harry didn't open the package or use the mirror is irrelevant.) Sirius could--and should--have taken the opportunity to explain what Occlumency was and why it was needed (to the best of his ability, not being an occlumens himself). He should not have allowed his animosity toward Snape to interfere with Dumbledore's plan for Harry to learn occlumency through the best teacher available. But resentment or jealousy or immaturity or whatever it was kept Sirius from accepting the possibility that Snape could and should be trusted with the occlumency lessons, and rather than keep his misgivings to himself, he reinforced them by using *Snape* as his reason for giving Harry the mirror (bad timing, bad motivation, and more secrecy No wonder Harry didn't use it when it was most needed). Lupin at least informed Harry that *Professor* Snape was a "superb occlumens"--showing him respect as a colleague and fellow member of the Order, as Sirius did not. But even he did not explain what occlumency was or why Harry needed it. The explanation was left to Snape, who, IMO, made it as clear as he could to a resistant pupil whose instinct to mistrust him had been reinforced by Sirius's misguided gesture and bad advice. Carol From sad1199 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 04:44:40 2004 From: sad1199 at yahoo.com (sad1199) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 04:44:40 -0000 Subject: Lily and unicorns (Bible ?) In-Reply-To: <004001c47b3f$1d5ff300$a3d086d9@oemcomputer> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109105 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jo Raggett" wrote: > Jen > <<<< Lily's blood* which he may have been using metaphorically, but it reminds me of Quirrellmort slaying the defenseless unicorn to drink its blood--Voldemort slayed the innocent at Godric's Hollow in hopes > of finally drinking from the cup of immortality, and it cursed him. >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > sad1199 asks: Has anyone in the group compared Lily to Mary (of the Bible)? I am just wondering about her pure innocence... I'm really not trying to be funny or crude but is JKR presenting Harry as the immaculate conception? Not trying to offend in any way as I am a church going Lutheran but it just popped into my head. Have a Happy Love Filled Day sad1199 From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 04:55:11 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 04:55:11 -0000 Subject: Snape and Hagrid have something in common... In-Reply-To: <002201c47a5c$bdd8d2e0$a4570043@technomad> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109106 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Eric Oppen" wrote: > If this has been discussed-to-death at one of the times when I wasn't able > to access the list, please forgive me. Rereading PS/SS, it struck me that > Hagrid and Snape have the same sort of eyes. > > Could they be...related? (On Hagrid's dad's side, I hasten to add!) > > We've seen that the WW tends to have a poor opinion of some of the other > magical races, giants in particular. What _was_ the response Hagrid's dad > got to his Cunning Plan, anyway? ("Oh, I've got this giantess, Fridwulfa, > up the spout, so she'll have my baby and we'll raise it together...") And > does Hagrid have any other relations---like, say, Snape's parents? > > If they are related, would this have shaped Snape's outlook in any way? > _Particularly_ given Hagrid's talent for giant-size mess-ups? (Think about > Hagrid in potions class...and shudder!) Carol responds: One very small point: Snape is a lot younger than Hagrid, 35 or 36 in GoF to Hagrid's 65 (he was expelled at 13, fifty years before CoS). So Snape could not have been Hagrid's teacher. He wasn't even born yet when Hagrid was expelled. Carol From sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com Fri Aug 6 05:11:13 2004 From: sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com (Amey Chinchorkar) Date: 6 Aug 2004 05:11:13 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) Message-ID: <20040806051113.25030.qmail@webmail10.rediffmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109107 Amey: Let me start by quoting Sherlock Holmes ?Circumstantial evidence is two edged sword. It may point to one thing but if you change your point of view slightly, it may point to asomething entirely different? (I don?t have exact quote, but you will get my gist.) Sorry if I snip the quotes you have given, but I don?t want to contest them. - RMM - Lupin says that Black was using dark arts learned from - Voldemort. What does Black respond with? "NO NO NO, I had nothing - to do with Voldemort!!!!" No. He responds with "what does Snape - have to do with it?" - This implies that Black has been doing something with Voldemort, for - he does not deny it. Amey: Why should he deny it again when Lupin said that he believed it because he didn?t want to believe that Sirius was getting in the school using their common knowledge. He wasn?t accussing Sirius there, he was saying what he wanted to believe, not even what he *really* believed. Now talking of Snape, it?s a different matter, he is age-old enemy and *known DE*. - RMM - >snip>Black and Pettigrew are friends at this point, for Black is able to - have Pettigrew become Secret-Keeper and convince the Potters of that - arrangement. Amey: Of course they are friends. Isn?t wormtail sitting between the Potters in the Photograph??? Though I wonder where Lupin was then, but then again, it might have a logical answer. After Black, Lupin is the closest friend of the Potters. Now Voldemort doesn?t believe in doing things in half. He will go for Sirius and Lupin both, but never for wormtail (in ideal conditions). Also if someone close to Potters is providing the information to Des, then natural choices are Sirius or Lupin. Now, Sirius is still to be believed, so who remains??? - RMM - Now, see this: - Again, Black does not deny an association with Voldemort, he only - snorts at the term "tricks". Amey: Who is putting the stress on *tricks*? If you see, the word is not italicized or anything, the whole sentence is a snort Voldemort and teaching tricks both are worth a snort for Sirius. - RMM - And: - Pettigrew had been spying for Voldemort for at least a year before - the Potters died. Yet, he was on good terms with Black and the - Potters. Amey: This is the information Sirius received when he heard the captured DEs speaking in Azkaban. said Black. "You've been hiding from Voldemort's old supporters. I heard things in Azkaban, Peter... They all think you're dead, or you'd have to answer to them....? (PoA) So even if he was a friend of Peter then, now he knows the truth about him firsthand. And as it seems Bella is quite close to Voldemort, she must know the truth about Peter. - RMM - Wormtail puts the other Marauders all in the same group as being - brave, as if they were able to stand up to Voldemort where Wormtail - was not. - This implies heavily that the Marauders, either collectively or - individually had some sort of relationship with Voldemort, and we see - from the narration that that relationship involved "learning" - and "teaching". Hence, the idea that Voldemort was tutoring some or - all of them comes into one's head. - Heck, who knows? Maybe Voldemort was teaching at Hogwarts for a time! Amey: Of course, Potter defied Voldemort three times. So if the prophesy (and Dumbledore) is right, they stood *against* Voldemort and defied him and also lived to tell the tales they are of course brave. Also, ?"Very few people know that Lord Voldemort was once called Tom Riddle. I taught him myself, fifty years ago, at Hogwarts. He disappeared after leaving the school ... traveled 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 recognizable. Hardly anyone connected Lord Voldemort with the clever, handsome boy who was once Head Boy here."? (CoS - Dumbledore) When was he going to teach them?? - CMM: - Black believed Lupin was spying for Voldemort!!! Why would he unless - he knew Lupin was involved with Voldemort in some fashion?? Amey: Why is there so much stress on the word *know*? He believed that Lupin was a spy, he didn?t know it. Well the *circumstantial evidence* was the (agaiun wrongly) against Lupin. - CMM: - Conclusion: All of the Marauders were involved with Voldemort. Some - of the Marauders more than the others. All the Marauders can use - Voldemort's name with ease, implying that they are not under - Voldemort's sway or afraid of him -- that is, all except Wormtail. - Also, Voldemort was doing some kind of instruction with them as the - nature of the relationship revolved around "learning" and "teaching". Amey: The Map was prepared when they were in school. So does that mean they were taking private lessons from Voldemort while they were in school? We have seen that anybody who has worked under Voldemort (including Snape) is mortally afraid of saying his name. Doesn?t this prove anything???? Amey, who will dig up some more evidence that Marauders were free of any Voldemort connection, except of course one of them. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Meliss9900 at aol.com Fri Aug 6 05:32:22 2004 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 01:32:22 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Half-bloods, Pure-bloods, etc. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109108 In a message dated 08/05/2004 17.26 Central Daylight Time, cldrolet at sympatico.ca writes: > Ron's answer was to the question from Harry, "Are all your family wizards?" > to which Ron said "Er - yes, I think so. I think Mum's got a second cousin > who's an accountant, but we never talk about him." Which is not to say that > the second cousin isn't a squib, but it wasn't a reply in relation to a > question about Squibs. I was looking through Rowling's site and she says that this cousin and his (Muggle) wife had "rather inconveniently produced a witch" If the cousin were a wizard then he had to have known there was a good chance of having a magical child. If he were a squib, he could have believably thought his odds of fathering a witch or wizard would have been much lower. Mel [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From omphale at onetel.com Fri Aug 6 05:57:35 2004 From: omphale at onetel.com (saraquel_omphale) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 05:57:35 -0000 Subject: [The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.2.20040805231256.0171b6f8@mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109109 > >Meltowne: > >Yes, plus he may not have done it to have Lupin to contol him, but to > >protect Lupin. As far as they knew, he had killed 2 of his best > >friends, so perhaps DD felt the third was also at risk. > > > Lissa: > > Whoohoo! thank you! I've been thinking that too; that Dumbledore was as > concerned for Lupin as he was for Harry. And it makes sense. Three out of > four of Sirius Black's best friends are dead... he's probably after the > fourth as well. > Hi everyone, I like this strand, but I had always assumed that Lupin got the Hogwarts job because of the anti-werewolf legislation which Umbridge had passed had made it almost impossible for Lupin to get a job. Sorry can't for the life of me remember where in OotP that is mentioned, but if I remember rightly whoever mentions it says it happened a couple of years back. Saraquel From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 6 06:29:19 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 06:29:19 -0000 Subject: Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109110 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > If that weren't bad enough, Sirius undermined any trust Harry might > have placed in Snape and the Occlumency lessons by giving him the > two-way mirror--*to use to contact him if Snape gave Harry a hard > time!* (The fact that Harry didn't open the package or use the mirror > is irrelevant.) Sirius could--and should--have taken the opportunity > to explain what Occlumency was and why it was needed (to the best of > his ability, not being an occlumens himself). He should not have > allowed his animosity toward Snape to interfere with Dumbledore's plan > for Harry to learn occlumency through the best teacher available. But > resentment or jealousy or immaturity or whatever it was kept Sirius > from accepting the possibility that Snape could and should be trusted > with the occlumency lessons, and rather than keep his misgivings to > himself, he reinforced them by using *Snape* as his reason for giving > Harry the mirror (bad timing, bad motivation, and more secrecy No > wonder Harry didn't use it when it was most needed). >> Carol imamommy: I think this is indicative of Sirius regarding Harry as a mixture of brother and son, and perhaps there is a strain of parental instinct here that causes Sirius to act as he does. If your child had a math teacher who was as horribly unfair to him as Snape is to Harry, would you say, "Well, he's a wonderful mathematician, and you need to learn math to succeed, so it doesn't matter that he makes you so paralyzed with fear you can't learn a thing in his class"? Sirius is acting like a parent; Lupin has the luxury of being a bit more detached. Sirius is still really upset when he finds out that the lessons have stopped. Sirius really doesn't have a lot of freedom here. DD only wants him to say so much. He can't contact Harry in any usual manner. I think he is desparate to help Harry, and it causes him real pain to think of what Harry's going to face back at school. What parent would do less? I also think this is resultant of DD's Big Mistake--he should have communicated things better, even if through somebody else. To paraphrase, "I should explain, members of the OOP have more reliable ways of communicating than through a teacher who scares Harry witless." imamommy From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Aug 6 06:45:51 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 06:45:51 -0000 Subject: Intro and Lucius In-Reply-To: <20040805185016.9508.qmail@web41208.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109111 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Maria Holub wrote: Flop: > Now, for my requisite substantive post. > > Since so many of the characters' names are > significant, I'd wondered why she chose Lucius (of > all things!) for Mr. Malfoy (um... Light Bad-Faith?... > That's a LITTLE odd!) > Geoff: Welcome to the madhouse! With reference to your comments, don't forget that Satan, before he fell from heaven, was Lucifer (the morning star), the chief and first of all the angels. Tolkien uses a similar idea in the Silmarillion. Sauron's master Morgoth (the Black Enemy) was a fallen Ainu, originally Melkor (He who arises in might). From romulus at hermionegranger.us Fri Aug 6 00:04:24 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 00:04:24 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109112 Matt: > > Then again, given that JKR has not always been absolutely > > precise around dates and class years, it may be futile to > > look for perfect consistency on this point. Geoff: > I take your point. Examples of weak spots like the day of the > week of Harry's 11th birthday spring to mind..... Speaking of Harry's birthday, there is a matchup datewise and daywise if you look at the "proof". There is only one place in SS that gives the illusion that Harry's b-day is July 31st. However, due to adverb prepositions versus adjective prepositions, the sentence implying Harry's b-day is 31 July is now changed to mean that the investigation into the break-in at Gringotts was continuing on 31 July. Big difference. RMM www.hermionegranger.us From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Aug 6 06:55:16 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 06:55:16 -0000 Subject: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109113 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "snow15145" wrote: Snow: > We don't know when Voldemort's birthday is though and that Does > matter. Harry is in year five in OOP and is 15; he doesn't turn 16 > until July after his fifth school year ends but before the 6th > begins. This would mean that Harry will be 17 when he graduates > Hogwarts but 18 in that same year. Geoff: In UK schools, the cut-off date for ages is 31st August. So anyone whose 11th birthday falls within that frame goes into the new First Year(modern Year 7). Hence, Harry is one of the youngest pupils in his year. I nearly made the point in my last post that Riddle must have a birthday early in the school year, because if we accept that he was in the Fifth Year and 16 and the Chamber was opened in the autumn term of 1942 (awful lot of Boolean "ands" there [!]) then his 16th birthday must have fallen early in his Fourth year making him one of the oldest pupils. From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Fri Aug 6 00:40:31 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 00:40:31 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: <00ae01c47ad7$1a5a0140$69c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109114 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > In the "Snape's Worst Memory" scene we have the Marauders calling each other by their nicknames all the time. No one knew they were animagi, these could just be silly nicknames they sung out to each other in the halls. Names that meant something to them, but not to anyone else. Remember, the Trio were to call Sirius "Snuffles" when they were talking about him. Just a nickname. Snape could have, probably would have, heard them calling each other by these nicknames at school, then seeing all the names on the map, would instantly put two and two together and believe HP had gotten the map directly from the manufacturers as he knew one of the manufacturers was currently working at the school - Lupin/Moony. > Hard to say... a lot of what Harry perceived in the pensieve was beyond Snape's own perception... although I am aware that is a matter of debate, I agree that the 360 degree view is evidence enough. Perhaps, perhaps, their nicknames were public knowledge, but if that were so, then why would Lupin claim it was a Zonko's product? He could have simply said that it was a cutsey thing that had belonged to Harry's dad, and left it at that. It wouldn't have raised any suspictions to have done so. Josh From omphale at onetel.com Fri Aug 6 06:56:25 2004 From: omphale at onetel.com (saraquel_omphale) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 06:56:25 -0000 Subject: Snape's reaction to Harry's assumption that he is a spy In-Reply-To: <20040806025902.65895.qmail@web53310.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109115 wrote: > As a constant lurker, I haven't seen any recent discussions of this > moment between Harry and Snape, so I decided to post and see what > everyone else thinks. I am curious about Snape's reaction to Harry > assuming that he is a DE spy in OotP. What does this mean in > regards to Snape's work for the Order? > > (page 521, Canadian Hardcover OotP): > > "That is just as well, Potter," Snape said coldly, "because you are > neither special nor important, and 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. > He had not meant to say it; it had burst out of him in temper. For a > long moment they stared at each other, Harry convinced he had gone > too far. But 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, if > you are ready, we will start again. > > Why would Snape be satisfied if Harry guessed right and he is a spy? Saraquel has always been intrigued by exactly what Snape does for TOotP: I definitely don't think that Snape has any direct contact with Voldemort, too much is known about him (see recent threads about Quirrelmort for a start) for Voldemort to be tricked. The passage which Nicole quotes is carefully worded, implying that Snape finds out what LV HAS SAID to his DEs, (and IMO particularly Lucius Malfoy) not what LV is doing. Snape jumps when LM is mentioned in the hospital scene at the end of GoF. I can't remember ever reading a scene which has both Snape and Malfoy in it, so we are never given insight into how they behave towards one another. Snape could well be using legilimancy to read LMs mind, but that requires eye contact, so in order for this idea to work they must meet. Either they meet knowlingly, in which case we must find a reason - Lucius could easily have a reason to hate Sirius, he is married to his sister, and as DEs they could have formed a bond with each other over their mutual hatred. Or, Snape may have some hold over Lucius, which I think less likely as Snape really piles it on thick with Draco and would be more likely to treat Draco meanly in order to encourage LM to toe the line. Or they 'meet unknowingly', in which case Snape must use some sort of disguise. Now there's a passage in GOF (p500 Uk pb) about Harry riding on the back of an eagle owl in his dream. Draco's owl is an eagle owl. This passage has always raised a question mark in my mind because it is unclear to me whether the eagle owl has been sent with a message by crouch jnr and lands in the chair to give the message to LV, or how I read it the first time, LV had possessed the owl to find out what was happening at Hogwarts and on landing in the chair 'turns back into' LV. this second interpretation would explain why Harry was flying on the back of the owl in the first place. The owl frequently goes to and fro, this has been established right from the start. Now if Snape was to possess the owl he would have access to the Malfoy's home and eye contact with Malfoy. Hmm, sometimes I read posts and think, Oh pulease that's a bit far fetched. But it's amazing how far one's imagination can take you:-) Saraquel From macfotuk at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 00:55:39 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 00:55:39 -0000 Subject: 'The' prophecy - One or Two subjects? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109116 A second post - and me a newbie? Well, here goes. JKR made it plain at her web site that she has put a LOT of care into the exact wording of the prophecy. Why then have more-or-less exactly the same words twice about he who will vanquish (whatever) will be born as July ends. My own view from reading OoTP, JKR's snippets and internet speculation too profuse to properly credit, is that Neville AND Harry are the subjects of the prophecy and that BOTh will be required in some way to see LV off. Like so many others I cannot believe that a series of books about HP as hero will have him (Harry) in a minor role at the end but this is not to say NL can't be there in some large or even small, but hugely significant way. Harry didn't go mad on clutching the prophecy so magic tells us it's about him (or those who put the magic on thought so), but NL also held the prophecy. It could be as others have suggested too I think that the initial removal broke the spell - indeed, why else would Lucius Malfoy feel able to demand the prophecy the moment after Harry had done the hard part and got it from the shelf? Only WE (readers HP and DD) know, assuming you believe this view, that NL might have been a subject of the prophecy and able to touch it, hence deatheater's not targeting NL to retrieve it for them. While LV may once have suspected NL was a possibility the years since his attempt on harry's life have convinced him, perhaps wrongly, that HP is the only wizard to fear*. Certainly, LV (but not DD I believe) thought that Harry was the only one could do it, though it may have required the Bode incident (attempt) to convince him of it. *I should, perhaps, say deal with since LV certainly HASN'T learned the lesson of fearing Harry and maybe he just never can since his only fear is dying (oh and Dumbeldore too, maybe). macfotuk From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Fri Aug 6 01:47:06 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 01:47:06 -0000 Subject: JKR's comments about the "half blood prince" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109117 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bex" wrote: > Now Yblitzka, for clarification: > JK has commented on her site that the HBP title was the original > title for CoS, but she removed the HBP storyline from that book, > saving it for a later book when it would be more relevant. There is > no HBP storyline in CoS, but the HBP title /does/ relate to something > Harry discovers in CoS. In short, we /have/ seen a "strand" of the > HBP, in that when we read Book 6, we will all go running for CoS at > some point and yell: > >From her website, I quote, "The link I mentioned between books 2 and 6 does not, in-fact, relate to the 'Half-Blood Prince' (because there is no trace left of the HPB storyline in 'Chamber'.) Rather, it relates to a discovery..." No trace... the HPB is not present in Chamber at all. :) That she liked the title for Chamber could be a) naming the book after a small piece of the book's story, like GOF and/or b) it does seem like a likely title for Riddle, even though that's definitely not who she's going to describe with it in book 6. Note that she could have inserted this strand in books 3-5, too. We're just going to have to wait and see, and I'm getting more and more sure that all of those waiting for an 'Aha! I should have known!" are going to be disappointed when it ends up being something from out of left field. :-) Josh From terpnurse at qwest.net Fri Aug 6 01:49:34 2004 From: terpnurse at qwest.net (Steven Spencer) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 18:49:34 -0700 Subject: "Faithful" Phoenix, Fidelius charm (Re: Lily and unicorns) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109118 > Jen wrote: > << JKR uses Unicorn imagery around Lily--pure, innocent, strong-- > and we know from Book 1 what slaying a Unicorn does! Dumbledore > said in OOTP that Voldemort *shed Lily's blood* ...at Godric's > Hollow in hopes of finally drinking from the cup of immortality, > and it cursed him. >> > Yb's turn: > I think what Jen is implying is that perhaps a unicorn (or its > blood) was used in a charm on Lily and Harry so that if someone tried > to kill them both, killing the second would backfire horrendously. > > Since Unicorn blood is hard to come by without getting cursed, I > would say this is a bit farfetched, using the blood of something > innocent for pretty much any purposes at all, even if the unicorn > would sacrifice it willingly. I personally am much more inclined to > go with the same theory but using Dragon's blood instead. Hi everyone! First time poster, but have been lurking long enough to pick up on some of the threads here. I don't know if it's been discussed to death or not, but on my last read-through of CoS, something caught my eye. When DD is touting the virtues of Phoenixes to Harry, he stresses the word 'faithful' when he says they make highly faithful pets. Well, knowing JKR's fondness for word play, I began thinking of any form of that word that may have cropped up in the past. The 'fidelius' charm came to mind. So I can't help but wonder if it's not unicorn or dragon blood that goes into that spell, but some essence of a phoenix? Their tears, perhaps? Just my two cents worth... Terpnurse From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Fri Aug 6 01:58:27 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 01:58:27 -0000 Subject: Intro and Lucius In-Reply-To: <20040805185016.9508.qmail@web41208.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109119 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Maria Holub wrote: > My name is Maria, and...I am 23 years old Why am I liking all the young women on here? *sigh* }:^] > Okay, then there's the fact that (according to the > Lexicon) JKR has said that there will be a new > Minister for Magic in HBP. Here's my theory: Lucius > Malfoy will be the next Minister for Magic (I know > that's awkward, since he finished OotP in Azkaban, but > bear with me and ignore that for the moment) this > will, of course, prolong the schism between the MoM > and the OotP, and ultimately ARTHUR (Weasley, of > course) will muster the Order and conquer Lucius' > Death Eater arse! > > Any thoughts? Many... We do know that Arthur is not the new Minister, but... in an interview, JKR answered 'yes' when asked if now that LM is in Azkaban, will be see more of Narcissa. This and Fudges ouster seem to tell me that LM will be persona non grata in the WW from here on out. Harry was right all along, and he's consistantly named LM as a death eater for over a year now. No more imperious defense here, unless that's why Fudge is kicked out... and if so, then LM still wouldn't be welcome in the high seat. Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Fri Aug 6 02:20:12 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 02:20:12 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin In-Reply-To: <00b901c47b47$69f70f70$85c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109120 > Aggie: > If this is the case then I wonder who DD would have chosen for the > DADA position if Sirius hadn't escaped!!" > > DuffyPoo: > Just adding fuel to the fire...Harry first heard of Black's escape > on the Muggle news the morning of his 13th birthday. That gives DD > the whole month of August to find Lupin and hire him. Keep in mind that in CoS, Lockhart was the _only_ applicant. Lupin and Moody were special requests by Dumbledore, one can assume if not specifically stated, and for 5th year, he hadn't found anyone before Umbridge was appointed (as the decree requires). At the end of CoS, DD was already noting the need to advertise for a new DADA while talkin with Harry... it's quite reasonable that he hadn't received a single application in the first month, and yes, after Sirius' escape, and remembering all the trouble he and James had gotten into, that it might take another Marauder to outwit him. Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Fri Aug 6 02:28:56 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 02:28:56 -0000 Subject: PT's Prediction In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109121 "xochilt1999" wrote: > I have heard a lot of different theories about HP and LV, and on if > HP will have to die in order to kill LV, however I have been thinking > that since HP's blood was used to give LV a body again, wouldn't > that also mean that if LV dies HP will, in a sense, die as well. And > Harry need not sacrifice himself? While the power of love implies that Harry will need to sacrifice himself like his mother did (only Harry's love would be strong enough to finish LV off this time)... I've backed off on that thought because of the "at the hand of the other" phrase of the prophecy. A sacrifice ala 1981 would be, in effect, self-inflicted... Also, the 'either' and 'neither' seems to imply that only one has to die... not both. I can't rule it out entirely... but it seems a stretch. grr Josh From ctcasares at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 6 03:16:34 2004 From: ctcasares at sbcglobal.net (tylerswaxlion) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 03:16:34 -0000 Subject: Snape's reaction to Harry's assumption that he is a spy In-Reply-To: <20040806025902.65895.qmail@web53310.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109122 Miranda wrote: > > He had not meant to say it; it had burst out of him in temper. For > a long moment they stared at each other, Harry convinced he had gone > too far. But there was a curious, almost satisfied expression on > Snape's face when he answered. > > Why would Snape be satisfied if Harry guessed right and he is a spy? > I have always assumed that this reaction means Harry is wrong, but > what else could Snape be doing for the Order? Or is this satisfaction > because Harry has figured things out? I've heard some theories that > perhaps Snape is satisfied to gloat over Harry how much he risks for > the Order, and that he knows more than Harry does. I like the idea, > but is it too obvious? I think it is Snape gloating--he first tells Harry that he is nothing special, and then rubs it in that he (Snape) is. What I find especially interesting, though, is the idea that Harry is so full of rage in OoP not just because of normal teenage mood swings, but because of his connection to Voldemort. Harry's scar hurts when Voldemort is being particularly evil. Dumbledore stays away from Harry b/c he wants to prevent Voldemort from learning anything. Occulmency lessons are to prevent Voldemort from using that connection to learn what Harry knows. Which makes me wonder if it's VOLDEMORT asking if it's Snape's job to spy. Harry didn't know he was going to say it--it burst out in rage. Harry is closest to Voldemort when Voldemort is angry. Maybe it's not a conscious Voldemort attempt to out Snape, but that subconscious link between the two. "tylerswaxlion" From eeyore6771 at comcast.net Fri Aug 6 03:22:11 2004 From: eeyore6771 at comcast.net (Pat) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 03:22:11 -0000 Subject: Ancestor / descendant (Re: Chamber of Secrets - The Unexplained) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109123 "snow15145" wrote: > Snow: > This is JKR's answer in a Scholastic interview October 16, 2000 > > Harry Potter for grownups again! Is Voldemort the last remaining > ancestor of Slytherin, or the last remaining descendent of > Slytherin? > > "Ah, you spotted the deliberate error. Yes, it should > read "descendent." That's been changed in subsequent editions. > (Keep hold of the "ancestor" one, maybe it'll be valuable one day!)" > > Hope this helps! Pat here: I'm going to correct myself here. I checked my hard back and my paperback again, and here's the really weird thing. In the hardback, (US, p.332) it says descendant--and the date is 1999. In the paperbook, (US, p. 332) it says ancestor-- and that one was actually later--printed in 2000. So we are still left with the question of why they would change it incorrectly. Odd, but very interesting--especially since she said deliberate mistake. Pat From sopraniste at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 03:23:20 2004 From: sopraniste at yahoo.com (Maria Holub) Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 20:23:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: DD knows where they are Message-ID: <20040806032320.74291.qmail@web41205.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109124 SSSusan: <<<<>> >>>>On your other point, it does seem that DD frequently knows where people who interest him are/when he needs to return from wherever he is, etc.>>>>>>>>> <<<<<>> Not to burst anyone's bubbles, I have my own theory on the subject of how Dumbledore knows so darned much. I've been playing with this idea for a while, and this seemed a good time to air it. A quick disclaimer, I will not be able to cite any specific references for OotP because my copy is in Japan with my sister until the beginning of next week (sniffle!) Now, we know that DD has an amazing intelligence network, based in part on the Headmaster's portrait gallery which allows him to access all of the past Headmasters'/mistresses' other portraits. We also know, although most of us took it as a joke, that DD didn't care what was done in OotP to discredit him, *just as long as they didn't take him off the chocolate frog cards.* So, how much of a stretch is it to think that DD may KEEP a copy of his own chocolate frog card, allowing him to check up on the others. Granted, he may not always SEE a lot, but I'm sure he'd HEAR plenty from various collectors' pockets! There IS one passage in PS/SS that could be interpreted to support this. When Harry first gets his DD chocolate frog card, DD gets a good look at him, vanishes from the card, and then returns moments later "sidled back into the picture on his card and gave him a small smile." (SS 103). I know it's not much, but as I see it, DD on the card has just gone to report to REAL DD that he's seen Harry, he's on the train, and everything is going according to plan. Flop __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From romulus at hermionegranger.us Fri Aug 6 05:56:22 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 05:56:22 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: <20040806051113.25030.qmail@webmail10.rediffmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109125 Amey wrote: > > Amey: > Of course, Potter defied Voldemort three times. So if the prophecy (and Dumbledore) is right, they stood *against* Voldemort and defied him and also lived to tell the tales they are of course brave. > > Also, > ""Very few people know that Lord Voldemort was once called Tom > Riddle. I taught him myself, fifty years ago, at Hogwarts. He > disappeared after leaving the school ... traveled 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 recognizable. > Hardly anyone connected Lord Voldemort with the clever, > handsome boy who was once Head Boy here."" (CoS - Dumbledore) > > When was he going to teach them?? >From the years 1976 to 1978 or 1979 is my guess. Dumbledore is the headmaster at Hogwarts in that timeframe. Does Dumbledore know of Lord Voldemort's "dangerous, magical transformations" at that time? Probably not. Is Lord Voldemort open about his affiliation and tendency towards the Dark Arts? By no means. Secondly, please note the ages of most of the DeathEaters. They are mostly of James Potter's age or less. What does that heavily imply? Nothing? A coincidence? No, that implies that these young men and women, who would be entering their 6th or 7th year at Hogwarts came under the influence of Lord Voldemort. Now, who at Hogwarts has influence over these kids? A Teacher. What teacher would have the freedom to teach the students about the Dark Arts? The Defense Against the Dark Arts Teacher. Hear Sirius Black describe how Lord Voldemort operated in those early days: [Ch 5 - OoTP] <<'Leave?' Sirius smiled bitterly and ran his fingers through his long, unkempt hair. 'Because I hated the whole lot of them: my parents, with their pure-blood mania, convinced that to be a Black made you practically royal... my idiot brother, soft enough to believe them... that's him.' Sirius jabbed a finger at the very bottom of the tree, at the name 'Regulus Black'. A date of death (some fifteen years previously) followed the date of birth. 'He was younger than me,' said Sirius, 'and a much better son, as I was constantly reminded.' 'But he died,' said Harry. 'Yeah,' said Sirius. 'Stupid idiot... he joined the Death Eaters.' 'You're kidding!' 'Come on, Harry, haven't you seen enough of this house to tell what kind of wizards my family were?' said Sirius testily. 'Were - were your parents Death Eaters as well?' 'No, no, but believe me, they thought Voldemort had the right idea, they were all for the purification of the wizarding race, getting rid of Muggle-borns and having pure-bloods in charge. They weren't alone, either, there were quite a few people, before Voldemort showed his true colours, who thought he had the right idea about things... they got cold feet when they saw what he was prepared to do to get power, though. But I bet my parents thought Regulus was a right little hero for joining up at first.'>> Please note the statement: "they thought Voldemort had the right idea" and then note the next one: "there were quite a few people, before Voldemort showed his true colours, who thought he had the right idea about things.." First, Sirius' younger brother joins the DeathEaters while he was still a teenager! Two, Voldemort is preaching about Pure Bloods. >From where? the Ministry of Magic? a Street corner? or at Hogwarts. Three, "before Voldemort showed his true colours" tells us that Voldemort was not showing his true colours for some time while he was building his following. And who was his following? Young impressionable students from Hogwarts. But what students? All the students? Or only those that Voldemort could trust not to tell Dumbledore. Could he then trust the likes of Lucius Malfoy? Crabbe? Goyle? Yes. How about the Marauders? Those rule breakers and daredevils? Do you think that they wouldn't be attracted to the powerful magic wielded by this mysterious DADA teacher? Absolutely. What did Lupin say of Dumbledore? Did he not keep secrets from him? Did not the Marauders become Animagi illegally? And only a Teacher would have access to such a degree as to make disciples of them. Thus, it is evident, that Lord Voldemort taught DADA at Hogwarts between the years 1976 and 1979, and many of the Slytherins and the Marauders became his disciples, until some of them saw what he really was. RMM From jo.sturgess at btopenworld.com Fri Aug 6 08:00:58 2004 From: jo.sturgess at btopenworld.com (mooseming) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 08:00:58 -0000 Subject: Human transfiguration is taught in 6th year... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109126 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > vmonte: > > In every book the kids learn some skill, meet an animal, learn > spells, and receive important items that become important (often in > their survival) later in the books. > > I think in GoF (was it?) Hermione mentions that human transfiguration > is taught in 6th year. > > It's about time the transfiguration teacher became more important. (I > mean this is DD & MM's specialty!) And MM did say that she was going > to help Harry become an Auror--and so perhaps she will be able to get > him to start seriously focusing on his studies. > > Aside from this, how do you think transfiguration will be worked into > the story line? > > vivian I suppose that Harry may follow in the marauders footsteps (pawprints?) and teach himself to transform. The marauders were focused by the desire to help Lupin and Harry, I suspect, is going to want to pass through that dratted veil in search of Sirius, might not be possible as a human. Couple of problems with this though, it took the marauders years and if Harry is infused with half a spirit essence he might become a tad confused as to what to become, half snake/ half lion, a veritable chimera. That phoenix isn't what it seems either, far too smart, I'd be prepared to accept Godric has been lurking around using his own form of immortality, just waiting for the right time to knobble Salazar's evil schemes. Planting that tail feather in Tom Riddle's wand could have been a booby trap for example. Which leads me to think the Dark Lord (whoever that might be) may have or will be slipping Harry a two edged sword metaphorically speaking - or perhaps not! Something Harry finds in the Chamber is very significant after all! Jo From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Aug 6 09:43:46 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 09:43:46 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin In-Reply-To: <003c01c47b3e$349b5380$a3d086d9@oemcomputer> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109127 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jo Raggett" wrote: > I hadn't thought of it from this angle before! That's very intersting! Do > you believe that DD hired Lupin *because* Sirius had escaped from Azkaban? > It certainly seems like something he would do! Did Sirius escape *before* > Lupin was hired though? I would imagine it would take time for DD to go > through the process of hiring a DADA teacher. Although Sirius had escaped > BEFORE the beginning of term as Harry heard it on the news at Privet Drive. > Would this have been enough time for DD to find Lupin and persuade him to > come to Hogwarts? I'm sure that if DD thought Lupin could control his > friends once (by making him prefect) then maybe he thought it would be > beneficial to have him do it again! Although he (Lupin) wasn't very good at > it first time around! I think this is whsat happened! It makes perfect > sense to me! > Oh, yes. We've had fun and games with this before, but don't let that stop you. How far you're willing to go depends on how much you think DD knows. Sirius talks in his sleep - "He's at Hogwarts," and is now on the run. Harry is/will be at Hogwarts. But why would Sirius wish to harm Harry? But there is someone at Hogwarts that Sirius would like to get his hands on. Peter/Wormtail. You really don't think that DD didn't know who's inside that ratskin do you? For all these years, a rat is accepted without question when students are allowed an owl, cat or toad? Though Sirius has no animus towards Harry the reverse is not true. Harry believes Sirius was responsible for the death of his parents. Fudge, who just happened to be at Azkaban the night before Sirius escapes, (pure coincidence of course - and if you believe that you might want to buy this 100% genuine gold brick) has loosed the Dementors. It all looks as if there's going to be a really interesting confluence of events. So how to control it? Well, there's this feller; seemingly looking for work and guess what? He knows Sirius, Peter, was a friend of the Potters *and* can teach Harry how to fend off Dementors. How fortunate! Just what we need to help keep the lid on a potentially explosive situation. No need to tell Lupin everything; a couple of sentences will be enough - "Peter's still alive, Sirius may come looking for him, get close to Harry and don't let him do anything silly. Oh, and teach him the Patronus spell, just in case." Which is what he does - note his first action on entering the Shrieking Shack is to disarm Harry, not to bind Sirius hand and foot, which is what you'd expect him to do. Lupin links all the participants involved. Harry, Sirius, Peter. He's not there by chance. Kneasy From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Fri Aug 6 09:46:39 2004 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 09:46:39 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109128 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: << snip >>When was he going to teach them?? <>...From the years 1976 to 1978 or 1979 is my guess. <>...Secondly, please note the ages of most of the DeathEaters. They are mostly of James Potter's age or less. What does that heavily imply? Nothing? A coincidence? No, that implies that these young men and women, who would be entering their 6th or 7th year at Hogwarts came under the influence of Lord Voldemort. Now, who at Hogwarts has influence over these kids? A Teacher. What teacher would have the freedom to teach the students about the Dark Arts? The Defense Against the Dark Arts Teacher. <> ...But what students? All the students? Or only those that Voldemort could trust not to tell Dumbledore. Could he then trust the likes of Lucius Malfoy? Crabbe? Goyle? Yes. RMM --- Inge: Love the idea of Voldemort teaching DADA at Hogwarts (but wouldn't Dumbledore know who he was? Did it matter? Would Dumbledore have known then what went on in the DADA-classes?) As for the years 1976-79... assuming James, Sirius etc. were born in 1960 (or close to that) they'd all be in their 6th - 7th year (as you said). No problem with that. But Lucius. He's older. How much older? 2-4 years? If so - he would not have been at Hogwarts by 1976 and wouldn't have been under the influence of Voldemort's teaching DADA ..... Other than *that* - cool theory! From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 6 09:48:17 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 05:48:17 -0400 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort Message-ID: <000e01c47b9a$80a232b0$52c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109129 > > RMM: > > Conclusion: All of the Marauders were involved with Voldemort. > > Some of the Marauders more than the others. All the Marauders > > can use Voldemort's name with ease, implying that they are not > > under Voldemort's sway or afraid of him -- that is, all except > > Wormtail. DuffyPoo: Who are the people who say LV's name with ease? DD, Lupin, Sirius, HP, and now Hemione Granger. Why? Simply because none of them bought into the fear factor. TR says, "No, Harry. I fashioned myself a new name, a name I knew wizards everywhere would one day *fear to speak,* when I had become the greatest sorcerer in the world!" People in the Wizarding World in general are afraid to speak LV's name now because they know, truly in their hearts, he isn't really gone, and are afraid speaking the name will make him reappear. DD isn't afraid of LV; to him he's still the brilliant but pompous and arrogant schoolboy he knew 50 years ago. Lupin and Sirius aren't afraid of him simply because they're not...they believe that "fear of a name increases fear of the thing itself." He was defeated once, he'll be defeated again and there's nothing in his name to fear. HP, in the beginning, didn't know any better, but from the end of first year, when DD told him to "Call himVoldemort, Harry. Always use the proper name for things. Fear of a name increases fear of the thing itself," he knows the 'name' is nothing to be afraid of. And finally, after DD practically forcing McGonagall to say his name, after Lupin saying 'Oh, Molly, come on, it's about time you got used to hearing his name....,"our dear Hermione has figured it out. Fear of a name increases fear of the thing. She is making herself unafraid, or at least less afraid, of LV by openly speaking his name. She believes, if they can only get others to be unafraid of speaking his name (watch her go at Ron for quivering), they will have a formidable army in the next battle. Wormtail was a traitor, he is a DE, he has the mark. All the DE's honour their Lord by not speaking his name. By calling him the Dark Lord out of respect and possibly fear. RMM "Truly? Dumbledore suspected Riddle, but if Riddle has not shown himself as Lord Voldemort until he gains a greater following, how is Dumbledore to know what his DADA teacher is doing? Lupin has shown that he keeps things from Dumbledore, just like the rest of the Marauders. Malfoy and the other Slytherins like the pure- blood talk of Riddle and so are they going to mention anything to that muggle-loving Dumbledore?" DuffyPoo now: "Dumbledore took the diary from Harry and peered keenly down his long, crooked nose at its burnt and soggy pages. 'Brilliant,' he said softly. 'Of course, he was probably the most brilliant student Hogwarts has ever seen.' He turned around to the Weasleys, who were looking utterly bewildered. 'Very few people know that Lord Voldemort was once called Tom Riddle. I taught him myself, fifty years ago, at Hogwarts. He disappeared after leaving 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.' " I realize this can be read many ways but I read it as DD knew who TR/LV was all along. HP didn't make a revelation to DD when he said TR is LV. DD is stunned but the brilliance of TR in making this diary. I think this rules out LV as a teacher at Hogwarts. He went away as Tom Riddle and resurfaced as Lord Voldemort. DD was already Headmaster, we know, from before Lupin started (how long before, we don't yet know) which was 1971. LV was rising in power throughout 1970-1981 .(if you believe it was 11 years..."You can't blame them, ' said Dumbledore gently. "We've had precious little to celebrate for eleven years." Said the night they were delivering HP to the Dursleys, so 1981.) DD knew who he was and wouldn't let LV teach Dark Arts if he had to cancel the class because he couldn't find an appropriate teacher. LV would be in the building up his army coming 'to' power before 1970. Certainly the youth of the day would be a good place to cultivate followers, but would he have time to teach? Could the DADA teacher in those days have not, more easily, done the cultivating for him? Riddle knew how closely DD watched those he suspected/mistrusted. One slip on his part as a teacher .... RMM "BTW, THE DARK LORD wasn't walking around bellowing to the world -- join up or die -- or ONLY BAD GUYS WANTED HERE -- or I WANT TO KILL ALL MUD-BLOODS - JOIN UP OR ELSE! Evil does not work that way." DuffyPoo: This is my reasoning, exactly, as to how we don't know who, besides Lily and James and Frank and Alice, have denied LV three times. We know they did, because DD says so. So far, that's all we have to go on. We don't know what they did but I don't believe, necessarily, that they escaped 'death' three times. Defying only means open resistance or failure to comply. Did no one else, in the whole WW, deny LV three times? That's a hard one for me to swallow. As you say, LV wasn't knocking on doors saying 'Join me or die.' People were resisting by simply telling Lucius Malfoy, and others in the 'gang,' to bugger off. Anyone, therefore, who joined the Order of the Phoenix openly resisted LV once. Sirius Black could have been seen as defying LV when severed ties with his family. RMM: "So what did Voldie do then...... Put a running ad in the Daily Prophet? JOIN THE DARK SIDE and TAKE OVER No, that is not how he did it...." DuffyPoo: LV already had his 'most intimate friends.' Those with whom he called himself Lord Voldemort while he was at school. (Perhaps DD got wind of it there he 'doesn't miss a trick, that man.') Would he not have made contact with them as soon as he resurfaced? (Or kept contact with them, for that matter. while he was transforming?) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 6 10:00:54 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 06:00:54 -0400 Subject: Both Spies... Message-ID: <001701c47b9c$43d28040$52c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109130 CMW: "If Peter were waltzing up to VM with Order info, wouldn't Snape, as a trusted DE..." snip Mary: "Also, and I may just be forgetting something, but he didn't really have any very big important information until the Secret Keeper position became his. And for Snape to have done anything about it, if he knew, it would have had to been to go right to the Potters home, since I have always been under the impression that once the Potters were in hiding, the attack was practically instantaeous. If I forgot something an important detail somewhere that would put my foot in my mouth, forgive me." DuffyPoo: "And then, barely a week after the Fidelius Charm had been performed --" [Fudge speaking here.] So, not quite instantaeous, but pretty quick, none the less. As I said on another post about this subject, Karkaroff pointed out that only LV knew who all his followers were. All the DEs didn't know all the DEs (and for good reason obviously or Karkaroff could have given more names in his hearing). If LV had his own reasons for keeping Snape and Wormtail from knowing about each other (my theory is he did have a reason) then they would not have known about each other. Besides, LV knew Wormtail's uses and they were few. Even the Order never considered him a spy, or that LV would want anything to do with "a weak, talentless thing like [him]." Karkaroff didn't mention Malfoy, Crabbe, Goyle, Nott, Avery, the Lestranges, Crouch, Jr....he only named those he was personally aware of: Dolohov, Rosier, Travers, Mulciber, Rookwood and Snape. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk Fri Aug 6 10:03:28 2004 From: severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk (severelysigune) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 10:03:28 -0000 Subject: What drives WW ? (was Chapter 24: Occlumency) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109131 Kneasy wrote: > Of course wizards aren't all that powerful without their wands, are they? And a wand would be a great boon to Goblins or Centaurs or other beings; it would probably boost their power and standing enormously. But only humans are allowed wands. How very convenient - for humans. Who passed that law? Wizards. What a surprise. Not taking any chances, are they? And a wizard gets his wand when he enters Hogwarts. Why not before? Youngsters practice with broom-sticks, why not wands? Under elevens are taught at home. With no wand what do they learn? What can they learn? < Sigune muses: Very right. That puts into perspective James' and Sirius' prejudice against Snape, who 'knew more curses when he arrived at Hogwarts than most seventh years' (paraphrasing). He *knew* them, yes; but he can't have been such a danger as he couldn't possibly have exercised. Yours severely, Sigune ~ who apologises for leading away from a great topic to a detail. From severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk Fri Aug 6 10:03:38 2004 From: severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk (severelysigune) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 10:03:38 -0000 Subject: What drives WW ? (was Chapter 24: Occlumency) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109132 Kneasy wrote: > Of course wizards aren't all that powerful without their wands, are they? And a wand would be a great boon to Goblins or Centaurs or other beings; it would probably boost their power and standing enormously. But only humans are allowed wands. How very convenient - for humans. Who passed that law? Wizards. What a surprise. Not taking any chances, are they? And a wizard gets his wand when he enters Hogwarts. Why not before? Youngsters practice with broom-sticks, why not wands? Under elevens are taught at home. With no wand what do they learn? What can they learn? < Sigune muses: Very right. That puts into perspective James' and Sirius' prejudice against Snape, who 'knew more curses when he arrived at Hogwarts than most seventh years' (paraphrasing). He *knew* them, yes; but he can't have been such a danger as he couldn't possibly have exercised. Yours severely, Sigune ~ who apologises for leading away from a great topic to a detail. From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Aug 6 10:19:06 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 10:19:06 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109133 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: RMM: > Speaking of Harry's birthday, there is a matchup datewise and daywise > if you look at the "proof". > There is only one place in SS that gives the illusion that Harry's > b-day is July 31st. > However, due to adverb prepositions versus adjective prepositions, > the sentence implying Harry's b-day is 31 July is now changed to mean > that the investigation into the break-in at Gringotts was continuing > on 31 July. > > Big difference. Geoff: I feel must respectfully disagree. Canon to start with: 'It was a cutting from the Daily Prophet: "GRINGOTTS BREAK-IN LATEST Investigations continue into the break-in at Gringotts on 31 July...." "Hagrid!" said Harry. "That Gringotts break-in happened on my birthday!..."' (PS "The Potions Master" p. 105 UK edition) The structure of the sentence only allows the interpretation that the crime was committed on 31st July. The phrase "on 31st July" refers to "Gringotts" and not "Investigations". If the report wanted to indicate that investigations were continuing, the standard wording would be.... "Investigations are still continue into the break-in...." No way would the paper produce something like "On 31st July, investigations are continuing into the break-in..." which is what you seem to be implying. Additionally, Harry quite clearly identifies this /date/ as his birthday. 31/07/91 was a Wednesday. Despite this, canon says: 'Monday. This reminded Harry of something. If it /was/ Monday - and you could usually count on Dudley to know the days of the week because of television -then, tomorrow, Tuesday, was Harry's eleventh birthday.' (PS "The Letters from No One" p.36 UK edition) From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Aug 6 10:23:57 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 10:23:57 -0000 Subject: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109134 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > Geoff: > In UK schools, the cut-off date for ages is 31st August. So anyone > whose 11th birthday falls within that frame goes into the new First > Year(modern Year 7). Hence, Harry is one of the youngest pupils in > his year. > > I nearly made the point in my last post that Riddle must have a > birthday early in the school year, because if we accept that he was > in the Fifth Year and 16 and the Chamber was opened in the autumn > term of 1942 (awful lot of Boolean "ands" there [!]) then his 16th > birthday must have fallen early in his Fourth year making him one of > the oldest pupils. Geoff: Whoops! Correcting my own post. What I meant to say was that his 16th birthday must have fallen early in his Fifth Year - theoretiacally he could have been 16 as early as 01/09/42. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 6 10:41:00 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 06:41:00 -0400 Subject: Harry's Patronus (was Re: To Where To When) Message-ID: <002001c47ba1$dde8d030$52c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109135 Josh "3) it ended up giving Harry confidence for his Patronus... he really is as powerful as everyone thinks he is when he believes in himself!" DuffyPoo: It is easy to cast a Patronus when there is no danger, remember the Quidditch incident, the first time HP produced a coporeal patronus? It was Malfoy and Co. he was sending the stag after. In lessons with Lupin, HP had only ever produced a "feeble Patronus" and wished it was stronger. (He thinks this after a conversation with Wood before the Ravenclaw game where he produces the above mentioned Patronus.) The incident in question gave Harry confidence to produce the Patronus because he realized he'd already done it, not because he is really as powerful as everyone thinks. Again, he was, when he cast the Patronus, in no real danger of being attacked by Dementors. They were on the other side of the lake with Sirius and his other self. The next time he uses a Patronus, in the Alley in Little Whinging, he very nearly doesn't get it to go. It wasn't confidence, or knowing that he is powerful, that created the Patronus then, it was thinking "he was never going to see Ron and Hermione again --- " Seeing their faces come to his mind created the happy thought/memory needed to make the spell work. Again, the next time we see HPs patronus is in the DADA OWL, when there is no danger to Harry. Even, some of the kids in the DA group could produce a Patronus, after a few classes, in a brightly lit room where there was no fear of danger. It's not mere confidence in yourself that makes a Patronus. Neville could be as confident as anybody, he had, in fact, been only second to Hermione to produce a Shield Charm (and Hermione had known about it, at that time, for about a year, as she had 'found it' and helped HP learn it for the third task of the tournament). The problem with Neville is he can't conjur up a happy thought/memory. That we only see Cho and Hermione's Patronuses (patroni?) in the room doesn't mean there weren't more. We saw Lavender and Neville struggling, and Seamus, on his very first go, getting "definitely something hairy, Harry." [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 6 11:19:44 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 07:19:44 -0400 Subject: [The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin Message-ID: <002d01c47ba7$47333670$52c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109136 Saraquel "Hi everyone, I like this strand, but I had always assumed that Lupin got the Hogwarts job because of the anti-werewolf legislation which Umbridge had passed had made it almost impossible for Lupin to get a job. Sorry can't for the life of me remember where in OotP that is mentioned, but if I remember rightly whoever mentions it says it happened a couple of years back." DuffyPoo: "Does Lupin know her?' asked Harry quickly, remembering Umbridge's comments about dangerous half-breeds during her first lesson. "No," said Sirius, "but she drafted a bit of anti-werewolf legislation two years ago that makes it almost impossible for him to get a job." Now this was duing Sirius' first head-in-the-fire conversation, the same night Ron received the letter from Percy. The first weekend back at Hogwarts, so, about the 8th of September. 'Two years ago" if that is exact, makes it the beginning of Sep of third year. Lupin would have been hired over the previous summer. But it would indicate why Lupin "had more grey hairs than when Harry had last said goodbye to him and his robes were more patched and shabbier than ever," when HP saw him at the beginning of OotP. Lupin hasn't been able to get work since he left Hogwarts. He'd squeaked in before legislation was passed (Sirius only said 'drafted' the anti-werewolf legislation two years ago, not that it was passed two years ago), but he can't get paid work now. I like the idea that DD hired Lupin under the noses of the Ministry, knowing the anti-werewolf legislation was in the works, or that DD was protecting Lupin from Sirius. Or both! ;-) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From vmonte at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 11:38:49 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 11:38:49 -0000 Subject: Harry's Patronus (was Re: To Where To When) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109138 DuffyPoo wrote: ...Again, he was, when he cast the Patronus, in no real danger of being attacked by Dementors. They were on the other side of the lake with Sirius and his other self. The next time he uses a Patronus, in the Alley in Little Whinging, he very nearly doesn't get it to go. It wasn't confidence, or knowing that he is powerful, that created the Patronus then, it was thinking "he was never going to see Ron and Hermione again --- " Seeing their faces come to his mind created the happy thought/memory needed to make the spell work. Again, the next time we see HPs patronus is in the DADA OWL, when there is no danger to Harry. Even, some of the kids in the DA group could produce a Patronus, after a few classes, in a brightly lit room where there was no fear of danger. It's not mere confidence in yourself that makes a Patronus. vmonte responds: I disagree. Harry was in danger of dying during the PoA attack. He was saving himself remember? How many Dementors were by that lake? It doesn't really matter how Harry conjures his patronus (whether it's confidence or the idea of not being able to see his friends again) but that he CAN conjure it! If I'm not mistaken 13 year old Harry saved Sirius, who was also an accomplished wizard. Harry definitely has a gift, but he needs to be "trained up a bit," which is exactly what DD is attempting. We need to remember that Harry has been successfully knocking Voldemort down since he was 11 years old. Is that not impressive? DD also mentions in one of the books that perhaps Harry's small victories against Voldemort will help to keep V at bay long enough to keep him from regaining his old power. DD is training Harry because he feels that Harry is capable of defeating Voldemort--IMO. vivian From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 6 11:45:11 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 07:45:11 -0400 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 Message-ID: <003601c47baa$d5501ab0$52c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109139 Geoff: > I take your point. Examples of weak spots like the day of the > week of Harry's 11th birthday spring to mind..... RMM "Speaking of Harry's birthday, there is a matchup datewise and daywise if you look at the "proof". There is only one place in SS that gives the illusion that Harry's b-day is July 31st. However, due to adverb prepositions versus adjective prepositions, the sentence implying Harry's b-day is 31 July is now changed to mean that the investigation into the break-in at Gringotts was continuing on 31 July. " DuffyPoo: "Investigations continue into the break-in at Gringotts on 31 July, ..." "Hagrid!" said Harry, "That Gringotts break-in happend on my birthday!" I don't think Harry can mistake when his own birthday is. July 31st. I think that has been confirmed by JKR by posting his birthday on her calendar last week, as July 31st. Whether the investigation is continuing on July 31st or the break-in took place on July 31st isn't important. HP is saying his birthday *is* July 31st. I can't, for the life of me, read 'break-in at Gringotts on 31 July' to mean anything other than the break-in was *on* 31 July. "When I failed to steal the stone from Gringotts..." [Quirrell speaking] "Quirrell's voice tailed away. Harry was remembering his trip to Diagon Alley -- how could he have been so stupid? He'd seen Quirrell there that very day, shaken hands with him in the leaky Cauldron." Harry and Hagrid had quite a conversation about Gringotts the morning before they left for Diagon Alley." 'Goblins?' 'Yeah -- so yeh'd be mad ter try an' rob it, I'll tell ye that. Never mess with goblins, Harry. Gringotts is the safest place in the world fer anything yeh want ter keep safe...'" This is the 31st of July that they are having the conversation. HP had watched Dudley's watch until he turned 11. Then Hagrid showed up, and this is the morning of the same day, after they'd had some sleep. Harry acknowledges he'd been in Diagon Alley on his birthday. No mention of a break-in, or attempted break-in, just that you'd be mad ter try an' rob it. I think the problem Geoff is referring to is about the specific reference to the day of the week of Harry's birthday, not the date. PS indicates that HP's 11th birthday is on a Tuesday, and somehow this just doesn't jive with what we know from the beginning of the story, that it started on a Tuesday, one day after HP's 15 month birthday. Geoff, or someone, is going to have to jump in here to explain it exactly. I am no good with math and worse with dates. I remember reading about it when I first joined this list, and marvelled at how clever these people were to figure it out. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 6 12:11:26 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 08:11:26 -0400 Subject: JKR's comments about the "half blood prince" Message-ID: <004401c47bae$8005db90$52c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109140 Josh said: "From her website, I quote, "The link I mentioned between books 2 and 6 does not, in-fact, relate to the 'Half-Blood Prince' (because there is no trace left of the HPB storyline in 'Chamber'.) Rather, it relates to a discovery..." "No trace... the HPB is not present in Chamber at all. :) That she liked the title for Chamber could be a) naming the book after a small piece of the book's story, like GOF and/or b) it does seem like a likely title for Riddle, even though that's definitely not who she's going to describe with it in book 6." DuffyPoo: Not, the HPB is 'not present', but, the HPB 'storyline' isn't present. Two different things as I see it. That's what JKR said, "there is no trace left of the HPB *storyline* in Chamber." Which could very well mean, that for those who believe the HBP is Goderic Gryffindor, while he is mentioned in CoS, there is really nothing important about him, or, should we say, anything leading up to him being the HBP. There's a lot of talk about Salazar Slytherin, but really nothing about GG, except that they started the school together and had a fight before SS left. Nothing really iimportant about GG himself. The disagreement between Slytherin and Gryffindor, was, after all, one of the discoveries of CoS. HBP could easily be more information about GG and the reason(s) for the departure of Slytherin, which isn't a storyline of CoS. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From yutu75es at yahoo.es Fri Aug 6 12:11:16 2004 From: yutu75es at yahoo.es (fridwulfa hagrid) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 14:11:16 +0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry's Patronus (was Re: To Where To When) References: Message-ID: <006801c47bae$7b515430$0fe16750@portatil> No: HPFGUIDX 109141 > vmonte wrote: > > DD mentions in one of the books that perhaps Harry's small victories > against Voldemort will help to keep V at bay long enough to keep him > from regaining his old power. DD is training Harry because he feels > that Harry is capable of defeating Voldemort IMO. > > Me (Fridwulfa): DD knows for sure that Harry CAN defeat Voldemort ("the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord...." and all that jazz) What he's trying to do IMO is to train Harry so when the moment comes he's ready. We don't know yet what this "special power" is, though there are zillions of theories out there, but what is quite clear is that DD knows that Harry can potentially defeat LV and therefore he's trying to help him (Harry, not Voldy) to become stronger and more skillful than the average magical kid. He's a cunning man old Dumbledore. Of course, he couldn't tell Harry that he needed special training or special abilities at first without explaining to him the prophety and his real rol in this particular war, so what he did was much more subtle: he set traps, so to speak, he created situations in which Harry had to develop special skills and learn how to fight and do things by himself, situations that DD thought were under control but which, most of the time, were not. Harry has fought Voldemort and these fights have made him stronger, magically speaking. But he still has a long way to go till the final battle. I think we'll see now Harry training, studying and practicing not for his grades but for his life, and he'll do it in earnest. He knows that he has to defeat Voldemort for real. Keeping him at bay, is not enough anymore now that Voldy has a body and his followers with him again. Cheers, Fridwulfa From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 12:14:49 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 05:14:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape, Quirellmort question... In-Reply-To: <00c001c47adb$c62ab290$69c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: <20040806121449.35327.qmail@web50101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109142 --- Cathy Drolet wrote: > I have my own theory about Snape which I have not yet posted as it > is very long-winded. However, from that theory, I think Snape has > not been appointed to the DADA position because of what DD fears > Snape may 'let slip.' (Nothing about Dark Arts, either. If you > want to know my theory, just ask.) ;-) Okay, I'm asking. Please tell us your theory. I love theories. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 6 12:23:16 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 08:23:16 -0400 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort Message-ID: <004801c47bb0$26cf8010$52c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109144 DuffyPoo: "then seeing all the names on the map, would instantly put two and two together and believe HP had gotten the map directly from the manufacturers as he knew one of the manufacturers was currently working at the school - Lupin/Moony." Josh "Perhaps, perhaps, their nicknames were public knowledge, but if that were so, then why would Lupin claim it was a Zonko's product? He could have simply said that it was a cutsey thing that had belonged to Harry's dad, and left it at that. It wouldn't have raised any suspictions to have done so." DuffyPoo again: I'm not saying the names were 'public knowledge' just that Snape may have overheard them as he was following them around trying to get the goods on Lupin, but they may well have been public knowledge. Lupin was trying to convince Snape that the thing was a joke, a Zonko's product, clearly not full of Dark Magic as Snape 'suspected'. Lupin knows that Snape knows whose map this was originally, that it's not full of Dark Magic, that Snape has made the connection between the names. He was trying to keep Harry out of the 'marauders' loop - really having a private conversation with Snape. Lupin, at this point, still believes 'Padfoot' is after Harry. He knows that HP knows James and Sirius were close friends and that Lupin is/was a friend as well. Snape has already planted in HP's mind that this map could have come from the manufacturers. While HP said, when asked, that he didn't know who any of those men were, if Lupin had said the map had belonged to James, he may be concerned that HP might make the connections. Lupin knows HP is a bright kid, he's practically producing a Patronus at 13. He's afraid HP may put two and two together and realize he is a werewolf. Snape had already set the homework, Hermione already, at this point, would have known the truth. How long would it be before HP figured it out? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Fri Aug 6 12:25:46 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (Jo Raggett) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 13:25:46 +0100 Subject: DD knows where they are Message-ID: <005101c47bb0$8063c820$0dde87d9@oemcomputer> No: HPFGUIDX 109145 DuffyPoo: >>>>Ack! Not bursting your bubble at all. This is a wonderful idea (as one who hates the thought that DD is time-turning his life away.). I knew that watch of his had to figure into the story somehow. Maybe he can change the hands to fit the people he wants to keep tabs on. Lily and James, back in the day, Harry & Co. now?>>>>> Aggie: I hate the thought of DD time-travelling too! This is my theory, that he can change the people on his watch to anyone he likes. So it 'was' used to keep tabs on James, Lily etc in their day and now on Harry & co now. Snow: >>>I like your idea Aggie! >>> Aggie: Thank you! So do I !! ;o)) Snow: >>>Dumbledore even comments about how much he likes Molly's fascinating clock. As for the twelve people he watches over, I can think of a few right off. <<>>>>>>>> Aggie: I think that it would have pretty much the same options as the Weasley's clock. I would imagine that there would be more areas specific to Hogwarts though. Perhaps he still has at home, at work etc for those (eg Fudge) who aren't at Hogwarts, but I would imagine there's 'in class', 'in the great hall', 'in the common room', 'in the dungeons' or (specifically for PS/SS) 'on the 3rd floor' or maybe, to save space, there is simply, 'where he/she should be' and 'where he/she SHOULDN'T be'!! 'Mortal Danger' would have to included! I would imagine the MoM would be on there too, considering that Fudge, and probably the members of the order would be on it. On this note 12 GP would be on there too! Hmmm this watch is getting awfully cramped now isn't it!?!?! Another time (in PS/SS) when DD could have used this watch was when he KNEW Harry had been in with the Mirror of Erised. aboutthe1910s: >>>Okay, the only passage I know of describing Dumbledore's watch says this: "It had twelve hands but not numbers; instead, little planets were moving around the edge." ...Maybe the watch shows "what's in the stars" for the people (if it is people) that the hands represent--thus explaining not only how Dumbledore knows things about things, but also how he so often *pre-empts* what is going to happen to them. Plus, it could still be vague enough to explain why he doesn't know *everything* and can even be wrong sometimes.>>>>>> Aggie: I knew someone would bring up the 'planet' thing! LOL! I like your reasoning though. It could be a 'written in the stars' view and I like this explanation as to why he gets things wrong. IIRC though, DD doesn't hold much weight with the 'art' of divination. That is if you meant it in this respect. Please bear in mind that I really hadn't thought this through when I posted and I'm just ad hoc-ing now!! My theory is that the hands are the 12 people that DD wants to keep an eye on and the planets are the places where they could be. Although now you have said that planets move around the edge it could be the other way round! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From drliss at comcast.net Fri Aug 6 12:24:15 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (drliss at comcast.net) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 12:24:15 +0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin Message-ID: <080620041224.19326.4113786E000C512E00004B7E22007348409C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 109146 Saraquel: Hi everyone, I like this strand, but I had always assumed that Lupin got the Hogwarts job because of the anti-werewolf legislation which Umbridge had passed had made it almost impossible for Lupin to get a job. Sorry can't for the life of me remember where in OotP that is mentioned, but if I remember rightly whoever mentions it says it happened a couple of years back. Lissa: As I understand it, Lupin had a hard time getting paid work both before and after PoA. In PoA, he says that he's been shunned his entire adult life, unable to find paid work. (I believe he says it in the Shrieking Shack, when he's talking about how much DD's trust means to him.) In OotP, you're right- Sirius does say Umbridge forced a law through two years ago that makes it impossible for Lupin to find a job. The impression I'm getting is that before PoA, Lupin could find odd jobs or really low-paying, more mundane jobs. The work obviously wasn't steady and he didn't make much, and probably never actually stayed at a job for too long, and jobs were probably few and far between, but it seems like maybe he could actually get work. I'm guessing that Umbridge's law was passed through once Lupin was installed at Hogwarts, because Fudge DID allow DD to hire Lupin. (That might have actually been the final straw for good old Deloras, and might have been what got her to write the law in the first place. A werewolf teaching at Hogwarts? Something's got to be done!) And once Lupin left Hogwarts... poof. No more jobs. (Which also means that if that law was put through before he left, he really pulled the noose around his own neck when he resigned.) Y'know, I'm very anti ESE!Lupin, for a lot of reasons. But I can see where, if this story were different and there weren't a few key things (like DD is the only one aside from the Marauders to ever really help Lupin, and joining up with Voldie means turning directly against DD), I can see where a different person would be bitter enough to turn ESE. But I'm really curious to see how the Ministry's regulation of werewolves is going to play into things. You don't introduce a new law in the fifth book that worsens a situation and then not do anything with it.... Liss [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From vmonte at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 12:28:00 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 12:28:00 -0000 Subject: The wizard formally known as Godric Gryffindor was also Nicolas Flamel Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109147 vmonte: Is it possible that Nicolas Flamel was Godric Gryffindor? Could GG have discovered the elixer of life and then assumed a new name and or appearance? Maybe Dumbledore was an apprentice to GG himself. And maybe DD acquired Fawkes directly from GG. Perhaps then Kneasy's theory of the traveling parasitic entity are true. Could DD & GG have been tracking SS all these years? Vivian From altered.earth at ntlworld.com Fri Aug 6 12:43:09 2004 From: altered.earth at ntlworld.com (digger) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 13:43:09 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Ancestor / descendant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41137CDD.90603@ntlworld.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109148 Pat wrote: > > Pat here: > > I'm going to correct myself here. > > I checked my hard back and my paperback again, and here's the really > weird thing. In the hardback, (US, p.332) it says descendant--and > the date is 1999. In the paperbook, (US, p. 332) it says ancestor-- > and that one was actually later--printed in 2000. So we are still > left with the question of why they would change it incorrectly. > Odd, but very interesting--especially since she said deliberate > mistake. > > Pat > "Deliberate mistake" is a colloquial joke phrase in British English. It means "oops, well spotted, I made a mistake, but lets have a joke and pretend I did it deliberately, even though we all know it was really a genuine goof" So I (as a brit) read it as ancestor WAS a genuine mistake and she is openly acknowledging it in a humorous way, albeit understandable only to Brits. From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Fri Aug 6 12:39:35 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (Jo Raggett) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 13:39:35 +0100 Subject: Chapter 24: Occlumency Message-ID: <006601c47bb2$c0c752e0$0dde87d9@oemcomputer> No: HPFGUIDX 109149 Melanie (I think) asked: > > why on Earth didn't Lupin or Sirius really sit >>down and have this chat with Harry? > >>>>>>SNIP>>>>>> Aggie: >>It is my belief that Sirius *DID* want to tell Harry all >>about it, (the night he [Harry]arrived) but that Molly, >>acting on DD's orders, deemed it inappropriate. Carol responds: >>>But these comments and quotes relate to an earlier point in the story, before the occlumency lessons have been proposed. Molly wasn't involved in the occlumency discussions, >>SNIP>> Aggie: This is true, but my point was that Harry wasn't told anything because it was DD's orders for him NOT to. This, I assumed, went for Occulmency too. Carol: >>>He [Sirius] should not have allowed his animosity toward Snape to interfere with Dumbledore's plan for Harry to learn occlumency through the best teacher available. >>SNIP>> Aggie: Agreed but then if he didn't act this way he wouldn't be the Sirius we all love!!! ;o)) Carol: >>>Lupin at least informed Harry that *Professor* Snape was a "superb occlumens"--showing him respect as a colleague and fellow member of the Order, as Sirius did not. >>> Aggie: Again, I agree but as someone else said (sorry can't find you right now!) Lupin's position with Harry allows him to be detached, Sirius's doesn't. Carol: >>But even he did not explain what occlumency was or why Harry needed it. >>> Aggie: On DD's orders??? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 6 12:42:21 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 08:42:21 -0400 Subject: These two, at least, wouldn't have been trusted not to tell DD. Message-ID: <005701c47bb2$d1c6fa50$52c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109150 RMM "But what students? All the students? Or only those that Voldemort could trust not to tell Dumbledore. Could he then trust the likes of Lucius Malfoy? Crabbe? Goyle? Yes. How about the Marauders? Those rule breakers and daredevils? Do you think that they wouldn't be attracted to the powerful magic wielded by this mysterious DADA teacher?" DuffyPoo: You've only just missed one thing. "And Snape was just this little oddball who was up to his eyes in the Dark Arts, and James -- whatever else he may have appeared to you, Harry -- always *hated* the Dark Arts." If James hated the Dark Arts so much, why would he take a special class from a special teacher? He wouldn't. Sirius left his family, at 16, because he didn't agree with their pure-blood mania, being all for the purification of the wizarding race. His parents were Dark wizards and Sirius wanted nothing to do with them. He wouldn't have joined the special class either. Lupin, a half-blood, wouldn't have been wanted in the class to begin with. These three couldn't have been trusted not to tell DD what was going on. Would Pettigrew have joined if his idols didn't? I doubt it. It would have made another reason for them to shun him, and he wanted to get closer to them not be pushed away. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From drliss at comcast.net Fri Aug 6 12:38:26 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (drliss at comcast.net) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 12:38:26 +0000 Subject: Chocolate frog cards (was: How DD knows where they are) Message-ID: <080620041238.16180.41137BC20006FF4900003F3422007354469C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 109151 Flop: So, how much of a stretch is it to think that DD may KEEP a copy of his own chocolate frog card, allowing him to check up on the others. Granted, he may not always SEE a lot, but I'm sure he'd HEAR plenty from various collectors' pockets! There IS one passage in PS/SS that could be interpreted to support this. When Harry first gets his DD chocolate frog card, DD gets a good look at him, vanishes from the card, and then returns moments later "sidled back into the picture on his card and gave him a small smile." (SS 103). I know it's not much, but as I see it, DD on the card has just gone to report to REAL DD that he's seen Harry, he's on the train, and everything is going according to plan. Lissa: I actually really, really, really like this theory! In addition to simply cracking me up, it sounds like something DD would do. The only question I have (and this is easily answered) is we do know there's at least one big thing that DD doesn't know: that Sirius, James, and Peter became Animagi. (I'm guessing he spys more on his students than the rest of Great Britian.) But hey- maybe he wasn't on the cards by then. Or maybe they didn't make the cards yet. Or maybe the boys weren't into chocolate. (For all that Lupin is portrayed as a chocoholic, he never actually EATS the stuff in the books, does he?) Liss [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From greatraven at hotmail.com Fri Aug 6 13:00:29 2004 From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 13:00:29 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109152 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jo Raggett" wrote: > > > I hadn't thought of it from this angle before! That's very intersting! Do > > you believe that DD hired Lupin *because* Sirius had escaped from Azkaban? > > It certainly seems like something he would do! Did Sirius escape *before* > > Lupin was hired though? I would imagine it would take time for DD to go > > through the process of hiring a DADA teacher. Although Sirius had escaped > > BEFORE the beginning of term as Harry heard it on the news at Privet Drive. > > Would this have been enough time for DD to find Lupin and persuade him to > > come to Hogwarts? I'm sure that if DD thought Lupin could control his > > friends once (by making him prefect) then maybe he thought it would be > > beneficial to have him do it again! Although he (Lupin) wasn't very good at > > it first time around! I think this is whsat happened! It makes perfect > > sense to me! > > > > Oh, yes. > We've had fun and games with this before, but don't let that stop you. > How far you're willing to go depends on how much you think DD knows. > > Sirius talks in his sleep - "He's at Hogwarts," and is now on the run. > Harry is/will be at Hogwarts. > But why would Sirius wish to harm Harry? > But there is someone at Hogwarts that Sirius would like to get his hands on. > Peter/Wormtail. > You really don't think that DD didn't know who's inside that ratskin do you? > For all these years, a rat is accepted without question when students are > allowed an owl, cat or toad? > > Though Sirius has no animus towards Harry the reverse is not true. Harry > believes Sirius was responsible for the death of his parents. > Fudge, who just happened to be at Azkaban the night before Sirius escapes, > (pure coincidence of course - and if you believe that you might want to buy > this 100% genuine gold brick) has loosed the Dementors. > > It all looks as if there's going to be a really interesting confluence of events. > So how to control it? > > Well, there's this feller; seemingly looking for work and guess what? He > knows Sirius, Peter, was a friend of the Potters *and* can teach Harry how > to fend off Dementors. How fortunate! Just what we need to help keep the > lid on a potentially explosive situation. > > No need to tell Lupin everything; a couple of sentences will be enough - > "Peter's still alive, Sirius may come looking for him, get close to Harry and > don't let him do anything silly. Oh, and teach him the Patronus spell, just > in case." > Which is what he does - note his first action on entering the Shrieking Shack > is to disarm Harry, not to bind Sirius hand and foot, which is what you'd > expect him to do. > > Lupin links all the participants involved. Harry, Sirius, Peter. > He's not there by chance. > > Kneasy Sue: I always assumed that Lupin got the job because a DADA teacher was needed and DD, kind soul that he is, gave a go to an unemployed werewolf who was, after all, a good teacher. Is DD really that much of a manipulator? For that matter, is he really that on the ball? If he did know Peter was alive and where he was, why wasn't he fighting to get Sirius out of Azkaban? Even Lupin thought Sirius had done it until the night at the Shrieking Shack - he said so - and he was one of Sirius's two best friends. if I thought DD was really so heartless as to let a man he believed innocent rot in Azkaban without even *trying* to help and then hired Lupin only to keep an eye on Harry, I'd be very disappointed in him. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Aug 6 13:04:36 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 13:04:36 -0000 Subject: [The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109153 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "saraquel_omphale" > Hi everyone, I like this strand, but I had always assumed that Lupin > got the Hogwarts job because of the anti-werewolf legislation which > Umbridge had passed had made it almost impossible for Lupin to get a > job. Sorry can't for the life of me remember where in OotP that is > mentioned, but if I remember rightly whoever mentions it says it > happened a couple of years back. Jen: Sirius mentions this in OOTP in the chapter Percy & Padfoot: "but she drafted a bit of anti-werewolf legislation two years ago that makes it almost impossible for him to get a job." (US, p. 302). I imagined, because of the way Sirius words this, that the legislation was a response to Lupin's public resignation in POA. As owls were 'winging their way' to Dumbledore's office, they were also winging their way to Fudge, protesting werewolves in public positions or something of the like. Sirius does make it sound like prior to the legislation, Lupin was *more* able to get a job, if not as easily as other people could. The legislation makes it 'almost impossible' now. From jferer at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 13:10:02 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 06:10:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Rowling to publish 8th book Message-ID: <20040806131002.96931.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109154 The Irish Examiner is reporting that JKR will be writing an eighth Harry Potter book. find the full article at http://www.irishexaminer.com/breaking/2004/08/03/story159884.html Apparently the book won't be a continuation..."But she [JKR] now wants to add an eighth entry, featuring outtakes she has edited from the series so far. Rowling will donate all proceeds from the book to charity, and publishers estimate the "Harry Potter Encyclopedia" could make in excess of $18m (15m)." From sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com Fri Aug 6 13:19:48 2004 From: sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com (Amey Chinchorkar) Date: 6 Aug 2004 13:19:48 -0000 Subject: Marauders and Lord Voldemort Message-ID: <20040806131948.19298.qmail@webmail8.rediffmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109155 - RMM - I believe Black was reckless, I believe James Potter was reckless, I - believe that Pettigrew was reckless, and I believe Lupin was reckless. - I believe all of the Marauders were reckless. - I believe they all dabbled in the Dark Arts. Amey: They were reckless, I believe you (except maybe wormtail, he is not reckless he is fan) But I cant really agree with you about Dark Arts. We know they all (James, Sirius and Lupin) hated Dark Arts. James, we get many instances. Sirius, because he got out of his parents? house and also 'Yeah,' said Sirius. 'Stupid idiot he joined the Death Eaters.', and 'Come on, Harry, haven't you seen enough of this house to tell what kind of wizards my family were?' said Sirius testily. Aren?t these proof enough that he hated Dark Arts? Also as for his teaching them, when he had the time to dabble into Dark Arts, travel far and wide and taech in Hogwarts? I believe - Heck, Hermione, Harry and Ron are in their second year and they are - already dabbling in the dark arts (Polyjuice Potion). Amey: Polyjuice Potion is never mentioned as a piece of Dark Art or else Dumbledore would have told Harry in CoS. Will Dumbledore want Harry to practice some Dark Magic? Polyjuice Potion is useful enough that Harry might consider using it again, if it is Dark Art, Dumbledore can?t take that risk. - How about the Marauders? Those rule breakers and daredevils? - Do you think that they wouldn't be attracted to the powerful magic - wielded by this mysterious DADA teacher? Absolutely. - What did Lupin say of Dumbledore? Did he not keep secrets from him? - Did not the Marauders become Animagi illegally? - And only a Teacher would have access to such a degree as to make - disciples of them. - Thus, it is evident, that Lord Voldemort taught DADA at Hogwarts - between the years 1976 and 1979, and many of the Slytherins and the - Marauders became his disciples, until some of them saw what he really - was. Amey: You are forgetting one important thing: ?>From what I found out after he died, he got in so far, then 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.'? (PoA) So, how come the Marauders came out without a scratch? If Voldemort taught them Dark Arts and they were even half brilliant than we can see from the Map, they would be prime target for him. ?Didn't want another Dark Lord competing with him.? did he??? Amey [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com Fri Aug 6 13:20:16 2004 From: sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com (Amey Chinchorkar) Date: 6 Aug 2004 13:20:16 -0000 Subject: Marauders and Lord Voldemort Message-ID: <20040806132016.27222.qmail@webmail9.rediffmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109156 - RMM - I believe Black was reckless, I believe James Potter was reckless, I - believe that Pettigrew was reckless, and I believe Lupin was reckless. - I believe all of the Marauders were reckless. - I believe they all dabbled in the Dark Arts. Amey: They were reckless, I believe you (except maybe wormtail, he is not reckless he is fan) But I cant really agree with you about Dark Arts. We know they all (James, Sirius and Lupin) hated Dark Arts. James, we get many instances. Sirius, because he got out of his parents? house and also 'Yeah,' said Sirius. 'Stupid idiot he joined the Death Eaters.', and 'Come on, Harry, haven't you seen enough of this house to tell what kind of wizards my family were?' said Sirius testily. Aren?t these proof enough that he hated Dark Arts? Also as for his teaching them, when he had the time to dabble into Dark Arts, travel far and wide and taech in Hogwarts? I believe - Heck, Hermione, Harry and Ron are in their second year and they are - already dabbling in the dark arts (Polyjuice Potion). Amey: Polyjuice Potion is never mentioned as a piece of Dark Art or else Dumbledore would have told Harry in CoS. Will Dumbledore want Harry to practice some Dark Magic? Polyjuice Potion is useful enough that Harry might consider using it again, if it is Dark Art, Dumbledore can?t take that risk. - How about the Marauders? Those rule breakers and daredevils? - Do you think that they wouldn't be attracted to the powerful magic - wielded by this mysterious DADA teacher? Absolutely. - What did Lupin say of Dumbledore? Did he not keep secrets from him? - Did not the Marauders become Animagi illegally? - And only a Teacher would have access to such a degree as to make - disciples of them. - Thus, it is evident, that Lord Voldemort taught DADA at Hogwarts - between the years 1976 and 1979, and many of the Slytherins and the - Marauders became his disciples, until some of them saw what he really - was. Amey: You are forgetting one important thing: ?>From what I found out after he died, he got in so far, then 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.'? (PoA) So, how come the Marauders came out without a scratch? If Voldemort taught them Dark Arts and they were even half brilliant than we can see from the Map, they would be prime target for him. ?Didn't want another Dark Lord competing with him.? did he??? Amey [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Aug 6 13:31:21 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 13:31:21 -0000 Subject: Lily and unicorns In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109157 Jen: No, I didn't mean my comment upthread literally. As I said in > > post 109065, I was comparing a wandless, defenseless Lily at the > > moment Voldemort killed her with the unicorn in the forest that > was > > slayed for its blood. Kristen: > Do we know for certain from the books that Lily was wandless? (On > re-viewing the movie of SS I was struck how curiously passive she is > in the flashback.) Jen: Technically? No :). It's been one of those hotly debated topics. All we know from Harry's flashbacks in POA is she's pleading with Voldemort not to kill Harry, "Not Harry, not Harry, please not Harry...take me, kill me instead--." (US, chap. 9, p. 179). She just doesn't sound like someone with the wand at the ready, prepared to fight with Voldemort. She never makes any defensive action (that we hear about anyway). So, speculatively? I think she was wandless. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 6 13:32:18 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 09:32:18 -0400 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin Message-ID: <006f01c47bb9$cba1eed0$52c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109158 Kneasy: "Fudge, who just happened to be at Azkaban the night before Sirius escapes, (pure coincidence of course - and if you believe that you might want to buy this 100% genuine gold brick) has loosed the Dementors." DuffyPoo: Hmm...my book doesn't say anywhere that Fudge was at Azkaban 'the night before' Sirius escaped. Fudge said he was out there on an inspection, and gave Sirius the paper because he said he missed doing the crossword puzzle. Sirius says "But then I saw Peter in that picture ... I realized he was at Hogwarts with Harry ... perfectly positioned to act." He later says "So you see, I had to do something. I was the *only one who knew Peter was still alive*...It was as if someone had lit a fire in my head...blah blah blah ...So, *one* night when they opened the door to bring me food, I slipped past them as a dog." One night, not "that night." I imagine it took Sirius a few hours at least, a day or two propbably, to formulate his plan. Harry had gotten that picture from Ron, in the early hours of his 13th birthday, shortly after 1 a.m.. The picture showed the Weasleys in front of a pyramid, Percy was wearing a fez with his Head Boy badge attached to it. The newspaper clipping said the Weasley's would be spending a month in Egypt, Ron said they would be back about a week before school started. The picture could have been taken anytime during the last week of July, Ron saving it to send with Harry's birthday card. Harry found out about Black's escape a few hours later on the Muggle news. Fudge had informed the Muggle Prime Minister of Black's escape but would he have done that the moment Black escaped or would he not have waited a few days to see if the Dementors could get him back first? Kneasy "You really don't think that DD didn't know who's inside that ratskin do you? For all these years, a rat is accepted without question when students are allowed an owl, cat or toad?" DuffyPoo: You've forgotten Lee Jordan's giant tarantula that he brought with him in his third year. I can't believe that DD knew Scabbers was PP for at least eight years and did nothing about it. We can't forget that DD didn't know about the three unregistered animagi running around Hogwarts, or are you saying he turned a blind eye to them? I think Lupin may have let him in on the secret, or Sirius told him himself over the next year, as DD recognizes the black dog in the pumpkin patch as Sirius/Snuffles at the end of GoF. DD believed Black had betrayed the Potters to LV although he was supposed to be James' best friend. It is easy enough to force an animagus to transform, we saw that. There's probably an anti-tranformation jinx in DD's storehouse of spells, like the anti-disapparation jinx he used in the DoM. He could have forced him to tranform, jinxed him, and turned him in to the Ministry. HP could have had his Godfather back for all those years, even if he couldn't live with him because of the required blood protection charm at the Dursleys. What would have been DD's point in keeping Scabbers' secret? Azkaban was supposed to be escape-proof and the Dementors take away a wizard's powers after a time. He wouldn't have considered the possibility that Sirius could escape and he would need Pettigrew for another purpose later. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Fri Aug 6 13:38:21 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (Jo Raggett) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 13:38:21 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109159 >Kneasy: > Oh, yes. > We've had fun and games with this before, but don't let that stop >you. How far you're willing to go depends on how much you think DD >knows. > > Sirius talks in his sleep - "He's at Hogwarts," and is now on > the run. > Harry is/will be at Hogwarts. > But why would Sirius wish to harm Harry? > But there is someone at Hogwarts that Sirius would like to get his hands on. > Peter/Wormtail. > You really don't think that DD didn't know who's inside that ratskin do you? > For all these years, a rat is accepted without question when >students are allowed an owl, cat or toad? Aggie: Umm Yes!! Call me naive but it *was* my impression that DD *didn't* know that the Marauders were animagi. He says so in PoA and I believe that DD doesn't mislead us. (hmm naive, stupid, disillusional, confounded!) As others have mentioned I presummed that the 'owl, cat or toad' were guidelines to mean only bring *one* pet to school. Kneasy: > Though Sirius has no animus towards Harry the reverse is not true. > Harry believes Sirius was responsible for the death of his parents. > Fudge, who just happened to be at Azkaban the night before Sirius > escapes,(pure coincidence of course - and if you believe that you > might want to buy this 100% genuine gold brick) has loosed the Dementors. Aggie: Where can I get one?! Is it going cheap??!? ;o)) Kneasy: > It all looks as if there's going to be a really interesting > confluence of events. > So how to control it? > > Well, there's this feller; seemingly looking for work and guess >what? He knows Sirius, Peter, was a friend of the Potters *and* can >teach Harry how to fend off Dementors. How fortunate! Just what we >need to help keep the lid on a potentially explosive situation. > > No need to tell Lupin everything; a couple of sentences will be >enough - "Peter's still alive, Sirius may come looking for him, get >close to Harry and don't let him do anything silly. Oh, and teach >him the Patronus spell, just in case." > Which is what he does - note his first action on entering the >Shrieking Shack is to disarm Harry, not to bind Sirius hand and >foot, which is what you'd expect him to do. > > Lupin links all the participants involved. Harry, Sirius, Peter. > He's not there by chance. Aggie: I'll agree that Lupin is not there by chance but I don't buy that DD knows Peter's still alive (although not completely against the idea). It is strange that the first action Lupin does when entering the Shrieking Shack is to disarm Harry and not do anything to Sirius. I loved reading this for the first time (and wish I could go back to that innocence!) my initial reaction was OH MY! ESE!Lupin!! The only thing that I can think of is that seeing Peter on the Map put enough doubt into his mind *not* to attack Sirius but to let him have his say. From sophierom at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 13:55:02 2004 From: sophierom at yahoo.com (sophierom) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 13:55:02 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109160 :"Jo Raggett" wrote: Do you believe that DD hired Lupin *because* Sirius had escaped from Azkaban? I'm sure that if DD thought Lupin could control his friends once (by making him prefect) then maybe he thought it would be beneficial to have him do it again! Although he (Lupin) wasn't very good at it first time around! I think this is whsat happened! It makes perfect sense to me! Kneasy wrote: Oh, yes. We've had fun and games with this before, but don't let that stop you. How far you're willing to go depends on how much you think DD knows. Sirius talks in his sleep - "He's at Hogwarts," and is now on the run. Harry is/will be at Hogwarts. But why would Sirius wish to harm Harry? But there is someone at Hogwarts that Sirius would like to get his hands on. Peter/Wormtail. You really don't think that DD didn't know who's inside that ratskin do you? For all these years, a rat is accepted without question when students are allowed an owl, cat or toad? Sophierom: Very interesting theory, But if DD knew Peter was Scabbers, why not deal with it himself? And why not deal with it immediately? DD believes Harry is the "one." Why would he allow a Death Eater to live in Harry's dorm room? Perhaps you could argue that he figured Peter was a wimpy death eater at best, one who wouldn't move until Voldemort gained power again. But after the events of year 1 and 2, DD knows LV is gaining power. While DD does seem to know a lot, I don't think he knew about Rat!Peter. Kneasy: Though Sirius has no animus towards Harry the reverse is not true. Harry believes Sirius was responsible for the death of his parents. Fudge, who just happened to be at Azkaban the night before Sirius escapes, (pure coincidence of course - and if you believe that you might want to buy this 100% genuine gold brick) has loosed the Dementors. Sophierom: You're right, this isn't a coincidence. But IMHO, the reason Sirius escaped the night after Fudge's visit is not due to a conspiracy or manipulation on Fudge or DD's part; it's because it was Fudge's newspaper that alerted Sirius to the danger. Sirius had no reason to escape before. What good would it do? He's a wanted man. He has no proof that he's innocent. Then, he sees the paper. He realizes who Scabbers really is. Now he has his reason to escape. If he can get to Scabbers, he can at least protect Harry and have his revenge (he's too emotional to consider saving Peter to prove his own innocence). Again, you could argue that DD somehow manipulated Fudge into going to Azkaban, giving Sirius the paper, and thus beginning the whole chain of events. But if you take that route, it seems to me that you're arguing something close to the DD time-travel theory. He would simply know too much, would be acting to begin a chain of events becuase he's already seen them unfold. Kneasy: It all looks as if there's going to be a really interesting confluence of events. So how to control it? Well, there's this feller; seemingly looking for work and guess what? He knows Sirius, Peter, was a friend of the Potters *and* can teach Harry how to fend off Dementors. How fortunate! Just what we need to help keep the lid on a potentially explosive situation. No need to tell Lupin everything; a couple of sentences will be enough - "Peter's still alive, Sirius may come looking for him, get close to Harry and don't let him do anything silly. Oh, and teach him the Patronus spell, just in case." Which is what he does - note his first action on entering the Shrieking Shack is to disarm Harry, not to bind Sirius hand and foot, which is what you'd expect him to do. Sophierom: I don't have my book here, so I can't be sure, but isn't the reason Lupin doesn't bind Sirius immediately that Lupin has seen Peter's name on the map, and he now knows the Sirius is innocent? If this is the case, then of course he's going to disarm Harry first. He knows Harry is out for revenge, and Lupin doesn't want Harry hexing the wrong man. Kneasy: Lupin links all the participants involved. Harry, Sirius, Peter. He's not there by chance. Sophierom: I agree that he's not there by chance. What I'm not sure about is that DD orchestrated the whole thing. I could buy Jo's idea (above) that DD chose Lupin because he thought Lupin, as one of Sirius's old friends, might best know how to protect Harrry from him. And you're exactly right when you say that Lupin links all the participants involved; but I think this is an example of JKR's omnipotence and not DD's. As author, she's the ultimate chess player and she can decide when to play what piece. The question is, does she play the Lupin piece in order to hint at DD's craftiness? I don't think so. I think she plays Lupin because she thought it was time that Harry learn more about his family, and who better to do so than one of his father's old friends. Also, Lupin continues the theme begun in book 2 - tolerence. In book 2, we see the introduction of the term mudblood, and we get intorduced to "peculiar institution" of house elves. Then we're shown a werewolf who is the best DADA instructor in Harry's 3 years, and he's basically being ousted because of his "condition." Just my thoughts. Thanks for bringing up such interesting theories! Sopehierom From pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 6 13:57:06 2004 From: pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net (pcaehill2) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 13:57:06 -0000 Subject: "I Must Not Tell Lies" Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109161 On another re-read of HP5, in particular the horrible Umbridge's horrible punishment--a thought struck me (ouch!): the scar from Umbridge's quill on the back of Harry's hand must stay with him, hmmm? So, pondering the possibilities-- --Could "I must not tell lies" brand Harry as a notorious liar, if misinterpreted (say, by the Centaurs?) --Could it (alternatively) mark him as someone sworn to tell the truth? --Or could it figure as a reminder to Harry, if/when he is particularly tempted to lie about something important? I think there's a good chance that JKR will allude to it somehow, since, as DD says, "Scars can come in handy." From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 6 14:46:34 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 10:46:34 -0400 Subject: Pettigrew Attacked Ron? Message-ID: <000a01c47bc4$2c41e920$6c90d1d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109162 While trying to find a quote for some reply this morning, I came across this, which I truly have never noticed before, in the chapter of PoA titled Hermione's Secret. "Professor, Black's telling the truth -- we saw Pettigrew -- --he escaped when Professor Lupin turned into a werewolf -- --he's a rat -- --Pettigrew's front paw, I mean, finger, he cut it off --" NOW, GET THIS... "--Pettigrew attacked Ron, it wasn't Sirius --" Where did that come from? Scabbers had faked his own death in February on a Thursday (Lupin/Harry's Patronus lessons were on Thursdays) - before the Gryffindor vs Ravenclaw match - in fact, the day Harry got his Firebolt back. There was a Quidditch practice the next day, then the match on Saturday against Ravenclaw, which Gryffindor won. Saturday night, after the festivities, Ron was attacked. Ron said, "Black! Sirius Black! With a knife!" and "Perce -- Sirius Black! In our dormitory! With a knife! Woke me up!" Later, Ron describes Black "and I saw him standing over me ... like a skeleton, with loads of filthy hair..." This sort of matches Harry's description of Black from the muggle news was "whose gaunt face was surrounded by a matted, elbow-length tangle," especially that it is now seven months later. Granted Ron wouldn't have known what Pettigrew looked like, but he would have seen pictures of Black in the Daily Prophet, and presumably spread over the town of Hogsmeade. (Although that is not stated, there were pictures of the 10 escaped DEs posted in the town in OotP.) Professor McGonagall asks Sir Cadogan if he let a man into the tower and Sir Cadogan said that he had, and that the man had the whole weeks' passwords written on a piece of paper. Sir Cadogan didn't say it was Black, Peeves told DD it was Black when the Fat Lady was attacked the previous Hallowe'en. In the Shrieking Shack, Black is speaking "He [Crookshanks] tried to bring Peter to me, but couldn't .. so he stole the passwords into Gryffindor Tower for me ... he took them from a boy's bedside table..." then black says "But Peter got wind of what was going on and ran for it ... this cat -- Crookshanks, did you call him? -- told me Peter had left blood on the sheets ... I suppose he bit himself ... well, faking his own death had worked once..." Black had the list of passwords. Nobody, in the Shrieking Shack admitted or denied attacking Ron, it was never mentioned. Would Scabbers have also known the passwords? He rarely left the tower room. If he had seen the list on Neville's table? Could it have been Pettigrew who actually attacked Ron? Why would he have done so? Is Pettigrew not only able to transform himself into a rat, but have some way of transforming into Black? Sirius used to keep his hair cut short (first OotP picture), was Pettigrew cutting it for him and pocketing some of the hairs? Oh, why would he need hairs...I wonder..... Why does this say "Pettigrew attacked Ron, it wasn't Sirius"????? DuffyPoo [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Aug 6 14:50:35 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 14:50:35 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109163 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sbursztynski" wrote: > > I always assumed that Lupin got the job because a DADA teacher was > needed and DD, > kind soul that he is, gave a go to an unemployed werewolf who was, > after all, a good > teacher. Is DD really that much of a manipulator? For that matter, is > he really that on the > ball? If he did know Peter was alive and where he was, why wasn't he > fighting to get Sirius > out of Azkaban? Even Lupin thought Sirius had done it until the night > at the Shrieking > Shack - he said so - and he was one of Sirius's two best friends. if > I thought DD was really > so heartless as to let a man he believed innocent rot in Azkaban > without even *trying* to > help and then hired Lupin only to keep an eye on Harry, I'd be very > disappointed in him. There is a small, well - smallish group of cold-eyed and cold-hearted posters that do not accept DD as the kindly old duffer who just happens to turn up at the end of each book to explain to Harry just what the hell has been going on. DD is a manipulator and fixer, for all his gentle smiles. He's Puppetmaster!DD. (Lots of previous threads on this.) OK, in this instance - he knows that Scabbers is Peter. What does that tell him? That the showdown between Peter and Sirius is not the one generally accepted. It does not tell him that Sirius is innocent. If fact, so far as canon goes, Sirius never claims to be innocent until the Shrieking Shack. Even DD seems to accept that Sirius was Secret Keeper and must be the betrayer. The whole Godric's Hollow incident is swept under the carpet by the MoM; there is no trial and 13 dead Muggles have to be covered up as well. A Sirius helpless with laughter is picked up at the site of a massacre and bunged straight in the slammer. Case solved. Nobody, not the Ministry (especially the Ministry) wants this can of worms opened again. (You'll note that nobody suggests that Sirius has a realistic chance of being cleared even after he's escaped and started talking. And Fudge plans on administering the Kiss asap. and looks forward to issuing a press release. It all smells of cover-up.) DD may have had his suspicions but what can he do about them? Effectively nothing except watch and wait. Peter is in hiding - obviously. Who from? Sirius is in the chokey, a place that's just about impossible to get out of, and Voldy's vanished. The reasonable assumption is that Peter is hiding from someone nasty - DEs. But if Sirius was the traitor then the DEs might be trying to avenge Sirius. And there are still some about. Better let Peter stay in hiding and keep an eye on him. But when Sirius escapes the situation looks like coming to a head. Who is available who might be able to talk to, to influence, Sirius? Ah, yes! His old friend Lupin. He might be able to get near to Sirius without getting his head blasted off. He also knows Peter and can get close to Harry. He's a friend of Harry's parents after all. Just the man for the job. DD might like Lupin, even trust him (read pippin for alternative views), but Hogwarts is not a refuge for the unemployable. A werewolf as a teacher? Once rumours of that got out the solids would really hit the fan, potion or no potion. Lupin is there for a reason, and it ain't charity. Except for very brief periods Harry is watched and protected. Fudge more or less admits watching Privet Drive "Don't want to lose you again," then Harry is esconced in Diagon Alley and when he gets on the train who's there but Lupin. Don't you find it odd that Lupin is the only teacher to use the Hogwarts Express? That he's the one who can produce a Patronus when one of the Dementors oh so conveniently let loose by Fudge approaches Harry? Does anyone believe that Sirius Black, the most wanted wizard in the WW could have infiltrated Kings Cross, a small space absolutely heaving with wizards, and sneaked on board? So why was the Dementor on the train? Because Harry was. But Harry might need help if it got too sniffy. So a wizard that can produce a Patronus could be handy, yes? (We'll ignore for the moment the theory I posted that Sirius was sprung by Fudge to give him an excuse to let loose the Dementors and that their orders were to get Harry, not Black. The Dementor had a reason to be on the train whether you go for that one or not.) DD feels responsible for Harry. If it looks like there might be danger looming he's not going to rely on Fudge and his minions. He wants his own man on the spot. And in this instance it's Lupin. Kneasy proud to wear the badge of the League of Conspiracy Theorists. Remember, paranoia can be fun. From snow15145 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 14:50:52 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 14:50:52 -0000 Subject: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109164 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" > wrote: > > > Geoff: > > In UK schools, the cut-off date for ages is 31st August. So anyone > > whose 11th birthday falls within that frame goes into the new First > > Year(modern Year 7). Hence, Harry is one of the youngest pupils in > > his year. > > > > I nearly made the point in my last post that Riddle must have a > > birthday early in the school year, because if we accept that he was > > in the Fifth Year and 16 and the Chamber was opened in the autumn > > term of 1942 (awful lot of Boolean "ands" there [!]) then his 16th > > birthday must have fallen early in his Fourth year making him one > of > > the oldest pupils. > > Geoff: > Whoops! > > Correcting my own post. What I meant to say was that his 16th > birthday must have fallen early in his Fifth Year - theoretiacally he > could have been 16 as early as 01/09/42. Snow: Have to disagree with you Geoff. The diary could not be the same year as the opening of the Chamber if the Chamber was opened in autumn of `42 because Riddle wrote in it and showed Harry the setup of Hagrid half way through June. If the diary was from 1942 and the Chamber was opened in 1942 then Riddle would have to have written about the Chamber being opened in June before it was actually opened in autumn. From this I conclude that the diary was dated in 1943 after the event of the Chamber opening in autumn of '42 for Riddle to have written about the events of the Chamber in June. The diary being a 1943 date book, Riddle would had to have turned 16 at some point in this year. It is feasible that Riddle did not immediately, upon receiving the diary, preserve his 16- year-old self. Riddle could have been in his 6th year in 1943 when he thought of preserving himself. Riddle's 6th school year would then be `43/'44 making his 7th school year `44/'45. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Aug 6 14:59:45 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 14:59:45 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin In-Reply-To: <006f01c47bb9$cba1eed0$52c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109165 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > Kneasy: > "Fudge, who just happened to be at Azkaban the night before Sirius escapes, > (pure coincidence of course - and if you believe that you might want to buy > this 100% genuine gold brick) has loosed the Dementors." > > DuffyPoo: > Hmm...my book doesn't say anywhere that Fudge was at Azkaban 'the night before' Sirius escaped. Kneasy; Oh yes it does. Arthur says so in chap. 4. "...because Fudge wanted to keep it quiet, but Fudge went out to Azkaban the night Sirius escaped." > > Kneasy > "You really don't think that DD didn't know who's inside that ratskin do you? > For all these years, a rat is accepted without question when students are > allowed an owl, cat or toad?" > > > DuffyPoo: > You've forgotten Lee Jordan's giant tarantula that he brought with him in his third year. > Kneasy: No, I hadn't. But something in a matchbox is hardly a magical pet. DuffyPoo: > I can't believe that DD knew Scabbers was PP for at least eight years and did nothing about it. We can't forget that DD didn't know about the three unregistered animagi running around Hogwarts, or are you saying he turned a blind eye to them? Kneasy: Yes. That's exactly what I'm saying. Do you really think Lupin was locked up in a shed every month and nobody checked up on him? A caring headmaster like DD? Tut, tut. From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Fri Aug 6 12:13:33 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 12:13:33 -0000 Subject: 'The' prophecy - One or Two subjects? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109166 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, macfotuk at y... wrote: > While LV may once have suspected NL was a possibility the years > since his attempt on harry's life have convinced him, perhaps > wrongly, that HP is the only wizard to fear*. Certainly, LV (but not > DD I believe) thought that Harry was the only one could do it, > though it may have required the Bode incident (attempt) to convince > him of it. Bode et al would have seen Harry's name on it, and therefore knew that the spells from the DoM personnel would have only accepted Harry, not Neville. Why? LV should have figured that some other piece he didn't know had been fulfilled in the interim. Josh From maritajan at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 13:31:53 2004 From: maritajan at yahoo.com (Marita Jan) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 06:31:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: What drives WW ? (was Chapter 24: Occlumency) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040806133153.66944.qmail@web12106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109167 --- severelysigune wrote: > Kneasy wrote: > > > Of course wizards aren't all that powerful without their wands, are > they? And a wand would be a great boon to Goblins or Centaurs or > other beings; it would probably boost their power and standing > enormously. But only humans are allowed wands. > How very convenient - for humans. > Who passed that law? > Wizards. What a surprise. Not taking any chances, are they? > And a wizard gets his wand when he enters Hogwarts. Why not before? > Youngsters practice with broom-sticks, why not wands? > Under elevens are taught at home. > With no wand what do they learn? What can they learn? < > But you don't have to have a wand everytime. Harry himself makes things happen without his wand (i.e., blowing up Aunt Marge). I know wands are necessary for certain types of magic, but obviously, that's not 100% true 100% of the time. MJ ===== -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Need a real estate professional? Visit my site at www.maritabush.com With Marita, great service comes first.....and lasts! __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From lorelei3dg at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 13:53:09 2004 From: lorelei3dg at yahoo.com (lorelei3dg) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 13:53:09 -0000 Subject: Halloween 81 In-Reply-To: <003601c47b39$269d6ca0$85c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109168 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > Lorel replied: > "It might be simpler than this. Isn't there some comment in OotP that > even though Harry knew the address of the Order, he would be > restricted by magic so that he would not be able to mention it to > people outside the Order? Also, even though DD is the Secret Keeper > for 12 GP, others know of the address." > > > DuffyPoo again: > > I don't recall ever reading that Harry was prevented by magic from telling someone the address of the Order, (not that it's not in there, I just don't recall it), but if they did, the person couldn't find GP anyway because Harry is not the Secret-Keeper. Lorel: I can't remember where (or even if) I read that, and can't access the book right now. When I get home on Monday, I can look for it. In the meantime, my apologies for bringing it up without textual support! DuffyPoo: Only the Secret-Keeper can tell anyone the address and have them find the place. The only people who can get into 12 GP, now that DD is the Secret-Keeper are the people DD himself tells (either words or writing, I presume). So, now that DD is the S-K of 12 GP, the Malfoys will not be able to enter it, even if they had visited there frequently before. At least that is how I understand it (which I admit, means nothing.) Lorel: Yes, we're on the same page here. DuffyPoo: The only concern I have regarding S-K and GP in particular is Kreacher. Did DD tell him the address? If not, how does he manage to go between GP and the Malfoy residence? Is it just more House-Elf brand magic? Lorel: I hadn't thought of that. At first thought I'd go with the idea of the House-Elf Magic. I hope we learn more about their power in the future books. DuffyPoo: > Who are the others that know the address? Do you mean the Malfoys, Tonks' parents, and the Lestranges? If that is who you do mean, I would expect, as stated above, that unless DD tells them the address himself, they can no longer find the place. Lorel: Actually, I meant the other members of the Order. They all know the address and can access the house even though they are not S-K. I was then drawing a parallel between this and Godric's Hollow: the Order members can get to 12 GP but not divulge its secrets; why couldn't Peter have shared the address with Sirius? He, too, would be able to access the house in GH. DuffyPoo: Even though Nymphadora (what a name!) Tonks knows where 12 GP is, she cannot bring Andromeda or Ted to GP because she is not the Secret- Keeper. As above, at least this is my understanding of how it works. Lorel: Exactly. So why would this be any different for Sirius? He can get there, but not bring people with whom Peter had not shared the secret. Of course, it just occurred to me that within this setup, Sirius would be the only other person who could know, because otherwise everyone else would have known that Peter was the S-K. Hmmm, that's a big weakness in my theory. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Aug 6 15:32:24 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 15:32:24 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109169 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sophierom" wrote: > > Again, you could argue that DD somehow manipulated Fudge > into going to Azkaban, giving Sirius the paper, and thus beginning > the whole chain of events. But if you take that route, it seems to > me that you're arguing something close to the DD time-travel theory. > He would simply know too much, would be acting to begin a chain of > events becuase he's already seen them unfold. > Kneasy: Ooh! Wash your mouth out! Time travel indeed! No thank you. No, DD didn't manipulate Fudge. Fudge is a baddy, either that or weak enough to be leaned on by someone evil. Fudge makes two visits to Azkaban. In the first he 'just happens' to let Sirius get hold of a newspaper that 'just happens' to have a photograph of Peter in animagus form on the front page. He leaves Sirius to stew for a while. He drops in again at a later date "Just happened to be in the neighbourhood"and surprise, surprise, this 'just happens' to be the night Sirius escapes. "Oh dear. We've lost a prisoner. Good job we 'just happen' to have some Dementors to track him down." Dementors who strangely seem to be uninterested in Sirius and extremely interested in Harry - in the train, on the Quidditch Pitch, after the Shrieking Shack. In the last two instances they *ignore* Sirius and 'just happen' to concentrate on Harry. Why? Because they've been told to. Springing Sirius provides a reason for events that will result in a tragic "accident' where an innocent boy is kissed. How sad. But good news for Voldy supporters. > Sophierom: > I don't have my book here, so I can't be sure, but isn't the reason > Lupin doesn't bind Sirius immediately that Lupin has seen Peter's > name on the map, and he now knows the Sirius is innocent? > If this is the case, then of course he's going to disarm > Harry first. He knows Harry is out for revenge, and Lupin doesn't > want Harry hexing the wrong man. Kneasy: A name on a map does not make Peter innocent. It just makes him alive. It provides an opportunity to ask questions, questions which are never asked. Lupin puts words in Sirius' mouth, Sirius doesn't have to say a damn thing. So who told Lupin? DD? From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com Fri Aug 6 15:40:07 2004 From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 15:40:07 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109170 > Alla wrote: > > Well, I don't know. James and Lily defied Voldemort three times, did > not they? If at the same time James maintained close relationship > with Voldie, that will look a little strange for me. boyd: The prophecy says, "born to those who have thrice defied him." Maybe Lily defied him thrice. Or maybe James defied him thrice publicly, since he was a spy who needed to maintain his cover. Or maybe the "him" isn't LV. > Then we have that "and James hated Dark Arts" , but I suspect that > you don't trust marauders words much... :o) Correct. Also, I don't need James to like the Dark Arts to be conspiring with LV about something. > > Boyd wrote: > > 2. Who better to tell LV who the secret-keeper was? LV found out > > somehow, and I think James told him. > Then Alla responded: > Why? To get him to kill his wife and son and himself? I mean, yes, > the possibilities are endless, but don't you think you are > overrreaching just a little bit? :o) Perhaps James and LV had some sort of bargain--take just Harry to spare me and Lily, or take me but spare Lily, or something. Just speculation, granted. Unfortunately for James, the bargain resulted in LV killing him and Lily. Those darn deceitful Dark Lords! I admit I am overreaching a bit, and my post is admittedly probably completely wrong--not sure whether I believe it myself--but there's *something* up with James. Why does JKR not tell us anything about him? Why show him in the memory as a conceited jerk? --boyd and I've got to stop forgetting to take my meds ;) From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Aug 6 15:49:31 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 15:49:31 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109171 > > Sophierom: > > I don't have my book here, so I can't be sure, but isn't the reason > > Lupin doesn't bind Sirius immediately that Lupin has seen Peter's > > name on the map, and he now knows the Sirius is innocent? > > If this is the case, then of course he's going to disarm > > Harry first. He knows Harry is out for revenge, and Lupin doesn't > > want Harry hexing the wrong man. > Kneasy: > A name on a map does not make Peter innocent. > It just makes him alive. It provides an opportunity to ask questions, > questions which are never asked. Lupin puts words in Sirius' mouth, > Sirius doesn't have to say a damn thing. So who told Lupin? DD? Jen: Technically, it wouldn't take much advanced critical thinking for Lupin to put two & two together here. He sees Peter is alive and has to ask himself, how & why? Didn't Peter die a hero trying to take on Sirius all by himself? Well, hold on then, if he was still alive after facing Sirius, why hide when Sirius is safe behind bars at Azkaban & miss out on all the hero-worship? Unless....unless....things aren't as they seem and Peter was trying to hide something. But what? If you couple Lupin's musings with the shred of doubt he felt that Sirius would ever betray James, it would all fall in place pretty quickly. He realizes Sirius is here after Peter, not Harry, and the next leap to make is that reason Sirius is after Peter is Peter is the guilty one. Lupin, after all, knows these guys like the back of his hand. He's seen Reckless!Sirius before and Wimpy!Peter; this 'new' reality of Peter as betrayer and Sirius out to avenge James' death would fit better in Lupin's mind than the old story. That's how I see it, anyway. Jen From drliss at comcast.net Fri Aug 6 16:14:32 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (drliss at comcast.net) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 16:14:32 +0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin Message-ID: <080620041614.6887.4113AE67000B679D00001AE722007621949C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 109172 > Kneasy: > A name on a map does not make Peter innocent. > It just makes him alive. It provides an opportunity to ask questions, > questions which are never asked. Lupin puts words in Sirius' mouth, > Sirius doesn't have to say a damn thing. So who told Lupin? DD? Jen: Technically, it wouldn't take much advanced critical thinking for Lupin to put two & two together here. He sees Peter is alive and has to ask himself, how & why? Didn't Peter die a hero trying to take on Sirius all by himself? Well, hold on then, if he was still alive after facing Sirius, why hide when Sirius is safe behind bars at Azkaban & miss out on all the hero-worship? Unless....unless....things aren't as they seem and Peter was trying to hide something. But what? If you couple Lupin's musings with the shred of doubt he felt that Sirius would ever betray James, it would all fall in place pretty quickly. He realizes Sirius is here after Peter, not Harry, and the next leap to make is that reason Sirius is after Peter is Peter is the guilty one. Lupin, after all, knows these guys like the back of his hand. He's seen Reckless!Sirius before and Wimpy!Peter; this 'new' reality of Peter as betrayer and Sirius out to avenge James' death would fit better in Lupin's mind than the old story. That's how I see it, anyway. Jen Lissa: Jen, I'm totally with you on this one. For a guy as smart as Lupin- and Lupin is definitely a pretty smart guy- as the pieces fall into place it's not that hard to put together. He's a calm, rational, reasonable person overall. Add to that that JKR has said that Lupin tends to be too forgiving of his friends, and you can see where he'd be ready to listen. The fact that he disarms Harry before doing a thing about Sirius I think served other purposes: 1.) I think JKR was setting up for the "this isn't as it seems." Lupin coming across there as ESE when that goes against everything Harry knows about him is the first sign of "something's not right here." 2.) Lupin is Sirius's opposite in at least one way, and that is he actually thinks before he does anything. Disarming Harry doesn't mean he's ready to let Sirius go free- just that he's ready to listen before Sirius is killed. 3.) Bringing her own personal favorite theory back into it, I think one of the reasons Lupin was so quick to take Sirius's side or at least to listen is because that was what he wanted to do. I'm still utterly sold on the pair of them having been an item, and Remus never being fully able to deal with the betrayal, or understand it. Love can make you do some stupid things, and I think in this case his initial reaction was to protect the person he loved. He cares about Harry, yes, but those feelings simply don't rival the feelings he has for Sirius. (Even if you go with deep bond of friendship, this still works. But I'm a romantic ;) ) I do agree that just a name on a map doesn't make Peter innocent, but hey- that's part of why Lupin wanted it all spelled out before he killed Peter. As far as Dumbledore goes, I think he WAS clueless about the marauders becoming Animagi, and he didn't realize that Peter was living in Hogwarts all the time. Granted, I base this entirely on the fact he said so, but not everyone can be lying to Harry ;) Lissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Aug 6 16:15:52 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 16:15:52 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109173 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > > Jen: Technically, it wouldn't take much advanced critical thinking > for Lupin to put two & two together here. He sees Peter is alive and > has to ask himself, how & why? Didn't Peter die a hero trying to > take on Sirius all by himself? Well, hold on then, if he was still > alive after facing Sirius, why hide when Sirius is safe behind bars > at Azkaban & miss out on all the hero-worship? > Unless....unless....things aren't as they seem and Peter was trying > to hide something. But what? > Kneasy: Too much thinking for Lupin - unless he's a bloody good actor, because according to canon he doesn't work it out until *after* he's disarmed Harry. He enters apparently thinking he's rescuing Peter. "Where is he, Sirius?" time passes, Sirius points to Ron and "But then..." Lupin muttered, staring at Black so intently it seemed he was trying to read his mind "..why hasn't he showed himself before now? Unless..." Lupins eyes suddenly widened, as though he were seeing something beyond Black, something none of the rest could see, "-unless he was the one...unless you switched without telling me?" Seems as if a totally brand spanking new concept has struck him. Something that had never even crossed his mind before. Kneasy From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Aug 6 16:29:13 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 16:29:13 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109174 > > Jen: Technically, it wouldn't take much advanced critical thinking > > for Lupin to put two & two together here. He sees Peter is alive and > > has to ask himself, how & why? Didn't Peter die a hero trying to > > take on Sirius all by himself? Well, hold on then, if he was still > > alive after facing Sirius, why hide when Sirius is safe behind bars > > at Azkaban & miss out on all the hero-worship? > > Unless....unless....things aren't as they seem and Peter was trying > > to hide something. But what? > Kneasy: > Too much thinking for Lupin - unless he's a bloody good actor, > because according to canon he doesn't work it out until *after* > he's disarmed Harry. > > He enters apparently thinking he's rescuing Peter. > "Where is he, Sirius?" > > time passes, Sirius points to Ron and > > "But then..." Lupin muttered, staring at Black so intently it seemed > he was trying to read his mind "..why hasn't he showed himself > before now? Unless..." Lupins eyes suddenly widened, as though he > were seeing something beyond Black, something none of the rest > could see, "-unless he was the one...unless you switched without > telling me?" > > Seems as if a totally brand spanking new concept has struck him. > Something that had never even crossed his mind before. Jen: Perhaps the actual conclusion is a brand spanking new concept, but the thoughts that lead to that conclusion (from my snip above) would have happened between the time Lupin saw Peter alive on the map and he reached the Shrieking Shack. Of course there's always the possibility Lupin is a Legilimens as well, from the comment "staring so intently at Black it seemed he was trying to read his mind." That's not a new theory, but he is the only other one in the books besides Dumbledore & Snape who seems to 'stare intently' at people. He did it again in OOTP to Sirius, in the kitchen at Grimmauld Place. Even if he's not a Legilimens, I think the concept of a humble/modest Peter would be something Lupin wouldn't believe. That fact alone, the Peter would pretend to be dead even after he's safe from Sirius' 'revenge', would give Lupin pause. Why pretend to be dead when you get public acclaim, a service award, etc. and the criminal is behind bars? That just doesn't add up. That alone makes it worth going to the Shrieking Shack to find out more. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 16:41:52 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 16:41:52 -0000 Subject: Snape's avoidance of Voldemort' s name (Was:OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chap 24) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109175 > Carol responds: > The name clearly causes pain to Snape: snip. > > Anyway, I don't think Snape is *afraid* of either Voldemort or > Voldemort's name (we've seen his courage demonstrated many times), but > he certainly wouldn't want to endure the pain of hearing the name > spoken if he could avoid doing so. And he probably does see Harry's > use of the name when powerful adult wizards (e.g., McGonagall) avoid > it as a form of arrogance. IMO, he is trying to make Harry realize > that, scar or no scar, he is not yet Voldmort's equal. > Alla: I am willing to accept the fact that that name causes pain to Snape as valid enough reason for him to avoid hearing it,if it is indeed true but if he thinks that Harry's saying it as arrogance, the only thing I can say TOUGH. In many ways Harry is more Voldemort equal than Snape is. He fought Voldemort several times and stood his ground. We saw Snape's courage, BUT we never saw him saying the name yet , so for now I am working under assumption that for one reason or another he IS afraid of the name. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 6 16:47:03 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 12:47:03 -0400 Subject: Ancestor / descendant Message-ID: <002a01c47bd5$00b4dcc0$3bc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109176 Digger said: "Deliberate mistake" is a colloquial joke phrase in British English. "It means "oops, well spotted, I made a mistake, but lets have a joke and pretend I did it deliberately, even though we all know it was really a genuine goof" So I (as a brit) read it as ancestor WAS a genuine mistake and she is openly acknowledging it in a humorous way, albeit understandable only to Brits." DuffyPoo: Thank you, digger, for clearing that up. I watch a lot of British televison and 'get' some of this stuff, but that one just didn't click. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 6 17:11:54 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 13:11:54 -0400 Subject: Marauders and Lord Voldemort Message-ID: <003301c47bd8$79935e70$3bc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109177 RMM - Heck, Hermione, Harry and Ron are in their second year and they are - already dabbling in the dark arts (Polyjuice Potion). Amey: "Polyjuice Potion is never mentioned as a piece of Dark Art or else Dumbledore would have told Harry in CoS. Will Dumbledore want Harry to practice some Dark Magic? Polyjuice Potion is useful enough that Harry might consider using it again, if it is Dark Art, Dumbledore can't take that risk." DuffyPoo: "Harry wandered over to the Restricted Section....Unfortunately, you needed a specially signed note from one of the teachers to look in any of the restricted books and he knew he'd never get one. These were the books containing powerful Dark magic never taught in Hogwarts and only read by older students stuying advanced Defence Against the Dark Arts." They got Moste Potente Potions, a book Snape had mentioned contained the Polyjuice Potion recipe, from the Restricted Section with a signed note from Lockhart. "Hermione opened Moste Potente Potions carefully, and the three of them bent over the damp-spotted pages. It was clear from a glance why it belonged in the Restricted Section...." Did DD ever find out that the Trio used Polyjuice potion? I just read CoS twice and don't remember it if he did. (I don't remember a lot of things so that wouldn't be surprising!) As an aside, and to why I don't think DD knew about the Polyjuice, I think Hermione was in the Hospital wing so long because she didn't tell Madam Pomfrey what happened to her so it took Madam Pomfrey longer to sort out. Remember, in OotP, Hermione suggested they go and tell Madam Pomfrey what had happened to Montague because Pomfrey hadn't been able to sort him out? I also thought it was interesting that she never made that suggestion about helping Madam Pomfrey with Marietta Edgecombe's predicament. Both the Polyjuice and jinx on the paper had the potential to get Hermione in trouble. Doesn't Phineas say that Slytherins are 'brave but not stupid. Given the chance they will always choose to save their own necks,' or something like that. Maybe Hermione belongs in Slytherin. ;-) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 6 17:16:21 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 13:16:21 -0400 Subject: "I Must Not Tell Lies" Message-ID: <003c01c47bd9$1844d3a0$3bc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109178 pcaehill2 said: >>>--Or could it figure as a reminder to Harry, if/when he is particularly tempted to lie about something important? I think there's a good chance that JKR will allude to it somehow, since, as DD says, "Scars can come in handy."<<< DuffyPoo: Harry could stand to use it as a reminder not to lie. He needs also to remember that DD told him "I am a sufficiently accomplished Legilimens myself to know when I am being lied to." Remember that, Harry Potter! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From meriaugust at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 17:50:35 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 17:50:35 -0000 Subject: Pettigrew Attacked Ron? In-Reply-To: <000a01c47bc4$2c41e920$6c90d1d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109179 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > While trying to find a quote for some reply this morning, I came across this, which I truly have never noticed before, in the chapter of PoA titled Hermione's Secret. > > "Professor, Black's telling the truth -- we saw Pettigrew -- > --he escaped when Professor Lupin turned into a werewolf -- > --he's a rat -- > --Pettigrew's front paw, I mean, finger, he cut it off --" > NOW, GET THIS... > "--Pettigrew attacked Ron, it wasn't Sirius --" > > Where did that come from? snip > Why does this say "Pettigrew attacked Ron, it wasn't Sirius"????? > > DuffyPoo I could be wrong, but I believe that this refers to Ron's injuries just following the Shreiking Shack scene, and to whatever spell it was that Wormtail used to knock Ron unconscious. I think that Snape, seeing Ron knocked out on the groud, infered that Black had done something to him, and told this version to DD. Harry (or Hermy) tells DD that it wasn't Sirius simply because it wasn't. And Pettigrew did attack Ron. That's all, I could be wrong. Meri From cruthw at earthlink.net Fri Aug 6 15:41:37 2004 From: cruthw at earthlink.net (caspenzoe) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 15:41:37 -0000 Subject: Weaslys' roles in book 6 (was Re: Percy's role in book 6) In-Reply-To: <001401c47484$4f6487b0$29c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109180 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > > Tara said > > "I'm anxious to see where Percy turns in book 6.. will he admit he was wrong, run home to his family and join the order? Will he be stubborn and arrogant, not admitting his mistakes, disbelieving in Dumbledore?" > > > DuffyPoo now: ... > I'm afraid Percy is going to get caught up in something. I don't think he is going to turn spy for LV or anything, at least not willingly. I'm thinking along the lines of Ludo Bagman here (God forbid he becomes the MoM), who was caught giving information to a LV spy in the ministry. ....> Having just finnished rereading COS, I could not help but notice the number of times Percy is encountered doing something mysterious that remains unexplained. The first time I readthe book, I assumed that all of the mystery had to do with Percy's budding relationship with Penelope Clearwater. However, on second reading, I realized that at least one of these encounters took place in the dungeons, where Pewnelope, being a Ravenclaw, seems unlikely to have been hanging out. In addition, more than one of them involves The VM possessed Ginny. Subsequently, in book 3, POA, we discover that Percy's former pet rat (now Ron's) is, in fact, a VM operative. Therefore, it seems to me that for whatever reason, VM and his operatives have targeted the Weasley family for some time. I think that they, with their red hair are the prime candidates for an heirship relationship with Gryffindor, and not the Potters. In addition, it seems to me that Ron, imparticular has some heavy links to possible Royal status, both via his name, and via the literary device of his proclamation as "our king" in OOTP. What any of this has to do with Half-Blooded- or Half Bloodedness, I don't know, except, possibly with Arthur's (name also an indication of possible royalness). But, I am convinced that Harry (everyman) will ultimately turn out to be the servant to Ron, the king, even if only metaphorically; ir makes good literary sense. Caspen From karen at dacafe.com Fri Aug 6 15:29:37 2004 From: karen at dacafe.com (karen at dacafe.com) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 08:29:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Halloween 81 In-Reply-To: References: <003601c47b39$269d6ca0$85c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: <13517.192.35.35.34.1091806177.squirrel@cafemail.dcccafe.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109181 > Lorel: > Exactly. So why would this be any different for Sirius? He can get > there, but not bring people with whom Peter had not shared the > secret. Of course, it just occurred to me that within this setup, > Sirius would be the only other person who could know, because > otherwise everyone else would have known that Peter was the S-K. > Hmmm, that's a big weakness in my theory. Karen: It is not a weakness. Peter tells Sirius because he is planning to set Sirius up as the betrayer. It is part of the overall plan. The only problem is that I do not believe Peter thought LV would kill James. ----------------------------------------- Stay ahead of the information curve. Receive DCC news and jobs on your desktop daily. Subscribe today to the DCC CafeNews newsletter. [ http://www10.dcccafe.com/nl/newsletter_subscribe.php ] It's informative and essential. From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Fri Aug 6 16:29:57 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 16:29:57 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109182 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sbursztynski" wrote: > For that matter, is he really that on the > ball? If he did know Peter was alive and where he was, why wasn't he > fighting to get Sirius > out of Azkaban? Even Lupin thought Sirius had done it until the night > at the Shrieking > Shack - he said so - and he was one of Sirius's two best friends. if > I thought DD was really > so heartless as to let a man he believed innocent rot in Azkaban > without even *trying* to > help and then hired Lupin only to keep an eye on Harry, I'd be very > disappointed in him. OK, I can't stand it anymore... :) The "all-knowing" Dumbledore has made _many_ _many_ mistakes in his life... including assuming Sirius' guilt. OotP should have shattered all this misconceptions that DD is perfect. He means well, and he is a fairly smart guy... and not too shabby at hiding his surprise from time to time (his mask has slipped on occasion)... but... he's not omniscient. Re-read DD's confession, and take him off his pedistal. DD didn't know about Quirrel in PS/SS (tsk tsk Snape), he didn't know about Ginny in CoS, he didn't know about Peter in PoA, he didn't know about Crouch!Moody in GoF, and he really screwed up in OotP by not sharing the first time he actually knew something useful! *off soapbox* Josh From manawydan at ntlworld.com Fri Aug 6 17:58:11 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 18:58:11 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why Voldemort is a fascist... References: <1091742116.15256.43854.m14@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <000801c47bde$f0e34980$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 109183 Nora: >really. Getting ahead is far too dependent upon who you know, >money, etc. I will defend the oft-maligned and questioned concept >of the meritocracy against all comers. :) I've argued elsewhere that the Ministry _requires_ a certain amount of meritocracy to administer its swollen empire, if only because there just aren't enough aristocrats left. But also that that transition was the basis for the disaffection among the aristocrats at people running the country and they have _no tapestries at all_! Agree with your comments about the issue of patronage. >I want more information on the governmental structure of the WW; how >we get a Minister, how things get passed, etc. But my deep >suspicion is that the WW, never going through things like >urbanization, never learned a lot of the lessons that Muggles did >about how to govern themselves in a state of societal flux. I think >another big point is that the WW itself has been a proving ground >for world destru...I mean, they've gotten themselves into a lot of >their own problems. Is the use of power a big theme (to reference >another thread?) Oh yes yes it is. I found myself musing about longevity and how it's affected the WW. . For us, the 17th century is so long ago that it's pretty alien, and it's natural to think that the Statute of Secrecy and the Ministry are so ancient that they've been around virtually for ever. But consider it this way. We know that Dumbledore is aged around 150 (and often assume that wizards live about twice as long as muggles as a result). But he doesn't come across as someone late on in life (compare the description of the elderly, frail, feeble-voiced Armando Dippet) and doesn't seem to be anywhere close to stepping down from the Headship (I don't know if the WW would understand the concept of "retirement"). So he would have been born round about 1840. In OoP, we were introduced to Griselda Marchbanks, who is old enough to have tested Dumbledore (which would have been round about the late 1850s). Arguable how old she would have been at the time - perhaps they moderated exams internally rather than externally at the time and she was on the staff, at round about McGonagall's age. Let's say (I am going somewhere with this, honest!) that she's around 50 years older than Dumbledore, so she would have been born around 1790 and her formative years would have been in the 1790s and 1800s. Assuming that wizards live three times as long as Muggles, that would make a wizarding generation 90 years. So her parents would have been born round about 1700, in the years just after the Statute of Secrecy. And her grandparents would have been born round about 1610, far enough ago to have been participants in the decision to go underground but near enough to have been alive for 20-30 years after Grisel was born. You have someone alive today who had direct contact with someone directly involved. That's got huge implications for people's mental attitudes. Something similar could be true for Lucius Malfoy (who we know is in his 40s) - if he grew up on stories told by his 18th century gran and granddad about how things used to be when pure blooded wizards had some proper respect, it could go a long way towards explaining how he turned out the way he did. But JKR alone knows all Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From romulus at hermionegranger.us Fri Aug 6 16:42:27 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 16:42:27 -0000 Subject: Marauders and Lord Voldemort In-Reply-To: <20040806131948.19298.qmail@webmail8.rediffmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109184 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Amey Chinchorkar" wrote: > Also as for his teaching them, when he had the time to dabble into Dark Arts, travel far and wide and taech in Hogwarts? Amey, Tom Riddle left school, traveled far and wide, then returned to Hogwarts. He gained a teaching position at Hogwarts based on his reputation -- which would be spotless since Voldemort had yet to openly show himself. He then began his program of gathering his disciples -- he probably had many from his travels as well -- see Karkaroff from Durmstrang. Perhaps Karkaroff helped Voldemort gain a position at Hogwarts with a Reference. As for Dumbledore, please note that Dumbledore is always one to give a person a chance to prove himself. See Lupin, Snape, etc. for examples. He probably saw how pathetic Tom looked and his heart went out to him. Only later and in hindsight could Dumbledore see that Tom had sunk so deeply into the Dark Arts. Now, and I am revising these numbers as new facts come in, from about 1970 to 1978 or 79 Voldemort is gaining disciples from his teaching position at Hogwarts. > I believe > > > - Heck, Hermione, Harry and Ron are in their second year and they are > - already dabbling in the dark arts (Polyjuice Potion). > > Amey: > Polyjuice Potion is never mentioned as a piece of Dark Art or else >Dumbledore would have told Harry in CoS. Actually the recipe came from a book in the restricted area of the library and Hermione said that the book was full of the Dark Arts. > > Amey: > You are forgetting one important thing: > > "From what I found out after he died, he got in so far, then 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.'" (PoA) > > So, how come the Marauders came out without a scratch? Amey, they didn't. James is dead, Lupin is an outcast, Black was framed and ended up in Azkaban, and Pettigrew has yet to defy the Dark Lord. > If Voldemort taught them Dark Arts and they were even half >brilliant than we can see from the Map, they would be prime target >for him. "Didn't want another Dark Lord competing with him." did >he??? I am not of the opinion that the Marauders were into the dark arts for the evil of it, but for the curiosity and excitement. When most of them saw where Voldemort was headed with it, they backed out. I believe that Lily Potter had alot to do with "saving" James etal from the clutches of Voldemort's power. Something about her love. RMM From meriaugust at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 18:00:35 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 18:00:35 -0000 Subject: "I Must Not Tell Lies" In-Reply-To: <003c01c47bd9$1844d3a0$3bc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109185 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > pcaehill2 said: > > >>>--Or could it figure as a reminder to Harry, if/when he is > particularly tempted to lie about something important? > > I think there's a good chance that JKR will allude to it somehow, > since, as DD says, "Scars can come in handy."<<< > > > DuffyPoo: > Harry could stand to use it as a reminder not to lie. He needs also to remember that DD told him "I am a sufficiently accomplished Legilimens myself to know when I am being lied to." Remember that, Harry Potter! I don't know. Harry, IIRC, doesn't lie all that often. Other than a few instances in PoA (when he tells Stan Shunpike that his name is Neville, when he tells Snape that he wasn't in Hogsmeade) I really can't think of any other places where he tells malicious, baldface lies. And those are places when I think a normal kid would find reason to lie: in trouble with a hated teacher and on the run from the law. He sometimes tells half truths (like about likiing Hagrid's cooking and classes) and doesn't always say what's on his mind (like in CoS when he resists the urge to tell DD about the Polyjuice Potion and everything) but we all do that. He's not a pathological liar in any sense of the word. The only thing that I can think that his scar would mean is that once again he is a marked man, only this time he has been marked by an oppressor. Looking at that scar Harry's gonna remember what it was like when he told the truth and wasn't believed, so maybe this will help him to listen better to others who say things that might not be believed by others. Looney Lovegood perhaps? Meri From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Fri Aug 6 17:18:38 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 17:18:38 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin In-Reply-To: <006f01c47bb9$cba1eed0$52c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109186 Kneasy wrote: >> > > "Fudge, who just happened to be at Azkaban the night before Sirius escapes > > >> And DuffyPoo answered: >> > Hmm...my book doesn't say anywhere that Fudge was at Azkaban 'the night before' Sirius escaped. Fudge said he was out there on an inspection, and gave Sirius the paper because he said he missed doing the crossword puzzle. Sirius says "But then I saw Peter in that picture ...blah blah blah ...So, *one* night when they opened the door to bring me food, I slipped past them as a dog." One night, not "that night." I imagine it took Sirius a few hours at least, a day or two probably, to formulate his plan. Harry had gotten that picture from Ron, in the early hours of his 13th birthday, shortly after 1 a.m. The newspaper clipping said the Weasleys would be spending a month in Egypt, Ron said they would be back about a week before school started. The picture could have been taken anytime during the last week of July, Ron saving it to send with Harry's birthday card. Harry found out about Black's escape a few hours later on the Muggle news. Fudge had informed the Muggle Prime Minister of Black's escape but would he have done that the moment Black escaped or would he not have waited a few days to see if the Dementors could get him back first? < << Yb's comments: Actually, Ive wondered about this too, and I think that Sirius had to have at least 24 hours to formulate his plan, probably 4-7 days. Fudge later comments (I think he does... I KNOW someone does) that Sirius has been talking in his sleep: "He's at Hogwarts." Thus, if Fudge gives him the paper one *day*, then Sirius sees the picture, then he has to sleep (or else no one would have heard his mumblings), then escaped the *next* night. Therefore, at least 36 hours, give or take, have to elapse between that fateful visit and Sirius escaping. And Duff is right, Fudge wouldn't *dare* admit that he lost the most wanted wizard of all time. He'd wait 2 or 3 days to see if his precious dementors could catch up with him, before telling the PM. I see him as just that kind of politician. Also, Kneasy: >> > > "You really don't think that DD didn't know who's inside that ratskin do you? For all these years, a rat is accepted without question when students are allowed an owl, cat or toad?" < < << And DuffyPoo pointed out: >> > You've forgotten Lee Jordan's giant tarantula that he brought with him in his third year. < << Yb again: I think DD did know something was special about that rat. Percy had it for years before Ron even got to Hogwarts. As a side note, We only know /firsties/ are allowed a cat, toad, or owl. The letters afterward make no mention of pet restrictions for older students. So Percy could have only brought the rat to Hogwarts the last 1 or 2 years, still giving DD plenty of time to realize that he is one strange critter. This would explain why Ron was allowed to bring the rat: Maybe DD sensed something about that critter and told MM to conviently "forget" that pet remark in Ron's letter. ~Yb From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Fri Aug 6 17:18:52 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 17:18:52 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin In-Reply-To: <006f01c47bb9$cba1eed0$52c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109187 Kneasy wrote: >> > > "Fudge, who just happened to be at Azkaban the night before Sirius escapes > > >> And DuffyPoo answered: >> > Hmm...my book doesn't say anywhere that Fudge was at Azkaban 'the night before' Sirius escaped. Fudge said he was out there on an inspection, and gave Sirius the paper because he said he missed doing the crossword puzzle. Sirius says "But then I saw Peter in that picture ...blah blah blah ...So, *one* night when they opened the door to bring me food, I slipped past them as a dog." One night, not "that night." I imagine it took Sirius a few hours at least, a day or two probably, to formulate his plan. Harry had gotten that picture from Ron, in the early hours of his 13th birthday, shortly after 1 a.m. The newspaper clipping said the Weasleys would be spending a month in Egypt, Ron said they would be back about a week before school started. The picture could have been taken anytime during the last week of July, Ron saving it to send with Harry's birthday card. Harry found out about Black's escape a few hours later on the Muggle news. Fudge had informed the Muggle Prime Minister of Black's escape but would he have done that the moment Black escaped or would he not have waited a few days to see if the Dementors could get him back first? < << Yb's comments: Actually, Ive wondered about this too, and I think that Sirius had to have at least 24 hours to formulate his plan, probably 4-7 days. Fudge later comments (I think he does... I KNOW someone does) that Sirius has been talking in his sleep: "He's at Hogwarts." Thus, if Fudge gives him the paper one *day*, then Sirius sees the picture, then he has to sleep (or else no one would have heard his mumblings), then escaped the *next* night. Therefore, at least 36 hours, give or take, have to elapse between that fateful visit and Sirius escaping. And Duff is right, Fudge wouldn't *dare* admit that he lost the most wanted wizard of all time. He'd wait 2 or 3 days to see if his precious dementors could catch up with him, before telling the PM. I see him as just that kind of politician. Also, Kneasy: >> > > "You really don't think that DD didn't know who's inside that ratskin do you? For all these years, a rat is accepted without question when students are allowed an owl, cat or toad?" < < << And DuffyPoo pointed out: >> > You've forgotten Lee Jordan's giant tarantula that he brought with him in his third year. < << Yb again: I think DD did know something was special about that rat. Percy had it for years before Ron even got to Hogwarts. As a side note, We only know /firsties/ are allowed a cat, toad, or owl. The letters afterward make no mention of pet restrictions for older students. So Percy could have only brought the rat to Hogwarts the last 1 or 2 years, still giving DD plenty of time to realize that he is one strange critter. This would explain why Ron was allowed to bring the rat: Maybe DD sensed something about that critter and told MM to conviently "forget" that pet remark in Ron's letter. ~Yb From romulus at hermionegranger.us Fri Aug 6 17:23:19 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 17:23:19 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109188 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Inge" wrote: > > Inge: > Love the idea of Voldemort teaching DADA at Hogwarts (but wouldn't > Dumbledore know who he was? Did it matter? Would Dumbledore have > known then what went on in the DADA-classes?) Not necessarily. He would have known had the students told him. But not all of the students in Voldemort's class would have been selected. When you join the Freemasons for example, you do not choose to join, they choose you to join. You have to prove your worth. Now, Voldemort was preaching Pure-Bloodism, and many families loved that! Hence, children from those families would make good candidates. The Pure-Blood families did not like the Muggle-loving Dumbledore. The Marauders were daredevils, showed their "cleverness" with transfiguration by their fifth year, and were known to keep things from Dumbledore. They were also curious, saw Tom Riddle's prowess with magic, and became interested. Another set of candidates. Remember, under Dumbledore's tenure as Headmaster, the School is not of a single mindset. There are different houses with different ideas. Dumbledore certainly would not agree to Voldemort's politics, but that hasn't stopped anyone from teaching at Hogwarts in the past. > > As for the years 1976-79... assuming James, Sirius etc. were born in > 1960 (or close to that) they'd all be in their 6th - 7th year (as you > said). No problem with that. > But Lucius. He's older. How much older? 2-4 years? If so - he would > not have been at Hogwarts by 1976 and wouldn't have been under the > influence of Voldemort's teaching DADA ..... > Other than *that* - cool theory! Thanks, and thanks for those enlightening facts! This is why I am revising my range of years then. If Lucius was born in 1954 as the lexicon states it, (I would love to see the calculation behind that date!) then that would mean that Malfoy was entering his 6th year at Hogwarts in 1970. Let us say then that Voldemort's first year at Hogwarts would be 1970. Immediately then, Malfoy and other Slytherins would be immediate candidates for the DEs. I say 1970 based on what Dumbledore said in 1981: ""You can't blame them," said Dumbledore gently. "We've had precious little to celebrate for eleven years." Looking back on the trouble with Voldemort, it appears that everything started going bad as soon as Voldemort showed up, although folks didn't understand why until the rot had openly appeared. Remember from what Sirius said, many agreed with Voldemort until he "showed his true colours". For many years then, Tom was acting completely underground at Hogwarts. Who knows, he may have been using the Chamber of Secrets for his own personal classroom for teaching the Dark Arts. The Marauders certainly would have been curious as to what was going on with Tom since they had the map and would see Tom's movements around the place. Anyway, thanks for the data. As more details come in, the more we will know about Voldemort's activities during the 1970s. RMM From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Fri Aug 6 17:41:38 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 17:41:38 -0000 Subject: Pettigrew Attacked Ron? In-Reply-To: <000a01c47bc4$2c41e920$6c90d1d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109189 DuffyPoo wrote: > While trying to find a quote for some reply this morning, I came across this, which I truly have never noticed before, in the chapter of PoA titled Hermione's Secret. > > "Professor, Black's telling the truth -- we saw Pettigrew -- > --he escaped when Professor Lupin turned into a werewolf -- > --he's a rat -- > --Pettigrew's front paw, I mean, finger, he cut it off --" > NOW, GET THIS... > "--Pettigrew attacked Ron, it wasn't Sirius --" > > Where did that come from? > > Scabbers had faked his own death in February on a Thursday (Lupin/Harry's Patronus lessons were on Thursdays) - before the Gryffindor vs Ravenclaw match - in fact, the day Harry got his Firebolt back. There was a Quidditch practice the next day, then the match on Saturday against Ravenclaw, which Gryffindor won. > > Saturday night, after the festivities, Ron was attacked. Ron said, "Black! Sirius Black! With a knife!" and "Perce -- Sirius Black! In our dormitory! With a knife! Woke me up!" Later, Ron describes Black "and I saw him standing over me ... like a skeleton, with loads of filthy hair..." This sort of matches Harry's description of Black from the muggle news was "whose gaunt face was surrounded by a matted, elbow-length tangle," especially that it is now seven months later. Granted Ron wouldn't have known what Pettigrew looked like, but he would have seen pictures of Black in the Daily Prophet, and presumably spread over the town of Hogsmeade. (Although that is not stated, there were pictures of the 10 escaped DEs posted in the town in OotP.) Professor McGonagall asks Sir Cadogan if he let a man into the tower and Sir Cadogan said that he had, and that the man had the whole weeks' passwords written on a piece of paper. Sir Cadogan didn't say it was Black, Peeves told DD it was Black when the Fat Lady was attacked the previous Hallowe'en. > Nobody, in the Shrieking Shack admitted or denied attacking Ron, it was never mentioned. > > Would Scabbers have also known the passwords? He rarely left the tower room. If he had seen the list on Neville's table? Could it have been Pettigrew who actually attacked Ron? Why would he have done so? Is Pettigrew not only able to transform himself into a rat, but have some way of transforming into Black? Sirius used to keep his hair cut short (first OotP picture), was Pettigrew cutting it for him and pocketing some of the hairs? Oh, why would he need hairs...I wonder..... > > Why does this say "Pettigrew attacked Ron, it wasn't Sirius"????? Yb thinks: YOWSA!!! What a thought! I always read that as when they were leaving the Shack, when Lupin tranformed, Peter grabbed a wand and started firing, knocking Ron out. It seems the kids are trying to explain everything that's happened in the last few hours, not 4 months ago. If Peter was saving Sirius' hair, (seems a little odd: "Peter, /what/ are you doing? Oh, nothing...") that would have been a long time to save it, though I can see a point to it, sort of. If Peter is dead, he can't be wandering around in human form, so when he isn't a rat (physically, that is; if he was anymore like a rat, he'd sprout a tail) he might want to tranform into someone else. But my first guess wouldn't be a wanted criminal. We know Peter is the only person who could confirm Sirius' story, so unless Sirius broke out of Azkaban, thus being on the run, no one would ever see him in public, so Peter wouldn't want to tranform into him. Would not go over well, not at all. So I think Sirius did attack Ron in the tower, but he was looking for Peter. Why would Peter attack Ron as Sirius? LV isn't back, and has had no contact with Peter yet, so there would be no reason. Plus, Peter has spoent enough time in the dormitories to know whose bed is whose, so he couldn't have made a stupid mistake like going for Harry but accidently attacking Ron instead. One thing that may help you, though I always saw it as hinting at /Sirius'/ animaga form: When Ron is bragging to everyone about what happened, he says "and then he [Black] /scampered/." (JK's italics, describing how Sirius ran off.) I always took this as a dog would scamper, but of course a rat could too. And one more thought: Sirius would probably transform when he realized his little plan had failed and Ron had woken up the entire tower. When he is dashing out of the common romm, down the halls, and to the doors or secret passageways, wouldn't someone notice a big hairy dog running through Hogwarts? This is probably arguable, and writer's license,, but what do y'all think? ~Yb (a non-southern girl with just the right amount of /twang/) From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 6 18:20:41 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 14:20:41 -0400 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin Message-ID: <004901c47be2$152b4880$3bc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109190 > Kneasy: > "Fudge, who just happened to be at Azkaban the night before Sirius escapes, > (pure coincidence of course - and if you believe that you might want to buy > this 100% genuine gold brick) has loosed the Dementors." > > DuffyPoo: > Hmm...my book doesn't say anywhere that Fudge was at Azkaban 'the night before' Sirius escaped. Kneasy; >>>Oh yes it does. Arthur says so in chap. 4. "...because Fudge wanted to keep it quiet, but Fudge went out to Azkaban the night Sirius escaped."<<< DuffyPoo: I stand corrected. But you have to read the rest as well. "..but Fudge went out to Azkaban the night Black escaped. The guards told Fudge that Black's been talking in his sleep for a while now." He went to Azkaban 'after' Black escaped to talk to the Dementors about how it could have possibly happened. No one was supposed to be able to escape. When he gave the paper to Black, it was while Fudge was doing his inspection, not the same night at all. "But then I saw Peter in that picture ... I realized he was at Hogwarts with Harry .. perfectly positioned to act.......it was an obsession...it gave me strength, it cleared my mind. So, *one* night when they opened my door to bring food, I slipped past them as a dog." *One* night, not 'that night'...not the same night as Fudge was there to inspect Azkaban and handed him the Daily Prophet. > DuffyPoo: > You've forgotten Lee Jordan's giant tarantula that he brought with him in his third year. > Kneasy: "No, I hadn't. But something in a matchbox is hardly a magical pet." DuffyPoo again: "'Give us a look, Lee, go on.'" The boy lifted the lid of a *box in his arms* and the people around him shrieked and yelled as something inside poked out a long, hairy leg." A box in his arms with a lid is a matchbox? I agree with those who say "owl, rat, or toad" is simply a reminder to bring only one pet. Lee was bringing his *giant* tarantula. (Wonder if Ron knew it was in the Gryffindor Tower?) Apart from numerous owls, Crookshanks, Trevor and Scabbers, we don't know what kind of weird magical or non magical critters are at the school. DuffyPoo: > I can't believe that DD knew Scabbers was PP for at least eight years and did nothing about it. We can't forget that DD didn't know about the three unregistered animagi running around Hogwarts, or are you saying he turned a blind eye to them? Kneasy: "Yes. That's exactly what I'm saying. Do you really think Lupin was locked up in a shed every month and nobody checked up on him? A caring headmaster like DD? Tut, tut." DuffyPoo again: I see, from another post of yours, that you're a "Dumbledore's a bad guy" theorist. I just don't buy it. I agree with Aggie, here: "Aggie: Umm Yes!! Call me naive but it *was* my impression that DD *didn't* know that the Marauders were animagi. He says so in PoA and I believe that DD doesn't mislead us." While I'm not sure I agree that DD doesn't mislead, I at least don't think he misleads on purpose, "Sirius told me all about how they became Animagi last night," said Dumbledore smiling. "An extraordinary achievement -- not least, keeping it quiet from me." I also agree with Sue who said: "If he did know Peter was alive and where he was, why wasn't he fighting to get Sirius out of Azkaban? Even Lupin thought Sirius had done it until the night at the Shrieking Shack - he said so - and he was one of Sirius's two best friends. if I thought DD was really so heartless as to let a man he believed innocent rot in Azkaban without even *trying* to help and then hired Lupin only to keep an eye on Harry, I'd be very disappointed in him." What a horrible character JKR would be portraying if DD truly did this kind of thing. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dk59us at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 18:25:44 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 18:25:44 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109191 RMM wrote: > From the years 1976 to 1978 or 1979 is my guess. > Dumbledore is the headmaster at Hogwarts in that timeframe. > Does Dumbledore know of Lord Voldemort's "dangerous, magical > transformations" at that time? Probably not. > Is Lord Voldemort open about his affiliation and tendency towards > the Dark Arts? By no means. > it is evident, that Lord Voldemort taught DADA at Hogwarts > between the years 1976 and 1979, and many of the Slytherins and the > Marauders became his disciples, until some of them saw what he > really was. Eustace_Scrubb: But Dumbledore says (SS/PS, Ch. 1): "My dear Professor, surely a sensible person like yourself can call him by his name? All this `You-Know-Who' nonsense ? FOR ELEVEN YEARS I have been trying to persuade people to call him by his proper name: Voldemort." Professor McGonagall flinched, but Dumbledore, who was unsticking two sherbet lemons, seemed not to notice. "It all gets so confusing if we keep saying `You-Know-Who'. I have never seen any reason to be frightened of saying Voldemort's name." (my emphasis) Now,it is assumed that Dumbledore is saying this in 1981, meaning that Lord Voldemort had been quite open about his Dark Arts affilations since about 1970. Now, exactly when Dumbledore figured out that Tom Riddle had become Lord Voldemort is open to question. But I think it is out of the question that Dumbledore would have hired Lord Voldemort to teach DADA during years that correspond pretty much to the height of Voldemort's rebellion against the wizarding establishment. I mean, I know that many have questioned Dumbledore's hiring practices over the years, both for the DADA post (wimps, werewolves, dandies, impostors) and others (half-giants, ghosts, centaurs), but I think suggesting that he'd knowingly hire the greatest dark wizard of all time for the post would be ludicr...wait a minute, wait just a minute...maybe it's just another example of Dumbledore being crazy like a fawkes! (ouch, sorry) Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb "If you're referring to the incident with the dragon, I was barely involved!" From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 6 18:45:19 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 14:45:19 -0400 Subject: Halloween 81 Message-ID: <005801c47be5$85f94690$3bc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109192 Lorel: "Actually, I meant the other members of the Order. They all know the address and can access the house even though they are not S-K. I was then drawing a parallel between this and Godric's Hollow: the Order members can get to 12 GP but not divulge its secrets; why couldn't Peter have shared the address with Sirius? He, too, would be able to access the house in GH." DuffyPoo: It's not just the Secret-Keeper who can get in. Anyone who the S-K personally tells "The Order of the Phoenix is at number 12 Grimmauld Place" can get in. I would think the other members of the Order have all been told the whereabouts by DD, so they have access to come and go freely. Peter could have shared the address with Sirius, maybe even did. We just don't know from the books so far. DuffyPoo: "Even though Nymphadora (what a name!) Tonks knows where 12 GP is, she cannot bring Andromeda or Ted to GP because she is not the Secret- Keeper. As above, at least this is my understanding of how it works." Lorel: "Exactly. So why would this be any different for Sirius? He can get there, but not bring people with whom Peter had not shared the secret. Of course, it just occurred to me that within this setup, Sirius would be the only other person who could know, because otherwise everyone else would have known that Peter was the S-K. Hmmm, that's a big weakness in my theory." DuffyPoo: Sirius couldn't get into Potter residence after Peter was made Secret-Keeper unless Peter told him. At least, that is my understanding. Sirius, Remus, DD knew exactly where the Potters were living in GH. As soon as the Fidelius Charm was performed, it 'slipped' from their memories, for lack of a better term. Peter must have told Sirius so he could visit James, Lily and baby Harry. Sirius said, "I'd arranged to check on Peter, make sure he was still safe, but when I arrived at his hiding place, he'd gone. Yet there was no sign of a struggle. It didn't feel right. I was scared. I set out for your parents' house straight away. And when I saw their house, destroyed, and their bodies -- I realise what Peter must have done." But then how would DD know to send Hagrid? In my theory, as soon as the house was destroyed the Fidelius Charm evaporates, or collapses, then all those who once knew where the house was, would know again. That's how DD knew so quickly that something had happened and sent Hagrid. The address of the house 'popped' back into his mind, so he knew the charm was broken. I'm only basing this on DD since he didn't know Peter was the S-K and therefore was obviously not told the address, yet he knew right away, quickly enough to send Hagrid "before the Muggles started swarmin' around", that something had happened to the Potters. Clear as mud? ;-) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Aug 6 18:53:26 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 18:53:26 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin In-Reply-To: <004901c47be2$152b4880$3bc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109193 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > > DuffyPoo again: > I see, from another post of yours, that you're a "Dumbledore's a bad guy" theorist. Totally and utterly wrong. Dumbledore has a plan, yes. We're told that in canon. Dumbledore is a sneaky, conniving manipulator whose utterances should be viewed with extreme caution. He tells half-truths, sometimes a hair's-breadth away from lies, he obfuscates. He has manoeuvered Harry until Harry's choices verge on the non-existent. He is using Harry. That does not make him 'a bad guy'. It makes him an opponent to be feared and a leader that does what is necessary to win a war - including accepting/making sacrifices. You can't beat Voldy by being fluffy; not if he's as bad as JKR makes out. ESE!DD is not something I have ever suggested, hinted at or postulated. Kneasy From gopotter2004 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 18:52:15 2004 From: gopotter2004 at yahoo.com (gopotter2004) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 18:52:15 -0000 Subject: DD knows where they are/Choc Frogs In-Reply-To: <005101c47bb0$8063c820$0dde87d9@oemcomputer> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109194 Aggie said: > Please bear in mind that I really hadn't thought this through when I posted and I'm just ad hoc-ing now!! My theory is that the hands are the 12 people that DD wants to keep an eye on and the planets are the places where they could be. Although now you have said that planets move around the edge it could be the other way round! > Now I'm saying: Well it seems absolutly logical that he would have planets. I mean, he wouldn't want their names on his watch, for goodness' sake-- if Fudge glanced at DD's wrist to admire the pretty sparkling time-teller just to realize that he was being *watched*? (heh, pardon the pun, I couldn't help it.) We all know what would happen-- DD would be removed from Hogwarts again, this time with catastrophic reprecussions, no doubt about it... I do love the Chocolate Frogs idea though. Bloody Brilliant. Becky From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Aug 6 19:24:03 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 19:24:03 -0000 Subject: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109195 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "snow15145" wrote: Snow: > Have to disagree with you Geoff. > > The diary could not be the same year as the opening of the Chamber if > the Chamber was opened in autumn of `42 because Riddle wrote in it > and showed Harry the setup of Hagrid half way through June. If the > diary was from 1942 and the Chamber was opened in 1942 then Riddle > would have to have written about the Chamber being opened in June > before it was actually opened in autumn. From this I conclude that > the diary was dated in 1943 after the event of the Chamber opening in > autumn of '42 for Riddle to have written about the events of the > Chamber in June. The diary being a 1943 date book, Riddle would had > to have turned 16 at some point in this year. It is feasible that > Riddle did not immediately, upon receiving the diary, preserve his 16- > year-old self. Riddle could have been in his 6th year in 1943 when he > thought of preserving himself. Riddle's 6th school year would then > be `43/'44 making his 7th school year `44/'45. Geoff: Working backwards, I've already postulated (in message 109027) that he was in the Lower Sixth in 1943/44 and the Upper Sixth in 1944/45. (By the way, the usual nomenclature for the Sixth Form is Lower Sixth and Upper Sixth covering the two years). I think we may be getting confused with our "years". The diary could quite easily be the same /school/ year as the opening of the chamber - our theory being 1942/43 in which case he could still have a 1943 diary which perhaps he got over the Christmas holiday. The only small hole this blows in my thinking is /when/ he turned 16 which isn't necessarily germane to the opening; whenever he had his birthday, we know that he was in the Fifth and the diary preserved his 16-year old self. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 6 19:49:13 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 19:49:13 -0000 Subject: The wizard formally known as Godric Gryffindor was also Nicolas Flamel In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109196 vmonte: > Is it possible that Nicolas Flamel was Godric Gryffindor? Could GG > have discovered the elixer of life and then assumed a new name and > or appearance? Maybe Dumbledore was an apprentice to GG himself. > And maybe DD acquired Fawkes directly from GG. > > Perhaps then Kneasy's theory of the traveling parasitic entity are > true. Could DD & GG have been tracking SS all these years? > SSSusan: Unless I'm misunderstanding your question, I don't think so. GG, SS, HH & RR founded Hogwarts about 1000 years ago, right? And when H/R/H learn about Nicholas Flamel, he's 665 years old. Granted, the book itself which gave his age might have been a few years old, but I don't imagine it was 335 years old. Or are you saying that maybe GG made the SS and changed himself into NF when he was 300-some years old? Doesn't sound very likely to me, but do you have a reason why you think he would he do this? Siriusly Snapey Susan, who's about as good at math as JKR so won't be surprised if I'm wrong somehow.... From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 6 19:54:20 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 19:54:20 -0000 Subject: Chocolate frog cards (was: How DD knows where they are) In-Reply-To: <080620041238.16180.41137BC20006FF4900003F3422007354469C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109197 Flop: >> So, how much of a stretch is it to think that DD may KEEP a copy of his own chocolate frog card, allowing him to check up on the others. Granted, he may not always SEE a lot, but I'm sure he'd HEAR plenty from various collectors' pockets! There IS one passage in PS/SS that could be interpreted to support this. When Harry first gets his DD chocolate frog card, DD gets a good look at him, vanishes from the card, and then returns moments later "sidled back into the picture on his card and gave him a small smile." (SS 103). I know it's not much, but as I see it, DD on the card has just gone to report to REAL DD that he's seen Harry, he's on the train, and everything is going according to plan.<< Lissa: > I actually really, really, really like this theory! In addition to > simply cracking me up, it sounds like something DD would do. > > The only question I have (and this is easily answered) is we do > know there's at least one big thing that DD doesn't know: that > Sirius, James, and Peter became Animagi. (I'm guessing he spys > more on his students than the rest of Great Britian.) But hey- > maybe he wasn't on the cards by then. Or maybe they didn't make > the cards yet. Or maybe the boys weren't into chocolate. (For all > that Lupin is portrayed as a chocoholic, he never actually EATS the > stuff in the books, does he?) SSSusan: Just playing devil's advocate here...DO we know for certain that DD didn't know SB/JP/PP were animagi? IIRC, there are folks here who believe DD knew all about it all along. In fact, I think Kneasy just posted his belief that DD knew Wormtail was PP all these years. So I'd ask, do we KNOW DD didn't know they were animagi, or is this yet another bit of into DD's keeping close to the chest? Siriusly Snapey Susan, who also gets a kick out of Flop's idea about the chocolate frog cards. :-) From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 6 20:02:54 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 16:02:54 -0400 Subject: Weaslys' roles in book 6 (was Re: Percy's role in book 6) Message-ID: <008701c47bf0$5d008860$3bc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109198 Caspen "Having just finnished rereading COS, I could not help but notice the number of times Percy is encountered doing something mysterious that remains unexplained. The first time I readthe book, I assumed that all of the mystery had to do with Percy's budding relationship with Penelope Clearwater. However, on second reading, I realized that at least one of these encounters took place in the dungeons, where Pewnelope, being a Ravenclaw, seems unlikely to have been hanging out." DuffyPoo: But Penelope was hanging out there, that day. 'The Slytherins always come up to breakfast from over there, ' said Ron!Crabbe, nodding at the entrance to the dungeons. The words had barely left his mouth when a girl with long curly hiar emerged from the entrance. 'Excuse me,' said Ron!Crabbe, hurrying up to her, 'we've forgotten the way to our common room.' 'I beg your pardon?' said the girl stiffly. 'Our common room? I'm in Ravenclaw.' Later, "Madam Pomfrey was bending over a fifth year girl with long curly hair. Harry recognised her as the Ravenclaw they'd accidentally asked for directions to the Slytherin common room." A later again "Percy's in shock,' George told Harry quietly. 'That Ravenclaw girl - Penelope Clearwater - she's a prefect. I don't think he thoght the monster woud dare attack a prefect." And last, "It's that Ravenclaw prefect, Penelope Clearwater,' said Ginny. 'That's who he was writing to all last summer. He's been meeting her all over the school in secret." As to the rest of your post about the Weasleys being related to Gryffindor, I'll have to consider that before I comment. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 6 20:18:54 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 20:18:54 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109199 Jen: >>Technically, it wouldn't take much advanced critical thinking for Lupin to put two & two together here. He sees Peter is alive and has to ask himself, how & why? Didn't Peter die a hero trying to take on Sirius all by himself? Well, hold on then, if he was still alive after facing Sirius, why hide when Sirius is safe behind bars at Azkaban & miss out on all the hero-worship? Unless....unless....things aren't as they seem and Peter was trying to hide something. But what? << Kneasy: > Too much thinking for Lupin - unless he's a bloody good actor, > because according to canon he doesn't work it out until *after* > he's disarmed Harry. > > He enters apparently thinking he's rescuing Peter. > "Where is he, Sirius?" > > time passes, Sirius points to Ron and > > "But then..." Lupin muttered, staring at Black so intently it > seemed he was trying to read his mind "..why hasn't he showed > himself before now? Unless..." Lupins eyes suddenly widened, as > though he were seeing something beyond Black, something none of the > rest could see, "-unless he was the one...unless you switched > without telling me?" > > Seems as if a totally brand spanking new concept has struck him. > Something that had never even crossed his mind before. SSSusan: Man! No fair! I decide to actually WORK all day at work and not get caught up on the list...and this really fun thread gets started! :-) Anyway, I think Jen's right that Lupin might've begun some preliminary pondering once he saw Pettigrew's name on the map. But even if Kneasy is right that the actual "aha!" moment didn't happen until Lupin arrived at the Shrieking Shack, there's still Lissa's argument concerning why Lupin may have FIRST disarmed Harry before "doing anything" about Sirius. That is, Lupin WANTED to find out that there was a good explanation, and that his friend Sirius had been wronged. I admit I'm one who likes the Sirius-Remus SHIP, too, but even if it doesn't go that deep, I think Lissa's right that the bond was very close with those four. Remus had found GREAT friends who were willing to learn difficult magic and take monthly risks just to be with him, and he likely had really suffered the (apparent) loss of all THREE of them to death or betrayal. If there was even a chance that something was amiss and that Sirius might actually be innocent, then I think we can understand Lupin's desire to disarm Harry and *listen* to what Sirius had to say. Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 6 20:22:54 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 20:22:54 -0000 Subject: Weaslys' roles in book 6 (was Re: Percy's role in book 6) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109200 Caspen wrote: > I think that they [the Weasleys], with their red hair are the prime > candidates for an heirship relationship with Gryffindor, and not > the Potters. Caspen, can you tell me where I missed the description of GG as a redhead? Siriusly Snapey Susan From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 6 20:34:10 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 16:34:10 -0400 Subject: Pettigrew Attacked Ron? Message-ID: <00ab01c47bf4$bb1811d0$3bc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109201 Yb thinks: "So I think Sirius did attack Ron in the tower, but he was looking for Peter. Why would Peter attack Ron as Sirius? LV isn't back, and has had no contact with Peter yet, so there would be no reason. Plus, Peter has spoent enough time in the dormitories to know whose bed is whose, so he couldn't have made a stupid mistake like going for Harry but accidently attacking Ron instead." DuffyPoo: But by the time Sirius attacked Ron, Crookshanks would already have known that Scabbers had faked his own death. That was on Thursday and Sirius attacked Ron on the following Saturday. However, I think Meri answered my question with this: Meri "I could be wrong, but I believe that this refers to Ron's injuries just following the Shreiking Shack scene, and to whatever spell it was that Wormtail used to knock Ron unconscious. I think that Snape, seeing Ron knocked out on the groud, infered that Black had done something to him, and told this version to DD. Harry (or Hermy) tells DD that it wasn't Sirius simply because it wasn't. And Pettigrew did attack Ron. That's all, I could be wrong." I was working on my Snape theory and had one of those DUH! moments. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 6 20:34:36 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 16:34:36 -0400 Subject: Curse Scars Message-ID: <00af01c47bf4$caa4c850$3bc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109202 I've read this before and couldn't understand it so now I'm asking all of you. "Fudge had taken half a step back from Dumbledore, but he looked no less stubborn. 'You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've heard of a curse scar acting as an alarm bell before...'" I don't ever remember reading any conversation between Fudge and Dumbledore regarding Harry's scar. He does tell Harry "I have a theory, no more than that ... It is my belief that your scar hutrs both when Lord Voldemort is near you, and when he is feeling a particularly strong surge of hatred." GoF What is Fuge referring to? DuffyPoo [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 20:40:44 2004 From: aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com (aboutthe1910s) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 20:40:44 -0000 Subject: Curse Scars In-Reply-To: <00af01c47bf4$caa4c850$3bc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109203 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > I've read this before and couldn't understand it so now I'm asking all of you. > > "Fudge had taken half a step back from Dumbledore, but he looked no less stubborn. 'You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've heard of a curse scar acting as an alarm bell before...'" > > I don't ever remember reading any conversation between Fudge and Dumbledore regarding Harry's scar. He does tell Harry "I have a theory, no more than that ... It is my belief that your scar hutrs both when Lord Voldemort is near you, and when he is feeling a particularly strong surge of hatred." GoF > > What is Fuge referring to? > > DuffyPoo When I read that, my thought was that maybe the "tatoos" that mark Death Eaters are actually curse scars--it seems very Voldie-like to have his followers marked by cursing them... I really don't have anything to back that up, it just struck me as a possibility. aboutthe1910s From dk59us at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 20:45:10 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 20:45:10 -0000 Subject: Longevity and Youth (was Re: Why Voldemort is a fascist..) In-Reply-To: <000801c47bde$f0e34980$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109204 Ffred wrote: > I found myself musing about longevity and how it's affected the WW... Eustace_Scrubb: A subject that always gets me musing, too! Ffred: > For us, the 17th century is so long ago that it's pretty alien, and > it's natural to think that the Statute of Secrecy and the Ministry > are so ancient that they've been around virtually for ever. But > consider it this way. We know that Dumbledore is aged around 150 (and > often assume that wizards live about twice as long as muggles as a > result). So he would have been born round about 1840. Assuming that > wizards live three times as long as Muggles, that would make a > wizarding generation 90 years. Eustace_Scrubb: And yet on the other side of the coin, we have a significant number of characters who seem to assume major responsibilities immediately after secondary school, there apparently being no college or university level education in the WW. We know that the Potters, Sirius and others were in the Order at the age many muggles (in the US anyway) are joining fraternities and muddling through college. Percy Weasley, for goodness sakes, is at the right hand of the Minister of Magic at the age of 19. We know that in the 11 years prior to Godric's Hollow, significant numbers died violently and prematurely. In fact, we know of few grandparents of current Hogwarts students, if I'm not too far mistaken. That Harry's grandparents (both the magical Potters and the (presumably) muggle Evanses) are dead and that nothing has been said of them would seem significant to me, although it appears that JKR may not agree. We know that one of Neville's grandmothers is alive, but she is mentioned in contexts that suggest she's a widow. I don't recall a mention of any other grandparents...I don't think we've ever heard anything about Ron's grandparents which seems odd given the amount we've learned about the Weasley family in general. Perhaps this is a result of the first war with Voldemort. Or perhaps it's an authorial oversight or just a decision that this doesn't bear on the plot. If the former, it seems there may be a generation or two in the WW that's been decimated...and this may also have an effect on attitudes about the more distant past. In any case, it does seem that the WW is heading towards a situation in which there are the very old and the very young with the middle aged cohorts much smaller in comparison. If the very old die off before passing along their knowledge of the past, then the WW is in danger of losing that connection with their heritage. Then again, the WW's attitude toward history is another thing that gets me musing...it doesn't seem to be valued much academically, does it? Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb "To be without a history is like being forgotten... to be forgotten must be the worst fate of all."--poet Donald Hall, in String Too Short to Be Saved. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Aug 6 20:57:50 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 20:57:50 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109205 SSSusan: > That is, Lupin WANTED to find out that there was a good explanation, > and that his friend Sirius had been wronged. I admit I'm one who > likes the Sirius-Remus SHIP, too, but even if it doesn't go that > deep, I think Lissa's right that the bond was very close with those > four. Remus had found GREAT friends who were willing to learn > difficult magic and take monthly risks just to be with him, and he > likely had really suffered the (apparent) loss of all THREE of them > to death or betrayal. If there was even a chance that something was > amiss and that Sirius might actually be innocent, then I think we can > understand Lupin's desire to disarm Harry and *listen* to what Sirius > had to say. Jen: Not to mention keeping *Harry* from doing something he's regret or would get him expelled. As the sane adult in the situation at the moment, since Sirius is seething and Pettigrew is a rat, Lupin did what any adult would do--minimize the damage until you can sort out the situation and take action. I'm not sure what Harry could do at that point in his magical development; I doubt he was really a threat to kill Sirius or even severely injure him with his wand, but still. Thinking of the playdates I've refereeed with little ones, the first course of action is always to disarm anyone with a threatening object in hand :). From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 21:12:07 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 14:12:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: [The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.2.20040805231256.0171b6f8@mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <20040806211207.91597.qmail@web50102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109206 >>Meltowne: >>Yes, plus he may not have done it to have Lupin to contol him, but >>to protect Lupin. As far as they knew, he had killed 2 of his best >>friends, so perhaps DD felt the third was also at risk. There's nothing more important to Albus Dumbledore than protecting Harry: both because Harry's necessary to save the wizarding world from Voldemort and because he's genuinely fond of him. The MoM's suspicion is that Sirius has broken out of Azkaban to (among other things) kill Harry. I think that Dumbledore hired Lupin so that he'd be protected from Black's pressure to force him to help him find Harry. Dumbledore's perception of Lupin includes the memory that Lupin was incapable of keeping his friends in line, of standing up to them. He's taking no chances that Lupin's got any tougher over the years so Lupin comes to Hogwarts as a teacher so Dumbledore can make sure Sirius can't get to him. > Lissa: > > Is anyone clear on what happened at the end of PoA? Lupin says he > resigned, Harry later (in OotP) says he was sacked. So did > Dumbledore request Lupin's resignation, or did Lupin give it > voluntarily? I didn't get the impression that Dumbledore was > fighting Lupin to stay at the end of > PoA, but I didn't get the impression he was pushing him out the > door, either. Lupin resigned because he had to; he'd (inadvertantly) endangered the students and the community at large because he hadn't taken his potion. Taking the potion was probably part of the employment deal. It's not just unthinking prejudice: werewolfs are legimately objects of fear and they are dangerous when they transform. Dumbldore didn't fire Lupin because he knew Lupin was honourable enough to do the right thing and quit. He regrets it but he has no choice either. Had Lupin not quit, Dumbledore would have fired him. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 21:40:59 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 14:40:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040806214059.66312.qmail@web50104.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109207 > imamommy: > If your child had a math teacher who was as horribly unfair to him > as > Snape is to Harry, would you say, "Well, he's a wonderful > mathematician, and you need to learn math to succeed, so it doesn't > matter that he makes you so paralyzed with fear you can't learn a > thing in his class"? Sirius is acting like a parent; Lupin has the > luxury of being a bit more detached. Sirius is still really upset > when he finds out that the lessons have stopped. Sirius really > doesn't have a lot of freedom here. No, he's not acting like a parent; he's acting like a Marauder again and he's expecting Harry to react like James would have ("A secret way to communicate that no one else knows of? COOL!!! Let's try it.") It's not true that Sirius sees Harry as James but he does assume that Harry will react the same way as James did. He does this a few times in OOTP. When he suggests to Harry that he might come up to Hogsmeade for a weekend as a dog and Harry begs him not to as it wouldn't be safe, he's doing the same thing he did in the Pensieve when he announced "I'm bored" and James immediately came up with a diversion. So he reacts to Snape the same way he did when he was a kid: the guy's a greasy git, end of conversation. He also acted like a lousy host when Snape came by at Christmas to tell Harry about the lessons. This is in contrast to his treatment of Mundungus "good old Dung" Fletcher who's inconsiderate stupidity almost got Harry and Dudley Dementored, plunged Harry into a trial at the MoM that gave Harry weeks of tension, stress and grief, and forced Dumbledore to openly confront Cornelius Fudge and Dolores Umbridge. And yet rather than taking Dung apart limb by limb for what he put Harry through, he treats him like a welcome guest. Does that sound like Sirius is acting like a parent? Would you treat someone that way who'd done that to your kid? And Harry is not afraid of Snape. It's an inconvenience and promises to be a lousy time but he's not afraid of him. Sirius had more than enough freedom to act like a responsible parent/older brother to Harry. What he didn't have - what he's never had - is the self-control to put his own emotions and prejudices on ice while putting Harry first. Over and over again he does short sighted things because he's never learned - never had to learn - that he doesn't come first. Magda (who really agrees with Carol's post, in case you can't tell) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From ExSlytherin at aol.com Fri Aug 6 21:54:50 2004 From: ExSlytherin at aol.com (Mandy) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 21:54:50 -0000 Subject: Why Voldemort is a fascist... (LONG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109208 > > Kneasy: > > Stalins victims weren't armed as his thugs were.< > > Pippin > Ah, Kneasy, it's not enough to be armed. Most people have to be > trained to kill. And AK is no machine gun. It takes eye contact > with your intended victim and a fair amount of magic behind > it--more than most wizards can manage if the fight at the MOM is > any guide. > Mandy here: The Dark wizards have the advantage in being able to walk into a room with the ability and desire to kill *anyone* in there with the AK, where the average wizard would have to be pushed to the breaking point before s/he could kill. And sometimes not even then. That's plenty of time for the DE to have killed a couple of kids or a spouse of two. We don't know what effect fear could have on the unforgivable or any other Dark Magic. It could render them impossible to perform, and them the average wizard would be a weaker target for the trained DE's. Most of the WW, in Britain, is not trained to use the Dark Arts, only to defend themselves against it. And I imagine that Hogwarts doesn't teach it's student body to defend itself against a large force of DE willing, and able, to use the unforgivable and other Dark Magic. Although Hogwarts really should have learned its lesson by now and bumped up it's Defense classes, but then all societies get complacent during peace time. It would be like using a sword to fight a man with a gun, no? The swordsman could possibly get in a few good slashes before being shot dead, but ultimately he would loose. He is at a distinct disadvantage. Also aren't there examples of camps during WWII where literally hundreds of men were held captive by just a handful of guards, because no one stood or spoke up? It's part of human nature to conform and easier to be told what to do. Perhaps someone with more knowledge than me in the area would care to comment. Cheers Mandy From navarro198 at hotmail.com Fri Aug 6 22:21:51 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 22:21:51 -0000 Subject: School cut-off date WAS:Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109209 Geoff: In UK schools, the cut-off date for ages is 31st August. So anyone whose 11th birthday falls within that frame goes into the new First Year (modern Year 7). Hence, Harry is one of the youngest pupils in his year. Bookworm: If that is the cut-off JKR uses, then Hermione should be in the same year as Ginny since her birthday is in September. Is the cut-off different in Scotland than it is in England? Or did JKR ignore it totally? Ravenclaw Bookworm From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Fri Aug 6 22:39:37 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (Jo Raggett) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 22:39:37 -0000 Subject: School cut-off date WAS:Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109210 > Geoff: > In UK schools, the cut-off date for ages is 31st August. > > Bookworm: > If that is the cut-off JKR uses, then Hermione should be in the same > year as Ginny since her birthday is in September. Aggie: Do we have a year for Hermione's birth then? Could it not be that she's just (one of) the oldest in the class? From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Fri Aug 6 22:46:44 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (Jo Raggett) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 22:46:44 -0000 Subject: Chocolate frog cards (was: How DD knows where they are) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109211 > SSSusan: > Just playing devil's advocate here...DO we know for certain that DD > didn't know SB/JP/PP were animagi? >>>>SNIP>>>>>>>> Aggie: We only know what DD told us. That is was quite a feat for them to become animagi, least of all to keep it from him. I was under the understanding that JKR has informed us that DD doesn't (purposely) mislead us. Yes, he can be wrong and omit to tell us things but I don't think he would downright lie. I have nothing against him knowing, just wasn't sure that he'd lie. Or is this me being Naive!Aggie again!!!! ;o)) From lorelei3dg at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 13:53:25 2004 From: lorelei3dg at yahoo.com (lorelei3dg) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 13:53:25 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore -- Secret Keeper for Grimmauld Place / Fidelius (Re: Halloween 81) In-Reply-To: <003601c47b39$269d6ca0$85c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109212 > DuffyPoo again: > I don't recall ever reading that Harry was prevented by magic from > telling someone the address of the Order, (not that it's not in > there, I just don't recall it), but if they did, the person couldn't > find GP anyway because Harry is not the Secret-Keeper. Lorel: I can't remember where (or even if) I read that, and can't access the book right now. When I get home on Monday, I can look for it. In the meantime, my apologies for bringing it up without textual support! DuffyPoo: > Only the Secret-Keeper can tell anyone the address and have them find > the place. The only people who can get into 12 GP, now that DD is the > Secret-Keeper are the people DD himself tells (either words or > writing, I presume). So, now that DD is the S-K of 12 GP, the > Malfoys will not be able to enter it, even if they had visited there > frequently before. At least that is how I understand it (which I > admit, means nothing.) Lorel: Yes, we're on the same page here. DuffyPoo: > The only concern I have regarding S-K and GP in particular is > Kreacher. Did DD tell him the address? If not, how does he manage > to go between GP and the Malfoy residence? Is it just more House-Elf > brand magic? Lorel: I hadn't thought of that. At first thought I'd go with the idea of the House-Elf Magic. I hope we learn more about their power in the future books. DuffyPoo: > Who are the others that know the address? Do you mean the Malfoys, > Tonks' parents, and the Lestranges? If that is who you do mean, I > would expect, as stated above, that unless DD tells them the address > himself, they can no longer find the place. Lorel: Actually, I meant the other members of the Order. They all know the address and can access the house even though they are not S-K. I was then drawing a parallel between this and Godric's Hollow: the Order members can get to 12 GP but not divulge its secrets; why couldn't Peter have shared the address with Sirius? He, too, would be able to access the house in GH. DuffyPoo: > Even though Nymphadora (what a name!) Tonks knows where 12 GP is, > she cannot bring Andromeda or Ted to GP because she is not the > Secret-Keeper. As above, at least this is my understanding of how > it works. Lorel: Exactly. So why would this be any different for Sirius? He can get there, but not bring people with whom Peter had not shared the secret. Of course, it just occurred to me that within this setup, Sirius would be the only other person who could know, because otherwise everyone else would have known that Peter was the S-K. Hmmm, that's a big weakness in my theory. From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Fri Aug 6 16:39:17 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 16:39:17 -0000 Subject: Pettigrew Attacked Ron? In-Reply-To: <000a01c47bc4$2c41e920$6c90d1d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109213 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > While trying to find a quote for some reply this morning, I came across this, which I truly have never noticed before, in the chapter of PoA titled Hermione's Secret. > > "Professor, Black's telling the truth -- we saw Pettigrew -- > --he escaped when Professor Lupin turned into a werewolf -- > --he's a rat -- > --Pettigrew's front paw, I mean, finger, he cut it off --" > NOW, GET THIS... > "--Pettigrew attacked Ron, it wasn't Sirius --" > > Where did that come from? > > Why does this say "Pettigrew attacked Ron, it wasn't Sirius"????? > This is where Hermione goes from telling the truth to desperation to save Sirius. Just in case that his actions in the 3rd year boys dorm and to the Fat Lady were damning on their own, or might prevent acceptance of the true 'Peter story', hey... make him look even more innocent than he is! :) Josh From romulus at hermionegranger.us Fri Aug 6 17:51:57 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 17:51:57 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109214 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > Geoff: > I feel must respectfully disagree. > > Canon to start with: > > 'It was a cutting from the Daily Prophet: > > "GRINGOTTS BREAK-IN LATEST > Investigations continue into the break-in at Gringotts on 31 July...." > > "Hagrid!" said Harry. "That Gringotts break-in happened on my > birthday!..."' > > (PS "The Potions Master" p. 105 UK edition) > > The structure of the sentence only allows the interpretation that the > crime was committed on 31st July. The phrase "on 31st July" refers > to "Gringotts" and not "Investigations". If the report wanted to > indicate that investigations were continuing, the standard wording > would be.... > > "Investigations are still continue into the break-in...." > > No way would the paper produce something like "On 31st July, > investigations are continuing into the break-in..." which is what you > seem to be implying. Geoff, Let me explain what I mean. What you say regarding the structure of the sentence may be true, but not necessarily. It is ambiguous based on the grammatical rules for Adverb Prepositions versus Adjective Prepositions. To understand the first part of the first sentence in the Prophet article, we have to properly construct the sentence. Here are the parts of that first sentence: Subject = "Investigations", Verb = "continue", Adverb Preposition #1 = "into the break-in" (since this preposition modifies the verb "continue", it is an adverb preposition), Adjective Preposition = "at Gringotts" (since this preposition modifies the noun "break-in", it is an adjective preposition) Adverb Preposition #2 = "on 31 July" since this preposition can modify the verb "continue" and not necessarily the noun "Gringotts". With adverb prepositions, they can be interchanged within the sentence without the meaning of the sentence being changed. To show this, let's simply interchange the two adverb prepositions in the sentence above. Here then is the new sentence: "Investigations continue on 31 July into the break-in at Gringotts, " Therefore, based on grammar, the headline can indicate that the investigations were continuing on 31 July instead of the break-in occurring on 31 July. Secondly, the "piece of paper", the cutting from the Daily Prophet, was lying on the table under the tea cozy. This implies that the cutting was from an old paper and not a new one. Hagrid cut it out of an old issue of the Daily Prophet because of its significance in regards to the Stone and Hagrid and Harry being at Gringotts on the same day of the break-in. Thirdly, the whole article from the Daily Prophet may not have been given to us. And Harry waits until well into the reading of the article to make the statement that the break-in occurred on his birthday. Thus, with the above grammatical reading of the headline, the birthday discrepancy for Harry Potter disappears. Tuesday is July 30th, and Tuesday is Harry Potter's birthday. Therefore, Harry Potter was born on July 30, 1980. RMM From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Fri Aug 6 18:04:35 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 18:04:35 -0000 Subject: Sirius' escape timeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109215 Kneasy wrote: > > "Fudge, who just happened to be at Azkaban the night before Sirius escapes, > > (pure coincidence of course - and if you believe that you might want to buy > > this 100% genuine gold brick) has loosed the Dementors." > > DuffyPoo answered: > > Hmm...my book doesn't say anywhere that Fudge was at Azkaban 'the night before' > Sirius escaped. > Kneasy replied: > Oh yes it does. > Arthur says so in chap. 4. > "...because Fudge wanted to keep it quiet, but Fudge went out to > Azkaban the night Sirius escaped." Yb's turn: I just posted on this, and now I know why I was confused about that remark for the first *4* times I read the book. Some clarification (what I think happened): Day 0: Fudge went to Azkaban to tour the facility, make sure everything is ship-shape. Sirius asks for the paper, sees the rat, recognizes Peter, starts making plans. Evening/night 0: Sirius is possibly first heard saying "he's at Hogwarts." We don't know how long he's been saying this, we just know (through Arthur from Fudge) that he was heard talking in his sleep, and he wouldn't have any reason to before Fudge's visit. See note below on this... Evening (4-5): I say (4-5) because we don't know how long Sirius was babbling in his sleep, or how long he's known about Peter. I vote for 4-5 days because the Weasley family picture was taken about a week before Harry's birthday, and Harry hears about Black on the muggle news on his birthday. We give Fudge the allotted 2-3 days to sit on this, since a) he doesn't want to admit to the Muggle world that this guy is loose, b) he doesn't want to admit to the WW that this guy is loose so he gives the dementors a chance to catch him first, or c) he needs the time to get a story straight with the PM. Thus Black probably escaped 2-3 day before Harry's birthday, which would be 4-5 days after the Weasley edition of the DP came out. SO... Evening 4-5 is when Sirius breaks out of Azkaban. Night 4-5: Fudge comes running to Azkaban (in his jammies and robes, I'm sure) and hears *someone* tell him that Black was muttering "he's at Hogwarts." OK, so that's my theory. I'd love to hear thoughts. Here's one more BIG NOTE though: We only know Sirius was mumbling "He's at Hogwarts" because that's what Fudge said. We have no proof of that beyond Fudge's word, which doesn't hold much water with me, personally. Maybe that was part of the grand scheme, that Fudge said Black was doing that, so he would look like a madman bent on killing again, thus justifying the use of extreme force, and pulling some of the focus off of Fudge... Anyway, comments appreciated ~Yb From vincent.maston.ml at free.fr Fri Aug 6 22:50:25 2004 From: vincent.maston.ml at free.fr (Vincent Maston) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 00:50:25 +0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: <20040806214059.66312.qmail@web50104.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040806214059.66312.qmail@web50104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41140B31.2060305@free.fr> No: HPFGUIDX 109216 Magda Grantwich wrote: > Sirius had more than enough freedom to act like a responsible > parent/older brother to Harry. What he didn't have - what he's never > had - is the self-control to put his own emotions and prejudices on > ice while putting Harry first. Over and over again he does short > sighted things because he's never learned - never had to learn - that > he doesn't come first. Of course, He hasn't had any way to grow up, ever. He was nearly still a child (about 20) when he got in a prison, for about 13 years... He never got a chance to get an emotional age beyond 20 By the way, I'm new here. Hello there. Vincent -- I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by. Douglas Adams From karen at dacafe.com Fri Aug 6 18:51:49 2004 From: karen at dacafe.com (karen at dacafe.com) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 11:51:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Dumbledore's fallibility (Re: The Timing of Lupin) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9336.192.35.35.36.1091818309.squirrel@cafemail.dcccafe.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109217 Josh: > The "all-knowing" Dumbledore has made _many_ _many_ mistakes in his > life... including assuming Sirius' guilt. OotP should have shattered > all the misconceptions that DD is perfect. He means well, and he is > a fairly smart guy... but... he's not omniscient. > > Re-read DD's confession, and take him off his pedestal. DD didn't > know about Quirrel in PS/SS, he didn't know about Ginny in CoS, he > didn't know about Peter in PoA, he didn't know about Crouch!Moody in > GoF, and he really screwed up in OotP by not sharing the first time > he actually knew something useful! And DD asks "What map?" in GOF when Barry says he saw his father in Potter's map. DD is wise and has many resouces but I agree - DD is not perfect or the puppetmaster. DD knows teenagers - he has been a headmaster for a lot of years - some of what has been discussed in the recent threads as controlling and all-knowing is from DD reliance on his personal knowledge and his network of teachers, pictures, ghosts, ..... Karen From romulus at hermionegranger.us Fri Aug 6 22:43:23 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 22:43:23 -0000 Subject: School cut-off date WAS:Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109218 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jo Raggett" wrote: > > Geoff: > > In UK schools, the cut-off date for ages is 31st August. > > > > > Bookworm: > > If that is the cut-off JKR uses, then Hermione should be in the same > > year as Ginny since her birthday is in September. > > > > Aggie: > Do we have a year for Hermione's birth then? Could it not be that > she's just (one of) the oldest in the class? RMM: September 19, 1979 making Hermione one of the oldest people in her class. She was born on a Wednesday -- the day of Mercury (symbol Hg) and cleverly named by her dentist parents -- Hermione Granger. RMM www.hermionegranger.us From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Fri Aug 6 22:33:49 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 22:33:49 -0000 Subject: School cut-off date In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109219 Geoff noted: >> In UK schools, the cut-off date for ages is 31st August. So anyone > whose 11th birthday falls within that frame goes into the new First > Year (modern Year 7). Hence, Harry is one of the youngest pupils in > his year. << And then Bookworm remarked: > If that is the cut-off JKR uses, then Hermione should be in the same > year as Ginny since her birthday is in September. Is the cut-off > different in Scotland than it is in England? Or did JKR ignore it > totally? Yb considers: Either JK ignored it, or Hermione may have been a special case. We don't know what cutoff date Hogwarts uses, and Hermione is rather close to maybe be let in early, like some Muggle schools in the US do. A rumored "magic quill" keeps track of all students who are born with magical powers, so I suppose something is used to keep track of children who may be showing "exceptional" power, like Hermione. Since she was less than 3 weeks past the deadline, DD and MM may have decided to bend the rules and let her in a year ahead (if 8-31 is the cutoff). She certainly isn't suffering for being a little younger (unless she's a lot older). I know canon doesn't note anything about the trio's birthdays, but has JK said that Hermione was born the same year as Harry (making her 2 months younger) or the year before (making her 10 months older)? I have trouble seeing her older than Ron /AND/ Harry. Just doesn't fit in my mind. ~Yb From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Fri Aug 6 21:08:08 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 21:08:08 -0000 Subject: Longevity and Youth (was Re: Why Voldemort is a fascist..) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109220 Eustace_Scrubb mused (thanks for the word, commented is getting boring): > Then again, the WW's attitude toward history is another thing that > gets me musing...it doesn't seem to be valued much academically, > does it? Yb muses now: Yes, definitely. Hogwarts has a ghost teaching History of Magic (which I'll bet is a really interesting class), and Binns is a pretty inattentive teacher: he never gets anyone's name right, and he doesn't seem to mind that everyone is falling asleep in his classes. Of course, who could blame them? I know lecture-only classes without a practical part or application are pretty sleep-inducing :). Pl;us we have Fudge, who was fresh out of the box around the first war, and he refuses to believe (until it stares him in the face-- literally!!) that the one person who started it is back. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it, anyone? I'd like to know what the WW did during the first war: strategy, offensive or defensive position, how did they handle themselves? Were they like chickens minus heads? Obviously Aurors were employed, but they seemed to be doing a lot of their work after LV fell. (of course, that's all we are seeing and hearing about. The Order was established long before Halloween '81.) The Goblin Rebellions have been mentioned many times, and we all know that Goblins control the WW's pursestrings. What were these rebellions about? Does Fudge even care? Probably not: they are't "human", so they are below his notice. DD said that LV gained power by spreading distrust among the magical population. If LV can bring up these historical rifts that Binns covers in his class, he can probably get some people/creatures on his side that we don't want siding with him. If the MoM and Fudge, or the new Minister of Magic, can't learn from past mistakes, this war will be a lot more difficult. I think those kids need to sit up and pay attention, because some of the stuff Binns is talking about could be important. ~Yb > "To be without a history is like being forgotten... > to be forgotten must be the worst fate of all."--poet Donald Hall, in > String Too Short to Be Saved. From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Fri Aug 6 20:41:13 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 20:41:13 -0000 Subject: GG/Weasleys' In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109221 Caspen wrote: > > I think that they [the Weasleys], with their red hair are the prime > > candidates for an heirship relationship with Gryffindor, and not > > the Potters. SSSusan asked: > Caspen, can you tell me where I missed the description of GG as a > redhead? Yb thinks: I think the relationship of Godric Gryffindor and red is being established by all the reds mentioned with Gryffindor. The house colors are red and gold, I think the mascot is a red lion, red is the color of royalty (and who has been "king" of the House cup for the past few years? Gryffindor!). Red hair just seems to fit GG: bold, a little hot-tempered, and he was the leader of the founders it seems, so he was the "king" of the group. Granted there is no canon to support GG having red hair, but maybe red wasn't just his favorite color? ~Yb From romulus at hermionegranger.us Fri Aug 6 20:55:22 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 20:55:22 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109222 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Eustace_Scrubb" wrote: > > Eustace_Scrubb: > But Dumbledore says (SS/PS, Ch. 1): > "My dear Professor, surely a sensible person like yourself can call > him by his name? All this `You-Know-Who' nonsense ? FOR ELEVEN > YEARS I have been trying to persuade people to call him by his proper > name: Voldemort." Professor McGonagall flinched, but Dumbledore, who > was unsticking two sherbet lemons, seemed not to notice. "It all gets > so confusing if we keep saying `You-Know-Who'. I have never seen any > reason to be frightened of saying Voldemort's name." (my emphasis) > > Now,it is assumed that Dumbledore is saying this in 1981, meaning that > Lord Voldemort had been quite open about his Dark Arts affilations > since about 1970. Now, exactly when Dumbledore figured out that Tom > Riddle had become Lord Voldemort is open to question. But I think it > is out of the question that Dumbledore would have hired Lord Voldemort > to teach DADA during years that correspond pretty much to the height > of Voldemort's rebellion against the wizarding establishment. Eustace, Good point based on that quote. Here is another quote from Hagrid in PS/SS: <<"Nah -can't spell it. All right -- Voldemort. " Hagrid shuddered. "Don' make me say it again. Anyway, this -- this wizard, about twenty years ago now, started lookin' fer followers. Got 'em, too -- some were afraid, some just wanted a bit o' his power, 'cause he was gettin' himself power, all right. Dark days, Harry. Didn't know who ter trust, didn't dare get friendly with strange wizards or witches... terrible things happened. He was takin' over. 'Course, some stood up to him -- an' he killed 'em. Horribly. One o' the only safe places left was Hogwarts. Reckon Dumbledore's the only one You- Know-Who was afraid of. Didn't dare try takin' the school, not jus' then, anyway. "Now, yer mum an' dad were as good a witch an' wizard as I ever knew. Head boy an' girl at Hogwarts in their day! Suppose the myst'ry is why You-Know-Who never tried to get 'em on his side before... probably knew they were too close ter Dumbledore ter want anythin' ter do with the Dark Side. "Maybe he thought he could persuade 'em... maybe he just wanted 'em outta the way. All anyone knows is, he turned up in the village where you was all living, on Halloween ten years ago. You was just a year old. He came ter yer house an' -- an' --">> Several things about Hagrid's statements. 1. As he made the statement in 1991 to Harry, 20 years previous would be about 1970 - 1971. 2. "started lookin' fer followers" implies that he is in the beginnings stages of his recruitment. And we know that he was not open about it until later when he gained in strength. Based on these two things - Voldemort began his recruiting around 1970; - Dumbledore has been trying to convince people to call him "Voldemort" since 1970; makes it stands to reason that the use of Voldemort's name is not comfortable with people for some reason that may have nothing to do with what the Dark Lord was or was not up to, openly or in secret. "Voldemort" may hold some other significance, which makes people afraid to say the name. Anyway, we know that Voldemort had not shown his true colours as yet. That came later. So, in 1970, Dumbledore insisted that people use Tom's new name, since maybe Tom had insisted on it and it was proper to have people call you by your proper name. Maybe the nature of the name is what first put people off, and maybe Dumbledore was put off by it, but that is what this person's name was, so by golly, call him by his name -- even though the name is "normally not spoken in polite company"!! Perhaps it's a swear word in the WW, or it may signify something politically incorrect. 3. Hagrid's statement: <> can imply many things. He laid low at the school if he was teaching there, knowing that he could not take over the school until he had gained enough adherents to the cause. I keep insisting on his presence at the school due to the fact that most of the Death Eaters were attending school in the 1970s. They had two months, in essence, outside of school to be indoctrinated or attracted by Voldemort in any given year. School year ended in late June and started in September. If Voldemort was not at the school, he had agents at the school actively recruiting. How else does he gain his following? Perhaps BOTH scenarios apply! Voldemort makes the Chamber of Secrets his headquarters, and brings his disciples in through the work of teachers at the school. His activities escape the notice of everyone, except the Marauders, and they stumble into his operation and thus into his power. > > I mean, I know that many have questioned Dumbledore's hiring practices > over the years, both for the DADA post (wimps, werewolves, dandies, > impostors) and others (half-giants, ghosts, centaurs), but I think > suggesting that he'd knowingly hire the greatest dark wizard of all > time for the post would be ludicr... Again, I do not believe that Dumbledore would hire someone knowing that he was the greatest dark wizard of all time. The fact that Dumbledore insists on people calling Tom by his proper name does not necessarily mean that Voldemort was known as the greatest dark wizard of all time yet. A couple of side notes. 1. The word vol-de-mort. I asked a French language professor about the word "vol". I noted that it can mean "thief". I asked if it could mean "cheater" as well. My professor answered "Yes, it can bear that interpretation." So, that makes it a possible meaning of "Cheater of Death" or "DeathCheater" if you will. Note his disciples are called "DeathEaters". For some reason they don't get the "ch"??? 2. Secondly, in the quote from Hagrid above, he says that Lord Voldemort killed the Potters on Halloween ten years ago. However, there is a contradiction here. Ted the Weatherman necessarily implied it was October 27, 1981 by his comments on the tele! Who are you to believe -- Ted the Weatherman in 1981, or Hagrid's memory in 1991? RMM From smiller_92407 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 6 23:39:03 2004 From: smiller_92407 at yahoo.com (Susan Miller) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 23:39:03 -0000 Subject: FILK: Moony Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109223 It's been a long time coming, but here is the fourth installment of my musical Cap Awry (to the story and songs of Cabaret). In this episode, the Trio and members of the Order gather at Grimmauld Place at Christmas. Backstory: OrderMember!Snape has just informed Harry that he will be giving him lessons in occlumency. The meeting - with Sirius present - did not go well and Snape is reminded of his ongoing difficulties with the surviving Mauraders. And after he kept Remus' secret when Remus was teaching the Defense of the Dark Arts! Honestly! At the Three Broomsticks, the lights come up on Snape, wearing the Sorting Hat. Moony (To the tune of Money) http://www.hamienet.com/6879.mid [SNAPE:] Lupin has a secret, you see But it's safe with me And I guarantee I'll never tell deliberately A secret's safe with me. On full moon nights you might hear a howl A deep throaty growl A wolf on the prowl You ask me and I'll say with a scowl It's certainly not he. A secret's safe with me. Moony, Moony, Moony, Moony Moony, Moony, Moony, Moony Moony, Moony, Moony, Moony If you ask me why I take So much care when I make him a potion I'll suggest and request you recall >From the old Shrieking Shack Used to come, once a month, a commotion. Here's a drug, chug-a-lug, drink it all. If you ask me why does he Time to time, seem to be looking pasty As the moon reaches fullest degree I'll just tell you, take a look In your book, to a werewolf you're tasty Study up on what you see! Lupin was a prefect, but he Would watch as his friends Threw hexes at me! Called me names like "Old Snivelly" That Potter boy was scum (raspberry) on keeping mum [The rip that is the HAT's mouth opens and the HAT joins in the chorus:] Moony, Moony, Moony, Moony Moony, Moony, Moony, Moony Moony, Moony, Moony, Moony [SNAPE and HAT, in canon:] When the moon is shining full In the night and the sky's kinda scary And the night sounds suddenly go still And you see out in the dark Shining eyes, and a form, something hairy And your blood suddenly gets a chill When you're hiding in your bed Full of dread and you're under the covers And you're cold but you're sweating a lot But when something comes a-rap Rat-a-tat, rat-a-tat at the window Well, I'll tell you who it's not! [SNAPE and HAT together:] Lupin has a secret, you see Kept safely with me And I guarantee I'll never tell deliberately A secret's safe with me. Hint a little, Moony, Moony Poke a little, Moony, Moony Moony, Moony, Moony, Moony Moony, Moony, Moony, Moony A monthly wolfish moonlit howl A teacher gone, a wolf on the prowl You ask me and I'll say with a scowl A secret's safe with me! ~ CV From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com Sat Aug 7 00:08:33 2004 From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 00:08:33 -0000 Subject: "I Must Not Tell Lies" In-Reply-To: <003c01c47bd9$1844d3a0$3bc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109224 > pcaehill2 said: > > >>>--Or could it figure as a reminder to Harry, if/when he is > particularly tempted to lie about something important? > > I think there's a good chance that JKR will allude to it somehow, > since, as DD says, "Scars can come in handy."<<< > > > DuffyPoo: > Harry could stand to use it as a reminder not to lie. ...Remember that, Harry Potter! (you must be a Snape lover) First the words are not legible. In OofP when Dobby tells Harry about the Room of Requirement,Harry looks at the back of his hand and sees a web of thin,white scars. And both pcaehill2 and DuffyPoo have forgotten that Harry was not being punished for lying, he was being punished for telling the truth. The truth about Voldemort and the murder of Cedric Diggory. He was being tortured by a vicious evil woman under the orders of an idiot to keep him from telling the truth. McMax. From drliss at comcast.net Fri Aug 6 23:53:40 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (Lissa Hess) Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 19:53:40 -0400 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin In-Reply-To: <1091835163.22068.37707.m17@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.2.20040806194856.0172fad0@mail.comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 109225 Magda: >The MoM's suspicion is that Sirius has broken out of Azkaban to >(among other things) kill Harry. I think that Dumbledore hired Lupin >so that he'd be protected from Black's pressure to force him to help >him find Harry. Dumbledore's perception of Lupin includes the memory >that Lupin was incapable of keeping his friends in line, of standing >up to them. He's taking no chances that Lupin's got any tougher over >the years so Lupin comes to Hogwarts as a teacher so Dumbledore can >make sure Sirius can't get to him. Lissa: Actually, we don't know that that's DD's impression for sure. Bear in mind that the Pensieve scene happened fifth year, most likely before the Prank. And by the time we see Lupin and Sirius together in OotP, Lupin is more than willing to stand up to Sirius, and not only that, is the only one that can get him to cooperate- usually with just a word or a look. I would bet several Galleons that Lupin started standing up to Sirius after the Prank, because he sure does it in OotP. I would LOVE to see JKR's take on what happened after the Prank. But I do still agree that DD was genuinely concerned for Lupin's safety. Magda: Dumbldore didn't fire Lupin because he knew Lupin was honourable enough to do the right thing and quit. He regrets it but he has no choice either. Had Lupin not quit, Dumbledore would have fired him. Lissa: Thanks. That's another conversation though I really would have liked to have had a pair of Extendable Ears for. I don't think Lupin's actually on his second chance before this. I wonder if DD WOULD have fired him. It's really hard to tell. (Personally, I think he was sprinting out of there and to Sirius, but hey. Who knows?) From Batchevra at aol.com Sat Aug 7 01:01:42 2004 From: Batchevra at aol.com (Batchevra at aol.com) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 21:01:42 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Pettigrew Attacked Ron? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109226 In a message dated 8/6/04 10:48:11 AM Eastern Daylight Time, cldrolet at sympatico.ca writes: >Why does this say "Pettigrew attacked Ron, it wasn't Sirius"????? DuffyPoo< When Lupin was transforming into a werewolf, he was chained to Pettigrew. Ron was also chained to Pettigrew to take him back to the castle and show Dumbledore that Pettigrew was alive and that Sirius was innocent. Lupin, during his transformation into a werewolf dropped his wand, Pettigrew picked it up, stunned Crookshanks and Ron, then Harry yelled Expelliarmus, Pettigrew dropped the wand and then Pettigrew went back into his rat form and ran away. Sirius had been fighting with Lupin. Batchevra [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From vmonte at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 01:42:15 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 01:42:15 -0000 Subject: GG/Weasleys' In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109227 Caspen wrote: I think that they [the Weasleys], with their red hair are the prime candidates for an heirship relationship with Gryffindor, and not the Potters. SSSusan asked: Caspen, can you tell me where I missed the description of GG as a redhead? Yb thinks: I think the relationship of Godric Gryffindor and red is being established by all the reds mentioned with Gryffindor. The house colors are red and gold, I think the mascot is a red lion, red is the color of royalty (and who has been "king" of the House cup for the past few years? Gryffindor!). Red hair just seems to fit GG: bold, a little hot-tempered, and he was the leader of the founders it seems, so he was the "king" of the group. Granted there is no canon to support GG having red hair, but maybe red wasn't just his favorite color? vmonte responds: I want the Weasley's to be related to GG but it really is a tough call. On JKR's website she mentions how redheads and weasels are always associated with evil/bad things, and that she thinks they are getting a bad rap. If the books are about making the right choices in life, I wonder what JKR will write regarding this issue. Are the Weasley's related to SS but choose to value GG's ideology? Or does Harry look like Tom Riddle because he is related to SS but has chosen to be like GG? There is also the whole problem with Tom being the last heir/descendent thing... (Is he heir or descendent?) Heck, I'm still confused about the age of the Weasley parents. vivian From karen at dacafe.com Sat Aug 7 00:15:58 2004 From: karen at dacafe.com (karen at dacafe.com) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 17:15:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: <20040806214059.66312.qmail@web50104.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040806214059.66312.qmail@web50104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <62337.68.34.189.212.1091837758.squirrel@cafemail.edacafe.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109228 Magda: > And Harry is not afraid of Snape. It's an inconvenience and promises > to be a lousy time but he's not afraid of him. > > Sirius had more than enough freedom to act like a responsible > parent/older brother to Harry. What he didn't have - what he's never > had - is the self-control to put his own emotions and prejudices on > ice while putting Harry first. Over and over again he does short > sighted things because he's never learned - never had to learn - that > he doesn't come first. > >From Karen: Of course Sirius often expects Harry to act like James. In this matter, both Sirius and Snape are taking Harry literally at face value. Harry looks like James (except for Lily's eyes) therefore he must react like James. Aren't eyes supposed to be the window to a person soul? Given what we know about Legilimency and Occlimency the eye contact is important. I think Harry's personality fits with what we know about Lily. I also believe that Lupin treats Harry differently because Harry reminds Lupin of Lily more than James. Lupin truely sees Harry as an unique person while Sirius and Snape see Harry as the personification of James. The 10 years Sirius spent in Azkaban has to affect how he looks at Harry. This is especially true as in OotP. Harry at 15 is only 6 years younger than James when he was killed (according to the timelines at hp-lexicon.org). I understand the Harry/James confusion that Sirius has. I don't understand the Snape hatred of Harry. Snape hates Harry but goes out of his way to protect him or come to his rescue. SS/PS - Troll, PoA - Shrieking Shack, GoF - Barty/Moody's office, OotP - alerts the order, goes into the forest looking for Harry. I wonder how Snape would have treated Harry if he had been put in Slytherin. ----------------------------------------- Stay ahead of the information curve. Receive EDA news and jobs on your desktop daily. Subscribe today to the EDA CafeNews newsletter. [ http://www10.edacafe.com/nl/newsletter_subscribe.php ] It's informative and essential. From generation2004 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 01:48:05 2004 From: generation2004 at yahoo.com (Martha) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 01:48:05 -0000 Subject: GG/Weasleys' In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109229 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bex" wrote: > Caspen wrote: > > > I think that they [the Weasleys], with their red hair are the prime > > > candidates for an heirship relationship with Gryffindor, and not > > > the Potters. > > SSSusan asked: > > Caspen, can you tell me where I missed the description of GG as a > > redhead? > > > Yb thinks: > I think the relationship of Godric Gryffindor and red is being > established by all the reds mentioned with Gryffindor. > Granted there is no canon to > support GG having red hair, but maybe red wasn't just his favorite > color? Martha thinks, I don't know if the red headed Weasleys are actually related to GG, but it's a very good thought :) I've always thought that deep purple represented royalty at least in some Christian traditions. Now I think that red represents emotion, boldness, bravery and shivelry. It also represents love... red represents everything that is expressed with great pation and truth. Maybe I just love the color. :) Martha From macfotuk at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 02:04:59 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 02:04:59 -0000 Subject: Snape's choice of memories for the pensieve In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109230 I haven't been able to track all of this thread and besides this my comments below will very likely belong in other threads on Snape,and also not be original (impossibility of an original thought, especially on anything as analysed as the HP books?), but here goes with some thoughts arising from re-reading the 'Snapes's Worst memory' chapeter of OotP: 1. Yes I agree Snape may have 'planted' the memory Harry saw - But, just because Harry thinks it should be Snape's worst memory because of the humiliation aspect, I think Snape would have other reasons for hiding this memory from HP (3 below). 2. There's little doubt in my mind (because it's said so several times) that it's Dumbledore's pensieve. I wonder if the bell jar in the time room at the MoM (containing the eternal hummingbird to egg and back again) isn't also full of the same stuff since it shimmers in the same way. No idea what significance this yet has (may ever have). 3. This point (point 3) is probably where this post belongs elsewhere, but here goes - re-read the entire memory in the following mindset: Snape is hopelessly (literally) in love with Lily for some reason, i.e. he feels that at some point there was reason to be hopeful; that or she was simply so attractive even badboy (pathetic and much wronged and so nasty boy I see him as more like) Snape could not help being infatuated. His apparent focus on reading the DADA exam paper afterwards is all a ruse to hide what he is really up to, which isn't to follow the marauders (why go near such awful bullies?) so much as to be near one of their number's real target i.e James is following Lily Evans cos he too is infatuated and that's what Snape is doing too, if more covertly (from a bush). Others have said that Snape can't love Lily because he calls her mudblood, but this is exactly what a 'man' might do when a 'girl' is seen publicly to be his only defence from bullies - he has (by some absurd honour view) to belittle her to make himself look less pathetic/unmanly even if it hurts both him AND her to do so. He knows that because (some unseen back history here) Lily has given him reason to be hopeful, she will understand/forgive his insulting her in public. 4. Snape's loving Lily (yes I know not an original idea of mine) explains a lot that has happened and might yet happen in the plot as it moves to the finale of book 7. Snape loves Lily and hates James as an enemy and rival. He hates Harry for at least four reasons and cannot prevent his most spiteful urges emerging whenever in his presence. Reasons to hate HP = 1. He is the son of, and closely similar in appearance and (Snapes's view) arrogance to, Snape's arch- enemy James Potter. 2. He (HP) is the reason for Lily's (Snape's eternal beloved) death, and 3. HP is the son Snape and Lily never had because James Potter won. 4. HP is a constant reminder to Snape of Lily's death, James' victory over him in winning her heart and of any discomfort/gult/anguish Snape may feel about his part (see next point) in her death. 5. As a one-time DE Snape would very likely want to see out his grudge with/resentment at James Potter. Like Tom Riddle, Snape has childhood emotional scars plus interests in the very darkest magic and, at least at one time, the prepardeness to use these methods to achieve revenge, desires and so on. He was a natural recruit. Unlike LV however, Snape can (does, or once did) feel love and has a strong sense of honour and justice, as much as the best of the other OotP members. Don't forget DD's words that it is out choices that matter, not just potential. Even so, being a DE and sidekick of LV afforded Snape a chance that if JP were removed, but Lily spared (as even LV hinted was possible at her death) then Snape could reclaim his love from a formerly hopeless situation. Thus, he could be a player in the death of JP (indeed he might gloat at it) yet his horror at LV's zeal to also kill Lily was what finally turned him against HP. It was perhaps to save Lily that Snape turned traitor to LV and when LV did not spare Lily Snape was placed in an irretrievably (perhaps) tragic position - on the wrong side (DD's and not LV's) despite his inclination otherwise. This leaves me wonderng how, if at all, Snape can (or will) redeem himself to either side. He could go either way and it would not be a surprise. To return to LV (if he ever left) would be to go with his natural inclinations given that Lily will never again be. His sense of honour however, despite his nastiness otherwise, might keep him loyal to the OotP not least because he can 'never go back' (to LV). I've a million other thoughts on Snape (who hasn't?), but will get these posted to see if there's stimulating commentary. "macfotuk" From vmonte at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 02:29:41 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 02:29:41 -0000 Subject: The wizard formally known as Godric Gryffindor was also Nicolas Flamel In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109231 SSSusan wrote: Or are you saying that maybe GG made the SS and changed himself into NF when he was 300-some years old? Doesn't sound very likely to me, but do you have a reason why you think he would he do this? vmonte responds: Yes, I was implying this. I don't know, I need to know the story behind DD's relationship with Flamel. Was/is Flamel part of the Order? Or is he just a scholarly pal/chemistry partner of DD's? Voldemort is obssessed with living forever, and DD is involved with longevity rocks and elixirs. Is it a coincidence? Or is DD and or Flamel interested in longevity because they have unfinished business with Voldemort (who won't die)? Who is Grindelwald? And why does the date of his defeat correlate with Tom's basilisk career?...and with DD showing up at Hogwarts? Didn't Voldemort say to someone that he has always been able to find men that would accept him into their hearts (big time paraphrasing)? Is he/has he been a parasite for some time? (If so, what happens to the people he lives off of? Are they discarded, or do they turn into Dementors?) How long has Flamel had the PS/SS? Because if he could keep himself alive for 666 years (yikes) why not a thousand? Is the Order of the Phoenix an ancient Order? Is it really ALL about SS and not about unimportant nor special Harry (just using Snape's thoughts here). If Voldemort is SS why doesn't he know it? Or is SS now inside of Harry (due to the GH attack)? I liked the image of Harry with steam coming out of his head during the PoA movie. Will Harry have to literally release something from his head? Is it just anger, or an entity? If it's an entity, where will it go? (I for one would hate to see SS inside of Snape!) I also liked the PoA movie image of Ron Weasley roaring, like a lion. I know everyone hates this idea but I think the brain attack will affect Ron. Did the brain belong to a Gryffindor? It's possible that DD met Flamel in his youth. Was he an apprentice? Did Flamel teach Dumbledore transfiguration? Finally, has Flamel been keeping his identity secret by morphing into new characters every few hundred years or so? Vivian From AllieS426 at aol.com Sat Aug 7 02:42:27 2004 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 02:42:27 -0000 Subject: Sirius' escape timeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109232 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bex" wrote: > > Evening (4-5): I say (4-5) because we don't know how long Sirius was > babbling in his sleep, or how long he's known about Peter. I vote for > 4-5 days because the Weasley family picture was taken about a week > before Harry's birthday, and Harry hears about Black on the muggle > news on his birthday. I think it has to be more than 4 or 5 days. Sirius tells Harry that the knowledge of Peter being alive and the traitor became an obssession. 4 or 5 days wouldn't be long enough to do that. Allie From sopraniste at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 02:34:03 2004 From: sopraniste at yahoo.com (sopraniste) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 02:34:03 -0000 Subject: DD knows where they are/Choc Frogs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109233 I had one other thought that kind of tied into the whole Spymaster!DD idea. Aside from the intelligence network, DD also strikes me as quite the propaganda-meister. Consider: "What happened down in the dungeons between yourself and Professor Quirrell is a complete secret, so, naturally, the whole school knows." (PS/SS 296). And who is the ONLY person who KNOWS what happened down in the dungeons between Harry and Professor Quirrell??? Ron and Hermione were both left behind, the only people who KNEW that it was Professor Quirrell were Harry (who was unconscious in the Hospital Wing at the time) and Dumbledore himself. Something similar happens in OotP (you'll have to forgive me again for not being able to cite the reference properly) right at the beginning of the chapter that immediately follows The Centaur and the Sneak. Harry and Marietta were the only students present, and neither of them talked, but SOMEHOW the whole school knows about DD's showdown with the MoM and his spectacular escape. Granted, McGonagall could have spread the word (in fact, I have no doubt that she did) but on WHOSE ORDERS??? Just something to think about. Flop. From aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 03:34:25 2004 From: aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com (aboutthe1910s) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 03:34:25 -0000 Subject: Delacour = "of the *court*" Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109234 Something I would have caught on my own if my French didn't suck soooo bad, but I found this (from here: http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2000/1000-aol-chat.htm) interesting: "Ah, Narri, you're nearly there... in fact, it means "flower of the court," like a noblewoman. Heart is "coeur." (I used to be a French teacher, sorry.)" Nobility... You know this is the only time that I can find, including in the books (though I admit I haven't really gone back through and searched for it) that Jo mentions nobility... Just interesting the context of the title of book six. Someone has probably already posted about this, but I couldn't find it, so I'm posting too. aboutthe1910s From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Sat Aug 7 04:10:09 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 04:10:09 -0000 Subject: Intro and Lucius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109235 > > Flop wrote: > >Here's my theory: Lucius Malfoy will be the next Minister for Magic (I know that's awkward, since he finished OotP in Azkaban, but bear with me and ignore that for the moment) this will, of course, prolong the schism between the MoM and the OotP, and ultimately ARTHUR (Weasley, of course) will muster the Order and conquer Lucius' Death Eater arse! > > Any thoughts? > > Bookworm: > There was thread last spring that started with: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/96436 > > I made the same argument about Lucius, then Arthur becoming > Minister, in my reply to that post: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/96440 > Jim Ferer and I kept a discussion of strategy and tactics going for awhile. We left it agreeing on some things and disagreeing on > others. Feel free to add your comments. > > Ravenclaw Bookworm Valky: Reposting from message 96440 That Bookworm said: -----------------------****************------------------------ I also think ? and have suggested this before without feedback ? that the normal rules aren't going to apply in the next year or two. I predict a coup led by non-other than our friend Lucius Malfoy. Did you really think Fudge will be able to keep the Death Eaters in prison without the help of the traitorous Dementors? With a real crisis, Fudge will just wring his hands while Malfoy and company boldly marches into the Ministry. Ravenclaw Bookworm -----------------------*****************-------------------------- Hi Flop and Hi Bookworm :D Valky Here. I concur with you both, in point by point. 1 The normal rules will not apply in the next two books. 2 The ministry will not be able to keep the incarcerated DE's. Azkaban will fall and the Dementors will prove DD right in showing zip nada loyalty to the Ministry and its kind. 3 If a coup on the Ministry is staged which is entirely a likely continuation of this, Lucius will be at the head of this, hencewise becoming new MOM. 4 The parrallel between le morte of Arthur and Lucius seems to me equally likely. Given that the previous steps manifest, Lucius will demand homage from Arthur and Arthur will tell him to rayally stuff it. 5 Finally and most interestingly I too, like Bookworm, question Lucius' loyalty to LV. Lucius has his own ruthless ambition, I don't truly believe he serves anyone. Best to You All from Valky From generation2004 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 02:32:51 2004 From: generation2004 at yahoo.com (Martha) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 02:32:51 -0000 Subject: Curse Scars In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109236 DuffyPoo wrote: > > I've read this before and couldn't understand it so now I'm asking > > all of you. > > > > "Fudge had taken half a step back from Dumbledore, but he looked no > > less stubborn. 'You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've heard of a > > curse scar acting as an alarm bell before...'" > > > > I don't ever remember reading any conversation between Fudge and > > Dumbledore regarding Harry's scar. He does tell Harry "I have a > > theory, no more than that ... It is my belief that your scar hurts > > both when Lord Voldemort is near you, and when he is feeling a > > particularly strong surge of hatred." GoF > > > > What is Fuge referring to? aboutthe1910s wrote: > When I read that, my thought was that maybe the "tatoos" that mark > Death Eaters are actually curse scars--it seems very Voldie-like to > have his followers marked by cursing them... I really don't have > anything to back that up, it just struck me as a possibility. Martha writes: That's really interesting,1910. You know there are many cultures that believe tattoos will connect them to a spiritual being and such, it's a good thing, though. So I don't know how relevant this comment is to yours, but it got me to think of something. I also see the Death Eater's mark as branding.. You know the whole burning flesh thing when Voldie calls his servants to his side. It reminds me of the markings on cattle, this marking shows that the animal is owned by a particular rancher. Obviously, Voldie sees his followers as his property, less than him, they are only to be used. As 1910 suggested, the Dark Mark is a curse or even a spell so that when the time comes (after he "defeats" the good side I suppose) he can have control over those who will protect his kingdom. The Pure blood families that entrusted to Voldie have totally traped them selves in a cage. Now, the question is, what will the slatterhouse or the pin that will await the marked ones? We may never know if Harry triumphs over Voldie. Martha From generation2004 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 03:12:54 2004 From: generation2004 at yahoo.com (Martha) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 03:12:54 -0000 Subject: Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: <62337.68.34.189.212.1091837758.squirrel@cafemail.edacafe.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109237 >From Karen: > Of course Sirius often expects Harry to act like James. In this > matter, both Sirius and Snape are taking Harry literally at face > value. Harry looks like James (except for Lily's eyes) therefore > he must react like James. > > Aren't eyes supposed to be the window to a person soul? Given > what we know about Legilimency and Occlumency the eye contact is > important. > > I think Harry's personality fits with what we know about Lily. I > also believe that Lupin treats Harry differently because Harry > reminds Lupin of Lily more than James. Lupin truly sees Harry as > an unique person while Sirius and Snape see Harry as the > personification of James. > > The 10 years Sirius spent in Azkaban has to affect how he looks at > Harry. This is especially true as in OotP. Harry at 15 is only 6 > years younger than James when he was killed (according to the > timelines at hp-lexicon.org). I understand the Harry/James confusion > that Sirius has. > > I don't understand the Snape hatred of Harry. Snape hates Harry > but goes out of his way to protect him or come to his rescue. > SS/PS - Troll, PoA - Shrieking Shack, GoF - Barty/Moody's office, > OotP - alerts the order, goes into the forest looking for Harry. > > I wonder how Snape would have treated Harry if he had been put in > Slytherin. Wooooooow! That's very well explained Karen, you are my hero :) What surprises me is how clearly Snape dislikes Harry. All the teachers (I presume) know that James P and Snape disliked each other in school. So I would think that Being a "respectable" adult would make Snape restrain himself and especially being a wizard with the ability to restrict others from invading his mind, it's a very difficult thing to do. So how is it that Snape can so easily let himself go at Harry? Martha From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Sat Aug 7 03:48:23 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 03:48:23 -0000 Subject: Who asked about more time travel? [Re: Delacour = "of the *court*"] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109238 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "aboutthe1910s" wrote: > Something I would have caught on my own if my French didn't suck soooo > bad, but I found this (from here: > http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2000/1000-aol-chat.htm) I found this in there: Q: "Will Harry time-travel again?" JK: "Not telling! " I guess that means it very well might come up again after all? I'm a little disappointed, but as long as she does it with good taste, I reckon. Josh From eeyore5497 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 05:00:09 2004 From: eeyore5497 at yahoo.com (Michelle Horcher) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 22:00:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: <62337.68.34.189.212.1091837758.squirrel@cafemail.edacafe.com> Message-ID: <20040807050009.70071.qmail@web12203.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109239 >From Karen: > Of course Sirius often expects Harry to act like > James. In this matter, both Sirius and Snape are > taking Harry literally at face value. Harry looks > like James (except for Lily's eyes) therefore he > must react like James. > > Aren't eyes supposed to be the window to a person > soul? Given what we know about Legilimency and > Occlumency the eye contact is important. > > > > I don't understand the Snape hatred of Harry. Snape > hates Harry but goes out of his way to protect him or > come to his rescue. SS/PS - Troll, PoA - Shrieking > Shack, GoF - Barty/Moody's office, OotP - alerts the > order, goes into the forest looking for Harry. Michelle Replies: Hi I kind of new, at least to this post. I'm not sure if there's any canon on Snape being in love with Lily but there certainly is canon on the rivalry between Snape and James. Assuming that he was in love with her and he has to look at those eyes every day in class, etc., those same beautiful eyes that Harry inherited from his mother, I can see #1 why he would be bitter yet #2 torn because Harry is still the child of the woman he loved. Michelle who is also intrigued by Severus... From eeyore5497 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 05:09:27 2004 From: eeyore5497 at yahoo.com (Michelle Horcher) Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 22:09:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.2.20040806194856.0172fad0@mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <20040807050927.1199.qmail@web12210.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109240 Lissa Hess wrote: > Bear in mind that the Pensieve scene happened fifth > year, most likely before the Prank. And by the time > we see Lupin and Sirius together in OotP, Lupin is > more than willing to stand up to Sirius, and not only > that, is the only one that can get him to cooperate- > usually with just a word or a look. I would bet several > Galleons that Lupin started standing up to Sirius after > the Prank, because he sure does it in OotP. I would > LOVE to see JKR's take on what happened after the Prank. Michelle replies: Ooh! Do you think we might see a couple more scene via the pensieve regarding the prank and after?!!! I also would love to see that!!!! Cheers!! From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Aug 7 06:57:41 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 06:57:41 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109241 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" > wrote: RMM: > Geoff, > Let me explain what I mean. > What you say regarding the structure of the sentence may be true, but > not necessarily. It is ambiguous based on the grammatical rules for > Adverb Prepositions versus Adjective Prepositions. Geoff: I think you actually mean "adverbial clauses" and "adjectival clauses"... The Concise Oxford Dictionary defines a preposition as an "indeclinable word serving to mark relations between the noun or pronoun it governs and another word", i.s. words like for, on, by etc. RMM: > To show > this, let's simply interchange the two adverb prepositions in the > sentence above. Here then is the new sentence: > "Investigations continue on 31 July into the break-in at > Gringotts, " > > Therefore, based on grammar, the headline can indicate that the > investigations were continuing on 31 July instead of the break-in > occurring on 31 July. Geoff: But that type of wording would never be used in a UK paper. A fairly standard layout would be "Investigations continue into the (recent) break-in at Gringotts (on Tuesday)/(on 31st July). The only possible structure which might use your heading wuold be if n investigation was re-opening with 31st July as the date ut was happening - not the date of the break-in. RMM: > Secondly, the "piece of paper", the cutting from the Daily Prophet, > was lying on the table under the tea cozy. This implies that the > cutting was from an old paper and not a new one. Hagrid cut it out of > an old issue of the Daily Prophet because of its significance in > regards to the Stone and Hagrid and Harry being at Gringotts on the > same day of the break-in. Geoff: Which I considered and decided was't really relevant. RMM: > Thirdly, the whole article from the Daily Prophet may not have been > given to us. And Harry waits until well into the reading of the > article to make the statement that the break-in occurred on his > birthday. > > Thus, with the above grammatical reading of the headline, the > birthday discrepancy for Harry Potter disappears. > Tuesday is July 30th, and Tuesday is Harry Potter's birthday. > Therefore, Harry Potter was born on July 30, 1980. Geoff: How on earth can Harry be so thick that he doesn't know his own birthday? Come on, Romulus, be serious, Harry recognised the date as his birthday, 31st July....... What more evidence do you want? From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk Sat Aug 7 07:02:44 2004 From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=) Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 08:02:44 +0100 (BST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: School cut-off date WAS:Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040807070244.22990.qmail@web25303.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109242 romulusmmcdougal wrote: --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jo Raggett" wrote: > > Geoff: > > In UK schools, the cut-off date for ages is 31st August. > > > > > Bookworm: > > If that is the cut-off JKR uses, then Hermione should be in the same > > year as Ginny since her birthday is in September. > > > > Aggie: > Do we have a year for Hermione's birth then? Could it not be that > she's just (one of) the oldest in the class? RMM: September 19, 1979 making Hermione one of the oldest people in her class. She was born on a Wednesday -- the day of Mercury (symbol Hg) and cleverly named by her dentist parents -- Hermione Granger. Now Udderpd Hermione Jane Granger was born on 19th September 1980. In the PoA Dumbledore refers to Harry and Hermione as two thirteen year old wizards. Making her the youngest of the trio and her birth year 1980. If you have any other cannon evidence to the contrary please post it don't just make sweeping statements. Just for your information Hermione's middle name is Jane, this was told to us by JKR in the World Book Day chat. TTFN Udder Pendragon ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________ Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/admin Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Yahoo! Groups Links --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 07:34:24 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 07:34:24 -0000 Subject: What constitutes "Dark Arts"? (Was: Marauders and Lord Voldemort) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109243 Amey: > > Polyjuice Potion is never mentioned as a piece of Dark Art or else > >Dumbledore would have told Harry in CoS. RMM: > Actually the recipe came from a book in the restricted area of the > library and Hermione said that the book was full of the Dark Arts. > Now Cory: I've been following this thread a bit, and I can't help wondering: who is to say whether a particular bit of magic is or isn't "dark arts"? One theme that I have gathered from my reading of the series is that "good" and "evil" are not absolutes. Or to put it another way, "The world is not divided into good people and Death Eaters." (Sirius). I don't know whether JKR intends to convey this message or not, but it is one that I have taken from the series nonetheless. Take Harry, for example. He is a "good" character, but he undeniably has some "evil" qualities (his rule breaking, and his overall aggressive nature in OotP). That doesn't change the fact that he's a good character though. I would analogize it to Star Wars: Luke is a good character, and he does not, in the end, turn to the dark side of the Force...but he does have "dark" qualities, and it is his dark qualities that eventually allow him to defeat Vader. His power lies in the fact that he can possess those powers without truly turning evil. I see Harry the same way. I don't know whether or not the Marauder's Map contains "dark" magic or not, but what if it does? Or what if Polyjuice Potion is considered by some to be "Dark Arts"?? Does the question or whether Harry, Hermione and Ron are good or bad characters turn on whether or not the use of polyjuice potion fits someone's definition of "evil" magic? I think not. For me, the message is that there is some "evil" in all of us, and there is some potential good in all evil. The strength of the truly good and righteous characters in the story is that whatever they do, they do it for a worthy cause. It matters not that they use a spell or a potion that some would call "evil"; rather, we judge the characters by whether or not their purpose is evil. --Cory From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 07:43:03 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 07:43:03 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS - 'That Night'- Fudge After the Fact In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109244 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > > Kneasy: > > "Fudge, who just happened to be at Azkaban the night before Sirius > > escapes, (pure coincidence of course - and if you believe that you > > might want to buy this 100% genuine gold brick) has loosed the > > Dementors." > > DuffyPoo: > > Hmm...my book doesn't say anywhere that Fudge was at Azkaban 'the > > night before' Sirius escaped. > Kneasy; > Oh yes it does. > Arthur says so in chap. 4. > "...because Fudge wanted to keep it quiet, but Fudge went out to > Azkaban the night Sirius escaped." > Asian_lovr2: Let's take a closer look at that quote- ---- Quote - Am Ed HB pg 65-66 ---- [Molly:] "But no one's really sure that Black's after Harry" There was a thud on wood, and Harry was sure Mr. Weasley had banged his fist on the table. [Arthur:]"Molly, how many times do I have to tell you? They didn't report in the press because Fudge wanted it kept quiet, but Fudge went out to Azkaban THE NIGHT Black escaped. The guards told Fudge that Blacks been talking in his sleep for a while now. Always the same words: 'He's at Hogwarts... he's at Hogwarts.' Black is deranged, Molly, and he wants Harry dead. ..." - - - End Quote - - - Sirius didn't escape because Fudge went to Azkaban, Fudge went to Azkanban /the night/ Sirius escaped BECAUSE Sirius escape. That night was after the fact. Just passing it along. Steve/asian_lovr2 From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 7 09:22:08 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 05:22:08 -0400 Subject: Did DD Know Animagi (Re: Chocolate frog cards ) Message-ID: <004401c47c60$03759a40$a8c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109245 SSSusan: "Just playing devil's advocate here...DO we know for certain that DD didn't know SB/JP/PP were animagi? IIRC, there are folks here who believe DD knew all about it all along. In fact, I think Kneasy just posted his belief that DD knew Wormtail was PP all these years. So I'd ask, do we KNOW DD didn't know they were animagi, or is this yet another bit of into DD's keeping close to the chest?" DuffyPoo now: The night Black wascaptured, DD came into the hospital wing and said "My apologies, Poppy, but I need a word with Mr. Potter and Miss Granger. I have just been taling to Sirius Black --" "I suppose he's told you the same fairy tale he's planted in Potter's mind?" spat Snape. "Something about a rat, and Pettigrew being alive --" "That, indeed, is Black's story," said Dumbledore. The next day Harry goes to see Lupin before he leaves, then DD comes in, and says to Harry, "Sirius told me all about how they became Animagi last night," said Dumbledore, smiling. "An extraordinary achievement -- not least, keeping it quiet from me." DD SAYS he didn't know they were Animagi. So, unless we're all supposed to believe he is intentionally lying to Harry here - and therefore to us - I can't see how we can take this any other way that that he truly didn't know there were three unregistered Animagi running around the school, or that Peter Pettigrew was sleeping in Gryffindor Tower. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 7 09:34:12 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 05:34:12 -0400 Subject: Pettigrew Attacked Ron? Message-ID: <004d01c47c61$b3227bb0$a8c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109246 > "Professor, Black's telling the truth -- we saw Pettigrew -- > --he escaped when Professor Lupin turned into a werewolf -- > --he's a rat -- > --Pettigrew's front paw, I mean, finger, he cut it off --" > NOW, GET THIS... > "--Pettigrew attacked Ron, it wasn't Sirius --" > > Where did that come from? > > Why does this say "Pettigrew attacked Ron, it wasn't Sirius"????? > Josh "This is where Hermione goes from telling the truth to desperation to save Sirius. Just in case that his actions in the 3rd year boys dorm and to the Fat Lady were damning on their own, or might prevent acceptance of the true 'Peter story', hey... make him look even more innocent than he is! :)" DuffyPoo: I'm sure you must be joking, Josh. As you can see, there is no indication of who made which statement. As I posted earlier, I think Meri cleared this up for me. She said they were talking about the injuries Ron was currently suffering from after being attacked by Pettigrew when he freed himself from a transforming Lupin. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From vsinghc620 at rogers.com Sat Aug 7 02:10:45 2004 From: vsinghc620 at rogers.com (wartarchimedes) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 02:10:45 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109247 RMM: > Thus, with the above grammatical reading of the headline, > the birthday discrepancy for Harry Potter disappears. > Tuesday is July 30th, and Tuesday is Harry Potter's birthday. > Therefore, Harry Potter was born on July 30, 1980. According to JKR's website, the birthday greetings, Harry was born on July 31st.. "wartarchimedes" From vincent.maston.ml at free.fr Sat Aug 7 07:44:36 2004 From: vincent.maston.ml at free.fr (Vincent Maston) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 09:44:36 +0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Sirius' escape timeline In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41148864.9000409@free.fr> No: HPFGUIDX 109248 Bex wrote: > We only know Sirius was mumbling > "He's at Hogwarts" because that's what Fudge said. We have no proof > of that beyond Fudge's word, which doesn't hold much water with me, No, he kinda admits it himself : When he learns that Wormtail's in Hogwarts, he becomes obsessed with it, since it's one of the very few thoughts the dementors can't suck out of him. Vincent -- I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by. Douglas Adams From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 7 09:51:53 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 05:51:53 -0400 Subject: Sirius' escape timeline Message-ID: <005b01c47c64$2bdc2cc0$a8c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109249 Yb's turn: "I just posted on this, and now I know why I was confused about that remark for the first *4* times I read the book. Some clarification (what I think happened): "Day 0: Fudge went to Azkaban to tour the facility, make sure everything is ship-shape. Sirius asks for the paper, sees the rat, recognizes Peter, starts making plans. "Evening/night 0: Sirius is possibly first heard saying "he's at Hogwarts." We don't know how long he's been saying this, we just know (through Arthur from Fudge) that he was heard talking in his sleep, and he wouldn't have any reason to before Fudge's visit. See note below on this... "Evening (4-5): I say (4-5) because we don't know how long Sirius was babbling in his sleep, or how long he's known about Peter. I vote for 4-5 days because the Weasley family picture was taken about a week before Harry's birthday, and Harry hears about Black on the muggle news on his birthday. We give Fudge the allotted 2-3 days to sit on this, since a) he doesn't want to admit to the Muggle world that this guy is loose, b) he doesn't want to admit to the WW that this guy is loose so he gives the dementors a chance to catch him first, or c) he needs the time to get a story straight with the PM. Thus Black probably escaped 2-3 day before Harry's birthday, which would be 4-5 days after the Weasley edition of the DP came out. SO... Evening 4-5 is when Sirius breaks out of Azkaban. "Night 4-5: Fudge comes running to Azkaban (in his jammies and robes, I'm sure) and hears *someone* tell him that Black was muttering "he's at Hogwarts." "OK, so that's my theory. I'd love to hear thoughts. "Here's one more BIG NOTE though: We only know Sirius was mumbling "He's at Hogwarts" because that's what Fudge said. We have no proof of that beyond Fudge's word, which doesn't hold much water with me, personally. Maybe that was part of the grand scheme, that Fudge said Black was doing that, so he would look like a madman bent on killing again, thus justifying the use of extreme force, and pulling some of the focus off of Fudge..." DuffyPoo: That's my theory, exactly, Yb, except for the bit about Fudge at the end. That makes sense though. One must have some reason to set Dementors loose on the WW. Just how many of those creeps are there, anyway? At least a hundred at the castle, more strolling the streets of Hogsmeade at night, and there must have still be lots left at Azkaban or the rest of the inmates could have escaped. I've never yet given much thought to Fudge - not like I have Snape, the Prophecy, etc. I know there's something about him that just doesn't sit well with me, but we know so little about him, I'm not sure I'll be able to pinpoint what it is. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kempermentor at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 08:34:46 2004 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 08:34:46 -0000 Subject: Harry's Patronus (was Re: To Where To When) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109250 DuffyPoo wrote: >> ...Again, he was, when he cast the Patronus, in no real danger of being attacked by Dementors. They were on the other side of the lake with Sirius and his other self. << vmonte responded: > I disagree. Harry was in danger of dying during the PoA attack. He was saving himself remember? How many Dementors were by that lake? If I'm not mistaken 13 year old Harry saved Sirius, who was also an accomplished wizard. < Kemper responds: I can see your point, Vivian. But, and though I don't have my books in front of me, Sirius doesn't have his own wand and hasn't used magic in forever, being locked up for 12 years. Not only that but he isn't well nourished to be getting it on with more than a few dementors. Harry is well fed and has been doing magic rather regularly over the past 3 years, has his own wand and has been practicing that particular spell for some time. From patientx3 at aol.com Sat Aug 7 09:57:14 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 09:57:14 -0000 Subject: Where was Lupin? (was: The Timing of Lupin WAS) In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.2.20040806194856.0172fad0@mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109251 Magda wrote: >> Dumbldore didn't fire Lupin because he knew Lupin was honourable enough to do the right thing and quit. He regrets it but he has no choice either. Had Lupin not quit, Dumbledore would have fired him. << Lissa replied: >> Thanks. That's another conversation though I really would have liked to have had a pair of Extendable Ears for. I don't think Lupin's actually on his second chance before this. I wonder if DD WOULD have fired him. It's really hard to tell. (Personally, I think he was sprinting out of there and to Sirius, but hey. Who knows?) << HunterGreen: Lissa's comment about where Lupin went after quitting (and this whole thread in general), reminds me of a question I've had about Lupin for awhile. During PS/SS, CoS and GoF, where is he? Harry is the son of one of his best friends, who was murdered, and on top of that he's 'the-boy-who-lived' and all that, which sparks so much curiosity that other wizards go out of their way to find him before he even rejoins the magical world (sorry, I don't have access to my copy of SS for a page reference). You think Lupin would be at least a little curious about him (perhaps watch one of his quidditch games...we don't know that only people from the school are allowed to go, and since its never mentioned that he went, I assume he didn't). Lupin's not around in the pub when Harry first goes to get his school things, (he could have written to Dumbledore and found out), and he's also not around during the weeks that Harry spends at the Leaky Cauldron during PoA. I could understand, perhaps, Lupin wanting to keep an emotional distance from Harry, so therefore not seeking him out, but why doesn't Dumbledore ask him to be a teacher before PoA? I very much doubt that he asked, because why would Lupin say no? SS/PS doesn't concern me, since he didn't know that Quirrel had become ESE, but I don't really believe that Dumbledore thought Lockhart was genunine. Lupin is such a natural teacher, that I wonder why, if Dumbledore was so desparate, that he didn't ask him to come teach *then*. In PoA, Lupin is introduced to Harry, and they develop a relationship, so the emotional distance (if there was one) is gone, yet Lupin disappears again. He quits, then rides off into the sunset, where he is not heard from or seen again until OotP. Now, remember, all through GoF, there is something obviously up around Hogwarts. Lupin is not called upon and he doesn't offer himself up for help, and he doesn't make an appearence at any of the triwizard events (I'm not saying that he *should* be, but his lack of interest in the son of one of his best friends who happens to look JUST like the friend, is odd). Sirius, the fugitive, is heard from. He's hiding in a cave in Hogsmeade and living off rats to stay close to Hogwarts. He's right at hand at the end of the book when the action start. In fact it would appear that Lupin (despite having close ties to Sirius, if not Dumbledore) is barely aware of the situation. [GoF chpt 36 - emphasis mine] ' "That will do to be going on with," said Dumbledore, stepping between them once more. "Now I have work for each of you. Fudge's attitude, though not unexpected, changes everything. Sirius, I need you to set off at once. You are to **alert** Remus Lupin, Arabella Figg, Mundungus Fletcher - the old crowd. Lie low at Lupin's for a while; I will contact you there." ' Lupin is active in the Order in the fifth book, and he was, at the very least, a member of the first order, so its interesting that he wasn't concerned about the events unfolding in GoF like Sirius was. What was he doing for that year? From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 7 10:32:04 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 06:32:04 -0400 Subject: Sirius' escape timeline Message-ID: <006d01c47c69$c8a3ba00$a8c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109252 > Evening (4-5): I say (4-5) because we don't know how long Sirius was > babbling in his sleep, or how long he's known about Peter. I vote for > 4-5 days because the Weasley family picture was taken about a week > before Harry's birthday, and Harry hears about Black on the muggle > news on his birthday. Allie "I think it has to be more than 4 or 5 days. Sirius tells Harry that the knowledge of Peter being alive and the traitor became an obssession. 4 or 5 days wouldn't be long enough to do that." DuffyPoo: It might be enough time, being as that was all Sirius had to think about, locked in an Azkaban cell, and it kept the Dementors out of his head, since it wasn't a happy thought. Dwelling on it constantly kept the Dementors at bay. Also, we know the Weasleys were on holiday in Egypt for a month and Ron said they would be back 'about a week' before term started. HP saw Black on the news and got the clipping from Ron on the same day, his 13th birthday, July 31st, but the picture must have been taken about a week previous, given that Errol had to fly the package from Egypt to Surrey, and we know that Errol is not the most reliable of birds, "Errol!" said Ron, taking the limp owl from Percy and extracting a letter from under its wing. "Finally [italicised] -- he's got Hermione's answer. I wrote to her saying we were going to try to rescue you from the Dursleys." Ron also indicated to Harry and Hermione that he wasn't supposed to use Errol to send Harry's birthday present, "You know he's not really up to long journeys." [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 7 10:44:02 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 06:44:02 -0400 Subject: Harry & Hermione's Birthdays (was Harry's B-day) Message-ID: <007801c47c6b$74dbe710$a8c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109253 RMM "Thus, with the above grammatical reading of the headline, the birthday discrepancy for Harry Potter disappears. Tuesday is July 30th, and Tuesday is Harry Potter's birthday. Therefore, Harry Potter was born on July 30, 1980." DuffyPoo: With one possible fly in the ointment. JKR has clearly stated HPs birthday is 31 July by posting it on her website calendar last week. Also, DD said two boys born at the end of July, Harry and Neville. He never once said their birthdays were the same day. JKR indicated Neville's birthday as July 30th. Whether the Daily Prophet is saying the break-in occurred on July 31, or that the investigation was continuing on July 31, HP read it as "the breaking which occurred on July 31" and referenced that to his own birthday. I think the kid, as much of a dolt as I sometimes think he is, would surely know his own birthday. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sat Aug 7 10:46:48 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 10:46:48 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS - 'That Night'- Fudge After the Fact In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109254 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > Asian_lovr2: > > Let's take a closer look at that quote- > > ---- Quote - Am Ed HB pg 65-66 ---- > [Molly:] "But no one's really sure that Black's after Harry" > > There was a thud on wood, and Harry was sure Mr. Weasley had > banged his fist on the table. > > [Arthur:]"Molly, how many times do I have to tell you? They didn't > report in the press because Fudge wanted it kept quiet, but Fudge > went out to Azkaban THE NIGHT Black escaped. The guards told Fudge > that Blacks been talking in his sleep for a while now. Always the > same words: 'He's at Hogwarts... he's at Hogwarts.' Black is deranged, > Molly, and he wants Harry dead. ..." > - - - End Quote - - - > > Sirius didn't escape because Fudge went to Azkaban, Fudge went to > Azkanban /the night/ Sirius escaped BECAUSE Sirius escape. That night > was after the fact. > Back to semantics and grammatical construction, I'm afraid. "Black's been talking.." is the key I think. I would read this as "Black has been talking" the implication being that it is a continuing activity. If Black were no longer in residence then I'd expect it to be written "Black had been talking". "Has" is the present indicative; "had" is the past subjunctive - or so I believe, though it's been one hell of a long time since I did grammar and I'll defer to anyone who who has a Fowlers that says differently. Kneasy From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 10:53:42 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 10:53:42 -0000 Subject: Chapter 24: Occlumency Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109255 > Michelle : Hi I kind of new, at least to this post. I'm not sure if there's any canon on Snape being in love with Lily but there certainly is canon on the rivalry between Snape and James. Assuming that he was in love with her and he has to look at those eyes every day in class, etc., those same beautiful eyes that Harry inherited from his mother, I can see #1 why he would be bitter yet #2 torn because Harry is still the child of the woman he loved. Mhbobbin: I'm rather intrigued by the idea that Snape has to look into Harry's eyes [Lily's eyes] to give Harry these lessons. And I'm still intrigued by how strongly Snape seems to react to what particular series of images. In the sequence when Snape sees the dog chasing Harry up the tree, he merely asks Harry who owned the dog. It appears to be a neutral observation, allowing Harry to know what he saw. But there is another series of images which upset both Harry and Snape. At the bottom of P 535 (Scholastic) Snape sees a dragon; Harry's parents in the Mirror; Cedric dead in the graveyard. Harry is very upset to see the image of Cedric. He notices that Snape is upset as well. ////"Snape looked paler than usual, and angrier, though not nearly as angry as Harry was."/// I assumed thatSnape was upset by seeing Cedric, because that wAs what upset Harry. I originally thought that Snape was worried by the graveyard images-- that maybe Snape was there, or mentioned, or it brought up memories of DE days or something but now I wonder. Perhaps it was the image of Lily Potter in the Mirror that upset Snape...not the image of Cedric as had upset Harry. Immediately after these images, Snape goes on a rant, "Fools who wear their hearts proudly on their sleeves, who cannot control their emotions, who wallow in sad memories and allow themselves to be provoked this easily--weak people...stand no chance against his powers" Who is Snape talking about as a fool? Harry or himself? This rant is particularly interesting as it follows the strongest reaction by Snape to anything seen in Harry's head--other than the Dept of Mystery stuff. It's very odd as it does not seem proportional to anything that Harry has done, or failed to do. ,,But then that also speaks to Snape's general attitude around Harry and his teaching methods. mhbobbin--who apologizes to those who read my previous post on this but I'm re-posting this thought because I think it belongs with this discussion. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 7 11:06:06 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 07:06:06 -0400 Subject: Theory on Snape - MASSIVE Message-ID: <008901c47c6e$8998dd40$a8c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109256 For those who asked, here it is. I apologise for the length and in advance to the ESE!Snape fans, but don't flame me until you read the last couple of sentences. ;-) My theory is that Snape is on the side of good and has never changed sides. Here is why: "Snape has been cleared by this council,' said Crouch coldly. "He has been vouched for by Albus Dumbledore." "No!' shouted Karkaroff, straining at the chains which bound him to the chair. 'I assure you! Severus Snape is a Death Eater!" Dumbledore had gotten to his feet. "I have given evidence already on this matter, ' he said calmly. 'Severus Snape was indeed a Death Eater. However, he rejoined our side before Lord Voldemort's downfall and turned spy for us, at great personal risk. He is now no more a Death Eater than I am." Snape is on the side of good. He is a "superb Occlumens." He can "shut down those feelings and memories that contradict the lie, and so can utter falsehoods in his [LV's] presence without detection." DD knows Snape from when he was a student at Hogwarts. He knows Snape is on the side of good (not all Slytherins turn in to Dark Wizards even if they do prefer the Dark Arts). They are fighting LV together after Snape's graduation. DD suggests to Snape that the Order/side of good needs a really good spy in the inner circle of LV/DEs. DD knows Snape is going to have to 'participate' in the DE's activities or risk being found out; Snape knows it, too. Snape 'at great personal risk' takes the job. He is in, or gets in, with Malfoy (they would have been at Hogwarts together, though about five years apart, they were both Slytherins) and suggests he wants to join the Death Eaters. His skill at Occlumency allows him to convince LV that his desire is to join the Dark Side and DD is a fool to fight him. Snape gets the tattoo. LV uses Snape to spy on DD. He's the perfect 'in'; Snape and DD are already chums. What truth or fiction Snape is feeding LV/DEs about DD we don't know (probably what DD tells him to, enough to keep LV from being suspicious). Snape suggests to LV that he appear to 'rejoin' the Order/side of good to continue to spy on DD from a better vantage point, a teaching job at Hogwarts, perhaps. LV accepts the plan....ohhh, I'm going to get the goods on DD!! Snape's not dead, "Well, you don't just hand in your resignation to Voldemort. It's a lifetime of service or death" (OotP) because the DEs and LV, until his vapourizing, believed Snape was spying for them. (Still believes it now that LV's rebirthed himself if you belive Snape is *the next man*: "Voldemort moved on, and stopped, staring at the space -- large enough for two people -- which separated Malfoy *and the next man*.") DD can genuinely state (he's not testifying here) that: "Severus Snape was indeed a Death Eater," because he was, at DD's own request, and LV's acceptance. "However, he rejoined our side before Lord Voldemort's downfall," because he did, in the eyes of the Ministry. DD knows he hasn't rejoined because he never truly left, but he's keeping that a secret. "Turned spy for us, at great personal risk," because he did turn spy, was, and still is, at great personal risk. "is now no more a Death Eater than I am," because he never 'really' was. Snape appeared to be a DE, joined on DD's suggestion, the DEs/LV believe he is. For the sake of any 'respectable' DEs in the crowd (those who were never caught or "are pretending to see the error of their ways"), they believe DD is deceived by Snape (The DEs think Snape has convinced DD he has left LV's employ and is now working as a spy for DD). The MoM believes Snape is being protected by DD which is the reason Snape's not been killed by DEs. Snape is still working as a spy for DD. That is the mission DD sent him on at the end of GoF. He admits it to Harry (if you believe he is telling the truth) "...and it is not up to you to find out what the Dark Lord is saying to his Death Eaters." [Snape] "No -- that's your job, isn't it?" Harry shot at him. "Yes, Potter,' he said, his eyes glinting. 'That is my job." (OotP) IF Snape was 'the next man' he would have been in the Graveyard with DD's knowledge (had to keep up the pretense of working for LV and spying on DD). We know Snape is still in with Malfoy, Sr. Malfoy, Jr suggests Snape apply for Dumbledore's job "I expect you'd have Father's vote, sir, if you wanted to apply for the job. I'll tell father you're the best teacher here, sir." Also, "You are being deliberately unhelpful! I expected better. Lucius Malfoy always speaks most highly of you!" [Umbridge] Regarding Quirrell, Snape was already suspicious of Quirrell, even before Hallowe'en, and suspecting it was Quirrell who let the Troll in, went after him. (What caused Snape to be suspicious of Quirrell, we are not told.) Did Snape know that it was Quirrell jinxing HP's broom? He may not have known it at the moment but obviously figured it out as Quirrell said that was why Snape wanted to referee the next Quidditch match. He was already suspicious of Quirrell. He knows Quirrell is after the Stone, but doesn't know about the boil on the back of Quirrell's head. He doesn't know Quirrell has a reason for wanting HP dead. Did he discuss his suspicion of Quirrell with DD? Probably that's why he's the Quidditch referee for the second match. Quirrell won't know that Snape is a DE; LV won't have informed him because it is a secret that Snape is a DE spying on DD for LV. Does Snape suspect that Quirrell is really Quirrellmort? Probably not, he believes Quirrell is after the Stone for himself. The Dark Mark hasn't started to come back yet. Why doesn't LV come to visit Snape some night and tell him he's living on the back of Quirrell's head and Quirrell wants the Stone for him? Because there is nothing Snape can do to help without tipping his hand to DD - in LV's eyes, that is. If Snape tries to help Quirrell and is caught, DD will 'find out' he's spying for LV (which Snape, of course, is not, but LV believes he IS) and DD will have to fire Snape, or risk everyone knowing that Snape is still a DE (which he's not, but it will look like he is if he's caught trying to steal the Stone). Of course, Quirrell knows about the Stone bcause he's been asked to help protect it. Snape's statement to Quirrell about loyalties is clearly Snape accusing Quirrell of being disloyal to DD in attempting to steal the Stone for himself at Hallowe'en. LV on the back of Quirrell's head, understands that Snape has to appear loyal to DD, because as far as he is concerned, Snape is still spying on DD for him. Karkaroff goes to Snape about the returning Dark Mark because he knew Snape 'was' a DE and would have the mark, too. He also believes Snape is on the run from LV as he is himself. Karkaroff is upset about the mark returning because he outed quite a few of LV's henchmen (Antonin Dolohov, Evan Rosier, Travers, Mulciber, Augustus Rookwood). Released from Azkaban for handing over Augustus Rookwood, he knows what LV's bodily return will mean to him. He thinks, since Snape 'switched sides' (he heard that he is no longer a DE right from DD's own lips in the court), that Snape should be equally concerned. Snape is not concerned because he knows Karkaroff is out of the loop. Karkaroff believes Snape switched sides and so LV should be after him as well. Snape knows that LV still believes he is one of his chosen DE's and is still, ceaselessly, spying on DD - he has no reason to fear LV's return as Karkaroff does. Snape's response: 'Then flee. Flee, I will make your excuses. I, however, am remaining at Hogwarts.' (I'll make your excuses to DD. I'll tell him you're a spineless weasel. I am remaining at Hogwarts because I'm much braver than you, Karkaroff, and I don't care if LV's coming back.) shows Karkaroff that he, Snape, is not afraid of a Dark Mark or the one it is connected to. Professor Snape is not mentioned at all on the day of the third task. The teachers patrolling the outside of the maze are Moody, Hagrid, McGonagall and Flitwick. Flitwick? The hedges are 20 feet tall! Why was Snape so conspicuous by his absence? Because DD knew the mark was getting darker and didn't want to commit Snape to anything when he may have to vanish at a moment's notice? " 'It's coming back...Karkaroff's too ... stronger and clearer than ever...' 'A connection I could have made without assistance,' Dumbledore sighed." Snape only had to be either outside the castle (if you believe it is the castle only that is protected against apparating/disapparating) or off the school grounds (if you believe the whole grounds are protected). As it is never mentioned whether Snape is even observing the third task, he could have been waiting outside of the school gates for what he and DD believed would be the inevitable - the Mark returning in full - and he could have apparated immediately to LV's side the minute that the Dark Mark burned. He was back at Hogwarts so quickly, because LV knows he is still working as a spy and though he could make excuses for a short time away, but he would be missed if the delay getting back was very long. LV has only mentioned a few names in the Graveyard, mostly of those who would have known about each other anyway - Avery, Malfoy, Crabbe, Goyle, Nott, the Lestranges. Yet HP thinks he's outnumbered 30 to 1. That leaves a lot of DE's unnamed. Including Snape who he didn't want just 'everyone' there to know about. It could account for Snape's making "a sudden movement, but as Harry looked at him, Snape's eyes flew back to Fudge," after HP named Malfoy as a DE. Snape knew he was standing near Malfoy in the circle and feared HP recognized him - his eyes perhaps, that hooked nose - under the hood and mask. DD won't let Snape teach DADA, not only because it may bring out the worst in him (as JKR says), but also in case he inadvertently lets something slip. DD needs Snape as a spy; he needs to know what the DEs, and now LV, are up to. He can't afford the risk involved - Snape's death - if a DE found out the truth (via a child in Snape's class). [Yes, I know we don't know if there were any DE's children in classes with Snape prior to Draco & Co. but it's only logical. Otherwise, all these kids are only children. Are the Weasleys and Patils the only Wizarding families with more than one child? They're the only ones we know of. The Creeveys don't count as they're Muggles. Certainly would account for the "dying out" of the WW Ron speaks of.] Of course, the other side of this is that Snape was on the side of good, went over to LV for his own reasons, is truly spying on DD for LV, convinced DD he had left the the DEs, is spying on LV for DD, and is truly a double agent. (This bit should make the ESE!Snape fans happy.) The DoubleAgent!Snape was where my theory started, but it evolved into GoodGuy!Snape somehow. My husband, who has never read the books but has heard my rambling about them, believes the DoubleAgent!Snape theory. He believes Snape is playing both ends against the middle so that, whoever gets vanquished in the end - good guys or bad guys - he'll still have a place in the structure. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com Sat Aug 7 11:15:19 2004 From: sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com (Amey Chinchorkar) Date: 7 Aug 2004 11:15:19 -0000 Subject: Marauders and Voldemort Message-ID: <20040807111519.16920.qmail@webmail10.rediffmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109257 - DuffyPoo: - "These were the books containing powerful Dark magic never taught in Hogwarts - and only read by older students stuying advanced Defence Against the Dark - Arts." It was clear from a glance why it belonged in the Restricted Section...." - Did DD ever find out that the Trio used Polyjuice potion? I just read CoS twice - and don't remember it if he did. (I don't remember a lot of things so that wouldn't - be surprising!) Amey: Then he started telling them everything. For nearly a quarter of an hour he spoke into the rapt silence: He told them about hearing the disembodied voice, how Hermione had finally realized that he was hearing a basilisk in the pipes; how he and Ron had followed the spiders into the forest, that Aragog had told them where the last victim of the basilisk had died; how he had guessed that Moaning Myrtle had been the victim, and that the entrance to the Chamber of Secrets might be in her bathroom .... (CoS) There is no direct mention of polyjuice, I admit. But then, he told *everything*. Also Snape knew about bloomslang skin, and surely would have guessed and told Dumbledore. Also, it is never mentioned as Dark Art. It is m,entioned as belonging to Restricted Section, but then *all* the books there don?t contain Dark Art recipies, do they? - RMM - As for Dumbledore, please note that Dumbledore is always one to give - a person a chance to prove himself. See Lupin, Snape, etc. for - examples. He probably saw how pathetic Tom looked and his heart went - out to him. Only later and in hindsight could Dumbledore see that - Tom had sunk so deeply into the Dark Arts. Amey: But he knew Tom was somehow connected to the attacks in his fifth year. He kept an close eye on him, forcing Tom to close the Chamber. I don?t think even Dumbledore would take a teacher with a suspicion of history of attacks against his fellow students and responsible for death of one. He disappeared after leaving the school ... traveled 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 recognizable. Hardly anyone connected Lord Voldemort with the clever, handsome boy who was once Head Boy here. So, he came back as Lord Voldemort, not as Tom. He had undergone many transformations, is it possible that Dumbledore wouldn?t recognize the Dark transformations he carried out? - RMM - Amey, they didn't. James is dead, Lupin is an outcast, Black was - framed and ended up in Azkaban, and Pettigrew has yet to defy the - Dark Lord. Amey: Not exactly what happened to Regulus James is dead because he stood between Voldmeort and Harry why didn?t Voldemort came after him before? They were exceptionally brilliant, so they must have learnt much. Why didn?t he try to kill all of them before they became a threat? Also, Lupin is not outcast because of his connection, but because of his being werewolf. Black was framed by wormtail not exactly upto standards of Voldemort is it??? I don?t think the evidence is so strong to make them prime suspects. Yes, after reading all this, I will keep them on the Radar, but as maybes We don?t have enough *hard* evidence to mark them. The circumstantial evidence works if you look at it with your mind set on them as criminals, but they look totally innocent if you look at the same evidence from innocent point of view works both way, guys. Amey [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cincimaelder at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 11:16:12 2004 From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (cincimaelder) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 11:16:12 -0000 Subject: DD knows where they are/Choc Frogs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109258 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sopraniste" wrote: > I had one other thought that kind of tied into the whole > Spymaster!DD idea. Aside from the intelligence network, DD also > strikes me as quite the propaganda-meister. > > Consider: "What happened down in the dungeons between yourself and > Professor Quirrell is a complete secret, so, naturally, the whole > school knows." (PS/SS 296). > > And who is the ONLY person who KNOWS what happened down in the > dungeons between Harry and Professor Quirrell??? > DD's showdown with the MoM and his spectacular escape. Granted, > McGonagall could have spread the word (in fact, I have no doubt that > she did) but on WHOSE ORDERS??? > MAE: I just wanted to comment about this. When you live in a place where pictures talk among themselves and to regular people, just about any rumor can spread like wild fire. From vmonte at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 12:01:31 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 12:01:31 -0000 Subject: Theory on Snape - MASSIVE In-Reply-To: <008901c47c6e$8998dd40$a8c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109259 Cathy wrote: DD can genuinely state (he's not testifying here) that: "Severus Snape was indeed a Death Eater," because he was, at DD's own request, and LV's acceptance. "However, he rejoined our side before Lord Voldemort's downfall," because he did, in the eyes of the Ministry. DD knows he hasn't rejoined because he never truly left, but he's keeping that a secret. "Turned spy for us, at great personal risk," because he did turn spy, was, and still is, at great personal risk. "is now no more a Death Eater than I am," because he never 'really' was. vmonte responds: I'm going to admit up front that I'm prejudiced against Snape because I personally see that being part of Voldemort's minions is as bad as believing in ethnic cleansing, being a part of the KKK, a Nazi, etc. It's hard to believe that DD would ask Snape to join an evil cult knowing full well what he would probably be doing there. Do you think that Snape stayed home making potions while Voldemort and gang murdered and tortured people? I do however, believe that DD is capable of forgiving people and giving them another chance (no matter what the crime(s)). Does DD think that Snape had some kind of epiphany? Like St. Paul, who realized his evil ways and converted? Sadly, I'm not as forgiving as DD, and I also find Snape's conversion hard to believe. The problem with being a great occlumens is that you can fool everyone and every side. Snape holds some nasty grudges. (Does he carry a list of people who have done him wrong? Has he crossed off James and Sirius?) Snape isn't just a grouchy guy who snaps at children. He's pretty nasty! Granted, it could very well be that long term association with Voldemort turns people crazy. Or that there are certain spells and magic that corrupt the soul, turning their victims into dark arts addicts. I think that DD keeps Snape from becoming the DADA teacher because it will fuel Snape's addiction. There is nothing nastier or sader than an unrepentant drug addict in denial. vivian From drliss at comcast.net Sat Aug 7 12:09:21 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (Lissa Hess) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 08:09:21 -0400 Subject: Snape's Worst Memory- New Twists In-Reply-To: <1091871258.5809.20264.m24@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.2.20040807075605.01734e10@mail.comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 109260 macfotuk >3. This point (point 3) is probably where this post belongs >elsewhere, but here goes - re-read the entire memory in the >following mindset: Snape is hopelessly (literally) in love with Lily >for some reason, i.e. he feels that at some point there was reason >to be hopeful; that or she was simply so attractive even badboy >(pathetic and much wronged and so nasty boy I see him as more like) >Snape could not help being infatuated. His apparent focus on reading >the DADA exam paper afterwards is all a ruse to hide what he is >really up to, which isn't to follow the marauders (why go near such >awful bullies?) so much as to be near one of their number's real >target i.e James is following Lily Evans cos he too is infatuated >and that's what Snape is doing too, if more covertly (from a bush). >Others have said that Snape can't love Lily because he calls her >mudblood, but this is exactly what a 'man' might do when a 'girl' is >seen publicly to be his only defence from bullies - he has (by some >absurd honour view) to belittle her to make himself look less >pathetic/unmanly even if it hurts both him AND her to do so. He >knows that because (some unseen back history here) Lily has given >him reason to be hopeful, she will understand/forgive his insulting >her in public. Lissa: macfotuk, I agree with you that there's more to this memory from Snape's POV than we're seeing. When Harry watches this memory, he's not watching it from Snape's POV, he's watching it from his father's. I'd LOVE to know what other memories Snape put in the Pensieve (it looked like there was more than one). I'm personally 75% fond of the Snape-loved-Lily theory, and since you outlined that so nicely, I'm not going to go into it, because I don't have anything good to add. But the other 25% of me has another theory... and funnily, I was thinking about posting it this morning anyway. What if, at the very beginning of their time at Hogwarts, Snape was friends with Lupin? Picture this scenario: it's the Hogwarts Express, 1970 (or whatever year the Marauders all started). Almost all the compartments are full. Severus Snape, quiet, greasy boy from a bad background, is looking for a seat. The only one he can find is with Remus Lupin- another quiet, tortured kid. After staring at each other awkwardly (because neither of them is remotely socially adjusted), they eventually get talking. Snape and Lupin have some similar traits and interests. They're both very academic. They're both very socially inept. Can you see where they might be drawn to each other? Of course, that night they're separated into different houses. But it's not like Lupin's immediately becoming great friends with the guys in his dorm- he's too nervous about being discovered. He smiles and laughs in the background, but isn't jumping out and embracing Sirius and James, yet. Potions hits, and the Gryffindors have double potions with Slytherin. Severus and Remus recognize each other, and pair up as lab partners. Despite being from different houses, they're actually getting along. Then something happens, gradually, and over the course of time: Remus DOES become friends with Sirius and James. And over the course of time Remus discovers the things he has in common with Severus aren't so deep. They begin to drift apart. Remus probably doesn't see it as a big deal- he's 11-12, and probably thinks Snape has made other friends as well. Severus is furious. This was HIS friend- maybe even his first friend- and Sirius and James STOLE him. He can't get over it. He knows Lupin pretty well. He notices Lupin disappears every month. He's curious as to where Lupin goes. And somehow, Dumbledore managed to shut Snape up about Lupin being a werewolf after the Prank. Maybe he just threatened Snape with expulsion and that worked, but maybe not. Is it possible that there was still a shred of loyalty in Snape? Nothing sure stopped him from hating Sirius and James, and Snape is clever enough to have gotten the truth out more subtly than just blurting it in the Dining Hall. (Assuming he doesn't know Dumbledore is an accomplished Leg-a-whootchimawatchie.) Even come the present day, yes, Snape hates Lupin. With a passion. But even though we think it's awful, as soon as we see Snape meet Sirius we know he doesn't remotely hate Lupin as much as he despises Sirius. But now take "Snape's Worst Memory" and put that potential dynamic into it. Lupin's friends are tormenting Snape, and he doesn't do a single thing to try and stop it. Perhaps Snape views this as the final betrayal of what was once a friendship? That would make this sting pretty darn badly as well. Needless to say there's not a shred of canon to back this up; just my own theory. But that early friendship could explain the bitter rift between Snape and the marauders, and put another interesting spin on why that's a memory Snape is protective of. (I also have a theory that now that Sirius is gone, it will be possible for Snape and Lupin to actually become friends. They have got to be the two most intensely lonely characters in the book, from what I can tell. In a way, that might actually be really nice.) Off for the weekend, Lissa From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 12:56:12 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 05:56:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chapter 24: Occlumency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040807125612.7003.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109261 --- mhbobbin wrote: > Perhaps it was the image of Lily Potter in the Mirror that upset > Snape...not the image of Cedric as had upset Harry. Immediately > after these images, Snape goes on a rant, "Fools who wear their > hearts proudly on their sleeves, who cannot control their emotions, > who wallow in sad memories and allow themselves to be provoked this > easily--weak people...stand no chance against his powers" > Who is Snape talking about as a fool? Harry or himself? He's talking about himself. And this little rant is very significant because it's the first bit of autobiography we've ever got from Snape himself and it's the first time he's ever really tried to give Harry what we might view as advice, to really communicate with him. (Snape being Snape, of course, he does it Snapishly and it goes over Harry's head completely since he sees it as more criticism. The deaf talking to the deaf, these two.) It's also, IMO, Exhibit A against the claims that Snape is wallowing in self-pity about being bullied by the Marauders. There's not a syllable of self-pity in that speech. Snape blames himself completely for falling for Voldemort. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From dontask2much at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 12:38:58 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 08:38:58 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Sirius' escape timeline References: Message-ID: <02b801c47c7b$82fce550$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 109263 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bex" > > Here's one more BIG NOTE though: We only know Sirius was mumbling > "He's at Hogwarts" because that's what Fudge said. We have no proof > of that beyond Fudge's word, which doesn't hold much water with me, > personally. Maybe that was part of the grand scheme, that Fudge said > Black was doing that, so he would look like a madman bent on killing > again, thus justifying the use of extreme force, and pulling some of > the focus off of Fudge... > > Anyway, comments appreciated charme: I concur with you about your statement about Fudge trying to make Sirius look like a madman - to me, it's almost like that message is tattoo'd on *Fudge's* head. It apparently met with some consternation that Fudge, seemingly without any other MoM approval and/or consultations, went to the Muggle PM and told him enough about Sirirus that the Muggle PM has "promised" to keep the secret! (See PoA, the Prophet article and you'll see what I mean.)Where's the Statute of Secrecy in all this I wonder? Is he going to do the same now after OoP that Voldemort's BACK? From pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net Sat Aug 7 13:54:45 2004 From: pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net (pcaehill2) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 13:54:45 -0000 Subject: "I Must Not Tell Lies" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109264 mcmaxslb wrote: [snip] > First the words are not legible. In OofP when Dobby tells Harry > about the Room of Requirement,Harry looks at the back of his hand > and sees a web of thin,white scars. pcaehill: Well spotted, mcmax! I was going by this previous quote: "But Ron had grabbed Harry's forearm and pulled the back of Harry's hand up level with his eyes. There was a pause, during which he stared at the words carved into the skin, then, looking sick, he released Harry" (OotP, ch. 13, Detention with Dolores) You're right, there is the distinct possibility that the words no longer show up as words as the scars heal. mcmaxslb continued: > And both pcaehill2 and DuffyPoo have forgotten that Harry was > not being punished for lying, he was being punished for telling > the truth. The truth about Voldemort and the murder of Cedric > Diggory. He was being tortured by a vicious evil woman under the > orders of an idiot to keep him from telling the truth. pcaehill responds: Nope, never forgot that Harry was being punished for telling the truth. All I was trying to suggest was that the scar might pop up later as a plot device (if the words haven't completely healed over, as you suggest). Then they might "come in handy" OR work against Harry, depending on the circumstances in which he reads them--or how someone else might read and interpret (or misinterpret) them. For instance, I could see Harry in some situation (say, with Dumbledore again, from whom he has "withheld info" several times over the years), and while he is pondering what to say, glances at his hand and (in spite of the horrible original circumstances of the scar's infliction) realizing that this is a situation in which he must not now lie. OR, some enemy (or creature who hasn't chosen sides, such as a goblin) seeing the words on his hand, and interpreting them to mean either that H. is sworn to tell the truth or has been previously branded as a liar. Seems a possibility, given the wondrous way JKR has of weaving various strands together from past books. Pam From pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net Sat Aug 7 14:07:40 2004 From: pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net (pcaehill2) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 14:07:40 -0000 Subject: Intro and Lucius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109265 M.Clifford wrote: [snip] > Finally and most interestingly I too, like Bookworm, question > Lucius' loyalty to LV. Lucius has his own ruthless ambition, I > don't truly believe he serves anyone. pam responds: Well stated! I totally concur. I don't think Lucius has been hoarding dark arts artifacts, etc., solely to serve as another's pawn. In particular, the DE all *witnessed* the second defeat of (or at least, if not defeat, then heroic escape from) LV when he was again face to face with H. And Lucius is not one to serve a loser, nor a half-blood. Btw, how is it that LV's lineage does not seem to be well-known among the DE? At first I thought it was because they didn't know LV was Tom Riddle. But Lucius must know that, having had his diary. And the fact that TR came from an orphanage was known to the headmaster of the time (which doesn't automatically suggest that it was common knowledge, but it wasn't stated conspiratorally, either, as though sharing a secret). If the DE all know that LV was Tom Riddle, once a student at Hogwarts, then LV must have taken great pains to conceal his parentage. Bellatrix seems distinctly outraged at the accusation that LV is half-blood, so she obviously didn't know his true parentage. But if Lucius knew LV used to live in a muggle orphanage, doesn't that suggest that Lucius, at least, knows LV's true half-blood parentage? I mean, if L. knew that LV's surname used to be Riddle, he could have researched it. I'm for the idea that Lucius is biding his time, giving lip-service to LV (since, for the time, LV holds the most magical powers, other than DD). Then at an opportune moment (either when LV is revealed as half blooded to all the DE, or when the tide is turning against LV and the DE perceive him to be weak), Lucius will lead a revolt against LV, wanting to be the supreme mugwump himself. Pam From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 7 14:11:02 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 10:11:02 -0400 Subject: Harry's Patronus (was Re: To Where To When) Message-ID: <000e01c47c88$5f967970$0cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109266 DuffyPoo wrote: >> ...Again, he was, when he cast the Patronus, in no real danger of being attacked by Dementors. They were on the other side of the lake with Sirius and his other self. << vmonte responded: > I disagree. Harry was in danger of dying during the PoA attack. He was saving himself remember? How many Dementors were by that lake? If I'm not mistaken 13 year old Harry saved Sirius, who was also an accomplished wizard. < DuffyPoo: We must remember there were two Harrys present that night. One on each side of the lake. The one who truly conjured the Patronus was in no danger from the Dementors, as they were all on the other side of the lake with the 'other' Harry and Sirius. (Man I hate TT.) "And there were the Dementors. They were emerging out of the darkenss from every direction, gliding around the edges of the lake ... they were moving *away from where Harry stood,* to the opposite bank ... he wouldn't have to get near them..." This Harry, this Harry on this side of the lake, was in no danger from the Dementors and could easily produce a Patronus. The Harry with the Dementors was only in danger of having his soul sucked out, not death. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 14:53:49 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 14:53:49 -0000 Subject: Harry's Patronus (was Re: To Where To When) In-Reply-To: <000e01c47c88$5f967970$0cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109267 > DuffyPoo: > We must remember there were two Harrys present that night. One on each side of the lake. The one who truly conjured the Patronus was in no danger from the Dementors, as they were all on the other side of the lake with the 'other' Harry and Sirius. (Man I hate TT.) Neri: Actually it is the other way around. The Harry who is attacked by the Dementors is in no danger at all (or at least not from the point-of view of the other Harry, if he would have only thought it through). This is because at this time we know that this Harry was already saved. The Harry who casts the Patronus, OTOH, is certainly in danger, since nothing is known about HIS future. Who's to say that there isn't a second gang of dementors sneaking behind him at the very moment? Neri, who likes TT when it's done right. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 7 15:08:45 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 11:08:45 -0400 Subject: Marauders and Voldemort Message-ID: <001f01c47c90$6fef5ff0$0cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109268 Amey: "Then he started telling them everything. For nearly a quarter of an hour he spoke into the rapt silence: He told them about hearing the disembodied voice, how Hermione had finally realized that he was hearing a basilisk in the pipes; how he and Ron had followed the spiders into the forest, that Aragog had told them where the last victim of the basilisk had died; how he had guessed that Moaning Myrtle had been the victim, and that the entrance to the Chamber of Secrets might be in her bathroom .... (CoS)" There is no direct mention of polyjuice, I admit. But then, he told *everything*. " DuffyPoo: Do you really think HP's gong to tell DD and MM something that will get himself, Ron and Hermione chucked out of school? (Whether it is specified that the Polyjuice potion is Dark Magic or not, the Trio believed it was something they shouldn't be doing or they wouldn't have needed to hide it in the least used bathroom in the school.) HP already believes, since the flying car-whomping willow incident that if he breaks any more school rules he'll be expelled. Admitting to Polyjuice is admitting to stealing Boomslang skin and Bicorn Horn from Snape's office. HP didn't steal it, Hermione did, he's not going to drop her in it, either. Admitting to using Polyjuice potion, if it is something they're not supposed to be doing, is dropping Ron in it as well (he's also due expulsion if he breaks another rule, not to mention what Molly would do to him.) The only things they learned from Malfoy while Polyjuiced was that the person who opened the chamber last time was expelled, that someone died and that it happened 50 years ago. HP learned these things, as well, from TR's diary, and from Aragog. No need to mention the Polyjuice business at all. HP, like DD in OotP, only told them the *everything* he thought they needed to know, not *EVERY THING.* Amey: "Also Snape knew about bloomslang skin, and surely would have guessed and told Dumbledore." DuffyPoo: Snape only knew the boomslang skin was stolen from his office. He may have suspected HP but that's all he did. He may have passed his suspicions to DD but without 'proof' what is DD expected to do? I'm sure boomslang skin is an ingredient in more potions than Polyjuice or why would Snape need to have it "in his private stores?" (Hmm, good question. Severus, what are you up to?) Besides, Snape still only supsects HP of taking the stuff two years later, "Boomslang skin, Gillyweed. Both come from my private stores and I know who stole them." (GoF) If Snape really knew who stole them, he wouldn't be saying this to HP, as HP never took any of it. He's trying to make HP angry enough to confess or spill the beans. He later threatens HP with Veritaserum, "And then, Potter .. then we'll find out whether you've been in my office or not,." (because I don't know yet, but I suspect it was you, and I'd really like to have proof of this so DD would have to expell you!) Harry doesn't like the sound of this because he knows him spilling the truth would land "a whole lot of people in trouble -- Hermione and Dobby, for a start --" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From srae1971 at bellsouth.net Sat Aug 7 15:14:25 2004 From: srae1971 at bellsouth.net (Shannon) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 11:14:25 -0400 Subject: Ron's Patronus Message-ID: <5.1.1.6.1.20040807105305.00cab4f8@mail.bellsouth.net> No: HPFGUIDX 109269 I was rereading OoP recently, and noticed something that struck me as a little bit odd. During the last DA meeting, (US Edition, pages 606-607), they are working on producing Patronuses. They mention Cho's swan, Hermione's otter, and she even mentions Lavender, Neville and Seamus. But no Ron, whether he was having trouble or had done it successfully, nothing. It seemed odd to me because usually when JKR gets into describing how students are handling difficult bits of magic, she at leasts describes Harry, Ron and Hermione's efforts. Anyone have any thoughts as to why he might have been left entirely out of this scene? Am I making something out of nothing? Shannon From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 7 15:22:35 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 11:22:35 -0400 Subject: Theory on Snape - Message-ID: <003d01c47c92$5e50ce80$0cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109270 vmonte responds: "I'm going to admit up front that I'm prejudiced against Snape because I personally see that being part of Voldemort's minions is as bad as believing in ethnic cleansing, being a part of the KKK, a Nazi, etc. It's hard to believe that DD would ask Snape to join an evil cult knowing full well what he would probably be doing there. Do you think that Snape stayed home making potions while Voldemort and gang murdered and tortured people? " DuffyPoo: Nope, I think what I said was "DD knows Snape is going to have to 'participate' in the DE's activities or risk being found out; Snape knows it, too. Snape 'at great personal risk' takes the job." However, staying home and making truth potions, potions that kill people (Didn't Malfoy, Sr indicate he had some "poisons that might make it appear ---"), potions that coud be used in 'confections' that had a little more oomph that turning someone into a canary if eaten, would have been a good job for "Excuse me, but I believe I am the Potions Master" Snape. vmonte: "I do however, believe that DD is capable of forgiving people and giving them another chance (no matter what the crime(s)). Does DD think that Snape had some kind of epiphany? Like St. Paul, who realized his evil ways and converted? Sadly, I'm not as forgiving as DD, and I also find Snape's conversion hard to believe." DuffyPoo: But Snape didn't really convert. He was on DD's side all along. He went over to LV on DD's orders, and came back after convincing LV that it would be a good plan, he could get closer to DD that way, in order to spy on him. No conversion necessary. vmonte "The problem with being a great occlumens is that you can fool everyone and every side. Snape holds some nasty grudges. (Does he carry a list of people who have done him wrong? Has he crossed off James and Sirius?)" DuffyPoo: You can only fool a Legilimens. No one else can get into his mind...that we know of so far. vmonte: "Snape isn't just a grouchy guy who snaps at children. He's pretty nasty! Granted, it could very well be that long term association with Voldemort turns people crazy. Or that there are certain spells and magic that corrupt the soul, turning their victims into dark arts addicts. I think that DD keeps Snape from becoming the DADA teacher because it will fuel Snape's addiction. There is nothing nastier or sader than an unrepentant drug addict in denial." DuffyPoo: Nastiness is a good cover, isn't it? Can't let the little kiddies - or anyone else - figure out he's really a good guy. Might get back to the DEs, especially now he's got Malfoy, Jr., Crabbe, Jr., Goyle, Jr., and Nott, Jr. all in his Potions classes. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 7 15:35:08 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 11:35:08 -0400 Subject: "I Must Not Tell Lies" Message-ID: <004601c47c94$1f179620$0cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109271 mcmaxslb continued: > And both pcaehill2 and DuffyPoo have forgotten that Harry was > not being punished for lying, he was being punished for telling > the truth. The truth about Voldemort and the murder of Cedric > Diggory. He was being tortured by a vicious evil woman under the > orders of an idiot to keep him from telling the truth. pcaehill responds: "Nope, never forgot that Harry was being punished for telling the truth. All I was trying to suggest was that the scar might pop up later as a plot device (if the words haven't completely healed over, as you suggest). Then they might "come in handy" OR work against Harry, depending on the circumstances in which he reads them--or how someone else might read and interpret (or misinterpret) them. For instance, I could see Harry in some situation (say, with Dumbledore again, from whom he has "withheld info" several times over the years), and while he is pondering what to say, glances at his hand and (in spite of the horrible original circumstances of the scar's infliction) realizing that this is a situation in which he must not now lie." DuffyPoo now: Thanking Pam, first of all, for posting what will amount to be my answer as well. I never forgot HP was being punished for telling the truth, but he does have a tendency to lie or, as Pam said, withold information. Catching a glance at even the thin white scars might make him stop and think. My initial post was actually using the scar as a reminder not to lie, or, to always tell the truth in front of DD now that he knows DD is a "sufficiently accomplished Legilimens" himself to know when he's being lied to...especially in HPs case when many times what he's 'lying' about or 'covering up' are rolling around in his head while he's making up his mind what to say. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 16:10:01 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 09:10:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Theory on Snape - MASSIVE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040807161001.50899.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109272 >> "Cathy Drolet" >> My theory is that Snape is on the side >> of good and has never changed sides. > "Nora Renka" > And my broad objections to it are largely thematic. Why do we get > this general feeling of something close to guilt rolling off of > Snape (I'm thinking of the scene with Crouch!Moody, and the lil' > speech to Harry in his office recently discussed) if there's not a > solid reason behind it?....If this is the switcheroo, > where's the great redemption path that we've been told Snape is > currently on? Where's the interview-canonical 'sordid past'? > Where's the illustrated theme of a choice resulting in horrible > things and one man trying to change his own actions? Yeah, I'm with Nora on this one. Snape is too filled with tension to have been a good guy all the time. And I think its much more satisfying plot-wise to have a genuine repented DE now fighting for good than otherwise. This isn't a series about black and white characters; there are shades of gray too. And Snape is the most interesting shade of gray around. There's no doubt in my mind he's done horrible things in the past. That Dumbledore can get past this to let him close to children is one of the mysteries of the books. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 17:21:38 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 17:21:38 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS - 'That Night'- Fudge After the Fact In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109273 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > > > Asian_lovr2: > > > > Let's take a closer look at that quote- > > > > ---- Quote - Am Ed HB pg 65-66 ---- > > ... but Fudge went out to Azkaban THE NIGHT Black escaped. The > > guards told Fudge that Black's been talking in his sleep for a > > while now. ..." > > - - - End Quote - - - > > > > ..., Fudge went to Azkanban /the night/ Sirius escaped BECAUSE > > Sirius escape. That night was after the fact. > > > Kneasy: > > Back to semantics and grammatical construction, I'm afraid. > > "Black's been talking.." is the key I think. > > I would read this as "Black has been talking" the implication being > that it is a continuing activity. > > If Black were no longer in residence then I'd expect it to be > written "Black had been talking". > ... > > Kneasy Asian_lovr2: You might be right if we could assume that people, and more important Mr. Weasley, speak with technical perfection, but they don't. There is a difference between the narative part and actual speech in any book. If JKR is a good writer, we would indeed expect narative to adhere to properly applied English, but in natural speech, it's pretty much anything goes, as long as it's consistent with the character. I don't personally find it all that uncommon or out of place for Arthur to say "...Black's been talking..." which we assume means 'Black has been talking'. Especially when it is the guards speaking and the time proximity is the very night Black escaped and perhaps only minutes from that escape. Really, it's just a thought. Steve/asian_lovr2 From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Aug 7 17:47:08 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 17:47:08 -0000 Subject: Where was Lupin? (was: The Timing of Lupin WAS) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109274 > HunterGreen: > Sirius, the fugitive, is heard from. He's hiding in a cave in > Hogsmeade and living off rats to stay close to Hogwarts. He's right > at hand at the end of the book when the action start. In fact it > would appear that Lupin (despite having close ties to Sirius, if not > Dumbledore) is barely aware of the situation. > [GoF chpt 36 - emphasis mine] > ' "That will do to be going on with," said Dumbledore, stepping > between them once more. "Now I have work for each of you. Fudge's > attitude, though not unexpected, changes everything. Sirius, I need > you to set off at once. You are to **alert** Remus Lupin, Arabella > Figg, Mundungus Fletcher - the old crowd. Lie low at Lupin's for a > while; I will contact you there." ' > > Lupin is active in the Order in the fifth book, and he was, at the > very least, a member of the first order, so its interesting that he > wasn't concerned about the events unfolding in GoF like Sirius was. > What was he doing for that year? Jen: And the year the Potters died, and the year of OOTP?? I don't know, but that question seems like a crucially important bit of information. I can understand why Lupin didn't try to make contact with Harry prior to POA, nor keep up contact once Sirius was in the picture. In my mind Lupin lives a very "survival-mode" life--always looking for work, trying to keep his head above water. Perhaps he takes a few steps forward, then he has to transform again and possibly ruin whatever foundation he's laid. He reminds me of Sisyphus doomed to roll the rock up the hill forever. Given his situation, and the loss of all his close friends at the time, it would probably be painful to connect with Harry on a personal level. Plus, I doubt he would feel that *personally* he has much to offer Harry. But as a teacher, where he does have something to offer and he can meet Harry within the context of teacher- student, well, he probably thought that would be the best way to meet and interact with Harry. Then Sirius came along, and Lupin seemed to bow out of the story again, as acknowledgement that Sirius was Harry's Godfather and needed time to conncet with him. As to where he goes in the story when he disappears and why....well, he seems to be a very powerful wizard. There's canon references that could indicate he's a Legilimens (POA in the Shrieking Shack & OOTP at Grimmauld), and we saw that with little effort he could conjure a Patronus in the face of a Dementor. He can produce flames in his hands without so much as a whispered incantation. Whatever he's been doing when was conspicuously absent,it appears he's also been learning and perfecting his wizarding skills. I hope his mysterious work won't turn out to be an unimportant detail JKR leaves out of the story. Somehow I doubt it though, she's said he'll have a larger role in Book 7. Jen Reese From sarahlizzy at hotmail.com Sat Aug 7 17:49:57 2004 From: sarahlizzy at hotmail.com (sarah_haining) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 17:49:57 -0000 Subject: Scottish school cut-off dates- Hermione's birthday riddle solved? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109275 > Geoff noted: > >> In UK schools, the cut-off date for ages is 31st August. So anyone > > whose 11th birthday falls within that frame goes into the new First > > Year (modern Year 7). Hence, Harry is one of the youngest pupils in > > his year. << > > And then Bookworm remarked: > > If that is the cut-off JKR uses, then Hermione should be in the > same > > year as Ginny since her birthday is in September. Is the cut- off > > different in Scotland than it is in England? Or did JKR ignore it > > totally? Sarah: I tend to stay out of timeline subjects as they usually just make my head hurt, but I might be able to help here. But please be patient if this isn't all that useful! :) Bookworm is right - the cut off date for the school year may well be the 31st of August in ENGLAND but that is not the case in Scotland. Scottish school cut-off dates are at the end of February/start of March (not sure of the exact date). This would easily allow for all of the trio to be born in 1980, with Hermione as the youngest of the three, no? Hope this helps. From dontask2much at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 13:10:24 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 09:10:24 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Theory on Snape - MASSIVE References: <008901c47c6e$8998dd40$a8c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: <037301c47c7f$e73be710$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 109276 From: "Cathy Drolet" >Snape 'at great personal risk' takes the job. He is in, or gets in, with Malfoy (they would have been at Hogwarts together, though about five years apart, they were both Slytherins) and suggests he wants to join the Death Eaters. His skill at Occlumency allows him to convince LV that his desire is to join the Dark Side and DD is a fool to fight him. Snape gets the tattoo. > > (Still believes it now that LV's rebirthed himself if you belive Snape is *the next man*: "Voldemort moved on, and stopped, staring at the space -- large enough for two people -- which separated Malfoy *and the next man*.") > > Snape is still working as a spy for DD. That is the mission DD sent him on at the end of GoF. He admits it to Harry (if you believe he is telling the truth) "...and it is not up to you to find out what the Dark Lord is saying to his Death Eaters." [Snape] "No -- that's your job, isn't it?" Harry shot at him. "Yes, Potter,' he said, his eyes glinting. 'That is my job." (OotP) > It could account for Snape's making "a sudden movement, but as Harry looked at him, Snape's eyes flew back to Fudge," after HP named Malfoy as a DE. Snape knew he was standing near Malfoy in the circle and feared HP recognized him - his eyes perhaps, that hooked nose - under the hood and mask. > The DoubleAgent!Snape was where my theory started, but it evolved into GoodGuy!Snape somehow. My husband, who has never read the books but has heard my rambling about them, believes the DoubleAgent!Snape theory. He believes Snape is playing both ends against the middle so that, whoever gets vanquished in the end - good guys or bad guys - he'll still have a place in the structure. Charme: First, Cathy, my apologies if I've snipped anything out of context - that is not my intent. However, after reading your post, I do notice how much Malfoy and Draco seem to rear their heads, and I have an idea that Snape doesn't spy on or for LV directly - he spies on and for Malfoy. In the same turn, I think feeds info BACK to Malfoy and Malfoy chooses to keep some of that info close rather than share it with anyone, including LV. I'm rather convinced that as far a Malfoy's concerned, he's rather like the second in command who leads the troops faithfully for his general, however I feel that our boy Lucius is waiting in the wings for the tide to turn his way and *he* can have all the glory. He may very well know that Snape is in cahoots with DD, and uses Snape for his own ambitious means to an end. Just my 2 cents - charme From sopraniste at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 15:02:23 2004 From: sopraniste at yahoo.com (sopraniste) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 15:02:23 -0000 Subject: DD knows where they are/Choc Frogs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109277 > MAE: > I just wanted to comment about this. When you live in a place where > pictures talk among themselves and to regular people, just about any > rumor can spread like wild fire. I'll accept that, but my final point still stands. Those Headmasters (who, I BELIEVE are the only portraits in DD's office) would NOT have told anyone what happened unless DD wanted them to! Were there any portraits in the final chamber in PS/SS, though? Somehow I doubt it. Flop. From carodave92 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 15:26:42 2004 From: carodave92 at yahoo.com (carodave92) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 15:26:42 -0000 Subject: Theory on Snape - MASSIVE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109278 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > Cathy wrote: > > DD can genuinely state (he's not testifying here) that: > "Severus Snape was indeed a Death Eater," because he was, at DD's own > request, and LV's acceptance. "However, he rejoined our side before > Lord Voldemort's downfall," because he did, in the eyes of the > Ministry. DD knows he hasn't rejoined because he never truly left, > but he's keeping that a secret. "Turned spy for us, at great personal > risk," because he did turn spy, was, and still is, at great personal > risk. "is now no more a Death Eater than I am," because he > never 'really' was. Is it possible that Snape had 'resigned' from DE and was being protected by DD at Hogwarts, the only real place where LV has no influence? When DD asked him to return to the DE fold, he could have been punished by LV and 'forgiven' like the DE in the circle at the graveyard (Avery? I don't remember offhand) to continue his spying...that could explain why he was never outside Hogwarts prior to OotP - not in Hogsmeade - always present for Xmas - although I do have to say that you present a very strong case for your pov. "carodave" From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Sat Aug 7 17:06:38 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 17:06:38 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS - 'That Night'- Fudge After the Fact In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109279 Kneasy: > Back to semantics and grammatical construction, I'm afraid. > > "Black's been talking.." is the key I think. > I would read this as "Black has been talking" the implication being that > it is a continuing activity. > > If Black were no longer in residence then I'd expect it to be written > "Black had been talking". > > "Has" is the present indicative; "had" is the past subjunctive - or so > I believe, though it's been one hell of a long time since I did grammar and > I'll defer to anyone who who has a Fowlers that says differently. "has been talking" refers to the night of the breakout, meaning that it has been going on in the past and has not stopped on its own. "was talking" would indicate a one time thing, has been or had been, indicate continuity, but "had been" would mean that it had stopped of its own. So, "has been" means that he was talking in his sleep for some time period up til his escape hours beforehand (he hadn't slept that night, obviously) Josh From zendemort at yahoo.co.uk Sat Aug 7 17:30:49 2004 From: zendemort at yahoo.co.uk (zendemort) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 17:30:49 -0000 Subject: Theory on Snape - MASSIVE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109280 > vmonte responds: > > I'm going to admit up front that I'm prejudiced against Snape because > I personally see that being part of Voldemort's minions is as bad as > believing in ethnic cleansing, being a part of the KKK, a Nazi, etc. > It's hard to believe that DD would ask Snape to join an evil cult > knowing full well what he would probably be doing there. Do you think > that Snape stayed home making potions while Voldemort and gang > murdered and tortured people? I would compare the Death Eater to Nazis, because of the situation in which the hatred for muggleborns arose. Slytherin believed muggles and muggleborns to be "untrustworthy." This idea of untrustworthy was applied to the Jewish people for many generations, and became the reason for ethnic cleansing in Germany. (We must also remember that Wizards were persecuted by Muggles in the past. It is partly for this reason that they created a separate world, and in creating this world, there was a deep hatred for Muggles. ) Much like Nazi Germany, many people were raised to view the Jewish as "christ-killers" and "untrustworthy," but many did not wish to see them eradicated, and some, after realizing the effects of Hilter, switched sides and became spies. Others who were in the Nazi party just followed orders. They didn't think twice about what they were doing. There was a study done on university students, I believe at Stanford, that showed most of these students WERE willing to torture others when instructed to, just to receive high marks. "zendemort" From romulus at hermionegranger.us Sat Aug 7 18:21:32 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 18:21:32 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109281 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > Geoff: > I think you actually mean "adverbial clauses" and "adjectival > clauses"... > > The Concise Oxford Dictionary defines a preposition as > an "indeclinable word serving to mark relations between the noun or > pronoun it governs and another word", i.s. words like for, on, by etc. Yes thank you. I mean "Adverb Prepositional Phrases" and "Adjective Prepositional Phrases". I guess I get lazy and do the shortcut method. > > Therefore, based on grammar, the headline can indicate that the > > investigations were continuing on 31 July instead of the break-in > > occurring on 31 July. > > > Geoff: > But that type of wording would never be used in a UK paper. A fairly > standard layout would be "Investigations continue into the (recent) > break-in at Gringotts (on Tuesday)/(on 31st July). The only possible > structure which might use your heading wuold be if n investigation > was re-opening with 31st July as the date ut was happening - not the > date of the break-in. I respectfully disagree. "never be used in a UK paper" is not a valid objection. I'm sorry, but newspapers are some of the worst places to find good grammar! A valid objection would be to show that adjective prepositional phrases override adverb prepositional phrases in priority of consideration when constructing a sentence in the English language. Secondly, whether the investigation is "continuing" or "re-opening" does not change the fact that both are verbs and both can be modified by adverb prepositional phrases. And "on 31 July" can be considered an adverb prepositional phrase or, I must admit an adjective prepositional phrase that modifies the noun preceding it -- "Gringotts". Therefore, it is ambiguous. However, if we are to credit Jo Rowling, the TEACHER, with any sense of knowledge about grammatical rules and times and dates, we must admit that while that wording has "never be[en] used in a UK paper", we must have some respect for Jo and give her the benefit of the doubt. I say that Jo left this ambiguous to keep us off-balance. > > RMM: > > Secondly, the "piece of paper", the cutting from the Daily Prophet, > > was lying on the table under the tea cozy. This implies that the > > cutting was from an old paper and not a new one. Hagrid cut it out of > > an old issue of the Daily Prophet because of its significance in > > regards to the Stone and Hagrid and Harry being at Gringotts on the > > same day of the break-in. > > > Geoff: > Which I considered and decided was't really relevant. It can make a great deal of difference. If the cutting was from today's paper -- which would bear a September or October date on it, then the relevance of "on 31 July" would indicate absolutely that the break-in occurred "on 31 July". However, the cutting, laying under a tea cozy, tells us that it is old and is only there because of the relevance to when Hagrid and Harry were at the bank. As it is old then, "on 31 July" can indicate that the investigation was continuing "on 31 July". RMM From romulus at hermionegranger.us Sat Aug 7 18:29:00 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 18:29:00 -0000 Subject: Harry & Hermione's Birthdays (was Harry's B-day) In-Reply-To: <007801c47c6b$74dbe710$a8c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109282 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > DuffyPoo: > Whether the Daily Prophet is saying the break-in occurred on July 31, or that the investigation was continuing on July 31, HP read it as "the breaking which occurred on July 31" and referenced that to his own birthday. I think the kid, as much of a dolt as I sometimes think he is, would surely know his own birthday. I am not disputing that Harry doesn't know his own birthday. I am disputing that not all of the article was necessarily made known to us as readers. Harry read the headline. Then he continued to read further into the article. Then the action switches to Harry's memory. Then Harry exclaims "hey that break-in occurred on my birthday!" Could it be that the headline just made Harry think of that, or was there more in the article that made Harry speak? Again, it is ambguous. RMM From vmonte at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 19:01:10 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 19:01:10 -0000 Subject: Theory on Snape - In-Reply-To: <003d01c47c92$5e50ce80$0cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109283 vmonte: "I do however, believe that DD is capable of forgiving people and giving them another chance (no matter what the crime(s)). Does DD think that Snape had some kind of epiphany? Like St. Paul, who realized his evil ways and converted? Sadly, I'm not as forgiving as DD, and I also find Snape's conversion hard to believe." DuffyPoo: But Snape didn't really convert. He was on DD's side all along. He went over to LV on DD's orders, and came back after convincing LV that it would be a good plan, he could get closer to DD that way, in order to spy on him. No conversion necessary. vivian again: You mean according to your theory don't you? Per canon, Snape was once a DE that switch sides at personal risk. Do you really think that DD knowingly allowed Snape to murder and torture people just so that he could gain information about Voldemort? This would make DD worse than Voldemort IMO. vmonte "The problem with being a great occlumens is that you can fool everyone and every side. Snape holds some nasty grudges. (Does he carry a list of people who have done him wrong? Has he crossed off James and Sirius?)" DuffyPoo: You can only fool a Legilimens. No one else can get into his mind...that we know of so far. vivian again: I always get these spells mixed up, sorry. vmonte: "Snape isn't just a grouchy guy who snaps at children. He's pretty nasty! Granted, it could very well be that long term association with Voldemort turns people crazy. Or that there are certain spells and magic that corrupt the soul, turning their victims into dark arts addicts. I think that DD keeps Snape from becoming the DADA teacher because it will fuel Snape's addiction. There is nothing nastier or sader than an unrepentant drug addict in denial." DuffyPoo: Nastiness is a good cover, isn't it? Can't let the little kiddies - or anyone else - figure out he's really a good guy. Might get back to the DEs, especially now he's got Malfoy, Jr., Crabbe, Jr., Goyle, Jr., and Nott, Jr. all in his Potions classes. vivian again: Didn't JKR say something about Snape's personality? Something about children aren't fooled by this kind of teacher (I know I'm misquoting). I really think that with Snape what you see is what you get. Adults have a tendency to rationalize behavior in a way that a child does not. I think Dumbledore is in for a nasty surprise. vivian From dontask2much at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 19:17:06 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 15:17:06 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: DD knows where they are/Choc Frogs References: Message-ID: <048701c47cb3$2153b260$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 109284 From: "sopraniste" > I'll accept that, but my final point still stands. Those Headmasters > (who, I BELIEVE are the only portraits in DD's office) would NOT have > told anyone what happened unless DD wanted them to! Were there any > portraits in the final chamber in PS/SS, though? Somehow I doubt it. > > Flop. charme: I disagree that the Headmaster portraits can be "controlled' by DD that way. When DD returns to the Hogwarts at the end of OoP, the sentence used to describe how is received by the portraits is not *all* of the portraits received him warmly, instead the sentence reads "most" of them did. There may be Headmaster portraits who do not agree with DD as a Headmaster - we don't know, but you can speculate as you like to the word "most." charme From vmonte at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 19:19:00 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 19:19:00 -0000 Subject: Ron's Patronus (Warning Ron=DD) In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.6.1.20040807105305.00cab4f8@mail.bellsouth.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109285 Shannon wrote: I was rereading OoP recently, and noticed something that struck me as a little bit odd. During the last DA meeting, (US Edition, pages 606- 607), they are working on producing Patronuses. They mention Cho's swan, Hermione's otter, and she even mentions Lavender, Neville and Seamus. But no Ron, whether he was having trouble or had done it successfully, nothing. It seemed odd to me because usually when JKR gets into describing how students are handling difficult bits of magic, she at leasts describes Harry, Ron and Hermione's efforts. Anyone have any thoughts as to why he might have been left entirely out of this scene? Am I making something out of nothing? vmonte responds: You are not making something out of nothing. There is a reason why JKR left this bit out. JKR once said that she could not tell a fan what Snape's patronus was because it would give too much away. I bet Ron's patronus would also... My theory (and it's not popular) is that Ron is Dumbledore and that they both have the same patronus. vivian From yahoogroups at catbirdco.us Sat Aug 7 18:37:50 2004 From: yahoogroups at catbirdco.us (Michal) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 11:37:50 -0700 Subject: Wizard/Muggle Money was: Wizarding Professions In-Reply-To: <000c01c478c1$0281d1a0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> References: <1091431442.38115.35114.m24@yahoogroups.com> <000c01c478c1$0281d1a0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: <6.1.0.6.0.20040807112601.05eb9eb0@mail.catbirdco.us> No: HPFGUIDX 109286 The Wizarding Profession posts mentioned wizards doing their shopping and speculated on how they acquired Muggle goods. So my brain started thinking about money. In the books, the Grangers exchange Muggle money for Wizard money, a service that would probably be unavailable unless wizards had a use for Muggle money. So, I suspect that wizards do business with Muggles. Individuals might go to the Gap or Penneys to get jeans (or flowered nightgowns to wear at the World Cup). A shopkeeper might acquire merchandise from Muggle wholesalers. A rich wizard might invest in Muggle businesses. Of course, they'd have to behave properly, following the secrecy rules set by the Ministry of Magic. Michal From yahoogroups at catbirdco.us Sat Aug 7 19:00:32 2004 From: yahoogroups at catbirdco.us (Michal) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 12:00:32 -0700 Subject: Why we'll never know all about the WW In-Reply-To: <000c01c478c1$0281d1a0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> References: <1091431442.38115.35114.m24@yahoogroups.com> <000c01c478c1$0281d1a0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: <6.1.0.6.0.20040807113801.05eb8d10@mail.catbirdco.us> No: HPFGUIDX 109289 One thing I've noticed is that people sometimes forget that the HP books are about Harry Potter and that if something doesn't come to his attention, we usually won't know about it. Also, if something comes to his attention and it's not related to the story, we are still unlikely to know about it. The HP saga is so huge, that JKR has to leave out nearly everything that isn't directly related to the story. That makes finding clues a little easier, though, since if a mention of something isn't significant in the current book, odds are good that it's a "foreshadowing" of something in a future book. Think about it! If it was all in the books, they'd be at least as large as a set of encyclopedias! That's not to say that it's not fun to speculate about and recreate JKR's wizarding world using hints from the books and their author. It is fun! But because the story is centered on Harry, we should expect that some of the peripherals won't hang together properly. Michal go ahead, say "duh" From romulus at hermionegranger.us Sat Aug 7 21:03:17 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 21:03:17 -0000 Subject: School cut-off date WAS:Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: <20040807070244.22990.qmail@web25303.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109290 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, udder_pen_dragon wrote: > Now Udderpd > > Hermione Jane Granger was born on 19th September 1980. In the PoA >Dumbledore refers to Harry and Hermione as two thirteen year old >wizards. Making her the youngest of the trio and her birth year 1980. Udderpd, Yes, if you read Dumbledore's meaning that way, then yes they were both 13 yrs old at the time. However, there is another way that Dumbledore can refer to them as "two thirteen year olds". He can be referring to them as "two thirteen year olds" in the same manner that he refers to them as "two 3rd years". Let me explain. First, Professor Dumbledore is not in charge of sending out the letters of invitation to those "about to turn eleven." Professor McGonagall is. So Dumbledore would not know the exact birthdays of ANY OF THE STUDENTS. All he would know is that a student is eleven years old when he is in his first year, twelve when he is in his second year, and so on. Secondly, the movie PoA, based on the book, and screenwritten by a person in close collaboration with Jo Rowling herself, had that scene from the book supplemented with the presence of Ron Weasley. In the movie, Dumbledore refers to them as "three thirteen year old wizards". Well, the date being in late spring or early summer makes Ron Weasley fourteen years old (Ron's B-day = March 1st) and Dumbledore WRONG IF you read it to mean that they were indeed all 13 years old at that moment. But Dumbledore is not wrong if he is referring to "thirteen year olds" as being synonymous with "third year students". Therefore, the objection that Dumbledore makes them 13 years old at the exact time of his statement falls. To repeat: 1. Dumbledore does not know the birthdays of all the students since he has nothing to do with their letters of invitation to Hogwarts. 2. The reference used by Dumbledore about "thirteen year olds" is a general term used to describe all the students in the 3rd year. And finally, there is absolutely nothing "clever" about dentists naming their child Hermione if she was born in 1980. In the Q&A at the National Press Club, October 20, 1999, Jo Rowling stated, in regard to Hermione's name, that it came from a character in Shakespeare's play A Winter's Tale, although Jo says that the characters are not at all similar. Jo thought it made sense for a couple of professional dentists to name their only daughter something like that to show how "clever" they were. If she was born in 1979, on the other hand, there exists a QUADRUPLE significance about her name and September 19, 1979. And this would show that the Grangers were VERY CLEVER indeed! RMM www.hermionegranger.us From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Sat Aug 7 21:26:57 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 21:26:57 -0000 Subject: "I Must Not Tell Lies" In-Reply-To: <004601c47c94$1f179620$0cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109291 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > DuffyPoo now: > Thanking Pam, first of all, for posting what will amount to be my answer as well. I never forgot HP was being punished for telling the truth, but he does have a tendency to lie or, as Pam said, withold information. Catching a glance at even the thin white scars might make him stop and think. My initial post was actually using the scar as a reminder not to lie, or, to always tell the truth in front of DD now that he knows DD is a "sufficiently accomplished Legilimens" himself to know when he's being lied to...especially in HPs case when many times what he's 'lying' about or 'covering up' are rolling around in his head while he's making up his mind what to say. > See, I still see it as the reverse... Harry finally tells the truth, and boom... gets punished for it. Reminds me a bit of MM telling the trio to go back to their dorm at the end of PS/SS. Harry has never had a good experience dealing with authority... of any kind. Everyone, and I do mean everyone, has refused to listen to him at some point or the other, or outright lied to him. I more feel that the scar will remind him of this... adults cannot be trusted. Josh From patientx3 at aol.com Sat Aug 7 21:37:22 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 21:37:22 -0000 Subject: Snape's Worst Memory- New Twists In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.2.20040807075605.01734e10@mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109292 Lissa wrote: >> What if, at the very beginning of their time at Hogwarts, Snape was friends with Lupin? [snip] Snape and Lupin have some similar traits and interests. They're both very academic. They're both very socially inept. Can you see where they might be drawn to each other? [snip] Then something happens, gradually, and over the course of time: Remus DOES become friends with Sirius and James. And over the course of time Remus discovers the things he has in common with Severus aren't so deep. They begin to drift apart. Remus probably doesn't see it as a big deal- he's 11-12, and probably thinks Snape has made other friends as well. Severus is furious. This was HIS friend- maybe even his first friend- and Sirius and James STOLE him. He can't get over it. << HunterGreen: I really like this theory (I've heard it during another thread at some point). On the surface Lupin doesn't have that much in common with Sirius and James, and just because they were in the same dorm room does not guarentee instant friendship (look at Seamus and Dean in reference to Ron and Harry). Sirius and James probably got along right off the bat and may not have been all that interested in Lupin at first (they may, in fact, have been rather exclusive and ignored him). Since the only other person we know of who was in their dorm at the time was Peter, its reasonable that Lupin may have been friends with someone from another house. I've always wondered when/why the rift started between James and Snape. It can't be something like Harry/Draco, because I can't see either of them offering the other friendship. The rift is extremely personal, and feeling like someone stole your only friend is quite personal. Not to go into more speculation (but here I go anyway...) but after James/Sirius made friends with Lupin I can see the two of them making fun of the dark arts (loudly) in potions together, and then making a gesture toward Snape (of course), and Lupin going along with it, because, well, he's Lupin. He's probably excited that two of the most popular kids in his year want to be friends with him. Snape may have retaliated with some sort of dark hex, and there you go. It begins. This also sheds light on Snape's treatment of Harry in the very same classroom. Lissa continued: >> He knows Lupin pretty well. He notices Lupin disappears every month. He's curious as to where Lupin goes. And somehow, Dumbledore managed to shut Snape up about Lupin being a werewolf after the Prank. Maybe he just threatened Snape with expulsion and that worked, but maybe not. Is it possible that there was still a shred of loyalty in Snape? Nothing sure stopped him from hating Sirius and James, and Snape is clever enough to have gotten the truth out more subtly than just blurting it in the Dining Hall. << ' "So that's why Snape doesn't like you," said Harry slowly, "Because he thought you were in on the joke?" "That's right," sneered a cold voice from the wall behind Lupin. ' [PoA chpt 18, pg 357, US ed.] HunterGreen: I can't see loyalty to Lupin being a reason to keep quiet because Snape thought Lupin was in on it (why he'd think Lupin would want to participate in something like this is another matter). My favorite theory on why he didn't tell is that he was embarassed that he both fell for Sirius' bait about the tree and that James Potter of all people was the one to save him. Dumbledore might have reminded him of this fact. If Lupin was outed (and therefore expelled) and Sirius was expelled, I'm sure James would be spreading that story all over school, trying to make Snape's life as miserable as possible for getting two of his friends expelled. And it would have worked rather easily too, considering how unpopular Snape was at the time, and how popular Sirius and James were. Lissa: >> Even come the present day, yes, Snape hates Lupin. With a passion. But even though we think it's awful, as soon as we see Snape meet Sirius we know he doesn't remotely hate Lupin as much as he despises Sirius. << HunterGreen: And Lupin appears to have absolutely no ill-will toward Snape. Not a shred. Even his messege in the map (although its not *directly* from him) is the least mean out of the four. I'm sure he heard about Snape wanting to get him thrown out of the school back when he was a teenager, and I'm sure Snape might have hit him once or twice with a spell aimed for James, but adult Lupin is amazingly mature compared to Sirius and Snape. Of course it could just be that he's trying to be extra sweet to Snape because Snape is making the potion for him every month, but I don't get a sense of any real feelings hiding under that. Their relationship in PoA is rather odd in fact. Lupin is not only consistently pleasant with Snape he calls him 'Severus' as opposed to 'Professor Snape'. Snape on the other hand calls him 'Lupin' most of the time, without even bothering for the professor. Since he did indeed think Lupin was plotting to kill him (along with James and Sirius), that would explain the extreme amount of ill-will. If Lupin were once friends with him (and understands that Snape thought he was trying to kill him, and that there's no reasoning with Snape), it would make sense why he'd call Snape by his first name, and why he doesn't seem to have any bad feelings toward him. Lissa: >> But now take "Snape's Worst Memory" and put that potential dynamic into it. Lupin's friends are tormenting Snape, and he doesn't do a single thing to try and stop it. Perhaps Snape views this as the final betrayal of what was once a friendship? That would make this sting pretty darn badly as well. << HunterGreen: I don't know if Snape's eyes were on Lupin at all during the incident though. Lupin should have come to his aid, if not as a friend, but as a prefect, but Snape seemed angry at the idea of anyone coming to his aid (Lily, for all we know, might have been a prefect too, she did become head-girl a few years later). Lupin is extremely ashamed both then and in the present when Harry asks him about it. Could some of that shame be because Snape used to be a friend of his? Lissa: I also have a theory that now that Sirius is gone, it will be possible for Snape and Lupin to actually become friends. They have got to be the two most intensely lonely characters in the book, from what I can tell. In a way, that might actually be really nice. HunterGreen: That could be attatched as a part of this theory, but I don't know if its possible or not. Snape would have to realize that Lupin was never trying to kill him, and that Lupin didn't support the things his friends were doing. And Snape changing his mind about things doesn't happen easily. However, now that both Sirius and James are gone, it has a much better chance of happening. (it was never going to happen with Sirius around). From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Aug 7 21:40:02 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 21:40:02 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109293 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" > wrote: > > > Geoff: > > I think you actually mean "adverbial clauses" and "adjectival > > clauses"... > > > > The Concise Oxford Dictionary defines a preposition as > > an "indeclinable word serving to mark relations between the noun or > > pronoun it governs and another word", i.s. words like for, on, by etc. > > Yes thank you. I mean "Adverb Prepositional Phrases" and "Adjective > Prepositional Phrases". I guess I get lazy and do the shortcut > method. > > > > > Therefore, based on grammar, the headline can indicate that the > > > investigations were continuing on 31 July instead of the break- in > > > occurring on 31 July. > > > > > > Geoff: > > But that type of wording would never be used in a UK paper. A fairly > > standard layout would be "Investigations continue into the (recent) > > break-in at Gringotts (on Tuesday)/(on 31st July). The only possible > > structure which might use your heading wuold be if n investigation > > was re-opening with 31st July as the date ut was happening - not the > > date of the break-in. > > I respectfully disagree. > "never be used in a UK paper" is not a valid objection. I'm sorry, but > newspapers are some of the worst places to find good grammar! > > A valid objection would be to show that adjective prepositional > phrases override adverb prepositional phrases in priority of > consideration when constructing a sentence in the English language. > Secondly, whether the investigation is "continuing" or "re-opening" > does not change the fact that both are verbs and both can be modified > by adverb prepositional phrases. > > And "on 31 July" can be considered an adverb prepositional phrase or, > I must admit an adjective prepositional phrase that modifies the noun > preceding it -- "Gringotts". Therefore, it is ambiguous. Geoff: But you have avoided commenting on the fact that Harry states quite categorically that it occurred on his birthday, the 31st July, which removes any ambiguity. Harry's birthday was 31/07/80 which was, in the real world, a Wednesday but, in PS, reference is made to it being a Tuesday, therefore, there is a discrepancy - which isn't entirely surprising since JKR is a bit free and easy with days of the week in one or two other places. From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Aug 7 21:46:00 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 21:46:00 -0000 Subject: School cut-off date WAS:Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109294 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: > RMM: All he would know is that a > student > is eleven years old when he is in his first year, twelve when he is > in > his second year, and so on. Geoff: Since we are specialising in being pedantic, a student is 11 at the beginning of the First Year and either becomes 12 during the year or during the summer holidays. Hence he or she is 12 at the beginning of the Second Year becoming 13 during the year or during the summer holidays and so on..... From jferer at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 21:46:37 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 21:46:37 -0000 Subject: Wizard/Muggle Economies - was Wizard/Muggle money In-Reply-To: <6.1.0.6.0.20040807112601.05eb9eb0@mail.catbirdco.us> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109295 Michal:"In the books, the Grangers exchange Muggle money for Wizard money, a service that would probably be unavailable unless wizards had a use for Muggle money." Well, there has to be that service for the Muggle families who have a foot in the wizard world, like the Grangers and many others, but that would leave the question of what Gringotts would do with the Muggle money once it had it. Michael:"So, I suspect that wizards do business with Muggles. Individuals might go to the Gap or Penneys to get jeans (or flowered nightgowns to wear at the World Cup). A shopkeeper might acquire merchandise from Muggle wholesalers. A rich wizard might invest in Muggle businesses. Of course, they'd have to behave properly, following the secrecy rules set by the Ministry of Magic." I agree with you, and it's almost got to be a source of the tension in the wizard world between the "purebloods" and the others. Hermione isn't going to stop going to Marks & Spencer because she's a witch, nor will the other kids in school from the Muggle world. Next thing you know, somebody's got on a great looking little item from a fashionable Muggle shop, and other kids will see it and want it. The rest flows from that, the investment and involvement with the Muggle world. A lot of the purebloods must hate it. Lucius probably speaks out against it often - all the while plugging money into Muggle investments. I can imagine Muggle goods brought into the wizard world and enchanted - toasters that don't need plugged in and shirts that repel spaghetti sauce. What do you think Lucius's cover in the Muggle world is? I've got it - record producer. It's a natural. If things don't work out for Draco, he can always be in a boy band. :-) Jim Ferer From manawydan at ntlworld.com Sat Aug 7 21:46:39 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 22:46:39 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Longevity and Youth (was Re: Why Voldemort is a fascist..) References: <1091835163.22068.37707.m17@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <000e01c47cc8$08271920$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 109296 Eustace wrote: >And yet on the other side of the coin, we have a significant number of >characters who seem to assume major responsibilities immediately after >secondary school, there apparently being no college or university >level education in the WW. We know that the Potters, Sirius and >others were in the Order at the age many muggles (in the US anyway) >are joining fraternities and muddling through college. Percy Weasley, >for goodness sakes, is at the right hand of the Minister of Magic at >the age of 19. I've noticed this also. Whatever else it is, the WW is certainly not the gerontocracy that you might imagine that it would be, given the greater longevity of wizards (and the likely absence of things like retirement ages and old age pensions!) People get into positions of responsibility early. It's also worth noting that the age of puberty is comparable with that of Muggles, suggesting that wizards stay fertile for much longer than Muggles do. Although the parents we've encountered _seem_ to be on the youthful side, the sample we've seen is probably too small to draw any conclusions about whether (say) James and Lily were typical in having children young. >We know that in the 11 years prior to Godric's Hollow, significant >numbers died violently and prematurely. In fact, we know of few >grandparents of current Hogwarts students, if I'm not too far >mistaken. That Harry's grandparents (both the magical Potters and the Agree entirely. you'd expect there to be not only grandparents but also (if it's correct that WW families have children early) great grandparents in abundance. >Perhaps this is a result of the first war with Voldemort. Or perhaps >it's an authorial oversight or just a decision that this doesn't bear >on the plot. If the former, it seems there may be a generation or two >in the WW that's been decimated...and this may also have an effect on >attitudes about the more distant past. In any case, it does seem that >the WW is heading towards a situation in which there are the very old >and the very young with the middle aged cohorts much smaller in >comparison. If the very old die off before passing along their >knowledge of the past, then the WW is in danger of losing that >connection with their heritage. Possibly, though the WW doesn't appear to be a society recovering from so severe a trauma that almost an entire generation has been wiped out. Perhaps it's just the characteristics of the sample that we've seen in the books (who aren't typical, by any means, given that people like the Potters and the Longbottoms were in the front line against Voldemort. >Then again, the WW's attitude toward history is another thing that >gets me musing...it doesn't seem to be valued much academically, does >it? Agreed once again, I've wondered elsewhere why so much of it is kept under the carpet: why Binns's class (and just how old is Binns anyway) dwells so much on non-human history and on the administrative historical issues... Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From vmonte at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 21:56:15 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 21:56:15 -0000 Subject: "I Must Not Tell Lies" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109297 pcaehill responds: For instance, I could see Harry in some situation (say, with Dumbledore again, from whom he has "withheld info" several times over the years), and while he is pondering what to say, glances at his hand and (in spite of the horrible original circumstances of the scar's infliction) realizing that this is a situation in which he must not now lie." vmonte responds: Actually, what if he learns to block his mind from Voldemort but is then betrayed by his flesh. What I mean is (and I never would have thought of this if it wasn't for your post) what if Harry is captured and tortured to reveal some information. Harry lies, but is caught lying because of the scar. DE: Do you know were DD is? Harry: No DE: Is he at such and such location... Harry: No (scar signals that he is a lying.) This could be very bad indeed. vivian From aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 22:10:12 2004 From: aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com (aboutthe1910s) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 22:10:12 -0000 Subject: Snape's Worst Memory- New Twists In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.2.20040807075605.01734e10@mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109298 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Lissa Hess wrote: > macfotuk > What if, at the very beginning of their time at Hogwarts, Snape was friends > with Lupin? I really like this theory--especially because, in the entire series thus far, we have yet to see any non-Slytherin at all form *any* sort of a friendship really with a Slytherin--well, I suposse one *could* count the Durmstrang kids, but we *didn't* really see any great lasting friendships form there. Anyway, I find that particularly odd in the context that Godric Gryffindor and Salazar Slytherin were once *best* friends. Lissa again: >(Assuming he doesn't know Dumbledore is an accomplished > Leg-a-whootchimawatchie.) I'd also just like to say that the word "Leg-a-whootchimawatchie" made my day. aboutthe1910s From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk Sat Aug 7 22:36:25 2004 From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=) Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 23:36:25 +0100 (BST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: School cut-off date WAS:Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040807223625.15785.qmail@web25307.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109299 romulusmmcdougal wrote: --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, udder_pen_dragon wrote: > Now Udderpd > > Hermione Jane Granger was born on 19th September 1980. In the PoA >Dumbledore refers to Harry and Hermione as two thirteen year old >wizards. Making her the youngest of the trio and her birth year 1980. Udderpd, RMM wrote Yes, if you read Dumbledore's meaning that way, then yes they were both 13 yrs old at the time. However, there is another way that Dumbledore can refer to them as "two thirteen year olds". He can be referring to them as "two thirteen year olds" in the same manner that he refers to them as "two 3rd years". Let me explain. First, Professor Dumbledore is not in charge of sending out the letters of invitation to those "about to turn eleven." Professor McGonagall is. So Dumbledore would not know the exact birthdays of ANY OF THE STUDENTS. All he would know is that a student is eleven years old when he is in his first year, twelve when he is in his second year, and so on. Secondly, the movie PoA, based on the book, and screenwritten by a person in close collaboration with Jo Rowling herself, had that scene from the book supplemented with the presence of Ron Weasley. In the movie, Dumbledore refers to them as "three thirteen year old wizards". Well, the date being in late spring or early summer makes Ron Weasley fourteen years old (Ron's B-day = March 1st) and Dumbledore WRONG IF you read it to mean that they were indeed all 13 years old at that moment. But Dumbledore is not wrong if he is referring to "thirteen year olds" as being synonymous with "third year students". Therefore, the objection that Dumbledore makes them 13 years old at the exact time of his statement falls. To repeat: 1. Dumbledore does not know the birthdays of all the students since he has nothing to do with their letters of invitation to Hogwarts. 2. The reference used by Dumbledore about "thirteen year olds" is a general term used to describe all the students in the 3rd year. And finally, there is absolutely nothing "clever" about dentists naming their child Hermione if she was born in 1980. In the Q&A at the National Press Club, October 20, 1999, Jo Rowling stated, in regard to Hermione's name, that it came from a character in Shakespeare's play A Winter's Tale, although Jo says that the characters are not at all similar. Jo thought it made sense for a couple of professional dentists to name their only daughter something like that to show how "clever" they were. If she was born in 1979, on the other hand, there exists a QUADRUPLE significance about her name and September 19, 1979. And this would show that the Grangers were VERY CLEVER indeed! Now Udderpd again Firstly: Please do not leave my name at the top of your posts I do not want your meanderings around the film world attributed to me. Secondly: We do not quote or discuss the films on this list. If you wish to do this either go to the film list, or go to OTC. Thirdly: The only cannon quote I know of and the one that is good enough for the 'HP Lexicon' is the one you so glibly dismiss from. Also I would be very surprised if Professor Dumbledore wasn't perfectly aware of the exact ages and birthdays of this particular trio. For your information cannon is what J. K. Rowling says in interviews or writes herself. TTFN Udder Pendragon Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/Files/Admin_Files/hbfile.html Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Yahoo! Groups Links --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From macfotuk at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 22:40:45 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 22:40:45 -0000 Subject: Snape's choice of memories for the pensieve In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109300 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, macfotuk at y... wrote: > snip> some thoughts arising from re-reading the 'Snapes's Worst > memory' chapeter of OotP: > > 1. Yes I agree Snape may have 'planted' the memory Harry saw - But, > just because Harry thinks it should be Snape's worst memory because > of the humiliation aspect, I think Snape would have other reasons > for hiding this memory from HP (3 below). > > > 3. (point 3) Snape is hopelessly (literally) in love with Lily One of the things I meant to add to this post was that I think it was immensely important (JKR's clever writing as usual) that Harry didn't share what he saw of Snape's memory with Hermione. The reasons given are completely understandable, not least that Harry feels utterly ashamed of his own intrusive behaviour so is hardly likely to advertise it. However, As a 15 yo BOY, and Lily's son, Harry wouldn't be of a mindset to spot Snape's feelings about Lily (assuming they're there). Hermione could have done this, even second- hand, but he doesn't share with her. His inability to see things even when they are under his own nose (Cho Chang's behaviour and especially feelings - which it takes the as always perceptive Hermione to 'interpret' for Harry) means he could not see deeper things in the memory that adult readers might be able to upon reading the chapter. From macfotuk at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 22:56:42 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 22:56:42 -0000 Subject: Snape's Worst Memory- New Twists In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109301 Lissa Hess wrote: > > > What if, at the very beginning of their time at Hogwarts, Snape was > friends > > with Lupin? > I like this idea. It could well be true. Clearly Snape has never forgiven Lupin for something* since by the time of PoA he tolerates Lupin quite clearly against his will. Sure he makes the potion to keep RL from werewolfing, probably on DD's strict orders, but in most other ways he wants to 'out' Lupin and see the back of him. * something could mean nearly eating him and being the cause of Snape owing James Potter a bond of duty for saving his life, or it could be simply that Lupin was a (hated) marauder, or it could be as you say he was let down/betrayed at a vulnerable time by Lupin Choosing James and Sirius in stead of himself. A friendship might well fit with the (IMO quite bonkers) theories that Snape is a vampire so they would share a bond of 'otherness' when first they met. By the way, did anyone spot in CoS that Gilderoy claims to have used the homomorphus charm on the waga wagga werewolf and this spell (turns werewolf back to human) might come in use to any wizard whom Lupin unwittingly attacks that is on his own side. Of course Gilderoy wouldn't have done this, but the wizard that did (who GL stole the details from for his book) was no doubt expert at the spell. > > Lissa again: > > >(Assuming he doesn't know Dumbledore is an accomplished > > Leg-a-whootchimawatchie.) > > aboutthe1910s: > I'd also just like to say that the word "Leg-a-whootchimawatchie" made > my day. I liked this too. Honestly Legilimens - what a mouthful! From macfotuk at yahoo.com Sat Aug 7 23:17:40 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 23:17:40 -0000 Subject: Veil Room at MoM in OotP Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109302 I am sure this subject was done to death and spotted at the time (or since) and while I've read TONS on it I don't recall this particular strand that occurred when re-reading the 'department of mysteries' and 'beyond the veil' chapters recently - apologies to anyone whose prior ideas are not cited: 1. When the rescuing 6 first encounter the fateful veil room Harry is drawn to the arch. Harry is standing on the dais itself when he utters just two words - "Sirius" and then later "Yeah". It is at this point that he 'snaps back' out of the trance the veil has had on him and moves out of the room at Hermione's insistence. Was it Hermione that got him off the dais or that he had given the veil the name of its next sacrificial victim? I hate this idea but it is just the kind of tragic Shakespearian hand-of-fate type thing that JKR might do - namely that Harry sealed Sirius' fate without realising it by uttering those words - the only other victim the veil would otherwise have accepted being Harry himself as the person who had voluntarily (well as much as any victim responding to the calls of the sirens can be considered voluntary) put his head on the line (foot on the dais). I hate this idea and want it not to be the case. Hermione's readings, judgements and assessments are almost always spot-on and this was the room in the MoM that most freaked her out. We end up finding something about why later when it is the scene of Sirius' death. At the same time I think it significant that neither Hermione nor Ron could sense the voices or the palpably sinister attaction of the arch and they can't see Thestrals either, while Luna, Ginny* and Neville, who all can, are almost as fascinated as Harry by the veil when first they encounter it. *Not sure if Ginny can see Thestrals, but even if not her possession by LV (as TR in CoS) might serve as the sensitisation necessary to allow her to be responsive to the magical allures of the veil. From romulus at hermionegranger.us Sat Aug 7 23:28:27 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 23:28:27 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109303 Geoff: > But you have avoided commenting on the fact that Harry states quite > categorically that it occurred on his birthday, the 31st July, which > removes any ambiguity. RMM: I haven't avoided any such thing. I am reading the sentence according to correct grammar, modifying the verb where need be and modifying the noun appropriately. Secondly, I have posted somewhere else already the fact that Harry does not speak out right away after seeing the headline. He reads into the body of the news article and then, and only then, does he exclaim that the robbery occurred on his birthday. We do not necessarily have the whole text of the news article. The rest of the text could have stated something like: "...the robbery, which occurred the day before...." Geoff: > > Harry's birthday was 31/07/80 which was, in the real world, a > Wednesday but, in PS, reference is made to it being a Tuesday, > therefore, there is a discrepancy - which isn't entirely surprising > since JKR is a bit free and easy with days of the week in one or two > other places. RMM: Actually 31/07/80 was a Thursday. July 31, 1991 was a Wednesday, and that is what you refer to I am assuming. "JKR is a bit free and easy with days of the week in one or two other places". Yes, she is but you have to know what she is doing. One cannot dismiss the "apparent" problem with "Oh she is just hopeless when it comes to dates -- poor woman!!" I'm sorry, I would not want to be considered as "dotty" before my time. Jo is only in her 30s. Give her a break. Let me take on another date and show how it is being totally abused by the "prevailing opinion". The day that the story began, everyone says is.......... Halloween, October 31, 1981. How do we arrive at that date? Because, ten years later, Hagrid says so. However, we have ABSOLUTE PROOF, from that day's activities itself that the day -- Tuesday, was October 27, 1981. And why do I say that? Because of what TED the WEATHERMAN stated on the television that very evening. Now, what did he say? Folks from England would know exactly what date he was referring to when he said "Bonfire Night". And Ted said in reference to Bonfire Night, what? That Bonfire Night will not be occurring until when? Ted said: "Next week". When is Bonfire Night in England, and if it occurred next week, and if today is Tuesday, what is the DATE? So, then, would you take the 10 year old memory of Hagrid over today's word of a newsreader? I wouldn't. Let me ask a question. Was Jo Rowling's dating skills called into question before she wrote Order of the Phoenix? I will venture an answer and say YES, her abilities with dates and times has been severely questioned over the course of the first four books. Do you think she would then want to remedy her poor abilities by maybe keeping a calendar near her so that when she refers to a particular day, that she could then get the date right when she is writing OoTP? I would certainly say YES to that as well. I can just hear her now: "Golly Mr. Editor, I am such a nitwit when it comes to dates, and Gee, how come your editors couldn't even get them right either?" What a combo we have here: A nitwit author combined with nitwits for editors!!! Then OoTP is released and what do we find??? We find Jo Rowling making atrocious mistakes to the point that up to September we think it is 1993 and then after we think it is 1996 by the way that Jo is dating things in the book. I believe Jo dated OoTP erroneously to poke fun at us. In essence, she is saying: "You want bad dates??? I'll give you bad dates!! You won't figure out what I was saying earlier? Well here, take these!" At least that is what I would have done had I been in her shoes. :-) Sincerely perplexed by poor math skills, RMM www.hermionegranger.us From lightwriterandpaws at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 01:15:19 2004 From: lightwriterandpaws at yahoo.com (lightwriterandpaws) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 01:15:19 -0000 Subject: Phineas Nigellus ch. 37 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109305 This is my first time posting. In chapter 37 Phineas Nigellus is told by DD that Sirius is dead (page 826). He says he doesn't believe it and leaves his portrait. By page 828 it says that he had still not returned (to his portrait). In fact it never mentions him returning. Does anyone have an opinion regarding why he does not return? "lightwriterandpaws" From Batchevra at aol.com Sun Aug 8 02:03:58 2004 From: Batchevra at aol.com (Batchevra at aol.com) Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 22:03:58 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 Message-ID: <6.2fe5a7e5.2e46e40e@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109306 In a message dated 8/7/04 9:38:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time, romulus at hermionegranger.us writes: >However, we have ABSOLUTE PROOF, from that day's activities itself that the day -- Tuesday, was October 27, 1981. And why do I say that? Because of what TED the WEATHERMAN stated on the television that very evening. Now, what did he say? Folks from England would know exactly what date he was referring to when he said "Bonfire Night". And Ted said in reference to Bonfire Night, what? That Bonfire Night will not be occurring until when? Ted said: "Next week". When is Bonfire Night in England, and if it occurred next week, and if today is Tuesday, what is the DATE?< I would ask you first where are you writing from? If you are in the United States, as I am, you are probably getting Bonfire night, which is usually in the US on Halloween, confused with Bonfire night which in England is November 5, Guy Fawkes Day. Which is next week according to the book. I can understand your confusion about it. Batchevra [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Sun Aug 8 01:35:49 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 01:35:49 -0000 Subject: School cut-off date WAS:Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: <20040807223625.15785.qmail@web25307.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109307 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, udder_pen_dragon wrote: > Thirdly: The only cannon quote I know of and the one that is good enough for the 'HP Lexicon' is the one you so glibly dismiss from. Also I would be very surprised if Professor Dumbledore wasn't perfectly aware of the exact ages and birthdays of this particular trio. Just to throw Hermione's age back into limbo, I will say this... first, we will know quite early in HPB... as she will insist on getting her apparition license immediately if she is older than the rest... age will finally start to matter in the books depending on when the cut-off date is. However, I cannot be as sure that Albus "KnowsLessThanHeSeemsTo" Dumbledore is aware of each student's birthday... he knows Harry's because of special circumstances... and honestly, even if Hermione were really 14 at the time, is 14 going to be any more credibility to Minister "SiriusMustBeKissedNow" Fudge than 13? DD's point still stands, and his accuracy will be determined later. Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Sun Aug 8 01:50:36 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 01:50:36 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109308 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: > I'm sorry, I would not want to be considered as "dotty" before my > time. Jo is only in her 30s. Give her a break. However, several of these books were written over the course of years, so an exact timeline can be difficult. She's only made a few specific references... 1492 for Sir Nick... that she probably shouldn't have done. However, Halloween falling on Saturday 2 years in a row is the main thing here... she just doesn't care! If it is important to the plot, she schemes like a mad woman, keeps copious notes, etc. etc. But when it's a nothing, she's so out of phase with the crux of her story, that she can't make simple connections or care about importance. Proof of this? Mark Evans. She didn't even realize that her little boy down the street's surname would cause such a fuss... he's a nothing, but you'd think that immersed in the Potterverse, that she'd recognize the protagonist's mother's maiden name! Oh well... This is the same thing I use to excuse Flint, Charlie's age, Gryffindor's Quidditch history, and every other little detail that doesn't really affect the books... except to toss our overanalyzing rears into the deep end with a sinking jinx to boot. ;-) If math is ever involved, and it's not directly related to Harry... take a sip of something alcoholic, and let it pass. His birthday is 7/31, and that's a fact. Whether or not the Daily Prophet's grammar was correct (and as someone who had to routinely correct his English teachers, I don't fully trust anyone's grammar!), this is true, and all considerations should come from there. Now smile ;) Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Sun Aug 8 01:57:26 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 01:57:26 -0000 Subject: Phineas Nigellus ch. 37 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109309 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lightwriterandpaws" wrote: > In chapter 37 Phineas Nigellus is told > by DD that Sirius is dead (page 826). He says he doesn't believe it > and leaves his portrait. By page 828 it says that he had still not > returned (to his portrait)...it never mentions him returning. > Does anyone have an opinion regarding why he does not return? 1) not that important in the emotional charged setting at the time 2) but, given his concern (probably more for the family line than anything else), he might have had a lot of portraits to dart into at HQ, portraits to talk to, and maybe even an Order member or 3 to question. After all this, he might have simply broken down and sulked in a portrait in the room with Buckbeak or something. I'm sure we'll see more Phineas later on, and since dealing with the death of Sirius will be an issue for at least a little while, it's quite possible that his reations then and now will come up. Josh From macfotuk at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 02:01:01 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 02:01:01 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109310 > We find Jo Rowling making atrocious mistakes Sincerely perplexed by poor math skills, > RMM > www.hermionegranger.us Geez give the woman a break! She is fantastically gifted at storytelling and fantastically bright too (her plots) but yes she does not give a toss for numbers and pedantic, nictpicking match-ups. Always when JKR 'gets it wrong', and yes there have been LOADS of examples, it is for the sake of the story. Things like no first year had ever been a quidditch player before HP is for literary impact, not factual accuracy so that someone plotting back that Alicia Spinnet must be in year X is nonsense. Likewise, the elder Weasley kids are long gone but totting up the numbers doesn't make sense with Gryffindor not having won the house cup for years. Why is Luicius so old producing his first-born (Draco) when others must be so young (Percy as Minister of Magic assistant and HP's own parents almost being teen pregnancy victims). Lots and lots and lots doesn't match up in the interests of the story which is, after all, what we love. All the aha! gotcha must drive JKR mad or bemuse her mightily. Why has noone at Hogwarts ever had a flying lesson after the first day when Harry caught the remembrall? Why has Harry never asked about his parents, grandparents etc from wizards who must clearly know this info and have no reason not to tell him? Why are ALL his relatives, muggle or wizard, dead in a world of long-lived people? Not because JKR is hiding anything (apart from what she must) so much as Harry appears more tragic and isolated with no folks apart from the dreadful Dursleys. It is patently preposterous that 100,000 wizards can attend the Quidditch world cup final and yet all wizards know all others by first name, one school suffices for the entire UK and Snape couldn't have time (not convinced on this but it's an argument that's been made) to teach all those who need to be taught potion at Hogwarts. One of the best examples of things not adding up is: There are five boys per house per year (roughly) - 40 students per year @ 7 years (1-6th then upper 6th) = 280 students max in all of Hogwarts. This is about half the number popularly percived to be the case and besides means the wizard cohort of the UK is rather tiny. Certainly not large enough for there to have been mass celebrations in every town - the Dursley's at least - the day HP became 'the boy who lived'. Maybe numbers are massively depleted because of the 1st war, but the point is it's stupid to count. JKR is always a writer, always writing for literary impact and never for strict accuracy. Sorry if this sounds harsh, but the books are fantasy. Speculating about them is fun but it IS NOT REAL, none of it. JKR makes it real with her fantastically skillful writing but even she doesn't want us to be so up it that we lose touch with it being fantasy, and so allowed to have literary license. I know it frustrates the US audience that it is so UK-based, but it is equally frstrating to me as a Brit that the magic world does not sem to have much of Eastern mysticism in it, such as Chinese wizards, Inidian fakhirs, Shamen, nd so on. It just does not fit the plot and the setting. I am NOT trying to be a killjoy, cynic or anything else here (I am as much into analysing this stuff - to my partner's amazement) as the rest of you, but whenever numbers and consistency start to be required you REALLY have to take everything with a liberal pinch of salt. We are all trying to guess what's in JKR's mind, not least because she's told us the books have enough clues to allow us to do this - it doesn't mean she'll make it easy. The number of red herrings is enormous. Many have compared her plotting to Agatha Christie who, IMO, never gave much away until the very last page and when you found out what the key link was with which to solve the mystery it was SO tenouous and buried in the red herrings that few would have guessed it, even if it did often appear very early in the particular book. I wonder what Dickens (who wrote a few of his most famous works in serial form) might have made of his fans guessing what he'd do next with his characters in the profusion that the modern day internet affords. I believe I am right in thinking that there was equal hysteria ahead of each of his chapters and people queueing at docks to meet the boat bearing the latest episodes of his works. There was a horrible thread about JKR dying before she managed to complete the series but I hope she (or her publishers) has found some fan fiction author she likes sufficiently who could take up the aegis (and her completed last chapter) to fill in books 6 and 7 in her absence - god forbid! To ensure the series was completed even if only in the 'this is what was supposed to happen' vein. With child 3 on the way I wish her the longest and happiest of lives and hope she does never try to top HP (and why would she need to, at least as JKR, though the writer in her will need to express itself often and variously I hope perhaps under some other pseudonym). This would be like Christopher Tolkien tidying JRR's notes into a series of interesting (to fans) books like the Silmarillion that noone expected to have the literary ability of the original masterpieces but which nonetheless filled in the back story clamoured for. Not that I'm in the camp that compares JRRT and JKR - they are quite different and share only the strand of fantasy/escapism. I wonder if Warners and her publishers don't have massive life insurance policies though sadly you can bet Jessica and David won't be the beneficiaries. Anyway, leave her to get on. I find it fantastic that she's an internet fan and has her own web site to let us who thirst for books 6 and 7 know that (a) she's progressing and (b) snippets/hints to keep our active imaginations going during the wait. I hope jkrowling.com doesn't end up taking so much time she can't do the books even though I'm constantly frustrated it hasn't been updated. BTW - should JKR ever read this - when is Voldemort going to get REALLY nasty? Yes I know you said there'd be more deaths, but for obvious reasons he was pretty quiet during OotP. Must we wait until book 7 for all the dirt on Lily, Petunia, James and Snape? The opening chapter(s) of OotP was(were) certainly shocking on Petunia but then it was left hanging. So like you - but yes you have a plot to hide, even while expounding it slowly book by book to its final denoument. Aarghhh - will *I* live long enough, let alone our heroine (JKR)? Have to hope so with three of my own not yet ready for Hogwarts. From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Sun Aug 8 02:07:52 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 02:07:52 -0000 Subject: Psychological experiments (Was: Re: Theory on Snape - MASSIVE) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109311 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Nora Renka" wrote: > Both deal with the issue of everyday people placed into situations > of responsibility with oversight. The best HP analogy (see, Elves, > I *can* do one!) is perhaps how people were willing to go along with > Crouch and functionally carry out the punishments he ordered, even > as harsh and autocratic as they were. I'm reluctant to put Umbridge > in this category--she's just a lil' too independently nasty--but > doing something like what she did out of a perceived fidelity to > one's superiors...awfully close. Milgram's basic question was > whether to be loyal to personal moral standards or loyal to a > system...Percy? I think overall it sounds like more confirmation of 'absolute power corrupts absolutely', although I read it as being in some form or fashion. Even Dumbledore has fallen prey, by thinking himself nearly infalliable. Fudge...he started off begging for DD's help, and then grew to resent him as his own self-confidence emerged in the position. Umbridge... yeah, she's so high up, she thinks she can get away with anything... as long as she thinks she has some rationale to excuse it... although authority in of itself is usually enough for 99% of the population. Now as for Percy... yeah, it's going to be quite interesting to see how he falls out from the event of OotP. While he swear allegience to the new ministry (and whose side will they be on now?)? Has his bought too far into Fudge's hatred of DD to switch back? i.e. DE! Percy. Or will his shame drag his sorry tail between his legs and return him home? Ahh... the intrigue! Josh From lorelei3dg at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 02:15:25 2004 From: lorelei3dg at yahoo.com (lorelei3dg) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 02:15:25 -0000 Subject: Halloween 81 In-Reply-To: <005801c47be5$85f94690$3bc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109312 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > DuffyPoo: > Sirius couldn't get into Potter residence after Peter was made Secret-Keeper unless Peter told him. At least, that is my understanding. Sirius, Remus, DD knew exactly where the Potters were living in GH. As soon as the Fidelius Charm was performed, it 'slipped' from their memories, for lack of a better term. Peter must have told Sirius so he could visit James, Lily and baby Harry. Sirius said, "I'd arranged to check on Peter, make sure he was still safe, but when I arrived at his hiding place, he'd gone. Yet there was no sign of a struggle. It didn't feel right. I was scared. I set out for your parents' house straight away. And when I saw their house, destroyed, and their bodies -- I realise what Peter must have done." > > But then how would DD know to send Hagrid? In my theory, as soon as the house was destroyed the Fidelius Charm evaporates, or collapses, then all those who once knew where the house was, would know again. That's how DD knew so quickly that something had happened and sent Hagrid. The address of the house 'popped' back into his mind, so he knew the charm was broken. I'm only basing this on DD since he didn't know Peter was the S-K and therefore was obviously not told the address, yet he knew right away, quickly enough to send Hagrid "before the Muggles started swarmin' around", that something had happened to the Potters. Clear as mud? ;-) > Lorel: Yes, it makes sense to me now. I do believe that Peter shared the secret with Sirius: it makes sense for Sirius to know so that he could help the Potters if Peter weren't around, and it helps set Sirius up for their betrayal. It also seems reasonable that there would be no reason for a Fidelius Charm if the thing it protects is harmed. Thanks for the insight. :) From juli17 at aol.com Sun Aug 8 03:00:18 2004 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 23:00:18 EDT Subject: Thoery on Snape - Message-ID: <1d9.28069791.2e46f142@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109313 > vivian again: > > Didn't JKR say something about Snape's personality? Something about > children aren't fooled by this kind of teacher (I know I'm > misquoting). I really think that with Snape what you see is what you > get. Adults have a tendency to rationalize behavior in a way that a > child does not. I think Dumbledore is in for a nasty surprise. > > vivian > I agree. With Snape what you see is what you get. I can't imagine him spying on Voldemort since the beginning, faking his nastiness all along. Anything's possible, and JKR is the only one who knows the real Snape, but as Nora, Magda and others have said, such a development would disappointing. I'd hate to see such a complex and fascinating character essentially erased--"I was just faking, kids! No angst, no murky motives, no tortured past, why I'm really just a nice, uncomplicated, regular (rather boring actually) guy!" OTOH, I don't think DD is in for a nasty surprise. What you see with Snape--an embittered, unhappy, generally mean-spirited man who did horrible things, then for reasons yet unknown switched loyalties and allied himself with DD--is what you get. Snape is a man who never forgets or forgives a slight, as we know from the pensieve scene and from his unending grudge against James's son. Whether Voldemort did something to earn his enmity, or his conscience belatedly kicked in when he realized the scope of Voldemort's evil, Snape isn't one to back down. (He does have a few good qualities after all, including courage and determination.) I do agree children don't rationalize behavior. They see Snape's personality clearly, but they don't delve beyond that. Which is why, even when Snape does the right thing in the end, he will remain unapologetically his unpleasant self while doing it ;-) Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From yahoogroups at catbirdco.us Sat Aug 7 21:49:35 2004 From: yahoogroups at catbirdco.us (Michal) Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 14:49:35 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chamber of Secrets - The Unexplained In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.1.0.6.0.20040807143300.02da4290@mail.catbirdco.us> No: HPFGUIDX 109314 >Snow: >This is JKR's answer in a Scholastic interview October 16, 2000 > >Harry Potter for grownups again! Is Voldemort the last remaining >ancestor of Slytherin, or the last remaining descendent of Slytherin? > >"Ah, you spotted the deliberate error. Yes, it should >read "descendent." That's been changed in subsequent editions. (Keep >hold of the "ancestor" one, maybe it'll be valuable one day!)" > >Hope this helps! IMO, JKR seems to enjoy messing with us! Note the "maybe" concerning its significance. Also, in looking up the definition of "deliberate" I see that it can mean "not rash or hasty," "unhurried," and "premeditated." That doesn't mean she didn't accidentally use the wrong word; it could just mean that she thought about using what (may have) turned out to be the wrong word. Maybe she just doesn't like to say she made a mistake! I just can't see JKR planning to hide hints in different editions of the books, but I could be wrong. Are there any similar instances of trans-edition hinting? BTW, which word did she use in the most recent edition? From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 03:40:04 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 03:40:04 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Dark Mark (Was: OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chapter 24) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109315 Sigune wrote: > > It always seemed to me that the Dark Mark on Snape's arm had > something to do with it all. It seems to me that Death Eaters are > even more in terror of Voldemort's name than other wizards and > witches. It struck me that in CoS (and I sincerely apologise if this > is movie contamination; I ought to reread the book), Malfoy was taken aback by Harry's speaking Voldy's name out loud, and so are, if I am not mistaken, the DE's at the DoM - as if it physically hurts them to hear it. I suspect that the Dark Mark is a rather powerful link with > Voldemort, comparable in a way to Harry's scar; and old beliefs have > it that when you speak, for example, the Devil's name, he might just > come to you. So maybe, for DE's more than for others, speaking > Voldemort's name kind of activates their bond, drawing his attention > to them. > Or at the very least, the DE's are in mortal fear of their own > leader. > And I'm with you Pippin: we don't want Snape saying Voldy's name to > be the last thing he does. Let him keep wincing and live nastily ever after. Carol responds: I know that I mentioned this in another post, but I'm so hopelessly and permanently behind that I won't even try to locate it or see if anyone responded to it. Instead I'll just repeat my main point, without any support whatever: I think it's only Snape, not the DEs in general, who feels pain via the Dark Mark when he hears Voldemort's name, and I think it's because the Dark Mark senses his disloyalty. I think the loyal DEs' reasons for not using the name are different from Snape's--real or pretended fear of Voldemort, and in Bella's case, awe of and fanatic loyalty to her "master." IIRC, Crouch!Moody (pretending to be the real Moody) says Voldemort's name out loud with something like pleasure. Whether he could do so in his undisguised form I don't know. Under the veritaserum he uses "the Dark Lord" and "my master," but I don't think it's fear or the Dark Mark that causes him to do so. It seems to be fanatical devotion like Bellatrix's. Can anybody find canon support for the *loyal* DEs feeling pain like Snape's (other than when they're being summoned to the graveyard or when LV is actually touching the Dark Mark)? If not, it seems to me that Snape's pain, both when Voldemort's name is mentioned and when Crouch!Moody is talking about "DEs who walked free" is strong evidence (not proof--I know the difference) that Snape is indeed disloyal to Voldemort and not ESE!. Yes, yes, yes to Snape living nastily (or at least sarcastically) ever after. Carol, who apologizes to anyone who addressed this idea in response to her earlier post From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 03:56:24 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 03:56:24 -0000 Subject: Teaching wizards (was Re: Jobs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109316 starlandcolleen wrote: > > on another thread, somebody pointed > > out that J.K.R. confirmed in an interview that wizard kids do not > > have go to muggle school before Hogwarts. Are their basic skills, > > i.e. reading, home-taught? Perhaps there are tutors for this? Any > > thoughts? > Mandy replied: > Hmm. I go with the teaching at home theory because they are all so > far apart they couldn't get together on a daily basis but maybe they > do some kind of short courses for lots of students, a bit like summer schools. It could be that tutors go to the house to teach but how do families with little money afford this? It might be something that is provided for nothing and funded by the MoM. I would favour the > teaching at home option and believe that different levels in ability > are indicative of the quality of teaching they have received from > their parents. Tutors would only be available to visit for certain > subjects and for a certain amount of time during any given week, as > with home taught muggles who have private tutors and irregular tutor > groups. > > I also think there are apprenticeships rather than colleges and > Unis. We must remember that the students stay at school for an extra > two years if they choose to, and I think in this time they not only > take lessons applicable to the type of job they want to do, but also > have practical tasks to help them to get tp grips with the jobs they > will be going for. We haven't really seen yet what happens during > these next two years. I think there will be more focussed work > instead of it being general teaching. > > We only have to look at Percy to realise that he went straight from > Hogwarts into the MoM. Of course he could have attended a very brief summer school before Harry arrived at the Weasleys, we don't know that he didn't. Carol responds: JKR says in an interview that there are no wizard colleges or universities, so you're correct there, but of course aurors (and maybe other professions) require additional training. (I'm betting that Percy went straight into his very junior-level position, with nothing more than a bit of on-the-job training.) A seventeen-year-old is considered an adult (no prolonged adolescence for them), and a student with even one OWL, IIRC, is considered a fully qualified wizard. (Percy had twelve OWLs, and probably half a dozen NEWTs as well.) Regarding pre-Hogwarts education, I'm guessing that Molly homeschooled her kids, but rich witchlings and wizardlings (e.g., Draco) may have had private tutors. Maybe that's how Lupin earned a living before PoA. Otherwise the peeling letters on his suitcase reading "Professor R.J. Lupin" are difficult if not impossible to explain. It makes sense to me, anyway. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 04:21:37 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 04:21:37 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: <00ae01c47ad7$1a5a0140$69c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109317 Josh wrote: > "If Snape knew so much, then why didn't he know the big black dog in > the hospital wing with Harry at the end of GoF was Sirius until he > transformed? The MWPP monikers on the map only make sense if you know > multiple animagi forms. It's quite reasonable to assume that Snape > (as a fake spy for Voldemort within the Order, evil or good) would > not know about Wormtail also acting the spy, as compartmentalization > is good security. Moony makes sense as Lupin, but only if you can put > it in context with another Marauder so as to narrow the field to 1 > werewolf amongst the world's population throughout recent-enough > history. > > No, I seriously doubt Snape put the nicknames into play until he had > the pleasure of dealing with Padfoot and Moony calling each other > such in his presence in between Order business." > > DuffyPoo replied: > > In the "Snape's Worst Memory" scene we have the Marauders calling each other by their nicknames all the time. No one knew they were animagi, these could just be silly nicknames they sung out to each other in the halls. Names that meant something to them, but not to anyone else. Remember, the Trio were to call Sirius "Snuffles" when they were talking about him. Just a nickname. Snape could have, probably would have, heard them calling each other by these nicknames at school, then seeing all the names on the map, would instantly put two and two together and believe HP had gotten the map directly from the manufacturers as he knew one of the manufacturers was currently working at the school - Lupin/Moony. Carol adds: I agree completely with DuffyPoo. The Marauders seem to have used the nicknames openly, arrogantly certain that no one would discover their secret. As for the map ostensibly containing Dark Magic (which Snape, of all people, would recognize if it were real without the aid of Lupin or anyone else), I think that was just a ruse to call in Lupin and find out what he could about the parchment from one of the makers. Your "manufacturers" reference backs up that interpretation. So does Lupin's remark, "I'll take this *back* now, shall I?" Back? When did he have it that Snape would know about? Only twenty years before, when he and the other Marauders were using it. Snape must have understood Lupin's meaning, which he could not protest in front of Harry without revealing Lupin's connection to James and Sirius. He would also have recognized that Lupin's claim to the map was better than his and would have (rightly) assumed that Lupin would not return the confiscated map to Harry--at least not while he was still teaching at Hogwarts. Lupin, BTW, had his own reasons for keeping the map from Harry or anyone else (particularly Snape and Dumbledore). He couldn't let it be known that "the animagus Black" (to steal Bella's term) knew secret passageways into Hogwarts and might well be hiding in the Shrieking Shack. Bad Lupin! Maybe not ESE!, but still putting his own needs before Dumbledore's--or Harry's. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 05:33:30 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 05:33:30 -0000 Subject: Why Voldemort is a fascist/sparing Lily In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109318 SSSusan enquired: Why > *might* Voldy have been willing to let Lily live? I've some > thoughts on this, too, but I'm always interested to hear multiple > views.<< > > > Kneasy responded: in terms of the current thread *if* Voldy is an > ideologically driven fanatic determined to instute the primacy of > purebloods at any cost then one would expect him to wipe out > Lily with absolutely no compunction. He didn't. So maybe he's > not being ideologically driven; maybe he's a pragmatist doing > what he sees as necessary to achieve his personal ends. > > Lily has defied him 3 times we're told. For a murdering ideologue > this would be unforgivable and would merit the ultimate sanction. > But Voldy isn't thinking along those lines - he wants to kill Harry, > that seems to be his sole aim. James possibly and Lily for sure > need not have died. But if they get in the way then die they will. > That is a very cold pragmatic way of assessing the 'mission' - that > it's a safeguard for his future security, not an aspect or > reflection of a wider political agenda. Siriusly Snapey Susan again: While I'm > convinced that Voldy had a *reason* for suggesting she didn't have to die--that he really did *mean* it when he said it--I can't come up > with much in the way of WHY, beyond the rather tired ideas of his > somehow being related to Lily or having promised to try to spare her > for someone else, i.e., Severus. Carol steps in: Hi, SSS. I'm not sure I should even post this because you already know what I think on the matter, but here goes. I think Kneasy is right that, from Voldemort's perspective, Lily didn't have to die. Whatever Voldemort's political agenda may normally be, his personal mission to kill his prospective destroyer, the baby in the Prophecy, overrode all other concerns that day. Lily wasn't threatening him; she apparently wasn't even armed; she was just trying to kill Harry and she died because she wouldn't get out of his way and let him accomplish his mission. (From her own perspective, of course, she *did* have to die, but that has nothing to do with your question.) He wasn't telling her to get out of the way because she was a promised reward to Severus or his own relative or any other other hypothetical reason. He just wanted her to stop blocking his path. He wasn't seeing her as a member of the Order who had defied him three times, though that was no doubt how he saw James. He was seeing her as a "silly girl" whose motives he neither respected nor understood. She was just Harry's "common Muggleborn mother"--a nobody, beneath contempt, not worth killing (except maybe as an afterthought after he had accomplished his objective). I imagine that if he had succeeded in killing Harry, she would have suffered the fate of his own Muggle grandparents after he killed his father. With his mission accomplished, he could attend to less important details--including his own vendetta against Muggleborns if he so chose. Or he might have chosen to let her live on in wretchedness, having lost house, husband, child, and the battle against evil all in a few short moments. That, IMO, would have been crueller than killing her. In short, he was willing to let her live, at least for the time being, but in his view, or at least the view he presents to Harry, she foolishly chose to die. IMO, he's speaking a half truth (she didn't have to die *then*) to torture Harry, but he also clearly doesn't understand that she *did* have to die to save Harry, and that her self-sacrifice was neither foolish nor accidental. I agree with Kneasy that Voldemort's actions in this case were motivated neither by mercy (which he can't feel) nor politics (which were secondary or even tertiary in this instance) but by sheer cold pragmatism and (IMO--not sure Kneasy agrees with this part) contempt for an enemy who would not even fight him. He underestimated her to his great detriment, and I'm guessing he'll make the same mistake with Harry. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 05:55:47 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 05:55:47 -0000 Subject: Snape, Quirrellmort question... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109319 > Josh: > > Only 3 were absent who weren't in Azkaban, and Snape's absence > > would be assumed as he would be on Hogwarts grounds and unable to > > apparate so immediately. > > Siriusly Snapey Susan: > I think you're right, Josh, that if Snape *isn't* one of the three > Voldy mentions, it might be because he realizes Snape couldn't get > away from Hogwarts immediately without arousing DD's suspicions. > > On the other issue--I'm away from my books, so I probably shouldn't > take this on, but if I'm wrong, I'm sure someone will correct me. > *Is* it true that there were only three who were missing who weren't > in Azkaban? Weren't there several gaps around the circle? I thought > that Voldy simply *discussed* three but that they didn't comprise all the missing DEs in toto. Can someone confirm or correct me? Carol responds: He specifically mentions the "three who have died in his service" (Wilkes, Rosier, and ?); the "loyal servant" (Barty Jr.), the "coward" (has to be Karkaroff, IMO, since he has reason to fear the other DEs and has "fled"), and the one he believes has left him forever (Snape, IMO); and two of the three Lestranges (Bellatrix and Rodolphus). He does *not* mention Rabastan, oddly enough, since he was one of the four who "loyally" sought out the Longbottoms to Crucio them for information, or any of the other Azkaban prisoners (Rookwood, Dolohov, Mulciber, possibly Jugson). There's also Travers, who went to Azkaban and may have died there since he wasn't in the MoM raid--I doubt that such a death would count as dying in LV's service). So, yes, there are at least four or five gaps that were passed over in silence, just as there appear to be DEs who were present but unnamed. Carol, who thinks that Barty Jr. kept tabs on both Snape and Karkaroff for Voldemort and that Voldemort knows very well who fled through cowardice and who chose to remain at Hogwarts at great personal risk. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 06:17:18 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 06:17:18 -0000 Subject: Snape not saying "Voldy" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109320 SSSusan wrote: > These ideas are helpful in understanding why Snape might not be > willing to say "Voldemort" and why he isn't comfortable with others > around him doing so. > > I still have a question, though. If we agree that, for whatever > reason, Snape won't say "Voldemort," why does he still continue to > use the term "Dark Lord" instead of "He Who Must Not Be Named" > or "You Know Who"? Doesn't "The Dark Lord" imply more respect or > reverence for Voldy than we'd like to see Snape offering up? Carol responds: For once I have a short answer. :-) "He Who Must Not Be Named" is pompous and cumbersome, whereas "The Dark Lord" is short and to the point, conveying a sense that Voldemort is dangerous, which I think Snape wants Harry and the other students need to realize more fully. (Harry has defeated LV so often that he seems to have lost that necessary sense of what the resurrected Voldemort, with his plans fully formed and all his armies and weapons in place, might be able to accomplish. His saying the name must seem to Snape an act of foolish arrogance worthy of James.) Second, the term "Dark Lord" suits Snape's rather sinister (and I think carefully cultivated) image. Can you imagine him saying "You Know Who"? I can't. And besides, if he's communicating with Lucius Malfoy as we suspect, he can't slip up and use a term that, say, McGonagall might use. He has to sound like an ally of the DEs--in fact, still one of them despite being "stuck" at Hogwarts--and not an enemy. Above all, IMO, he has to fool his own students, most notably Draco Malfoy, who would report his suspicions to "Father" in a moment if he had any. Or would have done so before Lucius got hauled off to Azkaban. Carol From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 06:38:10 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 06:38:10 -0000 Subject: Scottish school cut-off dates- Hermione's birthday riddle solved? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109321 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sarah_haining" wrote: > > Geoff noted: > > >> In UK schools, the cut-off date for ages is 31st August. > > > > Sarah: > > ...edited... > > Scottish school cut-off dates are at the end of February/start of > March (not sure of the exact date). This would easily allow for all > of the trio to be born in 1980, with Hermione as the youngest of the > three, no? > > Hope this helps. > > Sarah Asian_lorv2: Not to be a nitpicker or anything, but I'd like to point out that Hogwarts while IN Scotland, is not a Scottish school. Although, I admit that we have nothing but real world schools to use as a reference point. Just curious, is it Feb/Mar of the year in which you start school, or is it Feb/Mar of the following year? Example; turn 11 Feb/Mar of 2000, start school Sept 2000, or start school Sept 2000, turn 11 in Feb.mar 2001? Just curious. Steve/asian_lovr2 From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Aug 8 07:00:23 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 07:00:23 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109322 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, macfotuk at y... wrote: RMM: > > > We find Jo Rowling making atrocious mistakes > > Sincerely perplexed by poor math skills, macfotuk: > I am NOT trying to be a killjoy, cynic or anything else here (I am > as much into analysing this stuff - to my partner's amazement) as > the rest of you, but whenever numbers and consistency start to be > required you REALLY have to take everything with a liberal pinch of > salt. We are all trying to guess what's in JKR's mind, not least > because she's told us the books have enough clues to allow us to do > this - it doesn't mean she'll make it easy. The number of red > herrings is enormous. Geoff: I realise you are but, at the risk of appearing discourteous, several of us on the group have had our answers to RMM dismissed as bad maths, bad English and nowhere along the line has he accepted the possiblity that he might just be wrong. I have, on numerous occasions in the past acknowledged that I have misread something or misunderstood but here, we have a storm in a teacup which has erupted because I casually remarked that JKR had got the day of Harry's birthday wrong. I'm not blasting her for that; it is just that, as someone else has said, there are more important things to consider. I doubt whether the denouement of Book 7 hinges on whether Harry's birthday was a Tuesday or a Wednesday. Let us return though to some of the evidence which RMM submits. Because English depends so much on prepositions, the position of an adverbial or adjectival phrase is important because a misplaced one can distort the meaning of a sentence. In Latin, for example, the case endings meant that word order was very fluid. Our famous - or infamous - "Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus" could be expressed using several different word orders but a Latin speaker will still understand it. In the way in which it is quoted on the Hogwarts motto, the first Latin word, "Draco", is the last, "dragon", in the translated English sentence. If you were to approach a cross-section of native English speakers with the phrase "Investigations continue into the break-in at Gringotts on 31 July...", I would be willing to predict that the majority, if not all, would interpret this as the robbery being on the date given because, if 31 July referred to the investigation, the phrase is at the wrong end of the sentence. Re Harry's comment, he makes the remark immediately after reading the quoted section. If there was further information which might suggest that the investiagtion was indeed continuing on the 31st after the event, why isn't it in the quoted section which Harry reads and would it be the first day of an investigation or an on-going one which makes Harry's comment questionable. I suspect this is a red herring. Finally, Ted the weatherman. Suppose I say on a Wednesday, "I am going to London next week". That does not necessarily mean in exactly a week, i.e. the following Wednesday; it could be the Monday or the Tuesday etc. Again, if RMM is being pedantic and Ted is saying that Bonfire Night is exactly a week hence, that isn't the case based on Tuesday 27/10/81 because Bonfire Night that year was on its normal date, 5th November, the Thursday of the following week. I rest my case. From theadimail at yahoo.co.in Sun Aug 8 08:17:26 2004 From: theadimail at yahoo.co.in (theadimail) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 08:17:26 -0000 Subject: The Final Showdown Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109323 Hi, I think the final showdown between Harry and Voldemort comes somewhat like this. Dumbledore mentioned a room which contained a force so powerful that it was kept locked all times. I think this is the same room that Harry tried to open with Sirius' knife and the knife melted. I think the showdown happens in this room . Harry learns to weild the power, the only wizard who can do it(it is kept locked all the times after all). A major part of the next two books will be occupied with his learning to acquire to weild that power. After aremed with it, he goes after Voldemort. He kills Voldemort ofcourse, but the things is this power stuff is so powerful that it takes a great toll on him. Some other predictions: Harry will kill Bellatrix in the sixth book. DA will become some sort of scouting party, offering their services to protect Hogwarts when it is under siege. That the first thing DUmbledore will want to do is to reclaim his arrested Death Eaters is obvious but he has only dememntors at his command. I think they will mass attack on some soft target... Platform 93/4 perhaps? Bye ADI From naama_gat at hotmail.com Sun Aug 8 08:41:11 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 08:41:11 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109324 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Nora Renka" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" > wrote: > > > > > 1. < > the school using dark arts he learned from Voldemort, that being > > an Animagus had nothing to do with it... so, in a way, Snape's > > been right about me all along." > > "Snape?" said Black harshly, taking his eyes off Scabbers; for the > > first time in minutes and looking up at Lupin. "What's Snape got > > to do with it?">> > > > > Note: Lupin says that Black was using dark arts learned from > > Voldemort. No, he doesn't. He is presenting it as a lie he was telling himself, to avoid having to feel the obligation to tell DD about Black's animagus ability. It is *not* a statement of fact. You can't just pluck a sentence out of context like that and not lose practically all it's meaning! > > > > Black believed Lupin was spying for Voldemort!!! Why would he > > unless he knew Lupin was involved with Voldemort in some fashion?? > > Unanswered question, and an awfully curious one. Kinda one of the > $10,000 questions of the series. The answer might lie in Peter-the- > actual-spy, or, don't forget the general thematic emphasis on > Voldemort's *ability* to spread fear and all that other stuff. In > other words, the most likely situation is that *neither* of them > were actually, factually involved with Voldemort--but each (for the > Unknown Reason) thought the other was. There's really nothing more > to say on this question until we get canon on it. Ummm... Am I missing something? They suspected each other because they knew (via DD) that there was a spy in the Potter's near circle of friends. So, it's not that they inherently didn't trust each other, but that they were forced to consider that one of their best friends is a traitor. Everybody apparently had a blind spot regarding Peter (including the Potters), so what other choice did they have (each one knowing himself to be innocent) but suspect the other? > > Conclusion: All of the Marauders were involved with Voldemort. > > Some of the Marauders more than the others. All the Marauders can > > use Voldemort's name with ease, implying that they are not under > > Voldemort's sway or afraid of him -- that is, all except Wormtail. > > Also, Voldemort was doing some kind of instruction with them as > > the nature of the relationship revolved around "learning" > > and "teaching". > > > > Heck, who knows? Maybe Voldemort was teaching at Hogwarts for a > > time! > > One major problem with this; Dumbledore has been at Hogwarts the > whole time, right? He was Transfiguration teacher back when Tom > Riddle was at school, and he became Headmaster some time around when > Lupin would be heading off to school, because he let him in. Now, > Dumbledore *knows* who and what Tom Riddle/Lord Voldemort is-- unless > you think Voldie could pull off a Crouch!Moody on him, this seems > mighty unlikely. In addition to Voldie, well, just not seeming the > type to want to spend his time teachin' the kids... Also, DD said that Tom Riddle disappeared for many years, to *resurface* as Voldemort. Secondly, if Volermort was supposed to teach the Marauders at Hogwarts, the timing is off, since that was the time of the VW I. > -Nora notes that her favorite person in Theory Bay is Faith, who > always comes out of Hurricane Jo with her haircut intact Yep. I've identified with Faith long ago, and have never found cause to revoke that decision ... Naama From patientx3 at aol.com Sun Aug 8 09:19:19 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 09:19:19 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109325 macfotuk wrote: >> Always when JKR 'gets it wrong', and yes there have been LOADS of examples, it is for the sake of the story. Things like no first year had ever been a quidditch player before HP is for literary impact, not factual accuracy so that someone plotting back that Alicia Spinnet must be in year X is nonsense. Likewise, the elder Weasley kids are long gone but totting up the numbers doesn't make sense with Gryffindor not having won the house cup for years. Why is Luicius so old producing his first-born (Draco) when others must be so young (Percy as Minister of Magic assistant and HP's own parents almost being teen pregnancy victims). Lots and lots and lots doesn't match up in the interests of the story which is, after all, what we love. All the aha! gotcha must drive JKR mad or bemuse her mightily. << HunterGreen: I think often times her 'getting it wrong' has more to do with overanalyzing it, rather than anything being wrong. For example, in the case of July 31st, 1991 being a Wednesday, and not a Tuesday as its said in the text, I would find it amazing if she had got it correct. Nowhere in PS/SS does it state a year, in fact nowhere in *any* of the books does it state what the current year is. The only reference to what year it is is a math problem done with the year of Nick's 500th Deathday Party in relation to the year of his death. I'm not saying that that's not accurate, just that I don't believe that she started the series with a specific year in mind. Therefore she only had a one in seven chance of getting the day of the week right in PS/SS, because the series wasn't dated by year then. It was considered 'present time' (based on Dudley having a computer and video games), but not by a *year*. I can't fault her for this, its the reader looking too hard. Other things that you mentioned could just be the reader getting things wrong, or assuming things. It says that there hasn't been a first year *seeker* in a century, that doesn't mean there aren't ever first year chasers, keepers, and beaters (although a seeker seems like it would be most suited to a younger student than the other positions). The whole debacle with the number of years since Gryffindor winning the house cup not matching up with (Bill or Charlie)'s age, could just mean that they won last during (Bill or Charlie)'s second or third year and not since. Its us that's assuming it HAS to mean his sixth or seventh year, it doesn't say anywhere that it is. When it comes to Lily and James' age when they had Harry, as far as the BOOKS (not outside things like interviews) are concerned, we can only guess in a five or so year-span (based on Sirius' near-in-age cousin marrying Lucius Malfoy who was 41 in OotP). Doing this big math problem based on an age she gave for GoF!Sirius (I think this is where this fact comes from) during an interview and coming to your own conclusion, is not something she's responsible for. I know most of what is said in interviews can be taken as truth, but I also remember that those are impromptu, not something that she necessarily thought deeply about or edited or had anyone else edit. I won't call something a book error until the error is 100% from the book (not something where the book and the interview contradict each other, like in the case of the number of students who attend Hogwarts -- she says a number that does not seem to be reflected in the text). I've done some writing myself, and I know sometimes what you think off the top of your head doesn't always work when you write it. Other things are indeed done for plot reasons. Like Harry not seeing the Thestrals at the end of GoF. The reason we are given is that the death hadn't "sunk in" yet, but we all know the real reason is that it would interrupt the story too much at the end of GoF (and it would, there was already enough going on without tossing that in too). Also, we must remember, that at least when she was writing the first few books, I doubt she expected readers to be looking this closely at the facts and the timelines and all that. Clearly 100% accurate and sensical timelines are not something thats a priority to her. It's something that she overlooked. So far it hasn't been anything bigger than a day of the week being odd (like September first always being a Sunday), or Snape appearing to take a long time to alert the order when Harry went to the DoM, so I wouldn't worry about it. But that doesn't mean its not fun to discuss. (o; From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sun Aug 8 09:46:07 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 09:46:07 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS - 'That Night'- Fudge After the Fact In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109326 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > You might be right if we could assume that people, and more important > Mr. Weasley, speak with technical perfection, but they don't. > > There is a difference between the narative part and actual speech in > any book. If JKR is a good writer, we would indeed expect narative to > adhere to properly applied English, but in natural speech, it's pretty > much anything goes, as long as it's consistent with the character. > > I don't personally find it all that uncommon or out of place for > Arthur to say "...Black's been talking..." which we assume means > 'Black has been talking'. Especially when it is the guards speaking > and the time proximity is the very night Black escaped and perhaps > only minutes from that escape. > > Really, it's just a thought. > Agreed, that's a possibility. But unless I read it my way there's little chance of a conspiracy, and what would I have to write about then? I hate SHIPs, Time Travel and the "Ooh! wouldn't it be good if..." sort of posts. What's left? Character assessments or analysis of possibly significant events - I'm starting to repeat myself on those - and conspiracies of one sort or another, actual or imagined. Final resolution theories are a bit iffy to say the least, we're missing too much information on key figures and events; there's great gaping holes all over the place. After the next book we should be able to tackle that with a fair chance of success, but at the moment..... Besides, JKR is a linguist, she studied languages at university, so there's a fair chance that verb forms and tenses are accurate reflections of what she's trying to tell us. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. Kneasy From patientx3 at aol.com Sun Aug 8 09:55:19 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 09:55:19 -0000 Subject: Why Voldemort is a fascist/sparing Lily In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109327 Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: > While I'm > convinced that Voldy had a *reason* for suggesting she didn't have >to die--that he really did *mean* it when he said it--I can't come up > with much in the way of WHY, beyond the rather tired ideas of his > somehow being related to Lily or having promised to try to spare her > for someone else, i.e., Severus. Carol replied: >> I think Kneasy is right that, from Voldemort's perspective, Lily didn't have to die. Whatever Voldemort's political agenda may normally be, his personal mission to kill his prospective destroyer, the baby in the Prophecy, overrode all other concerns that day. Lily wasn't threatening him; she apparently wasn't even armed; she was just trying to kill Harry and she died because she wouldn't get out of his way and let him accomplish his mission. [snip] He wasn't telling her to get out of the way because she was a promised reward to Severus or his own relative or any other other hypothetical reason. He just wanted her to stop blocking his path. He wasn't seeing her as a member of the Order who had defied him three times, though that was no doubt how he saw James. << HunterGreen: I completely agree. However, though, I don't think he necessarily had more respect for James than he did for Lily. I don't think either of them *had* to die (at least not before Harry). From what we've been told, Voldemort often delegates his evil tasks to the DE's, so Godric's Hollow is a special situation. Perhaps his basic plan was just to go inside, kill Harry, and leave (he did go at night, he probably hoped that James and Lily would be asleep...it would make the whole thing much easier). He'd tangled with them three times before, and they'd won (in the sense that they lived), and despite his power, I can see him just not wanting to deal with them that night. He doesn't leave his evil lair very often, and might have been eager to get the killing-infant business over with as quickly as possible so he could return to his lair. Voldemort enters the Potter home with that mindset, and encounters James in the living room(?). He might have tried to sweep by James and head for Lily and Harry (according to the memory Harry has in PoA, James says "take Harry and go..." which indicates the three of them were in the room and Lily was either holding Harry, or near him). Voldemort, at this point, is far more interested in getting to Harry before Lily manages to do something like get out of the house, but there is James, presumably also standing in Voldemort's way, but he had a wand. They may have dueled, or perhaps Voldemort simply AKed him immediately since he was a threat (because he was standing there with his wand, facing Voldemort and prepared to fight). Then Voldemort, already annoyed with the diversion, heads for Lily and Harry, and Lily jumps into his way. She's not armed and he can see Harry behind her, so he at first just wants her to get out of the way. I don't know why he didn't just AK her immediately, perhaps AK takes more energy and concentration than he wanted to bother with at the moment (at least on her). Voldemort's common sense may have been kicking in in the back of his mind too (saying that there might be a reason she's innocently standing there without a wand, saying "kill me instead!"), and it took him a moment to disregard it and kill her anyway. At first I don't see the need for *killing* her, since he may have been more focused on just pushing her out of the way, but she wouldn't get out of the way, and she was talking to him so that caught his attention and he decided to just kill her then, as opposed to waiting until Harry was finished with. He really should have gone with his first instinct. Carol: >>I agree with Kneasy that Voldemort's actions in this case were motivated neither by mercy (which he can't feel) nor politics (which were secondary or even tertiary in this instance) but by sheer cold pragmatism and (IMO--not sure Kneasy agrees with this part) contempt for an enemy who would not even fight him. He underestimated her to his great detriment, and I'm guessing he'll make the same mistake with Harry.<< I agree with that as well. After all, he could see what he had come for (Harry), behind her, his mind was more on that than anything else. He only turned his attention to her when she demanded it. As for making the same mistake with Harry, he already did that in GoF. I wonder, though, if he's thick enough to repeat that mistake. From vmonte at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 10:20:54 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 10:20:54 -0000 Subject: Veil Room at MoM in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109328 macfotuk at y wrote: Hermione's readings, judgements and assessments are almost always spot-on and this was the room in the MoM that most freaked her out. We end up finding something about why later when it is the scene of Sirius' death. At the same time I think it significant that neither Hermione nor Ron could sense the voices or the palpably sinister attaction of the arch and they can't see Thestrals either, while Luna, Ginny* and Neville, who all can, are almost as fascinated as Harry by the veil when first they encounter it. *Not sure if Ginny can see Thestrals, but even if not her possession by LV (as TR in CoS) might serve as the sensitisation necessary to allow her to be responsive to the magical allures of the veil. vmonte responds: Interesting post. I think that Harry mentioning Sirius's name was probably a forshadowing of his death via veil. But doesn't he also think that he hears Ron talking to him from the veil? Something like: 'Ron is that you?' and then Ron: 'I'm here mate.' I think that Ron actually walks around from behind the veil. This really creeped me out by the way. Ginny, Neville, Luna, and Harry are attracted to the veil because they have all had either near death experiences, or they've witnessed death. Hermione has not seen death but is smart enough to realize that there is something creepy or sinister about the room and that GNLH seem attracted to the veil. Ron is the only one who is not creeped out or affected by the veil. He casually walks around it's side to answer Harry, his friend. Now, I never read this scene like you have, but if you are right, then Harry has given the veil Sirius and Ron's name. I also just reread this scene and noticed (for the first time--DUH) that the description of the veiled room sounds a lot like it may have been an ancient sacrificial site. So maybe you are right! This room was once somewhere else and was specifically used for sacrificing people to an ancient god. So, the only person unaffected and not afraid of death (like Sirius, per Nick's ghost) is Ron, the next victim of the veil. vivian From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 8 10:34:28 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 06:34:28 -0400 Subject: Theory on Snape - Message-ID: <001b01c47d33$49459ec0$53c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109329 Magda "Yeah, I'm with Nora on this one. Snape is too filled with tension to have been a good guy all the time. And I think its much more satisfying plot-wise to have a genuine repented DE now fighting for good than otherwise. This isn't a series about black and white characters; there are shades of gray too. And Snape is the most interesting shade of gray around. There's no doubt in my mind he's done horrible things in the past. That Dumbledore can get past this to let him close to children is one of the mysteries of the books." DuffyPoo: Of course he's done horrible things in the past, he was a DE! He had to do horrible things or he would have been found out. DD knows he's done horrible things...even if it was just brewing poisonous potions. The fact that DD still lets him teach is still one of the mysteries of the books. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 8 10:53:46 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 06:53:46 -0400 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS - 'That Night'- Fudge After the Fact Message-ID: <002401c47d35$faf5adc0$53c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109330 > Kneasy: > > Back to semantics and grammatical construction, I'm afraid. > > "Black's been talking.." is the key I think. > > I would read this as "Black has been talking" the implication being > that it is a continuing activity. > > If Black were no longer in residence then I'd expect it to be > written "Black had been talking". Steve/asian_lovr2 "I don't personally find it all that uncommon or out of place for Arthur to say "...Black's been talking..." which we assume means 'Black has been talking'. Especially when it is the guards speaking and the time proximity is the very night Black escaped and perhaps only minutes from that escape." DuffyPoo: First off, thanks to Kneasy for making me think, long and hard about this. I do tend to agree with Steve though. This isn't Arthur quoting Fudge or the guards, he's saying it himself. The only quote in Arthur's statement was "He's at Hogwarts...He's at Hogwarts," the words Sirius was supposed to have muttered in his sleep. Besides, who are the guards at Azkaban? Just the Dementors? If so, just how well educated are they? I heard someone on TV yesterday telling a story about a woman struck by lightning in 1907. She had her hand on a door knob in the house. The lightning hit the rod on the top of the house, travelled down through the house, ripped up the floor, went up the door to the door knob, went through the woman and blew off her shoes. He said "She's okay though." Well, I doubt she IS okay, it's most likley she is, by this point, long since dead. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kempermentor at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 08:02:13 2004 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 08:02:13 -0000 Subject: Theory on Snape - MASSIVE In-Reply-To: <008901c47c6e$8998dd40$a8c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109331 Duffypoo wrote: For those who asked, here it is. I apologise for the length and in advance to the ESE!Snape fans, but don't flame me until you read the last couple of sentences. ;-) My theory is that Snape is on the side of good and has never changed sides. Here is why: (MASSIVE snip) Of course, the other side of this is that Snape was on the side of good, went over to LV for his own reasons, is truly spying on DD for LV, convinced DD he had left the the DEs, is spying on LV for DD, and is truly a double agent. (This bit should make the ESE!Snape fans happy.) The DoubleAgent!Snape was where my theory started, but it evolved into GoodGuy!Snape somehow. My husband, who has never read the books but has heard my rambling about them, believes the DoubleAgent!Snape theory. He believes Snape is playing both ends against the middle so that, whoever gets vanquished in the end - good guys or bad guys - he'll still have a place in the structure. Kemper responds: Thank you so much for posting a well argued and written post! I'm a ESNE!Snape fan (Ever So Not Evil), so I disagree with your husband, Nora, Magda and Charme. Your theory makes sense in the Plot and Thematically. And here's why: DD wouldn't hire some evil man to work with youth, and a character can be unlikable and still be good because "it is our choices (snip) that show what we truly are." What makes Snape so intriguing and fun to theorize about is that he is a grey character, but as Duffypoo suggests (mostly), his grey is more of a concrete than it is a charcoal. From khinterberg at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 05:51:56 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 05:51:56 -0000 Subject: Mundungus Fletcher/Crookshanks Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109332 I was just re-reading OotP and noticed a nice description (p 22 US) of Mundungus Fletcher. "He had short bandy legs, long straggly ginger hair..." Sounds surprisingly like Crookshanks the cat. On p 60 of PoA Crookshanks is described "the cat's ginger fur was thick and fluffy, but it was definitely a bit bowlegged and its face looked grumpy..." Crookshanks is also often referred to as having "bandy legs." When we meet Mundungus, we find that he has been watching Harry and keeping in close contact with Mrs. Figg...a notorious cat lover. Jo Rowling doesn't throw these eerily similar descriptions and clues out for no reason. Could it be that Mundungus is an animagus whose form happens to be Crookshanks? From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 8 11:03:29 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 07:03:29 -0400 Subject: Theory on Snape Message-ID: <002d01c47d37$56bf08d0$53c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109333 charme "However, after reading your post, I do notice how much Malfoy and Draco seem to rear their heads, and I have an idea that Snape doesn't spy on or for LV directly - he spies on and for Malfoy. In the same turn, I think feeds info BACK to Malfoy and Malfoy chooses to keep some of that info close rather than share it with anyone, including LV. I'm rather convinced that as far a Malfoy's concerned, he's rather like the second in command who leads the troops faithfully for his general, however I feel that our boy Lucius is waiting in the wings for the tide to turn his way and *he* can have all the glory. He may very well know that Snape is in cahoots with DD, and uses Snape for his own ambitious means to an end." DuffyPoo: I have a very similar theory about our Slippery Friend. I just can't see him wanting to be 2 i/c forever as he appears a bit too ambitious to me for that. Even if LV is vanquished, LV is going to be ready in the wings to take over, unless of course he's killed between now and then. My theory in the making is rather on hold right now seeing as the slippery devil is sitting on his heiney in Azkaban. ;-) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 11:12:19 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 11:12:19 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109334 Re: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort > DuffyPoo replied: > Snape must have understood Lupin's meaning, which he could not protest in front of Harry without revealing Lupin's connection to James and Sirius. He would also have recognized that Lupin's claim to the map was better than his and would have (rightly) assumed that Lupin would not return the confiscated map to Harry--at least not while he was still teaching at Hogwarts. Lupin, BTW, had his own reasons for keeping the map from Harry or anyone else (particularly Snape and Dumbledore). He couldn't let it be known that "the animagus Black" (to steal Bella's term) knew secret passageways into Hogwarts and might well be hiding in the Shrieking Shack. Bad Lupin! Maybe not ESE!, but still putting his own needs before Dumbledore's--or Harry's. Mhbobbin replies: THis explanation of how Snape knows enough about the "Manufacturers" to make his comment is one that finally makes sense to me. I also wonder if we're going to learn when the Map was consfiscated by Filch many years before. We know that Gred and Forge found the map in Filch's file cabinet. And that Lupin was in Filch's file cabinet likely looking for it before he learns that Harry already has it. [Lupin finds the Boggart he has Harry learn the Patronus on in Filch's File Cabinet.] I wonder if the Map confiscation is related to the notorious Whomping Willow incident played on Snape--there are so many references to the incident without us learning the full truth and JKR has promised more about this. Of course, the confiscation of the Map--which Filch doesn't know how to work--could have been some other time as well. It's just that the WW incident keeps popping up as a defining moment in the lives of those involved. It apparently takes place Year Six of the Marauders' Hogwarts schooling [as there is a reference to being sixteen] and it still seems to be a defining moment in the experience of those involved. mhbobbin From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 11:17:00 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 11:17:00 -0000 Subject: Mundungus Fletcher / Crookshanks Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109335 "khinterberg" I was just re-reading OotP and noticed a nice description (p 22 US) of Mundungus Fletcher. "He had short bandy legs, long straggly ginger hair..." Sounds surprisingly like Crookshanks the cat. On p 60 of PoA Crookshanks is described "the cat's ginger fur was thick and fluffy, but it was definitely a bit bowlegged and its face looked grumpy..." Crookshanks is also often referred to as having "bandy legs." When we meet Mundungus, we find that he has been watching Harry and keeping in close contact with Mrs. Figg...a notorious cat lover. Jo Rowling doesn't throw these eerily similar descriptions and clues out for no reason. Could it be that Mundungus is an animagus whose form happens to be Crookshanks. mhbobbin: I think JKR was playing a joke on the Crookshanks is an Animagus theory that used to exist. JKR has said that Crookshanks is a kneazel. See FAQs for more info. Dung and Crookshanks appear in the same scene at Grimauld Place at some point. And how creepy would it be for Dung to be hanging out in a girls dormitory, sleeping in Hermione's bed? YUK!!! mhbobbin From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Sun Aug 8 11:30:53 2004 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 11:30:53 -0000 Subject: Mundungus Fletcher / Crookshanks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109336 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mhbobbin" wrote: > "khinterberg" >>>I was just re-reading OotP and noticed a nice description (p 22 US) of Mundungus Fletcher. "He had short bandy legs, long straggly ginger hair..." Sounds surprisingly like Crookshanks the cat. On p 60 of PoA Crookshanks is described "the cat's ginger fur was thick and fluffy, but it was definitely a bit bowlegged and its face looked grumpy..." Crookshanks is also often referred to as having "bandy legs." When we meet Mundungus, we find that he has been watching Harry and keeping in close contact with Mrs. Figg...a notorious cat lover. Jo Rowling doesn't throw these eerily similar descriptions and clues out for no reason. Could it be that Mundungus is an animagus whose form happens to be Crookshanks.<<< --- > mhbobbin replied: >>>I think JKR was playing a joke on the Crookshanks is an Animagus theory that used to exist. JKR has said that Crookshanks is a kneazel. See FAQs for more info. Dung and Crookshanks appear in the same scene at Grimauld Place at some point. And how creepy would it be for Dung to be hanging out in a girls dormitory, sleeping in Hermione's bed? YUK!!!<<< --- Inge: He he he .... yea, how creepy would that be for old Fletcher? Plus - wouldn't Hermione wonder where Crookshanks were if he were to disappear all summer to go wathcing Harry? From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 8 11:34:07 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 07:34:07 -0400 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 Message-ID: <003601c47d3b$9e2c91c0$53c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109337 RMM "It can make a great deal of difference. If the cutting was from today's paper -- which would bear a September or October date on it, then the relevance of "on 31 July" would indicate absolutely that the break-in occurred "on 31 July". However, the cutting, laying under a tea cozy, tells us that it is old and is only there because of the relevance to when Hagrid and Harry were at the bank. As it is old then, "on 31 July" can indicate that the investigation was continuing "on 31 July"." DuffyPoo: Wait a second. Hagrid could have cut it out of the paper that morning and placed it on the table, to put away later (I do it all the time). Hagrid had invited Harry for tea, "I know you get Friday afternoons off, so would you like to come and have a cup of tea with me around three?". He, at least I, take the tea cozy off the tea pot before I make tea, because I run hot water into the pot first, to warm it. Also, my current tea cozy, the pot sits down into it and the cosy pulls up around the pot and fastens at the top, but every tea cozy I had before that slipped down over the pot. You would have to take the tea cozy off to take off the pot's lid to put in tea leaves/bags and boiling water. He could quite easily have just dropped the tea cozy onto the freshly-cut-out-of-the-paper news article on the table. And, just to muddy the waters further. I've thought this was an old article. Probably from the Daily Prophet of a day or two after the break-in. Ron and Harry were talking about the break-in on the Hogwarts Express on Sept 1, "Did you hear about Gringotts? It's been all over the Daily Prophet, but I don't suppose you get that with the Muggles -- someone tried to rob a high security vault." 'All over the Daily Prophet,' here, looks, to me, like the story was in several issues of the Daily Prophet, the first being the day after the incident, then most likely a few after that with updates, one of which Hagrid cut out, as that article says that the break-in is "widely believed to be the work of Dark witches or wizards unknown." If this was the original article from the day of/after the incident, only those involved in the investigation might believe it was the work of Dark wizards, but once the break-in was reported to the public, it would be "widely believed," as Ron says, "My dad says it must've been a powerful Dark wizard to get round Gringotts.....'Course, everyone gets scared when something like this happens in case You-Know-Who's behind it." All that said, I still believe the article in question is saying that the break-in occurred on July 31st. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Aug 8 11:43:54 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 11:43:54 -0000 Subject: Scottish school cut-off dates- Hermione's birthday riddle solved? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109338 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: Asian_lorv2: > Not to be a nitpicker or anything, but I'd like to point out that > Hogwarts while IN Scotland, is not a Scottish school. > > Although, I admit that we have nothing but real world schools to use > as a reference point. > > Just curious, is it Feb/Mar of the year in which you start school, or > is it Feb/Mar of the following year? Example; turn 11 Feb/Mar of 2000, > start school Sept 2000, or start school Sept 2000, turn 11 in Feb.mar > 2001? geoff: I would suspect that it follows the English/Welsh pattern in that you are already 11 when you enter the First Year/Year 7. From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 11:44:28 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 11:44:28 -0000 Subject: Mundungus Fletcher / Crookshanks Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109339 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mhbobbin" wrote: > "khinterberg" Could it be that Mundungus is an animagus whose form happens to be Crookshanks.<<< --- > mhbobbin replied: >>>I think JKR was playing a joke on the Crookshanks is an Animagus theory that used to exist. JKR has said that Crookshanks is a kneazel. See FAQs for more info. Dung and Crookshanks appear in the same scene at Grimauld Place at some point. And how creepy would it be for Dung to be hanging out in a girls dormitory, sleeping in Hermione's bed? YUK!!!<<< --- Inge: He he he .... yea, how creepy would that be for old Fletcher? Plus - wouldn't Hermione wonder where Crookshanks were if he were to disappear all summer to go wathcing Harry? mhbobbin: I should have written that it'd be creepy for Hermione and friends but not for Dung. Double-YUK. I just want to add that Crookshanks NOT being an animagus was a disappointment for me. The way that Crookshanks had been hanging out in the Magical Pet shop, as though he was waiting for Scabbers to be seen by the Vet--and then permitting Hermione to adopt him when he had rejected other pet owners===I really wanted Crookshanks' story to be really interesting==like he was undercover law enforcement. I'm not hopeful that Crookshanks will play much role in the final two books as the Makers of That=Which=Must=Not=Be=Mentioned, didn't even include his magical powers and downsized his critical role. And JKR permitted it. I worry that Books 6 and 7 are going to disappoint some of us. And at the same time I want JKR to get a move on. mhbobbin From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 11:44:24 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 11:44:24 -0000 Subject: Mundungus Fletcher / Crookshanks Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109340 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mhbobbin" wrote: > "khinterberg" Could it be that Mundungus is an animagus whose form happens to be Crookshanks.<<< --- > mhbobbin replied: >>>I think JKR was playing a joke on the Crookshanks is an Animagus theory that used to exist. JKR has said that Crookshanks is a kneazel. See FAQs for more info. Dung and Crookshanks appear in the same scene at Grimauld Place at some point. And how creepy would it be for Dung to be hanging out in a girls dormitory, sleeping in Hermione's bed? YUK!!!<<< --- Inge: He he he .... yea, how creepy would that be for old Fletcher? Plus - wouldn't Hermione wonder where Crookshanks were if he were to disappear all summer to go wathcing Harry? mhbobbin: I should have written that it'd be creepy for Hermione and friends but not for Dung. Double-YUK. I just want to add that Crookshanks NOT being an animagus was a disappointment for me. The way that Crookshanks had been hanging out in the Magical Pet shop, as though he was waiting for Scabbers to be seen by the Vet--and then permitting Hermione to adopt him when he had rejected other pet owners===I really wanted Crookshanks' story to be really interesting==like he was undercover law enforcement. I'm not hopeful that Crookshanks will play much role in the final two books as the Makers of That=Which=Must=Not=Be=Mentioned, didn't even include his magical powers and downsized his critical role. And JKR permitted it. I worry that Books 6 and 7 are going to disappoint some of us. And at the same time I want JKR to get a move on. mhbobbin From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 8 11:55:42 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 07:55:42 -0400 Subject: Theory on Snape Message-ID: <003f01c47d3e$a1dbafb0$53c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109341 DuffyPoo: >>But Snape didn't really convert. He was on DD's side all along. He went over to LV on DD's orders, and came back after convincing LV that it would be a good plan, he could get closer to DD that way, in order to spy on him. No conversion necessary.<< vivian again: "You mean according to your theory don't you? Per canon, Snape was once a DE that switch sides at personal risk. Do you really think that DD knowingly allowed Snape to murder and torture people just so that he could gain information about Voldemort? This would make DD worse than Voldemort IMO. " DuffyPoo again: Yes, I meant according to my theory. Where does canon say that Snape murdered and tortured people? In my theory, his job for LV is to spy on DD. A 'spot of Muggle torture' such as took place at the Quidditch World Cup, may not have been nice, but didn't do any permanent damage either, apart from the family members having their memories modified. Mr. Roberts, according to the wizard in plus-fours, had to have his memory modified "ten times a day to keep him happy." DuffyPoo: >>>Nastiness is a good cover, isn't it? Can't let the little kiddies - or anyone else - figure out he's really a good guy. Might get back to the DEs, especially now he's got Malfoy, Jr., Crabbe, Jr., Goyle, Jr., and Nott, Jr. all in his Potions classes.<<< vivian again: "Didn't JKR say something about Snape's personality? Something about children aren't fooled by this kind of teacher (I know I'm misquoting). I really think that with Snape what you see is what you get. Adults have a tendency to rationalize behavior in a way that a child does not. I think Dumbledore is in for a nasty surprise." DuffyPoo again: Sorry, I can't keep up with all of JKRs interviews (and certainly can never seem to find something from her to quote when I want it...that dratted search at the Lexicon doesn't work well for me at all) she may well have said something I missed that would blow my theory completely out of the water. However, what you see is what you get could be the result of a nice, nasty little potion Mr. Snape drinks regularly. Mind you, I'm not hanging on to this thoery with my teeth. As I said, I started out thinking Snape was a double agent, but worked into this theory as I went along. Also, I have no vested interest in any of these people, they're fictional after all. I don't care if HP is the one to vanquish the Dark Lord or if it turns out to be Hermione, or some obscure person we hardly know of, or don't yet know. I don't care if DD is a polyjuiced LV, or if there are two DDs walking through all this world, one invisible, only showing up when needed, and that's how he knows everything he appears to know. It doesn't matter to me what side Snape ends up on. About the only outcome of the books I really would care about would be if Fred and George turned out to really be cheaters (in the matter of the Quidditch match or giving Hermione a sleeping draught in her Butterbeer) or if they go over to LV's side. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 12:16:53 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 12:16:53 -0000 Subject: James' Choice (Was Marauders' Map, Marauders and Voldemort) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109342 Naama writes: (snips) They suspected each other because they knew (via DD) that there was a spy in the Potter's near circle of friends. So, it's not that they inherently didn't trust each other, but that they were forced to consider that one of their best friends is a traitor. Everybody apparently had a blind spot regarding Peter (including the Potters), so what other choice did they have (each one knowing himself to be innocent) but suspect the other? mhbobbin: Sirius suspected Lupin. Lupin suspected Sirius [ Shrieking Shack scene]. James had to make a choice as to who the most likely spy was. I wonder how James made that choice. We know DD tried to persuade James to make him the Secret Keeper. James rejected that idea. DD then was not certain of which of James' three friends was the spy, however, DD did not want Sirius to be made the Secret Keeper. We know James chose Sirius rather than Lupin---the inference is that James thought Lupin was the spy. We're told why Pettigrew was not thought to be the spy and was still trusted. Did James think Lupin was the spy because he was a werewolf? Did James have other yet unrevealed reasons to suspect Lupin had an alliance with Voldemort? Maybe James didn't make a choice. I wonder if James hedged his bets-- -after all, so much was at stake. Is it possible that James also had a spell-arrangement with Lupin as well? There's still something so odd about Lupin's relationship to Harry-- how he shivers when Harry mentions his parents, how he doesn't touch Harry except when he holds Harry back from The Veil, and the JKR joke at the end of OotP which has Lupin saying to Harry "Keep in Touch." I know there are theorists who put forth an ESE!Lupin theory but I'm not convinced yet. Nor am I convinced that the Switching Spell theory out there--that James and Lupin switched souls-- is the solution either. Maybe we just don't have enough information. But there's much more to learn about James' trust / mistrust of Lupin. [shiver] mhbobbin From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 12:39:46 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 05:39:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Phineas Nigellus ch. 37 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040808123946.32833.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109343 > This is my first time posting. In chapter 37 Phineas Nigellus is > told by DD that Sirius is dead (page 826). He says he doesn't > believe it and leaves his portrait. By page 828 it says that he > had still not returned (to his portrait). In fact it never > mentions him returning. > Does anyone have an opinion regarding why he does not return? > > "lightwriterandpaws" Hello, LWAP (hope you don't mind the short form). Welcome to the group. I think he spent quite a bit of time moving around 12GP making sure Sirius wasn't there and then he stayed by himself to grieve for a while. Despite his apparent put-downs of his descendent, I do believe he had some feeling for him. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From sarahlizzy at hotmail.com Sun Aug 8 12:46:16 2004 From: sarahlizzy at hotmail.com (sarah_haining) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 12:46:16 -0000 Subject: Scottish school cut-off dates- Hermione's birthday riddle solved? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109344 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" > wrote: > > Not to be a nitpicker or anything, but I'd like to point out that > > Hogwarts while IN Scotland, is not a Scottish school. > > > > Although, I admit that we have nothing but real world schools to use > > as a reference point. Sarah: Well yes, from my Scottish education, I can safely say that Hogwarts doesn't follow the normal curriculum! :) But as Jo was a teacher in a Scottish school and Hogwarts is supposedly set in Scotland, I figured that it made sense that she would simply use Scottish cut-off dates, especially when the English dates cause confusion as to how the trio are all in the same year. Steve: > > Just curious, is it Feb/Mar of the year in which you start school, > or > > is it Feb/Mar of the following year? Example; turn 11 Feb/Mar of > 2000, > > start school Sept 2000, or start school Sept 2000, turn 11 in > Feb.mar > > 2001? > > geoff: > I would suspect that it follows the English/Welsh pattern in that you > are already 11 when you enter the First Year/Year 7. Sarah: It is February/March of the following year you start, if I am answering your question correctly!! I think the cut off date may actually be the 28th of February, so, as an example, the oldest person in my year at school was a boy born on the 13th March 1984 (who was 5 and 5 months when he started school in August 1989) and the youngest was a girl born on the 26th of February 1985 (who was 4 1/2 in August 1989). Phew! I hope that makes sense!! From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 8 12:49:55 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 08:49:55 -0400 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 Message-ID: <005001c47d46$35046640$53c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109345 HunterGreen: "It says that there hasn't been a first year *seeker* in a century, that doesn't mean there aren't ever first year chasers, keepers, and beaters (although a seeker seems like it would be most suited to a younger student than the other positions)." Duffyoo: The book says, "Seeker?" he [Ron} said "But first years never -- you must be the youngest house player in about --" "---a century," said Harry. I think that rules out first years as chasers, beaters, keepers, as well. HunterGreen: "Also, we must remember, that at least when she was writing the first few books, I doubt she expected readers to be looking this closely at the facts and the timelines and all that. Clearly 100% accurate and sensical timelines are not something thats a priority to her. It's something that she overlooked. So far it hasn't been anything bigger than a day of the week being odd (like September first always being a Sunday), or Snape appearing to take a long time to alert the order when Harry went to the DoM, so I wouldn't worry about it. " DuffyPoo: I agree, I doubt she expected readers to be looking so closely for timelines and whatnot. I think one of her biggest mistakes, including Flint and Mark Evans, was noting the date of Nick's deathday as 1492. If it weren't for that specific date none of this date speculation could be going on. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From vmonte at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 12:53:53 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 12:53:53 -0000 Subject: Theory on Snape In-Reply-To: <003f01c47d3e$a1dbafb0$53c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109346 DuffyPoo: Yes, I meant according to my theory. Where does canon say that Snape murdered and tortured people? In my theory, his job for LV is to spy on DD. A 'spot of Muggle torture' such as took place at the Quidditch World Cup, may not have been nice, but didn't do any permanent damage either, apart from the family members having their memories modified. Mr. Roberts, according to the wizard in plus-fours, had to have his memory modified "ten times a day to keep him happy." DuffyPoo: Nastiness is a good cover, isn't it? Can't let the little kiddies - or anyone else - figure out he's really a good guy. Might get back to the DEs, especially now he's got Malfoy, Jr., Crabbe, Jr., Goyle, Jr., and Nott, Jr. all in his Potions classes.<<< vivian: Didn't JKR say something about Snape's personality? Something about children aren't fooled by this kind of teacher (I know I'm misquoting). I really think that with Snape what you see is what you get. Adults have a tendency to rationalize behavior in a way that a child does not. I think Dumbledore is in for a nasty surprise. DuffyPoo: Sorry, I can't keep up with all of JKRs interviews (and certainly can never seem to find something from her to quote when I want it...that dratted search at the Lexicon doesn't work well for me at all) she may well have said something I missed that would blow my theory completely out of the water. However, what you see is what you get could be the result of a nice, nasty little potion Mr. Snape drinks regularly. vmonte again: Hi Duffypoo, please don't think that I'm attacking you, or your theory. I don't know how the series is going to end, but like you (and all the other HPFGUs on this site) I have strong opinions about the characters. I like reading other peoples ideas and discussing theories, etc. I'm sorry if I sometimes come on too strong and sound like I'm being condescending--because I'm not. (Besides, my theories are way out there anyway: Ron=DD, etc.) Now back to your post... Remember the scene in GoF where Fred and George give Dudley (or rather leave behind) a laced candy that makes Dudley's tongue swell? Well, what I remember about that scene is what happened afterward; Mr. Weasley yells at the boys for doing the exact thing he fights against at his job--muggle baiting. Mr. Weasley is mortified about what his children did to Dudley, a muggle. It doesn't really matter that Dudley is a bad person anyway, or that his memory could be modified if necessary. What matters is that a person who lives honorably should never do such a thing (according to Mr. Weasley--and probably JKR). In OOTP we also see Harry viewing Snape's penseive memories and feeling embarrassed (much like Mr. Weasley) at his father's behavior towards Snape, even though Snape is a jerk to Harry--according to Harry. I also really don't think that Snape is taking a potion that makes him nasty. If anything, he may be actually controlling his real self somehow. (Could he be even worse than what he seems--yes I think so. For someone who lectures Harry about his lack of emotional self- control, Snape is the one who often seems at boiling point.) And I also like Fred & George and Don't want any harm to come to them or any of the wizard kids they experiment on. Vivian From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 8 12:56:08 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 08:56:08 -0400 Subject: Mundungus Fletcher/Crookshanks Message-ID: <005901c47d47$134956e0$53c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109347 khinterberg "I was just re-reading OotP and noticed a nice description (p 22 US) of Mundungus Fletcher. "He had short bandy legs, long straggly ginger hair..." Sounds surprisingly like Crookshanks the cat. On p 60 of PoA Crookshanks is described "the cat's ginger fur was thick and fluffy, but it was definitely a bit bowlegged and its face looked grumpy..." Crookshanks is also often referred to as having "bandy legs." When we meet Mundungus, we find that he has been watching Harry and keeping in close contact with Mrs. Figg...a notorious cat lover. Jo Rowling doesn't throw these eerily similar descriptions and clues out for no reason. Could it be that Mundungus is an animagus whose form happens to be Crookshanks?" DuffyPoo: Unfortunately, both Mundungus and Crookshanks were in the kitchen at dinnertime the first day HP arrives at 12 Grimmauld Place. Fred, George and Mundungus are laughing over a story Dung told about stolen toads, and Ginny was playing with Crookshanks with Butterbeer corks on the floor. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 14:20:13 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 14:20:13 -0000 Subject: The Final Showdown In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109348 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "" wrote: [snip] dcgmck: I'm not disagreeing with your foregoing prediction, but I just want to comment on this one ancillary thought: theadimail wrote: > Some other predictions: > Harry will kill Bellatrix in the sixth book. dcgmck: Bellatrix belongs to Neville. Her fate is his right to determine, since she is the one who determined his fate by incapacitating his parents, leaving him to the not so tender mercies of his grandmother and other relatives. There's no other narrative reason for him to be growing stronger and more aggressive at this time. He has, after all, been with Harry and Co. since PS/SS when they first met on the train, got sorted into Gryffindor, found the Forbidden Room, served detention in the Forbidden Forest, and won enough points to overset Slytherin for the first time in seven years. Books 2-4 show Neville's timidity being reinforced by his ongoing academic failures. He continues to lurk around the edges of the tale, seeming to turn a bit of a corner at the GoF Winter Ball when Ginny agrees to be his date. That seems to mark a turn in Neville's development, as it does for so many young teens. His early social success seems to mark the beginning of his growing self-esteem and self-confidence, even as Harry's arguable social failure is paralleled by his increasingly darker world view (for obvious if unrelated reasons). [snip] > That the first thing DUmbledore will want to do is to reclaim his > arrested Death Eaters is obvious but he has only dememntors at his > command. I think they will mass attack on some soft target... > Platform 93/4 perhaps? > dcgmck: Do you perhaps mean Voldemort? From meriaugust at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 14:28:44 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 14:28:44 -0000 Subject: James' Choice (Was Marauders' Map, Marauders and Voldemort) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109349 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mhbobbin" wrote: > mhbobbin: > > Sirius suspected Lupin. Lupin suspected Sirius [ Shrieking Shack > scene]. James had to make a choice as to who the most likely spy > was. I wonder how James made that choice. We know DD tried to > persuade James to make him the Secret Keeper. James rejected that > idea. DD then was not certain of which of James' three friends was > the spy, however, DD did not want Sirius to be made the Secret > Keeper. > > We know James chose Sirius rather than Lupin---the inference is that > James thought Lupin was the spy. We're told why Pettigrew was not > thought to be the spy and was still trusted. Did James think Lupin > was the spy because he was a werewolf? Did James have other yet > unrevealed reasons to suspect Lupin had an alliance with Voldemort? > > Maybe James didn't make a choice. I wonder if James hedged his bets-- > -after all, so much was at stake. Is it possible that James also had > a spell-arrangement with Lupin as well? > > There's still something so odd about Lupin's relationship to Harry- - > how he shivers when Harry mentions his parents, how he doesn't touch > Harry except when he holds Harry back from The Veil, and the JKR > joke at the end of OotP which has Lupin saying to Harry "Keep in > Touch." > > I know there are theorists who put forth an ESE!Lupin theory but I'm > not convinced yet. Nor am I convinced that the Switching Spell > theory out there--that James and Lupin switched souls-- is the > solution either. Maybe we just don't have enough information. > > But there's much more to learn about James' trust / mistrust of > Lupin. [shiver] > > mhbobbin Meri now: I don't think that the fact that James eventually chose Sirius (before choosing Peter) is any indication that he didn't trust Lupin. I think it is more of an indication that Sirius was his *best friend*. He and Black were, as is said by many people, like brothers. And Lupin, no matter how much he and James cared for each other, just weren't close as sibs. Nine times out of ten you would trust your sib before a friend, right? And then, IIRC, they chose Pettigrew because who would suspect that *that* wizard (ie: someone talentless and weak) would be trusted with a job like Secret Keeping. If you ask me, Sirius and Lupin were the ones doing all the susposing when it came to who the traitor was, and James simply picked his bestest (sorry to make up words) friend and brother to take on the job of keeping secrets, that is, until he gave it to the actual traitor. Which was just mindbogglingly dumb. But that's another post. Who knows, maybe he flipped a coin. Meri - who can't wait to reread 1-5 once more before summer is over... From omphale at onetel.com Sun Aug 8 14:31:39 2004 From: omphale at onetel.com (saraquel_omphale) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 14:31:39 -0000 Subject: Theory on Snape - MASSIVE In-Reply-To: <037301c47c7f$e73be710$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109350 > > However, after reading your post, I do notice how much Malfoy and Draco seem > to rear their heads, and I have an idea that Snape doesn't spy on or for LV > directly - he spies on and for Malfoy. In the same turn, I think feeds info > BACK to Malfoy and Malfoy chooses to keep some of that info close rather > than share it with anyone, including LV. Saraquel goes very much along with Charme, I recently posted (109115) something similar and will post edited parts of it again here as it wasn't taken up: Saraquel has always been intrigued by exactly what Snape does for TOotP: I don't think that Snape has direct contact with Voldemort, too much is known about him (see recent threads about Quirrelmort for a start) for Voldemort to be tricked. The passage re Harry and Snape is carefully worded, implying that Snape finds out what LV HAS SAID (which could well just be reported speech) to his DEs, not what LV is doing. How and even why Snape is conected to LM I thought about a bit in that last post, but one possible connection between them could be Draco's eagle owl. Now there's a passage in GOF (p500 Uk pb) about Harry riding on the back of an eagle owl in his dream. This passage has always raised a question mark in my mind because it is unclear to me whether the eagle owl has been sent with a message by Crouch jnr and lands in the chair to give the message to LV, or how I read it the first time, LV had possessed the owl to find out what was happening at Hogwarts and on landing in the chair 'turns back into' LV. This second interpretation would explain why Harry was flying on the back of the owl in the first place. The eagle owl frequently goes to and fro between Draco and his parents, this has been established right from the start. Now if Snape was to possess the owl (or heaven forbid be yet another animagus) he would have access to the Malfoy's home and eye contact with Malfoy for legilimancy purposes. Now for something new: Snipped from Cathy's original text >if >you belive Snape is *the next man*: "Voldemort moved on, and >stopped, staring at >the space -- large enough for two people -- which separated Malfoy >*and the next >man*.") I very much liked the idea that Snape was at the graveyard, and am very convinced by her arguments, including the explanation for Snape jumping at Malfoys name (I know I've just contradicted myself, because above I said that I didn't think Snape spied directly on LV, in general I don't think he does, but I was really convinced by Cathy's argument... But I want to have my cake and eat it :-)) However, that then leaves us with the problem of who is 'the one who has left and will be killed'? snipped from Cathy's original post I promised myself I was going to stay outta Snapethreads. We always >end up arguing unknown points of fact, and there are enough of those >that no one can decently argue interpretation, at the moment Snape is a pivotal character in understanding so much that I think JKR has deliberately kept us in the dark with him and we really do need more information before we can even think of pieceing things together. Saraquel From srae1971 at bellsouth.net Sun Aug 8 14:51:58 2004 From: srae1971 at bellsouth.net (Shannon) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 10:51:58 -0400 Subject: theories Message-ID: <5.1.1.6.1.20040808104426.00c93048@mail.bellsouth.net> No: HPFGUIDX 109351 Is there someplace online, perhaps at the lexicon or elsewhere, that keeps a running list of theories regarding various characters, storylines, etc? Quite often I see someone refer to a theory that I've never heard of, and rather than posting everytime going, "er, what?" it would be nice if there was a place where the major ones, at least, were presented more or less coherently. For example, last night I was searching high and low for stuff about Ron possibly being a seer (a theory that, given my affection for Ron, I'm particularly fond of), but it was kind of a nightmare. Shannon From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Aug 8 15:02:56 2004 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 8 Aug 2004 15:02:56 -0000 Subject: Reminder - Weekly Chat Message-ID: <1091977376.44.90362.m20@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109352 We would like to remind you of this upcoming event. Weekly Chat Date: Sunday, August 8, 2004 Time: 11:00AM CDT (GMT-05:00) Don't forget, chat happens today, 11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern, 7 pm UK time. Chat times do not change 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 Hope to see you there! From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 15:09:49 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 15:09:49 -0000 Subject: James' Choice (Was Marauders' Map, Marauders and Voldemort) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109353 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mhbobbin" wrote: > > Sirius suspected Lupin. Lupin suspected Sirius [ Shrieking Shack > scene]. James had to make a choice as to who the most likely spy > was. I wonder how James made that choice. We know DD tried to > persuade James to make him the Secret Keeper. James rejected that > idea. DD then was not certain of which of James' three friends was > the spy, however, DD did not want Sirius to be made the Secret > Keeper. > > We know James chose Sirius rather than Lupin---the inference is that James thought Lupin was the spy. We're told why Pettigrew was not thought to be the spy and was still trusted. Did James think Lupin was the spy because he was a werewolf? Did James have other yet unrevealed reasons to suspect Lupin had an alliance with Voldemort? Meri now: I don't think that the fact that James eventually chose Sirius (before choosing Peter) is any indication that he didn't trust Lupin. I think it is more of an indication that Sirius was his *best friend*. He and Black were, as is said by many people, like brothers. And Lupin, no matter how much he and James cared for each other, just weren't close as sibs. snip Who knows, maybe he flipped a coin. Meri - who can't wait to reread 1-5 once more before summer is over... mhobbin writes: Perhaps it was as simple as James and Sirius being inseparable, causing James to choose Sirius. And perhaps it was as straightforward as the process of elimination that made Lupin the odd man out in the foursome, and the likely spy. After all, the last minute switch of Secret Keeper was not even revealed to DD and I hardly believe that DD was under suspicion. But Lupin was under suspicion. In the Shrieking Shack , <>, Pettigrew says to Lupin " You don't believe this...wouldn't Sirius have told you they'd changed the plan?" Lupin: "Not if he thought I was the spy Peter. I assume that's why you didn't tell me, Sirius." Sirius: "Forgive me Remus" And so forth. If James trusted Sirius as a brother, as Meri describes above, it is also likely that James shared Sirius' mistrust of Remus. The last minute switch was perhaps designed to fool Remus--after all, Remus believed that Sirius was the Secret Keeper. That information alone would have been useful to LV. What I'd like to know is what about Remus made James and Sirius think he was the spy. Process of elimination? Prejudice of werewolves? Or something else not yet revealed? Or did James hedge his bets, allowing one friend to believe he agreed with him about the other, while taking a separate course of action? The answer to the last cannot be known, IMO, by what is available. Only that there's something weird about how Lupin relates to Harry [shiver]. mhbobbin From vmonte at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 15:19:45 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 15:19:45 -0000 Subject: James' Choice (Was Marauders' Map, Marauders and Voldemort) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109354 mhbobbin wrote: What I'd like to know is what about Remus made James and Sirius think he was the spy. Process of elimination? Prejudice of werewolves? Or something else not yet revealed? Or did James hedge his bets, allowing one friend to believe he agreed with him about the other, while taking a separate course of action? The answer to the last cannot be known, IMO, by what is available. Only that there's something weird about how Lupin relates to Harry [shiver]. vmonte responds: This is very interesting, can you elaborate? I like the idea that James and Lily decided on a course of action that really had no basis on DD, Sirius, Lupin, and Wormtail's beliefs. Is it possible that the Potter's chose to die (a pre-planned event) in order to save their son? They may have felt there was no other way. vivian From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sun Aug 8 15:23:21 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith) Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 16:23:21 +0100 Subject: Villainy Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109355 Dunno about you but I'm disappointed in Voldy. Seems to be more caricature than character. More cardboard cut-out than cut-throat. Which is a bit surprising; JKR's pulled off a deliciously nasty piece of work in Snape but seemed unable to go a step further and produce an equally convincing evil mastermind. No wonder that in her web-cast in March JKR said that his future appearances would be sparse and that his minions would be scuttling about doing the dirty work at his behest. Most off us have read and enjoyed the 'Evil Overlord' list - the two hundred plus rules on how to stay at the top (and incidentally a useful guide to writers on what plot elements to avoid if you want a believable baddy and a resolution that isn't bulging at the seams with cliches). Admittedly most of the rules were devised for SF villains, though many are applicable to Fantasy or indeed any form of fiction that feature would-be global tyrants. The problem is that most villains are set up to lose; it's a given - evil never triumphs, and it won't in HP either. No matter how powerful and intelligent, no matter that he has overwhelming technological (or magical) advantage and an army of ruthless killers at his beck and call, it makes no difference. Even if the hero has nothing but a bent pocket knife and a piece of string, the baddy goes down. To do this the author must force him into committing egregious or even farcical mistakes. He has to - otherwise how could he possibly lose? The hero may be oath-sworn, with a heart filled with goodness and compassion; a song on his lips and with clean underpants and everything, but that doesn't stop a bullet, death-ray, AK or stab in the back - in RL that is - in fantasy it's a different story. Way back before WW I, might even have been in the Victorian era, there was a competition. A scenario was provided - the hero was chained hand and foot at the bottom of a deep, vertically sided pit with no ladder or hand-holds, the bottom was heaving with poisonous snakes and crocodiles, water was flooding in from a broken water main and a time-bomb was ticking. There was a prize for the best escape scenario submitted. The winner? "With one bound our hero was free." OK, HP isn't that bad, but there have been episodes where a nasty as truly evil as Voldy is supposed to be would walked away with a smile on his face and with a warm glow resulting from the knowledge of a job well done. He's aware of part of the Prophecy, he thinks Harry could be his nemesis, he's tried to kill Harry once at GH (or at least we presume so) and time and again Harry falls into his clutches. What happens? Voldy farts around, posturing and preening and eventually falls flat on his face. It's almost embarrassing. He's giving evil a bad name. Why be frightened of the bogey-man when he's as incompetent as this? I aired most of my gripes on the action scenes in post 108316; no point in repeating them, so this time I'll consider what makes an evil mastermind make the grade. Firstly - he must have ambitions that make sense. Voldy needs to sort out his priorities here. He wants to be immortal. ( Why? What is the point? To any thinking person immortality isn't a boon, it's a curse. It might be understandable if he was going to do something with all that time; travel the galaxies, meet strange aliens, feed them to Nagini. Not this one - he's staying at home.) In PS/SS getting hold of the Stone is his priority, Harry seems to be an accidental stumbling block to his plan. Thereafter he turns his attention on Harry. But if he stuck to his plan, gained true immortality while in the meantime avoiding young Potter then Harry becomes an irrelevance. And he'd save himself an awful lot of trouble if he stopped bashing his head against the same brick wall time after time. What are his wider ambitions? In reality we only have a vague idea, and that from Hagrid, " Getting supporters.....Taking things over." A bit vague for a manifesto. And since I can't remember Voldy coming out with any of the standard give-away phrases during any foaming-at-the-mouth carpet-chewing episodes; it makes you wonder if Hagrid's to be trusted in this. According to JKR (or so I've been told) he wants to *yawn* rule the world. Oh dear. No chance. In other tales there's always this McGuffin thingy - a ring, an amulet, the bicycle clips of power, that enable you to make others "bend to your will," whatever that means. But it generally works on a wholesale basis. Wear it and whole nations grovel. This time there's Voldy and a few dozen half-assed half-wits with delusions of adequacy who can't even subdue half a dozen school kids without cocking it up. Nah. Spiteful and targeted revenge for imagined childhood slights is one thing - stretching it to a lust for world domination is a bit much, even in these days of ersatz pop psychology. As presented in the books Voldy isn't a world threat, he's a local problem. In the 5 years covered by the books Voldy and his acolytes have killed about 20 (if you include the 13 Muggles). Hardly impressive from the most evil coterie around, is it? Voldy as a renegade in a small, hidden sub-section of society that works on a different basis to ours is fine. Expanding into the RW where RW systems and logic are our everyday currency is a mistake IMO. More limited ambitions do not equate to lower levels of evil; there are plenty of examples in fiction and the RW, from Vlad Tepes, or better yet Countess Bathory (a truly breath-taking monster, ?monstress?), and going through to the leaders of small cults. "The Wicker Man", anyone? So - an outline for an evil villain:- Understandable and/or credible ambitions that appear achievable. An original motivation that rings true (animus to your father turning one into a world tyrant just doesn't hack it). Intelligence in the villain predicates intelligent actions within the plot. For example punishing a messenger because he brings bad news is stupid and counter-productive. Even worse, not using a wand when you've got one in your hand. Why concentrate solely on the hero? Why not knock off the hero's friends and supporters? That really would be evil and there are too many Weasleys anyway. Nasty habits that chime with primitive personal fears. War doesn't do it, it's not aimed at you the reader *personally*; but imagining being ripped open and having your heart eaten can make your toes curl. So could selling Ginny to the Goblins as sushi-on-the-hoof, but controlling Belgium is a yawn. Ranting and posturing is out. Cold and implacable is in. He might be a nutter, but if he doesn't *appear* to be reasonable how's he going to attract followers? Potential problems will be foreseen and taken into account. He's supposed to be bright, isn't he? If he intends "taking over" he must have some idea of why he wants it and what he's going to do with it when he's got it. Anybody know? It would help greatly if the reader knew what it was that Harry was actually saving from his evil clutches. If he captures or corners the hero, expect the hero to die except in *very* exceptional one-off circumstances. (The conflict of wands works for Harry vs Voldy; Harry also escaping the ravening horde of DEs doesn't wash.) You can probably think of more attributes that would enhance the chill factor or maybe you think Voldy is perfectly satisfactory as he is. Personally I hoped for more. Bloodless deaths are bad enough when you're a committed FEATHERBOA. (After all we know there are spells/potions that can turn folk inside-out; why not use them?) And a really lip-smackingly evil villain isn't too much to ask for, is it? Kneasy From dontask2much at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 16:04:56 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 12:04:56 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: James' Choice (Was Marauders' Map, Marauders and Voldemort) References: Message-ID: <063a01c47d61$73948730$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 109356 From: "vmonte" > This is very interesting, can you elaborate? I like the idea that > James and Lily decided on a course of action that really had no basis > on DD, Sirius, Lupin, and Wormtail's beliefs. Is it possible that the > Potter's chose to die (a pre-planned event) in order to save their > son? They may have felt there was no other way. charme: Weird, after the Snape-Lupin-Harry scene when Snape confronts Lupin and Harry WRT the Marauder's Map and its "manufacturers," Lupin tells Harry that "Your parents gave their lives, Harry, to keep you alive." Notice that doesn't say "Your mother scarificed her life to keep you alive." Might not be anything, might be something, hm??? From finwitch at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 15:36:19 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 15:36:19 -0000 Subject: Curse Scars In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109357 DuffyPoo wrote: > > > I've read this before and couldn't understand it so now I'm asking > > > all of you. > > > > > > "Fudge had taken half a step back from Dumbledore, but he looked no > > > less stubborn. 'You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've heard of a > > > curse scar acting as an alarm bell before...'" > > > > > > I don't ever remember reading any conversation between Fudge and > > > Dumbledore regarding Harry's scar. He does tell Harry "I have a > > > theory, no more than that ... It is my belief that your scar hurts > > > both when Lord Voldemort is near you, and when he is feeling a > > > particularly strong surge of hatred." GoF > > > > > > What is Fuge referring to? For myself, I thought of Moody, who was described as having scars all over his skin (so many he hardly has scarless skin) AND has a reputation of being paranoid. I'd think that would suit well in this situation, considering that Fudge doesn't (want to) believe Dumbledore/Harry about the scar. How many times Moody has been alerted by his scars? How many? BTW, it is interesting how experienced and paranoid auror becomes captured by Dark Wizards! Finwitch From romulus at hermionegranger.us Sun Aug 8 15:53:04 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 15:53:04 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109358 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: Geoff: > > Finally, Ted the weatherman. Suppose I say on a Wednesday, "I am > going to London next week". That does not necessarily mean in exactly > a week, i.e. the following Wednesday; it could be the Monday or the > Tuesday etc. Again, if RMM is being pedantic and Ted is saying that > Bonfire Night is exactly a week hence, that isn't the case based on > Tuesday 27/10/81 because Bonfire Night that year was on its normal > date, 5th November, the Thursday of the following week. > > I rest my case. RMM: Geoff, I am sorry you continue to misunderstand me. Perhaps there is something about the differences in our language? When I say something like "see you next week" to someone, I do not mean to say that I will see you in exactly 7 days. I am saying, I will see you sometime next week. Okay? Now, Ted the Weatherman is saying on Tuesday that Bonfire Night is next week. He obviously is meaning "next week" the way I mean it, sometime next week. One simply consults the calendar and sees that November 5th falls on a Thursday. Counting back from that Thursday of "next week" one arrives to Tuesday of this week and finds -- VOILA!! -- Tuesday, October 27, 1981. Hence, the first book of Harry Potter started on Tuesday, October 27, 1981. I rest my case. RMM www.hermionegranger.us From dontask2much at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 16:21:45 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 12:21:45 -0400 Subject: The Voices & The Dementors - PoA Message-ID: <067801c47d63$cd6d6770$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 109359 Charme: Did anyone else other than me notice that when Harry has his "episodes" during his perceived or actual Dementor attacks, the words the voices say change somewhat? Maybe this is a by product of editing, but here's what I found in PoA: Chapter 9 - Grim Defeat "Not Harry, not Harry, please note Harry!" "Stand aside you, silly girl...stand aside, now..." "Not Harry, please no, take me, kill me instead -" "Not Harry! Please....have mercy....have mercy..." and then again: Chapter 12 - The Patronus "Not Harry! Please - I'll do anything -" "Stand aside. Stand aside, girl!" The first exchange is fairly detailed, including begging for mercy, yet no note of the "Please, I'll do anything -" How strange is all that? I can't even make a theory about it, I'm so confused.... charme From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com Sun Aug 8 16:29:40 2004 From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 16:29:40 -0000 Subject: Phineas Nigellus ch. 37 In-Reply-To: <20040808123946.32833.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109360 > > This is my first time posting. In chapter 37 Phineas Nigellus is > > told by DD that Sirius is dead (page 826). He says he doesn't > > believe it and leaves his portrait. By page 828 it says that he > > had still not returned (to his portrait). In fact it never > > mentions him returning. > > Does anyone have an opinion regarding why he does not return? > . > > I think he spent quite a bit of time moving around 12GP making sure > Sirius wasn't there and then he stayed by himself to grieve for a > while. Despite his apparent put-downs of his descendent, I do > believe he had some feeling for him. Additionally, Phineas' return would have distracted from the tense and highly-charged dialogue between Harry and Dumbledore. I don't see anyway that JKR could have effectively worked Phineas back into that scene. - CMC From jlawlor at gmail.com Sun Aug 8 17:19:46 2004 From: jlawlor at gmail.com (James Lawlor) Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 12:19:46 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Mundungus Fletcher/Crookshanks In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <96773c8804080810192b3e36f6@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109361 On Sun, 08 Aug 2004 05:51:56 -0000, khinterberg wrote: > Sounds surprisingly like Crookshanks the cat. On p 60 of PoA > Crookshanks is described "the cat's ginger fur was thick and fluffy, > but it was definitely a bit bowlegged and its face looked grumpy..." > Crookshanks is also often referred to as having "bandy legs." > When we meet Mundungus, we find that he has been watching Harry and > keeping in close contact with Mrs. Figg...a notorious cat lover. > Jo Rowling doesn't throw these eerily similar descriptions and clues > out for no reason. Could it be that Mundungus is an animagus whose > form happens to be Crookshanks? James: You know, I never noticed that myself. But according to JK Rowling's site: "Section: Rumours Crookshanks is an Animagus No, he's not, but he's not pure cat either. If you buy Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (all royalties to Comic Relief, which means you're helping some of the poorest children around the world) you might just be able to work out what Crookshanks really is." http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/rumours_view.cfm?id=7 But there is something up with cats in the books - >From the Scolastic.com chat 10/16/00 " Is there something more to the cats appearing in the books than first meets the eye? (i.e. Mrs. Figg's cats, Crookshanks, Prof. McGonagall as a cat, etc.) Ooooo, another good question. Let's see what I can tell you without giving anything away....erm....no, can't do it, sorry." http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2000/1000-scholastic-chat.htm - James Lawlor, who sadly had to skip a lot of email to get caught up recently, and will probably have to do so again next week jlawlor at gmail.com From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Sun Aug 8 18:03:00 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 18:03:00 -0000 Subject: James' Choice (Was Marauders' Map, Marauders and Voldemort) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109362 mhbobbin wrote: >>>Sirius suspected Lupin. Lupin suspected Sirius [ Shrieking Shack scene]. James had to make a choice as to who the most likely spy was. I wonder how James made that choice. We know James chose Sirius rather than Lupin---the inference is that James thought Lupin was the spy. We're told why Pettigrew was not thought to be the spy and was still trusted. Did James think Lupin was the spy because he was a werewolf? Did James have other yet unrevealed reasons to suspect Lupin had an alliance with Voldemort?<<< Meri: >>I don't think that the fact that James eventually chose Sirius (before choosing Peter) is any indication that he didn't trust Lupin. I think it is more of an indication that Sirius was his *best friend*. He and Black were, as is said by many people, like brothers. And Lupin, no matter how much he and James cared for each other, just weren't close as sibs. Who knows, maybe he flipped a coin.<< mhobbin responded: > Perhaps it was as simple as James and Sirius being inseparable, > causing James to choose Sirius. And perhaps it was as > straightforward as the process of elimination that made Lupin the > odd man out in the foursome, and the likely spy. After all, the > last minute switch of Secret Keeper was not even revealed to DD > and I hardly believe that DD was under suspicion. > > If James trusted Sirius as a brother, as Meri describes above, it > is also likely that James shared Sirius' mistrust of Remus. The > last minute switch was perhaps designed to fool Remus--after all, > Remus believed that Sirius was the Secret Keeper. That information > alone would have been useful to LV. > > What I'd like to know is what about Remus made James and Sirius > think he was the spy. Process of elimination? Prejudice of > werewolves? Or something else not yet revealed? SSSusan: I may be reading this thread incorrectly, but if I've understood, then the question is, why did James choose Sirius and NOT Lupin as Secret Keeper. If I've read it correctly, then I'm with Meri. I don't think there's any reason to assume that James thought Lupin was a spy. This may be simplistic on my part, but perhaps the reason Lupin wasn't chosen was that it just wasn't considered smart to choose a werewolf...who might be out of commission at some crucial point when contact needed to be made. For *me*, I just don't see any reason to read all that much into the choice. In other words, I don't see that NOT choosing Lupin means that we're to infer that James suspected he was the spy. Siriusly Snapey Susan From finwitch at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 17:26:52 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 17:26:52 -0000 Subject: Mundungus Fletcher/Crookshanks In-Reply-To: <005901c47d47$134956e0$53c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109363 > khinterberg: > "I was just re-reading OotP and noticed a nice description (p 22 US) > of Mundungus Fletcher. > > "He had short bandy legs, long straggly ginger hair..." > > Sounds surprisingly like Crookshanks the cat. On p 60 of PoA > Crookshanks is described "the cat's ginger fur was thick and fluffy, > but it was definitely a bit bowlegged and its face looked grumpy..." > Crookshanks is also often referred to as having "bandy legs." > When we meet Mundungus, we find that he has been watching Harry and > keeping in close contact with Mrs. Figg...a notorious cat lover. > Jo Rowling doesn't throw these eerily similar descriptions and clues > out for no reason. Could it be that Mundungus is an animagus whose > form happens to be Crookshanks?" > > > DuffyPoo: > Unfortunately, both Mundungus and Crookshanks were in the kitchen at dinnertime the first day HP arrives at 12 Grimmauld Place. Fred, George and Mundungus are laughing over a story Dung told about stolen toads, and Ginny was playing with Crookshanks with Butterbeer corks on the floor. Finwitch: So what? How do we know that Mundungus hasn't made/stolen a time- turner? Remember, in HP, people CAN be in two (or three) places at the same time. And even if he'd be the um... 5th? unregistered animagus we've heard of, Crookshanks beeing half-kneazle would add something new: even half-magical creature *can* be an animagus form. So we'll get to Harry who'll turn into a phoenix or a golden griffin...! Finwitch From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 19:23:29 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 19:23:29 -0000 Subject: James' Choice (Was Marauders' Map, Marauders and Voldemort) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109364 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > mhbobbin wrote: > >>>Sirius suspected Lupin. Lupin suspected Sirius [ Shrieking Shack > scene]. James had to make a choice as to who the most likely spy > was. I wonder how James made that choice. > > We know James chose Sirius rather than Lupin---the inference is > that James thought Lupin was the spy. We're told why Pettigrew was > not thought to be the spy and was still trusted. Did James think > Lupin was the spy because he was a werewolf? Did James have other > yet unrevealed reasons to suspect Lupin had an alliance with > Voldemort?<<< > > > Meri: > >>I don't think that the fact that James eventually chose > Sirius (before choosing Peter) is any indication that he didn't > trust Lupin. I think it is more of an indication that Sirius was his > *best friend*. He and Black were, as is said by many people, like > brothers. And Lupin, no matter how much he and James cared for each > other, just weren't close as sibs. > > Who knows, maybe he flipped a coin.<< > > mhobbin responded: > > Perhaps it was as simple as James and Sirius being inseparable, > > causing James to choose Sirius. And perhaps it was as > > straightforward as the process of elimination that made Lupin the > > odd man out in the foursome, and the likely spy. After all, the > > last minute switch of Secret Keeper was not even revealed to DD > > and I hardly believe that DD was under suspicion. > > > > If James trusted Sirius as a brother, as Meri describes above, it > > is also likely that James shared Sirius' mistrust of Remus. The > > last minute switch was perhaps designed to fool Remus--after all, > > Remus believed that Sirius was the Secret Keeper. That information > > alone would have been useful to LV. > > > > What I'd like to know is what about Remus made James and Sirius > > think he was the spy. Process of elimination? Prejudice of > > werewolves? Or something else not yet revealed? > > SSSusan: > I may be reading this thread incorrectly, but if I've understood, > then the question is, why did James choose Sirius and NOT Lupin as > Secret Keeper. If I've read it correctly, then I'm with Meri. I > don't think there's any reason to assume that James thought Lupin > was a spy. This may be simplistic on my part, but perhaps the > reason Lupin wasn't chosen was that it just wasn't considered smart > to choose a werewolf...who might be out of commission at some > crucial point when contact needed to be made. > > For *me*, I just don't see any reason to read all that much into the > choice. In other words, I don't see that NOT choosing Lupin means > that we're to infer that James suspected he was the spy. > > Siriusly Snapey Susan mhobbin writes: Except that Lupin WAS under suspicion. At least by Sirius, who had the trust of James. In the Shrieking Shack , <>, Pettigrew says to Lupin " You don't believe this...wouldn't Sirius have told you they'd changed the plan?" Lupin: "Not if he thought I was the spy Peter. I assume that's why you didn't tell me, Sirius." Sirius: "Forgive me Remus" Lupin: "Not at all, Padfoot, old friend. And will you,in turn, forgive me for believing you were the spy?" Remus suspected Sirius. Sirius suspected Remus. Equal weight. What did James think? Considering what was at stake, it is hard for me to imagine that Sirius and Remus, each, did not share their suspicions about the other with James. The inference from James' subsequent actions was that he chose Sirius, not Remus, to trust. And then chose Peter, upon Sirius' advice. Remus was not kept informed of this switch. Odd man out of the four friends. IMO, under suspicion. We know more about Sirius than Remus. On paper, Sirius might look like a candidate for Spy. His family background. His DE brother. His ability to pull that WW Prank back at Hogwarts. His recklessness. Remus, to date, has been presented as a thoughtful person with a chronic contagious illness. One skilled enough in Dark Arts to be one of the best teachers. We don't know much else. Yet. But my question that began the Thread, was on what information did James make his fateful decision. Trust of Sirius and perhaps, some reason not to trust Remus. Whether you agree with that conclusion or not, stay with me for a moment--you've read this far-- because I 'm going to argue a separate conclusion that might make you happier. DD advised James to make DD the Secret Keeper. James chose otherwise. When James was faced with the dilemma of determining which friend was ratting him out, the choice was between Sirius and Remus. So far, IMO, the indications are that James chose to trust Sirius and not Remus. What if James didn't choose one but chose a Plan B, some arrangement with checks and balances, one that Sirius /Pettigrew did not know. Remus did not know about the last minute switch between Sirius and Pettigrew. Was there another arrangement between James and Remus that Sirius didn't know? I agree that it is hard to imagine James believing that Remus was likely to rat him out. But Sirius did believe that, whether or not James agreed. And DD only trusted himself to be the SK, not any of the three friends. There's something really odd about Remus [shiver] and I think he's hiding more of a secret than his illness. mhbobbin From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 19:29:33 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 19:29:33 -0000 Subject: Mundungus Fletcher/Crookshanks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109365 --- > Finwitch: > > So what? How do we know that Mundungus hasn't made/stolen a time- > turner? Remember, in HP, people CAN be in two (or three) places at > the same time. And even if he'd be the um... 5th? unregistered > animagus we've heard of, Crookshanks beeing half-kneazle would add > something new: even half-magical creature *can* be an animagus form. > So we'll get to Harry who'll turn into a phoenix or a golden > griffin...! > > mhbobbin writes: I know you're somewhat joking. Or I think you are. But to those who still think that Dung is Crookshanks, I ask --do you really think that JKR would write about a creepy guy like Dung hanging out for years in the dorm of adolescent girls? I think that's the HP series rated xxx. mhbobbin From yswahl at stis.net Sun Aug 8 19:30:44 2004 From: yswahl at stis.net (samnanya) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 19:30:44 -0000 Subject: At least respect JKR if you can't say something intelligent Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109366 HunterGreen: Also, we must remember, that at least when she was writing the first few books, I doubt she expected readers to be looking this closely at the facts and the timelines and all that. Clearly 100% accurate and sensical timelines are not something thats a priority to her. It's something that she overlooked. ... " DuffyPoo: I agree, I doubt she expected readers to be looking so closely for timelines and whatnot. I think one of her biggest mistakes, including Flint and Mark Evans, was noting the date of Nick's deathday as 1492. If it weren't for that specific date none of this date speculation could be going on. Samnanya- "One of her biggest mistakes" ??? "Clearly 100% accurate and sensical timelines are not something thats a priority to her" ??? How did you know that HG ? How can you comment on her priorities? And how exactly is Nick's deathday of 1492 one of her biggest mistakes? How can you say that the date is not CRITICAL in oop or later books? It is one thing to have an opinion or not fully understand something. It is entirely another to criticize an author or that author's work without understanding how something YOU don't see may be critical in later books. And clearly, JKR just randomly throws around dates, and row numbers, and rat fingers, time turners, and pies as the mood serves her and just randomly happens to come up with these extraordinarily addictive storylines........ I have read a lot of theories on this site that I don't agree with, but at least they respected the material and the author. And clearly one of my biggest mistakes is getting all worked up over this................. And think of this ....... She has written five of the seven books in the series, and virtually NOTHING HAS BEEN GIVEN AWAY! This site alone has generated close to 50,000 posts since the last book was published. How many authors are good enough to pull that off??? Are you two ? [Dammit! I cant find my thorazine!] Now just so any rational person who has read this might get some value out of the above ravings,,,, lets see if anyone can figure out how 1492 and row 97 in oop MIGHT be related to each other -- or is this just random too ? [btw they are, but that is just my theory, though reasonably supported by canon and posted here in the past] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 20:07:41 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 20:07:41 -0000 Subject: Weasley Accountant (was: Half-bloods, Pure-bloods, etc.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109367 Siriusly Snapey Susan wants to know: > > >But why doesn't the WW need accountants, too? > > And so do I. > > They have banks and stores. People spend money, save money, donate money > (Lucius Malfoy). Of course they must have accountants. If nothing else, remember all those rows of goblins in Gringotts? That's an image straight out of a Dickens-era counting house. > > I agree that the Weasley relative is probably a Squib, and that is the > reason they don't discuss him very often. But you don't need magic to be an > accountant. It might help with things like self-sharpening quills and > making inkblots vanish, but whether you're a wizard or not, you have to do > the calculations yourself. On that level, wizards, squibs, and muggles are > equal. (Of course, muggles have calculators and computers ...) > > > Janet Anderson Carol responds: Maybe they have something resembling Rita Skeeter's Quick Quotes Quill, only charmed to do correct calculations. (The teachers could use something of the sort, too, considering how many papers they must have to mark!) I can also picture magical cash registers that make change for you rather than having to compute knuts and sickles in your head or on parchment. We never see the merchants in Diagon Alley doing anything of the sort. At any rate, I'm sure that the Weasley relative is a Squib, not a Muggle, but do Squib relatives indicate a Muggle ancestor somewhere in the past? Carol From hallisallimalli at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 20:16:21 2004 From: hallisallimalli at yahoo.com (halli) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 20:16:21 -0000 Subject: Paradoxes; Harry and the Patronus - was another wacko theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109368 This is the only way that I see that the events could have gone down: Harry's being attacked by the dementors by the lake. Somebody other than himself with the patronus saved him. It couldn't have been him; the only reason he saved himself when he went back in time was because he knew he'd already done it, which couldn't have been possible the first time the timeline played out (or he wouldn't have been saved and he wouldn't know to save himself. It would be a paradox, and I have to argue because I don't like him. He was saved because he saved himself and he saved himself because he'd been saved. It doesn't work. You can't have both at the same time. This is about where you could have probably made it a little shorter. You only need one person to pretend to be Harry/James and cast the patronus to save Harry, so he can go back in time, and save himself. This is just like the Terminator in that it's cool but sucks in reality. Rowan Sjet What are you talking about?? This post makes no sense, so naturally, I had to object. From what you're saying, Harry has to be saved by someone else in order to go back and save himself, right? If thats what happened, why did he need to go back? The other person would still have saved him! This is my understanding of what happened: Harry is nearly 'killed' by the dementors, but at the last second, he saves himself, because he traveled back in time. He comes to, travels back, does all that other good stuff, and saves himself again. The one who is saved does the same. It extends on basically in an endless circle, with the one who is saved then going back and saving the one after him. Thats what happens when someone goes back in time, a whole other reality IMO. Which is why the ministry is so careful regulating these time- turners. Before Harry goes back in time, the Harry before him has already gone back in time, and is waiting to save him. Did you notice how Harry THOUGHT someone else did it? Until, suddenly, it all hits him whats going on, he works it out and realizes it was him, so he stands up and does it. I'm sorry if I've confused anyone further or babbled too much, just wanted to see if I could explain it. How'd I do? -halli who is wondering just what she said up there^ From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 20:36:08 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 20:36:08 -0000 Subject: Marauders Map In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109369 Eleanor wrote: > > I got the feeling she might have put that in because her editor > said, "But it's another piece of paper with a mind of its own! Surely Harry would compare it to Riddle's diary!" > Yb responded: > I really don't see the editor having the gall (or something that > sounds like it) to demand that JK put an explanation in, illustrating the differences between the diary and the map. I think that quote was certainly put in intentionally, whether to throw us off the trail or to give us a hint about future allegiances. Carol responds: As an editor myself, I wouldn't consider such a comment by an editor "gall," especially if it were phrased as a polite query--something for the author to consider, not a "demand" that she insert an explanation. Of course, we have no way of knowing whether an editor did present such a query, but it wouldn't be out of line. That's what editors are paid for (it's called "substantive editing" as opposed to "copy editing," which involves fixing the grammar, sentence structure, etc. Me, I'd fix all those comma splices JKR is so fond of!). An author is not bound by contract to do everything an editor suggests or accept every correction, but it's in his or her interest to read those suggestions and corrections carefully and undo any editorial errors (order of the spells in the Priori Incantantem scene, anybody?) BTW, JKR really does need an alert editor to catch things like "ancestor" for descendant" in CoS (IIRC) and "his mother's grandparents" for "his mother's parents" on her website. (That last one is still uncorrected.) Carol From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Aug 8 20:44:55 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 20:44:55 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109370 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: RMM: > Geoff, I am sorry you continue to misunderstand me. Perhaps there is > something about the differences in our language? Geoff: Judging by your juggling act with "on 31st July", yes. RMM: > When I say something like "see you next week" to someone, I do not > mean to say that I will see you in exactly 7 days. > I am saying, I will see you sometime next week. Okay? > > Now, Ted the Weatherman is saying on Tuesday that Bonfire Night is > next week. He obviously is meaning "next week" the way I mean it, > sometime next week. One simply consults the calendar and sees that > November 5th falls on a Thursday. Counting back from that Thursday > of > "next week" one arrives to Tuesday of this week and finds -- VOILA!! > -- Tuesday, October 27, 1981. > Geoff: Perhaps I should spend some time banging my head on a wall - it's probably less stressful.... I'm beginning to be sorry I ever dropped an odd comment about Harry birthday into message 109040. Several contributors to this discussion have commented on the fact that Jo Rowling appears to have been a trifle cavalier with her use of days of the week. However you may view it, there are certainly discrepancies with the starting days of the Hogwarts school year. Now, I am not criticising her or blaming her for this. It has been remarked that maybe she didn't anticipate the power of the microscopes which would be levelled on her every word as the books are dissected. I have found quite frequently that other writers throw an odd day in without really analysing whether it fits their story. What I do find tiresome is your refusal to even consider that there are errors in the days. Every fact has to be distorted to fit "your" timeline. You have flown in the face of English grammatical usage in order to support your ideas about the Gringotts break-in despite Harry's quite obvious remark about his birthday linking with the 31st July. RMM: So, then, would you take the 10 year old memory of Hagrid over today's word of a newsreader? I wouldn't. > Hence, the first book of Harry Potter started on Tuesday, October 27, > 1981. I rest my case. Geoff: I think there is another mistake over the day here. I would indeed take the memory of Hagrid over the weatherman for one glaringly obvious fact.... Hagrid may be considered a bit of a buffoon by some folk but Hallowe'en is a most important date in the Wizarding World calendar - certainly in Hogwarts. Do you really think that he would so daft as to mix up a date of Hallowe'en with an everyday date like 27th October? Would something happen to one of us on 19th December and we go around 10 years later saying that it happened on Christmas Day? I'm not one for trawling through JKR's interviews but I'm sure someone will be able to point us to a comment from her that Harry's birthday is 31st July and he was attacked on Hallowe'en 1981. The Lexicon certainly supports these dates. From EyeMelodius at hotmail.com Sun Aug 8 20:52:15 2004 From: EyeMelodius at hotmail.com (annunathradien) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 20:52:15 -0000 Subject: Veil Room at MoM in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109371 > macfotuk at y wrote: > Hermione's readings, judgements and assessments are almost always > spot-on and this was the room in the MoM that most freaked her out. > We end up finding something about why later when it is the scene of > Sirius' death. > vmonte responds: > > Hermione has not seen death but is smart enough to realize that there > is something creepy or sinister about the room and that GNLH seem > attracted to the veil. I fluctuate in wondering if it was Hermione's intelligence or intuition that were driving her in that scene. Perhaps both? It always stuck out to me how Hermione was seemingly the only one acutely afraid of the room. I've wondered why? All these thoughts on the Veil Room being some former part of a (possibly ancient) sacrificial site are very intriguing to me. Druids and Celts practiced human sacrifice, didn't they? Even in "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" you have a character sacrificed on an altar. HP had the GOF resurrection ritual. > Now, I never read this scene like you have, but if you are right, > then Harry has given the veil Sirius and Ron's name. I also just > reread this scene and noticed (for the first time--DUH) that the > description of the veiled room sounds a lot like it may have been an > ancient sacrificial site. An exact reconstruct from it's original setting? It would make sense if the Unspeakables were trying to better understand not only the archway itself, but the potential mystery behind those who created it and why. Hence they rebuild it's exact setting - in a safe and secured environment - from when it was in use? The archway sits on a dais. As if the center of importance of which an audience could gather around and watch. That would coincide with many ancient (and not so ancient) cultures who put the victim / sacrifice out on display. Whether it be torture, public execution, etc. annunathradien From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 20:55:23 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 20:55:23 -0000 Subject: Weasley Accountant (was: Half-bloods, Pure-bloods, etc.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109372 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Meliss9900 at a... wrote: > In a message dated 08/05/2004 12.17 Central Daylight Time, > norek_archives2 at h... writes: > > > I agree that the Weasley relative is probably a Squib, and that is the > > reason they don't discuss him very often. But you don't need magic to be an > > > > accountant. It might help with things like self-sharpening quills and > > making inkblots vanish, but whether you're a wizard or not, you have to do > > the calculations yourself. On that level, wizards, squibs, and muggles are > > equal. (Of course, muggles have calculators and computers ...) > > > > > > Janet Anderson > > > > Just because they have (or would have use for) accountants doesn't mean that > a squib would be able to make a decent living at it in the WW. > > Using the limited view of the lives of the only 2 Squibs we've met to date as > a basis for judgement, I'd say not. We can use how Lupin is treated to see > how the WW treats those that are "different". I doubt a squib -- even if he > was a whiz with numbers -- would be treated any differently in the WW. > > Melissa Carol responds: I'm not sure whether I agree with you or not, but my impression (as implied but perhaps not stated in my previous post) is that the Weasley cousin is a Squib working in the Muggle world, probably passing as a Muggle and maybe even married to one. (As I said earlier, I think wizards would use magic to do accounting or bookkeeping or any rote task, just as they use it for cooking and cleaning.) Note also that Hermione says that her parents wouldn't be aware of the Daily Prophet "as they're both dentists"--implication: Dentistry is a Muggle occupation. I'm guessing that accounting is, too. (So how *do* non-Muggleborn wizards get their teeth fixed, other than going to Madam Pomfrey to have them shortened after a Densuageo hex? And what about optometrists? Harry got his glasses from the state, apparently, as the result of attending a state school. But where did James, a pureblood as far as we know, get his? St. Mungo's treats magical maladies, not astigmatism or myopia.) Carol From patientx3 at aol.com Sun Aug 8 21:38:17 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 21:38:17 -0000 Subject: At least respect JKR if you can't say something intelligent In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109373 HunterGreen previously: >>> Also, we must remember, that at least when she was writing the first few books, I doubt she expected readers to be looking this closely at the facts and the timelines and all that. Clearly 100% accurate and sensical timelines are not something thats a priority to her. It's something that she overlooked. ... <<< DuffyPoo replied: >> I agree, I doubt she expected readers to be looking so closely for timelines and whatnot. I think one of her biggest mistakes, including Flint and Mark Evans, was noting the date of Nick's deathday as 1492. If it weren't for that specific date none of this date speculation could be going on. << Samnanya- >>"One of her biggest mistakes" ??? "Clearly 100% accurate and sensical timelines are not something thats a priority to her" ??? How did you know that HG ? How can you comment on her priorities?<< HunterGreen: I think you misunderstood me. (did you read my entire post, or just the above quote?). I was referring to the complaint of July 31st 1991 being a Wednesday, not a Tuesday, and the impossibility of September 1st always being on a Sunday. But I was also saying that those things DO NOT MATTER. My post was mostly focused on readers jumping to conclusions that something is a mistake when its not, and when it is an actual mistake its something so small that it doesn't matter. I don't know her priorities, that's correct, but if 100% accurate and sensical timelines (notice the number of adjectives...) are a priority to her, its not a high priority. Otherwise (if they were *100%* accurate, as opposed to 99.999999% accurate, like I think they are) there wouldn't be *any* mistakes. Samnaya: >>I have read a lot of theories on this site that I don't agree with, but at least they respected the material and the author. And clearly one of my biggest mistakes is getting all worked up over this.................<< HunterGreen: Perhaps it is. Because myself and (I'm assuming) DuffyPoo weren't really cricitizing her work at all. I think her point was that naming a year was a mistake because then everyone jumped forward to figure out what the current year was, and that took away part of the timeless quality of the books (not from within the books, I for one never bothered to do the math) and it let people accuse her of making day and date mistakes, when the date is not an important part of the books. From patientx3 at aol.com Sun Aug 8 21:52:33 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 21:52:33 -0000 Subject: Weasley Accountant (was: Half-bloods, Pure-bloods, etc.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109374 Carol wrote: >>So how *do* non-Muggleborn wizards get their teeth fixed, other than going to Madam Pomfrey to have them shortened after a Densuageo hex? And what about optometrists? Harry got his glasses from the state, apparently, as the result of attending a state school. But where did James, a pureblood as far as we know, get his? St. Mungo's treats magical maladies, not astigmatism or myopia.<< HunterGreen: Perhaps they call dentists something else (ex: they don't have doctors, they have 'healers') since they do something completely different than dentists. They would just magically fix teeth (Hermione had wanted to do it before, but her parents wouldn't let her, which leads me to believe there are people besides Madam Pomfrey who do it). I have to say, if that's the case, I'm extremely jealous (can you imagine having a tooth fixed being a two-minute painless procedure with no healing time?). As for the glasses thing, I have no idea. Its odd how there isn't a magical way to fix eyesight, or if there is, its odd that so many wizards have chosen not to use it. I know that there is the muggle way of fixing eyesight, and there are plenty of people (myself included), who don't want to get that done, so maybe the magical way is just as obnoixious and risky. Perhaps it requires being blind for a certain amount of time, or its so difficult that only certain healers(?) do it and its very expensive. I have no idea where they get their glasses though. I can't imagine wizards having to go to a muggle optometrist (especially a pureblood like James), so there must be wizards who make them. I'd imagine its a lot simplier than muggle optometry though. From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Sun Aug 8 21:05:06 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 21:05:06 -0000 Subject: The Voices & The Dementors - PoA In-Reply-To: <067801c47d63$cd6d6770$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109375 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "charme" wrote: > Charme: > > Did anyone else other than me notice that when Harry has his "episodes" > during his perceived or actual Dementor attacks, the words the voices say > change somewhat? How about the easy to buy theory that a 15 mos old's perception is what it is? No concrete words actually stuck, but a partial meaning did... Josh From lilyp at superig.com.br Sun Aug 8 20:43:25 2004 From: lilyp at superig.com.br (lilypo2007) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 20:43:25 -0000 Subject: Wizard Genetics (Was Re: Lily's Family) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109376 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lifeavantgarde" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jmay_71" wrote: > > Stefanie: > > > > "Therefore Harry would be considered only 'half' wizard, because > of his MOTHER'S GRANDPARENTS." > > To me this is HUGE. > > > > Steve: > > > Until the statement has remained unchallenged on her website > >for 30 days, I'm not considering it a fact. Personally, I think > > > she actually meant to say either 'his mother's PARENTS' or > > > Harry's grandparents. > > dcgmck: > > > > OK. Caution duly noted... But... If, in fact, JKR actually > > titillated us intentionally instead of accidentally (and not > just > > out of the excitement of her recently announced pregnancy), why do I have no recollection of anyone ever calling Harry a 'mudblood'? > >Malfoy exhibits no reticence in using the term on everyone else of > > evident Muggle heritage, so why stop with Harry, whom he so > clearly loathes and envies? > jmay: > I may be a bit off topic here, but I am gonna go out on a limb and guess that whether or not JKR made a mistake with Lily's parents >or grandparents doesn't really matter.The big point she is trying to make is that classification by blood is ridiculous.She shows this > by comparing the DEs to the Nazis. The complete and total irony > being both groups are/were following a leader who's genetic > background included that which they hate. I agree with Steve and jmay, that we must wait and that this issue is not important. And I can add a very good reason. The English and Italian versions of the site tell us that Lily's grandparents were muggles. But the French, German and Spanish versions tell us Harry's grandparents were muggles. So there is a mistake somewhere. If it was so important that one of Lily's parents was not a muggle she wouldn't allow this mistake to remain in her site for two weeks. She surely would have noticed it, since she used to be a French teacher. I suppose she must know some Spanish as well, because she lived in Portugal and Portuguese and Spanish have much in common (Portuguese is my first language - any people with a little knowledge of Portuguese would understand that sentence). So, I think, this is not a really important question, or else she would have noticed it and would have already corrected the mistake. And dcgmck, Harry is a half-blood, not a muggle-born. Malfoy use the word mud-blood to label people like Hermione, whose parents (both) are muggles. James was neither a muggle nor a muggle-born. that means Harry would never be a mud-blood. But there are several people who call Lily either a muggle-born or a mudblood : Harry himself (CoS, when he is talking to Tom Riddle), Snape (OotP, in the scene of the Pensieve), Hagrid (PS/SS). Lilyp From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Sun Aug 8 21:38:07 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 21:38:07 -0000 Subject: At least respect JKR if you can't say something intelligent In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109377 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" wrote: > It is entirely another to criticize an author or that author's work > without understanding how something YOU don't see may be critical > in later books. > And clearly, JKR just randomly throws around dates, and row > numbers, and rat fingers, time turners, and pies as the mood serves > her and just randomly happens to come up with these > extraordinarily addictive storylines........ Well, the dates not making sense is fairly random... rat fingers and time turners and stuff are at least useful. Whether or not a particular date in what we assume to be 1981 was a Tuesday or a Thursday doesn't mean anything.... especially since we know that these things are wrong. We value JKR and her books for the plotline, which is well done and intended for a 7 book stretch... unlike other plots lines that were stretched far beyond their original reach... Dune, anyone? Yes, one thing that would be nice for her to handle, if she does as she's said and revises all 7 books, is weeding out all the inconsitancies and perusing a calendar or 10... but we are obligated by the evidence to realize that there are things that simply don't matter in the books, and that they aren't all red herrings by intent. > Now just so any rational person who has read this might get some > value out of the above ravings,,,, lets see if anyone can figure > out how 1492 and row 97 in oop MIGHT be related to each other -- > or is this just random too ? You mean that the digits add up to 16? and therefore 7 given Arithmancy? Nah... digit counting games get old, and Sir Nick's original death is too far removed from the prophesy's storage location in the DoM to be related. Perhaps JKR is a Columbus fan (kinda surprising that was left out of a certain namesake's rendition of a certain book that contains it) and perhaps she came up with where the prophesy was stored in '97? Who knows? :) Josh From lilyp at superig.com.br Sun Aug 8 19:45:11 2004 From: lilyp at superig.com.br (lilypo2007) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 19:45:11 -0000 Subject: Theory on James and Lilly Potters occupations In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109378 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "charme" > wrote: > > From: "nihil8750o" > > > > > First I'll start with James. I believe that he was an Auror. I know this is absolutely not unique, but there has been a lot of clues in the books > > > especially "OotP". Such as Kingsley Shacklebolt's familiar refrence to James when being first introduced to Harry. > > snip > > > > > Now if it is hard to swallow that Lilly was the DAtDA teacher > here are some > > > points that show that possibly at least one of the Potters > (Lilly o James) held > > > that Hogwarts position. > > > > Charme: > > > > Hmmm. While that's possible, one would have thought JKR would > mention this, > > or someone would, as those that are Aurors are mentioned quite > often by > > multiple characters. > Potioncat: > Welcome to the list, nihil! > > Well, I'd vote against auror. I could be wrong (thought it's never > happened before) but I don't think there was time for auror training > and becoming an auror for James to have been more than a novice. > > We're told in some interview that the Potters didn't have to work, > but it was said in a way that implied what they did was significant. > > So, having one or both of them working at Hogwarts would make > sense. Particularly given how fondly both McGonagall and Hagrid > speak of James and Lily. (Not Potter and Evans.) > Lilyp: There were many posts in this thread and I can't be fair to all of them. But I chose to keep the ideas above, to talk about them. Nice point about Kingsley knowing James. But that doesn't mean James is an auror. Arthur knows Moody and Bode and Bagman. What if James or Lily or both of them worked at the MoM? JKR mentioned in an interview that she wouldn't tell us right now what their jobs were because it'll be important. It was in Scholastic Chat Febr, 3rd, 2000: Q:"What did the Potter parents do for a living before Voldemort killed them?" JKR:"I'm sorry to keep saying this, but I can't tell you because it's important to a later plot. But you will find out later!" That means their professions are important to a later plot and she couldn't tell us before, because we would wonder about them and it would probably spoil the plot. What careers would have this effect? What kind of job could give away anything about the plot? And why were they at home? Were they allowed to work at home? Well, my bet is that they were Unspeakables. That's why nobody speaks about their jobs, since nobody knows much about it. In particular, I think they were researchers and Lily's researchs were about Death. (Part of the researches could be done at home, as muggle researchers know. At least the reading part of them.) Evidences? There is no evidence what so ever, but it would explain some things: 1. Lily would know more about how to protect Harry. 2.It would explain why Voldemort hesitated to kill her. Some HP fans are always questioning why Voldemort would want to kill James. I don't think it is quite a question. We have seen Voldemort killing a lot of people just because they were on his way: Frank Bryce, Bertha Jorkins, Cedric Diggory. Usually he doesn'n think twice. He just gets rid off what is bothering him . Yes, Harry was his main target, but Lily was on his way, why did he even asked her to give him the baby? He didn't give Cedric a chance to know where he was! That's why I think that what must be explained is his attitude towards Lily and not the one towards James. 3. Dumbledore says to Harry: (Chapter 37 OotP) "And then you saw Rockwood, who worked in the Department of Mysteries before his arrest, telling Voldemort what we had known all along - that the prophecies held in the Ministry of Magic are heavily protected. Only the people to whom they refer can lift them" That means the Order already knew it. How? If they had someone who worked at DoM, it would be an explanation. Lilyp From mandyallen286 at fsmail.net Sun Aug 8 19:35:04 2004 From: mandyallen286 at fsmail.net (wapp13) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 19:35:04 -0000 Subject: Wands and spells Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109379 Correct me if I've missed something, but having just read GoF for the eighth time I realised that Harry, when he is in the alleyway with Dudley, casts a spell without his wand in his hand. Is this right? He says 'lumos' and the wand tip lights up. I have always assumed the wand has to be held my the person casting the spell, otherwise why have a wand in the first place? And a couple of other things struck me while reading this again (goodness knows why they haven't occurred to me before now - must have been reading with my eyes closed!) One is that Aunt Petunia says the dementors were guarding Azkaban when Lily was hanging around with James Potter because she heard them talking about it. Had Voldemort not recruited them on his team at this point? If not, when did they join him? And another thing - maybe these should have been three posts! - Petunia says in PS that Lily was always showing off doing magic tricks, turning tea cups into mice during the school holidays. Was magic not banned during holidays as it is in Harry's experience? Any thoughts anyone? Mandy Pandy From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 22:09:21 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 22:09:21 -0000 Subject: Villainy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109380 > Kneasy wrote: > Dunno about you but I'm disappointed in Voldy. > Seems to be more caricature than character. > More cardboard cut-out than cut-throat. > Which is a bit surprising > > Neri shakes head in bemusement: Kneasy, I sometimes wonder why you still read HP. With your talent you'd be making much better use of your time writing FF, or even your own original FEATHERBOA fantasy, with a believable and chilling Evil Overlord. You can already count on me buying a copy. I wouldn't be able to resist it. Could it be that you are trying to make HP into something it isn't? Could HP be a book about (warning: a really wild speculation ahead) Harry Potter? Not about Voldy, and maybe not even about Snape or DD's plan? Could Voldy be there mainly as a challenge for Harry? Someone for Harry to fight while he's not busy wrestling with bothersome teenager friends, bothersome teenager rivals, system injustice, grownups' prejudice, pressure from high expectations, an abusive family, lousy teachers, crucial exams, hopes of future career, winning the Quidditch cup, first dates, and several other petty matters that sometimes occupy the mind and time of growing up kids? So if certain parts of the set are a bit flimsy at the seams, could it perhaps be an indication of the author's priorities? Neri From romulus at hermionegranger.us Sun Aug 8 16:07:01 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 16:07:01 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109381 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" wrote: > HunterGreen: > > Also, we must remember, that at least when she was writing the first > few books, I doubt she expected readers to be looking this closely at > the facts and the timelines and all that. Clearly 100% accurate and > sensical timelines are not something thats a priority to her. It's > something that she overlooked. RMM: I have a question then. Has anyone here had a book published? Does anyone here know that the book publisher has people called "editors" that go over the book for exactly these kinds of discrepancies? So, unless the editors are a bunch of bumble brains, they would be telling Jo: "You have some dates wrong here. Fix them or we will." But yet, the dates stay in the book the way they are. Why? For only one reason: Because the DATES are NOT WRONG. It is how we are misreading them. (I exclude the last book because they put the dates in wrong to make a point about our lack of being able to discern what is being said.) HunterGreen: > But that doesn't mean its not fun to discuss. (o; RMM: It is fun to discuss because the stuff is truly accurate, IF you know what to look for. Otherwise, the whole thing is nonsense. From mandyallen286 at fsmail.net Sun Aug 8 19:17:45 2004 From: mandyallen286 at fsmail.net (wapp13) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 19:17:45 -0000 Subject: Teaching wizards / Lupin (was Re: Jobs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109382 Carol wrote: > Regarding pre-Hogwarts education, I'm guessing rich > witchlings and wizardlings (e.g., Draco) may have had > private tutors. Maybe that's how Lupin earned a living before > PoA. Otherwise the peeling letters on his suitcase reading > "Professor R.J. Lupin" are difficult if not impossible to > explain. Ah, I hadn't picked up on the peeling letters. Well observed, and I agree he must have been doing teaching of some description for a fair few years. Mandy From mietoesarepink at comcast.net Sun Aug 8 14:50:04 2004 From: mietoesarepink at comcast.net (Maren Gest) Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 08:50:04 -0600 Subject: Mundungus Fletcher/Crookshanks References: Message-ID: <000501c47d56$fdb19670$6401a8c0@C3P0> No: HPFGUIDX 109383 "khinterberg" wrote: > Could it be that Mundungus is an animagus > whose form happens to be Crookshanks? That is an intersting theory, however, on Jkrowling.com JK Rowling said that Crookshanks is a Kneazle which is nothing like an animagus. "Maren" From patientx3 at aol.com Sun Aug 8 22:28:47 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 22:28:47 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109384 RMM: >>I have a question then. Has anyone here had a book published? Does anyone here know that the book publisher has people called "editors" that go over the book for exactly these kinds of discrepancies? So, unless the editors are a bunch of bumble brains, they would be telling Jo: "You have some dates wrong here. Fix them or we will." But yet, the dates stay in the book the way they are. Why? For only one reason: Because the DATES are NOT WRONG. It is how we are misreading them. (I exclude the last book because they put the dates in wrong to make a point about our lack of being able to discern what is being said.)<< HunterGreen (who is a little dismayed that everything in her original post on this subject was ignored except for the last paragraph): The editors wouldn't know to tell her to "fix" things like the days of the week, since they don't know what year the books are supposed to be in. As for other things, like the September first issue, I think that's an artistic license thing (or perhaps the WW has a special calender). Mostly, I agree with you though, that many of the mistakes people talk about aren't mistakes at all, but things readers are misreading (or looking too closely at). Out of curiosity though, what dates in OotP are you speaking of? From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 22:36:21 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 22:36:21 -0000 Subject: Wands and spells In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109385 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "wapp13" wrote: > Correct me if I've missed something, but having just read GoF for the > eighth time I realised that Harry, when he is in the alleyway with > Dudley, casts a spell without his wand in his hand. Is this right? > He says 'lumos' and the wand tip lights up. I have always assumed > the wand has to be held my the person casting the spell, otherwise > why have a wand in the first place? mhbobbin writes: Yes, that is correct and I believe it is yet another indication that Harry is gaining in power. But I think you mean OotP not GOF. > And a couple of other things struck me while reading this again > (goodness knows why they haven't occurred to me before now - must > have been reading with my eyes closed!) One is that Aunt Petunia > says the dementors were guarding Azkaban when Lily was hanging around > with James Potter because she heard them talking about it. Had > Voldemort not recruited them on his team at this point? If not, when > did they join him? mhbobbin writes: Not sure that we know that the Dementors were ever an ally of Voldemort in Voldemort's reign of terror. Obviously, DD is worried that they could become allies, as he expresses that in PoA. And in GoF, yes, Voldemort refers to recruiting the Dementors as they are his natural alllies. But when you say that Petunia heard Lily and James talking about hte Dementors--you may be being intentionally misled by JKR. Petunia heard "she" talking about them [we assume Lily and have no other choices yet] and "that awful boy". We don't know who Petunia means by awful boy. Does James seem like an awful boy to you--maybe awful to Snape but likely well behaved and presentable in front of Lily's family. This, IMO, is classic JKR sleight of hand. We assume that Petunia is talking about Harry's parents because Harry assumes that she is --"If you mean my parents, why don't you use their names?' Petunia doesn't answer. She has not yet told who she meant by AWFUL BOY. Some posters believe that Snape is the awful boy. I do. Mandy Pandy: > > Petunia says in PS that Lily was always showing off doing magic > tricks, turning tea cups into mice during the school holidays. Was magic not banned during holidays as it is in Harry's experience? > mhbobbin: Good question. We just don't know. Even in Harry's experience, the law is inconsistently enforced. mhbobbin From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 22:41:27 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 15:41:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Molly - Thoughts on a Witch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040808224127.41815.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109386 > SSSusan wrote: > > As for the comment "the woman has no sensitivity at all", again, > this speaks to our different interpretations & reactions to Molly. > You haven't cared for her since GoF. Whereas probably the most > poignant moment in the books so far for me was one in GoF, and it > took place between Molly & Harry. It occurs in the hospital wing, > after the TriWizard tourney & graveyard horrors are over, and Molly > envelopes Harry in a hug, holding him the way *every* child > deserves to be held by someone who loves him. I saw that as > extremely sensitive. Probably we see Molly at her best around Harry. As you say, she does indeed give him the unconditional maternal love that he hasn't had since he was 15 months old. It's a heck of a lot more than she gives her own family. Molly, Molly, Molly, - why do I dislike her? Let me list the ways: 1. She's a bad loser. When you argue with Molly, there's no "let's agree to disagree" about it, it's war to the knife. She's losing the fight with Sirius about what to tell Harry so she hurls the snotty Azkaban comment at him (OOTP). Even the mild-mannered Lupin feels compelled to be sharp with her. In the same quarrel, she is totally unreasonable about her own children hearing important information about the Order's work and makes herself foolish by getting more emotional as it goes on. It's clear throughout OOTP that when Molly's upset about something, the whole house walks on eggs until she gets over it. 2. Her controlling tactics backfire on her or don't work at all. Has anyone noticed that the Weasley kids are all really good liars and dissemblers? Everything from "only telling strategic parts of the truth" to "baldface denials" seem to be part and parcel of their moral equipment. Arthur at his angriest - the ton-tongue toffee episode in GoF - threatens the twins with the worst thing he can think of - he'll tell Molly what happened. And when she's actually there and overhears part of it, he backtracks and dissembles furiously rather than tell her what happened. I don't believe that Molly wants her kids to lie to her; no mother does. But she has failed to realize that her overwhelming, controlling tactics have given her kids the idea that in order to have a peaceful life, they can't always (or even often) tell Molly the truth. On the other hand, you can't blame them for assuming that for her "ignorance is bliss" as she seems to prefer to ignore anything that qualifies as bad news rather than confront or even anticipate it. 3. She plays favourites. Perfect Prefect and Prat Percy is Exhibit A, of course. Yes he's a pill but he didn't get that way accidentally and its clear for the first four books that he's Molly's ideal son, something that she throws at the twins every chance she gets. But when Ron becomes prefect, all of sudden he goes from being barely acknowledged to the new golden boy. She's ignored his wishes for years (sandwiches he doesn't like, maroon sweaters although he doesn't like the colour, the dress robes incident) and all of a sudden he's wonderful. 4. She says and does hurtful things. The Azkaban shot at Sirius was mentioned above. But how about the second-hand dress robes for Ron that looked like a girl's dress and had soiled lace around the collar and cuffs? She's a witch, isn't she? She couldn't have transfigured them into something halfway decent? Or cut the damn lace off? Or does she really think a teenager is going to parade around a Hogwarts social event wearing something that practically screams "I'm too poor to dress properly"? Or how about the Easter Eggs she sent to Ron, Harry and Hermione in GoF - Ron and Harry got huge chocolate/caramel things but Hermione got a tiny little egg because Rita Skeeter had written an article claiming that Hermione broke Harry's heart? The same Rita Skeeter who prints lies about Arthur (whose name she consistently gets wrong) but can suddenly be trusted 100% about Hermione? And when Molly comes to Hogwarts she's cold and unfriendly to Hermione until Harry (not the most sensitive guy on the planet) loudly tells her that Hermione has never been his girlfriend. Or Molly's comment when Ron becomes prefect? "That's everyone in the family!" "What are we, next door neighbours?" says Fred/George. Imagine, a comment so pointed and direct it even managed to get through the twins' armour. I really think that comment - and the unspoken but clear implications behind it - rival Snape's "I see no difference" in terms of sheer callous cruelty. And Snape has the bare excuse that he's supposed to be a snarky git. 5. The way she treats Arthur should count as a human rights violation. She runs him down in front of the kids, heck she treats him LIKE one of the kids and one of the dumber ones at that. She shrills at him over his stiches, she rakes him down over the flying car, she gives him all kinds of grief over disagreeing with her in OOTP over what to tell the kids. 6. Harry. After all of the above, the way she treats Harry stands out as the one thing she does get right. Although I'm not sure that she'll be able to keep her controlling tendencies lashed down for the remainder of the series. Her jab Sirius in front of Harry doesn't auger well for any one else who gets close to the boy. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo From juli17 at aol.com Sun Aug 8 23:18:43 2004 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 19:18:43 EDT Subject: James' Choice (Was Marauders' Map, Marauders and Voldemort) Message-ID: <1d0.27f56cc1.2e480ed3@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109387 > charme: > > Weird, after the Snape-Lupin-Harry scene when Snape confronts Lupin and > Harry WRT the Marauder's Map and its "manufacturers," Lupin tells Harry that > "Your parents gave their lives, Harry, to keep you alive." Notice that > doesn't say "Your mother scarificed her life to keep you alive." Might not > be anything, might be something, hm??? I've always taken Lupin's word there at face value. Despite all the focus on Lily "not having to die" and sacrificing her life for Harry, James also sacrificed his life for Harry. Assuming the events at Godric's Hollow transpired as have been hinted at, James acted as the front line of defense, attempting to protect/save both Lily and Harry, and sacrificing his life in the process. And, since we don't yet know what conversation might have transpired between James and Voldemort (as we do with Lily and Voldemort), Voldemort might well have told James to get out of the way (i.e., give me the boy and you live) as he essentially said to Lily. Likely neither James or Lily had to die if they'd been willing to hand over Harry to save themselves. But they weren't willing to do that, fortunately for us and for Harry :-) Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Sun Aug 8 23:24:05 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 23:24:05 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109388 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: > Does anyone here know that the book publisher has people called > "editors" that go over the book for exactly these kinds of > discrepancies? > > So, unless the editors are a bunch of bumble brains, they would be > telling Jo: "You have some dates wrong here. Fix them or we will." Oh! You mean those same bumble brains that changed the wand order of Harry's parents at the end of GoF from JKR's original correctness to the published incorrectness that caused so much confusion? Yeah... we know ALLLL about them *snort* Josh From ryokas at hotmail.com Sun Aug 8 23:31:54 2004 From: ryokas at hotmail.com (kizor0) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 23:31:54 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109389 > Oh! You mean those same bumble brains that changed the wand order of > Harry's parents at the end of GoF from JKR's original correctness to > the published incorrectness that caused so much confusion? > > Yeah... we know ALLLL about them > > *snort* > > Josh In all fairness, JKR did mention that it was a honest mistake and that the bumblebreain in question had otherwise done quite a competent job - that's why she didn't check it herself. And the fact that I remember details like this is a bit creepy. I blame my freaky memory. - Kizor From romulus at hermionegranger.us Sun Aug 8 23:38:36 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 23:38:36 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109390 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" wrote: HunterGreen: > > Out of curiosity though, what dates in OotP are you speaking of? RMM: Thursday, August 12th, the date of HP's hearing (indicating that it is 1993) and Monday, September 2nd, first full day back at Hogwarts (indicating that it is 1996) RMM www.hermionegranger.us From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 23:48:17 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 23:48:17 -0000 Subject: Ron's Patronus (Warning Ron=DD) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109391 vmonte wrote: > > You are not making something out of nothing. There is a reason why > JKR left this bit out. JKR once said that she could not tell a fan > what Snape's patronus was because it would give too much away. I bet > Ron's patronus would also... > My theory (and it's not popular) is that Ron is Dumbledore and that > they both have the same patronus. Now Cory: But as of yet, we don't know what DD's patronus is either, do we? We saw DD cast the patronus charm when the dementors showed up during the quiddich match, but we don't know what form it took. Furthermore -- and I'm not arguing against Ron=DD as a theory; I'm not entirely sold one way or the other on that issue -- but if JKR *is* going the Ron=DD route in the story, it seems to me that inconspicuously revealing each of their patronuses is exactly the type of clue that JKR *would* give, doesn't it? --Cory From snow15145 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 23:58:39 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 23:58:39 -0000 Subject: Theory on James and Lilly Potters occupations In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109392 Lilyp snipped: That means their professions are important to a later plot and she couldn't tell us before, because we would wonder about them and it would probably spoil the plot. What careers would have this effect? What kind of job could give away anything about the plot? And why were they at home? Were they allowed to work at home? Snow: I love your deduction process! That's the best way to approach a given situation in my opinion. How could Lily's profession pose a possible danger to secrets of the ending? It might not just be that she was an unspeakable but more specifically in what department she was working in and what she was dealing with. Lilyp: Well, my bet is that they were Unspeakables. That's why nobody speaks about their jobs, since nobody knows much about it. In particular, I think they were researchers and Lily's researchs were about Death. (Part of the researches could be done at home, as muggle researchers know. At least the reading part of them.) Evidences? There is no evidence what so ever, but it would explain some things: 1. Lily would know more about how to protect Harry. 2.It would explain why Voldemort hesitated to kill her. Some HP fans are always questioning why Voldemort would want to kill James. I don't think it is quite a question. We have seen Voldemort killing a lot of people just because they were on his way: Frank Bryce, Bertha Jorkins, Cedric Diggory. Usually he doesn'n think twice. He just gets rid off what is bothering him . Yes, Harry was his main target, but Lily was on his way, why did he even asked her to give him the baby? He didn't give Cedric a chance to know where he was! That's why I think that what must be explained is his attitude towards Lily and not the one towards James. 3. Dumbledore says to Harry: (Chapter 37 OotP) "And then you saw Rockwood, who worked in the Department of Mysteries before his arrest, telling Voldemort what we had known all along - that the prophecies held in the Ministry of Magic are heavily protected. Only the people to whom they refer can lift them" That means the Order already knew it. How? If they had someone who worked at DoM, it would be an explanation. Snow: This could be exactly why Voldemort asked Lily to move out of the way. If Lily worked in the Ministry of Mysteries, Voldemort may assume that Lily could be a valuable asset to him in his further endeavors to immortality. This could also be the reason the Potters defied him three times already because of his interest in Lily's department and her knowledge of it. Voldemort does seem to like his inside help at the Ministry. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 00:44:44 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 00:44:44 -0000 Subject: Theory on Snape - MASSIVE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109393 > > Kemper wrote: > Thank you so much for posting a well argued and written post! I'm a > ESNE!Snape fan (Ever So Not Evil), so I disagree with your husband, > Nora, Magda and Charme. > Your theory makes sense in the Plot and Thematically. And here's why: > DD wouldn't hire some evil man to work with youth, and a character > can be unlikable and still be good because "it is our choices (snip) > that show what we truly are." Alla: Oh, Dumbledore would not hire some evil man to work with youth? You know what is coming, right? :o) Crouch!Moody, Quirrell, who brought Voldie to school and dumbledore failed to notice, etc.... Dumbledore does not know everything and I firmly maintain that Snape, if he is ESE! could conceal the truth from him. But, i don't really believe in ESE!Snape. I just believe in Dumbledore , who could be very stupid. From yahoogroups at catbirdco.us Mon Aug 9 01:32:18 2004 From: yahoogroups at catbirdco.us (Michal) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 18:32:18 -0700 Subject: Polyjuice was: Time-turning as literary device In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.1.0.6.0.20040808182046.0344ca90@mail.catbirdco.us> No: HPFGUIDX 109394 At 08:32 AM 8/3/04, you wrote: >but I >don't want to see Polyjuice again. It's been used twice, once rather >implausible Aren't there three instances? Could there be more? 1: Hermione!cat and Harry&Ron!Crabbe&Goyle (or Goyle&Crabbe, I forget which) 2: Crouch!Moody 3: MaCrouch!SonCrouch and SonCrouch!MaCrouch (chronologically, this one should be first or second, though we found out about it last) JKR seems to have shown us both the usefulness and dangers of this tool, though less explicitly than with the time-turner. Hermione made an assumption about the hair from Millicent's robes and paid the price. Is this the only time (ha!) she's been incautious? I'll have to think about that. Michal From macfotuk at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 01:25:03 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 01:25:03 -0000 Subject: Veil Room at MoM in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109395 to my post 109302) > vmonte responds: > > Interesting post. I think that Harry mentioning Sirius's name was > probably a forshadowing of his death via veil. Yes I do too, Just not sure if JKR is simply being Shakespearian/ironic in having Harry 'pre-figure' Siruis' death, or else alluding to his strong divination abilites that others have credited him with, or else as I stated that he might have 'given' the veil a victim's name, i.e. Sirius. > think that he hears Ron talking to him from the veil? Something > like: 'Ron is that you?' and then Ron: 'I'm here mate.' I think that > Ron actually walks around from behind the veil. This really creeped > me out by the way. I simply read this at the time (and still do) that Harry is tying to rationalise the voices he can hear and so picks on the closest real world person, Ron. I'm not sure his foot is on the dais at this time either and I believe JKR has said somewhere that Hermione and Ron will survive at least until the finale, so I don't believe we'll see the veil get Ron. I'm not convinced the veil needs to figure again in the remainign plot (books 6 and 7), but then again it may have a critical role (perhaps it'll be the only way for Harry to defeat Voldemort. There was certainly some compelling reason in the plot as to why Sirius had to die. JKR didn't want to do it, but 'had to' (and some personal sadness at that in doing so!). I'd always believed the reason was that it doesn't suit the developing story for Harry to be allowed to have anyone he can consider really close enough to be properly in lieu of family. Of course, it may instead have been to introduce us to the veil because it reappears even more importantly later or else the place/state Sirius has gone to does. From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Mon Aug 9 02:40:19 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 02:40:19 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109396 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kizor0" wrote: > > Josh: > > Oh! You mean those same bumble brains that changed the wand order > Kizor: > In all fairness, JKR did mention that it was a honest mistake and > that the bumblebreain in question had otherwise done quite a > competent job - that's why she didn't check it herself. > > And the fact that I remember details like this is a bit creepy. I > blame my freaky memory. At least you confirm the bumblebrainedness. ;-) Yeah, actually they would do quite well to get a bunch of us to proof HPB and book 7, as we've probably over analyzed so much of the book, we'd note these oddities more quickly than anyone else, including JKR! I still remember being instantly hit sideways when in OotP in Dumbledore's office, Harry is sniffling about having never asked Sirius if he'd gone to watch the PoA Quidditch game to compare Harry and James' flying... because I'd remembered in PoA reading the Sirius has actually remarked this very comparison to Harry after the Shrieking Shack. *sigh* Y'all have to admit... we'd all work for free for Scholastic or Bloomberry (or whomever) and do a pretty bang up job on a final draft. Josh From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 02:41:15 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 02:41:15 -0000 Subject: Marauder's Map, the Marauders, and Voldemort In-Reply-To: <004401c47b3b$46e583b0$85c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109397 > DuffyPoo wrote: > Lupin says, "I happen to *know* that this map was confiscated by Mr FIlch many years ago. Yes, I know it's a map. I don't want to know how it fell into your possession." (emphasis mine). Sounds like Lupin knew *exactly* how Filch came by the map but wasn't about to tell. The explanation was too long and perhaps would compromise his secret. Carol adds: I think it would have compromised *all* his secrets, most notably that both he and Sirius Black knew secret passages into Hogwarts castle and that Sirius could well be hiding on the grounds, either in dog form or in human form inside the Shrieking Shack. The fact that he was a werewolf would no doubt have come out, too, if the rest were known. I can understand why he might conceal all this from Harry, but believing, as he apparently did or at least claimed to, that Sirius was a murderer and Harry was in danger, he ought to have turned the map over to Dumbledore. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 03:30:08 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 03:30:08 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin WAS Re: Dumbledore and Lupin In-Reply-To: <00b901c47b47$69f70f70$85c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109398 Aggie wrote: > > " Although Sirius had escaped BEFORE the beginning of term as Harry heard it on the news at Privet Drive. > Would this have been enough time for DD to find Lupin and persuade him to come to Hogwarts? I'm sure that if DD thought Lupin could control his friends once (by making him prefect) then maybe he thought it would be beneficial to have him do it again! Although he (Lupin) wasn't very good at it first time around! I think this is whsat happened! It makes perfect sense to me! > DuffyPoo responded: > > Just adding fuel to the fire...Harry first heard of Black's escape on the Muggle news the morning of his 13th birthday. That gives DD the whole month of August to find Lupin and hire him. Carol adds: Or conversely, it gave Lupin time to learn about the job and decide he wanted to apply. Of course, DD had probably been placing ads in the Daily Prophet and elsewhere since Lockhart's, erm, unfortunate accident back in June, but hearing that Black had escaped could have motivated Lupin to apply for a vacancy he already knew existed. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 03:41:34 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 03:41:34 -0000 Subject: DD knows where they are In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109399 Aggie wrote: > This comment of yours made me wonder if DD had one of those clocks > like the Weasley's. He could 'programme' it to show whoever he liked. What about his *watch*? It is mentioned several times > and it is never explained how it works, AND it's on JKR's web site (when Peeves comes)!! > IMO it would solve some of the mysteries as how DD KNOWS so much. He > has a list, (12 hands I do believe the watch has) of the 12 people he wants to keep tabs on and then he just has to look at his watch to know where they are. > > It would explain how he knew he should be a Hogwarts in PS/SS, and > how he knew to be early at Harry's hearing in OotP and I'm sure there are loads of other times that this would explain, WITHOUT reverting to Time Travel! > > Who do you think the 12 are? > Any thoughts on this? > > Snow: > > I like your idea Aggie! Dumbledore even comments about how much he > likes Molly's fascinating clock. As for the twelve people he watches > over, I can think of a few right off. > > Clock Hands and excuse as to why they were "chosen": > > 1st-Harry (of course) > 12th-Snape (this one I saved specifically for twelve o'clock! Over > Harry or Riddle/Voldemort because he spies on both Harry and > Voldemort for DD. Snape was spying on what Voldemort was doing > through his occlumency teaching with Harry. Snape's hesitation in > answering Harry's question of "I guess that's your job, to spy, is > it" can possibly construed as well yes in a way I am spying on > Voldemort through you silly boy) > > My question to you Aggie is what possible perils or safe zones (like > Weasley's clock at home, at work, in mortal danger) appear on the > watch? Carol: Just a small aside, hardly worth mentioning, but I always pictured Dumbledore's watch as a pocketwatch, not a modern wristwatch like the one on the site. It would suit him better, being old-fashioned (like chamber pots!) and would also be larger to accommodate "mortal peril" and other situations/places like those on the Weasleys' clock. Love the idea of changing the people to fit the conditions of the moment (would he always need twelve?) and Snape at High Noon/Midnight. Good observation that Snape was checking on Voldy through the occlumency lessons. Maybe *that's* why they were terminated--he'd found out what he needed to know and they weren't helping Harry (who also, of course, wasn't helping himself). Carol, who vastly prefers this idea to Time Travel in any form, although (ack!) he could probably use the watch for that, too, if the need arose. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 04:00:39 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 04:00:39 -0000 Subject: Lily and unicorns In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109400 Jen wrote: > > <<<< imagery around Lily--pure, innocent, strong--and we know from Book 1 > what slaying a Unicorn does! Dumbledore said in OOTP that Voldemort > *shed Lily's blood* ...at Godric's Hollow in hopes of finally > drinking from the cup of immortality, and it cursed him. > > Yb's responded: > I think what Jen is implying is that perhaps a unicorn (or it's > blood) was used in a charm on Lily and Harry so that if someone tried to kill them both, killing the second would backfire horrendously. > > Since Unicorn blood is hard to come by without getting cursed, I > would say this is a bit farfetched, using the blood of something > innocent for pretty much any purposes at all, even if the unicorn > would sacrifice it willingly. I personally am much more inclined to > go with the same theory but using Dragon's blood instead. Carol: Setting aside the unicorn blood question (I can't imagine her using it since it requires the death of an innocent creature; also charms, unlike potions, are done with a wand and a spell or an incantation, and except in cases of Dark Magic like the incantation used to restore Voldemort, probably don't require a potion as part of the process), it wasn't a matter of saving Harry *or* Lily, with whoever died first saving the second. Why would *she* want to live at the expense of her child's life? No loving mother would. In any case, *his* was the life that needed to be protected in order for Voldemort to be defeated and the Prophecy fulfilled. "Not Harry! Please! Not Harry! Kill me instead!" (Quoting from memory.) She knew she had to be sacrificed for Harry to be saved--and for the ancient magic, whatever it was, to take effect. The other way around was clearly not in her thoughts. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 04:07:44 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 04:07:44 -0000 Subject: Both Spies... In-Reply-To: <20040805233113.41925.qmail@web42004.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109401 CMW: > "If Peter were waltzing up to VM with Order info, wouldn't Snape, > as a > trusted DE..." snip > > > > Mary: > > Also, and I may just be forgetting something, but he didn't really have any very big important information until the Secret Keeper position became his. And for Snape to have done anything about it, if he knew, it would have had to been to go right to the Potters home, since I have always been under the impression that once the Potters were in hiding, the attack was practically instantaeous. If I forgot something an important detail somewhere that would put my foot in my mouth, forgive me. Carol responds: Or right to Dumbledore, to tell him what happened. But I think Snape was already teaching at Hogwarts, hired at the beginning of the term, when the Potters were murdered on October 31. He might, however, have sensed a change (or changes) in the Dark Mark that alerted him that something was terribly amiss and alerted Dumbledore that way. One way or another, I think he's connected with telling Dumbledore the news and that's why Dumbledore trusts him. But I don't think Snape knew that Peter was a spy, much less the Secret Keeper. It's pretty clear throughout PoA that he thinks Sirius is a murderer--and that he's saving HRH from both a murderer and a werewolf in the Shrieking Shack. Carol From oppen at mycns.net Mon Aug 9 04:08:16 2004 From: oppen at mycns.net (ericoppen) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 04:08:16 -0000 Subject: Villainy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109402 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith wrote: > Dunno about you but I'm disappointed in Voldy. > Seems to be more caricature than character. > More cardboard cut-out than cut-throat. > Which is a bit surprising; JKR's pulled off a deliciously nasty piece > of work in Snape but seemed unable to go a step further and produce an > equally convincing evil mastermind. To be fair to her, those are _hard_ to write...at least if you want the good guys to win! S.M. Stirling says that in his works the villains "have read the Evil Overlord list," so he has to work harder to pull off believable wins for the Good Guys. And sometimes---they don't. > > The problem is that most villains are set up to lose; it's a given - > evil never triumphs, and it won't in HP either. No matter how powerful > and intelligent, no matter that he has overwhelming technological (or > magical) advantage and an army of ruthless killers at his beck and > call, it makes no difference. Even if the hero has nothing but a bent > pocket knife and a piece of string, the baddy goes down. Hence, the plethora of Incredibly Stupid, Overconfident Villains. Otherwise, the writers might have to _work_ to figure out convincing ways for the heroes to win. > > To do this the author must force him into committing egregious or even > farcical mistakes. He has to - otherwise how could he possibly lose? To be fair, a lot of RL villains have done just this. The man who led Germany from 1933 to 1945 is a prime example---I'll not mention his name here for fear of invoking Godwin's Law, but it has been commented that anybody in the world _other than him_ could have won against Stalin by doing a few simple things that were well within his power. >what makes an evil > mastermind make the grade. > > Firstly - he must have ambitions that make sense. > Voldy needs to sort out his priorities here. > He wants to be immortal. ( Why? What is the point? To any thinking > person immortality isn't a boon, it's a curse. It might be > understandable if he was going to do something with all that time; > travel the galaxies, meet strange aliens, feed them to Nagini. Not this > one - he's staying at home.) Of course, he should also figure out _eternal youth_ while he's on it- --wouldn't do to end up like that character in Greek myth, the one who got immortality but _not_ eternal youth, and ended up as a cricket. And I wouldn't mind immortality---the thing I'll hate most about death is that there'll be all these books coming out afterwards that I'll never get to read! > > In PS/SS getting hold of the Stone is his priority, Harry seems to be > an accidental stumbling block to his plan. > Thereafter he turns his attention on Harry. But if he stuck to his > plan, gained true immortality while in the meantime avoiding young > Potter then Harry becomes an irrelevance. And he'd save himself an > awful lot of trouble if he stopped bashing his head against the same > brick wall time after time. Very, very true. Or if he went with the "Keep it simple, stupid!" plan---finding and hiring a Muggle hit man or hit team to go after Harry in the summer at the Dursleys' wouldn't be terribly difficult. Or Imperiusing one of the Dursleys to poison Harry's food. > > What are his wider ambitions? In reality we only have a vague idea, > and that from Hagrid, " Getting supporters.....Taking things over." A > bit vague for a manifesto. And since I can't remember Voldy coming out > with any of the standard give-away phrases during any > foaming-at-the-mouth carpet-chewing episodes; it makes you wonder if > Hagrid's to be trusted in this. True again. Hagrid's not exactly a bubbling fountain of Revealed Truth, now is he? For that matter, what if "taking over the WW" isn't just what he tells his DEs is his plan, to keep them busy and out of his way while he gets up to his _real_ goals. > This time there's Voldy and a few dozen half-assed half-wits with > delusions of adequacy who can't even subdue half a dozen school kids > without cocking it up. I wouldn't be surprised, myself, if the DEs at the Ministry weren't hampered by _not_ being "Lord Voldemort;" IOW, unlike him, they did have scruples, even unconscious ones, about hurting or killing kids--- especially since some of them had children that age themselves. I think that a lot of the "commit gratuitous atrocities, bwahahaha!" schtick the DEs go through is to weed out the ones that really aren't up to snuff---the ones who can't or won't obey Lord Thingy, right, wrong or purple. > > Nah. Spiteful and targeted revenge for imagined childhood slights is > one thing - stretching it to a lust for world domination is a bit > much, even in these days of ersatz pop psychology. > > As presented in the books Voldy isn't a world threat, he's a local > problem. In the 5 years covered by the books Voldy and his acolytes > have killed about 20 (if you include the 13 Muggles). Hardly impressive > from the most evil coterie around, is it? Voldy as a renegade in a > small, hidden sub-section of society that works on a different basis to > ours is fine. Expanding into the RW where RW systems and logic are our > everyday currency is a mistake IMO. Especially since the MoM is in communication with the Muggle PM. At seventh and last, a FAE or even a pony-nuke on Lord Thingy's position would fix _his_ little red wagon, once and for all. > > So - an outline for an evil villain:- > > Understandable and/or credible ambitions that appear achievable. > > An original motivation that rings true (animus to your father turning > one into a world tyrant just doesn't hack it). > > Intelligence in the villain predicates intelligent actions within the > plot. For example punishing a messenger because he brings bad news is > stupid and counter-productive. Even worse, not using a wand when you've > got one in your hand. That said, it is stated repeatedly that the Notorious V.Mort has gone through a lot of "dangerous magical changes," starting out as that han'sum young Head Boy and turning into something like a bad _Star Trek_ alien from the first show. Can it be that some of those transformations didn't go _quite_ right, and played hob with his mind? > > Why concentrate solely on the hero? Why not knock off the hero's > friends and supporters? That really would be evil and there are too > many Weasleys anyway. Good question, this. > > Nasty habits that chime with primitive personal fears. War doesn't do > it, it's not aimed at you the reader *personally*; but imagining being > ripped open and having your heart eaten can make your toes curl. So > could selling Ginny to the Goblins as sushi-on-the-hoof, but > controlling Belgium is a yawn. Or, even worse...no, let's not go there. This is _Harry Potter,_ not _The Alchemist of Gor_ (_Potions Master of Gor,_ in the US edition). Of course, selling Ginny might turn into a money-making deal for Lord Wal-Mart. See the O. Henry story "The Ransom of Red Chief" if you want the details. > > Ranting and posturing is out. Cold and implacable is in. > He might be a nutter, but if he doesn't *appear* to be reasonable > how's he going to attract followers? > > Potential problems will be foreseen and taken into account. > He's supposed to be bright, isn't he? > > If he intends "taking over" he must have some idea of why he wants it > and what he's going to do with it when he's got it. Anybody know? It > would help greatly if the reader knew what it was that Harry was > actually saving from his evil clutches. > > If he captures or corners the hero, expect the hero to die except in > *very* exceptional one-off circumstances. (The conflict of wands works > for Harry vs Voldy; Harry also escaping the ravening horde of DEs > doesn't wash.) All excellent points. Frankly, were I in Tom Riddle's shoes as he left Hogwarts, I'd get myself a job with the MoM, to learn how it worked from the inside out. I don't know if I'd become an Auror---I'd bet that potential Aurors are screened by a top Legilimens, and until I had Occlumency down absolutely pat, I'd not want to risk going near a Legilimens if I didn't have to. I'd also get to know Important Wizards---*cough the Malfoys and Blacks, cough cough* who could help me in my Rise to Power. I'd leave the magical transformations for later, once I was MoM or the man behind the MoM, pulling his strings. If he were as good at schmoozing in the Ministry as Percy Weasley seems to be, combined with a bit of the ol' ruthless approach (poison in the Butterbeer, a discreet AKing _with no stupid Dark Marks,_ and so on) he could well still be a relatively young wizard when he got to the top. From romulus at hermionegranger.us Mon Aug 9 04:20:36 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 04:20:36 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109403 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: Geoff: > > What I do find tiresome is your refusal to even consider that there > are errors in the days. Every fact has to be distorted to fit "your" > timeline. You have flown in the face of English grammatical usage in > order to support your ideas about the Gringotts break-in despite > Harry's quite obvious remark about his birthday linking with the 31st > July. RMM: I do not refuse to consider that there are errors in the dates as given by Jo Rowling. In another post, I pointed out two dates that do not fit the days in OotP. However, the timeline consists of three different kinds of dates: the first are important dates for us to remember and work from, the second are ambiguous and play a lesser role, at least up to now, in the story; and the third type are dates that are just plain wrong and are red herrings, if you will, or oversights by Jo Rowling that do not matter. Secondly, I have pointed out that the July 31st date is ambiguous based on English grammar. You have not countered with a grammatical argument that supercedes mine. You say that the UK papers would "never" do this. And thirdly, maybe to most folks who read over the narrative see July 31st as the birthday; however, I find it a logical sticking point because of Jo's use of Tuesday, and the day before that -- Monday, and Sunday, and any other days she used in that week leading up to Harry's birthday in PS/SS. Fourthly, Jo has never plainly told us Harry's birthday. Until she does, the text remains ambiguous as do a lot of other texts in the books that hide valuable clues. As for this birthday's importance, it hold no major significance other than the day of the week on which he was born - a Wednesday. I find that coincidental. And fifthly, Jo Rowling seems to place great importance on birthdays, although she has stated that she has not talked about them much up to now. I say: AND FOR GOOD REASON!!! I believe they are critical. > > Geoff: > I think there is another mistake over the day here. I would indeed > take the memory of Hagrid over the weatherman for one glaringly > obvious fact.... > > Hagrid may be considered a bit of a buffoon by some folk but > Hallowe'en is a most important date in the Wizarding World calendar - > certainly in Hogwarts. Do you really think that he would so daft as > to mix up a date of Hallowe'en with an everyday date like 27th > October? RMM: Well for that year, yes I would say that there would be a huge mixup. Consider the celebration going on that day!! Voldemort was gone! Dumbledore's own words: "We've had precious little to celebrate these last eleven years." Big celebrations happening 4 days before Halloween. I say very easy to get them mixed up that year. A ten year old memory could play tricks on the giant, whereas, Jo narrated a math word problem into the very day to help us identify the exact time. [ Granted, she helped lots more when she gave us Nick's deathday. ] But why give all the narrative from the television? She could have left out the bit about "Bonfire Night" or as it is also called "Guy Fawkes Day". And that is a bit of odd coincidence as well -- FAWKES happens to be the name of Dumbledore's phoenix. And this is the other point. Jo sees birthdays as very very important. She tells us birthdays in her interviews ALL THE TIME. EG) I have seen at least three different interviews where Hermione Granger's birthday is given. I rank birthdays in her stories as being in the first category above. If there is a birthday mentioned, or deathday in one case, it is critical. There are no mistakes in the books regarding birthdays, unless the July 31st crowd is correct. Geoff: > The Lexicon certainly supports these dates. RMM: I will grant you that. The lexicon and prevailing opinion are on your side. :-) I have only my inner "voices" to support me. Perhaps a little more Electro Shock therapy is called for here, even though I just had my last round less than a week ago. RMM www.hermionegranger.us From catlady at wicca.net Mon Aug 9 04:31:59 2004 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 04:31:59 -0000 Subject: theories In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.6.1.20040808104426.00c93048@mail.bellsouth.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109404 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Shannon wrote: << Is there someplace online, perhaps at the lexicon or elsewhere, that keeps a running list of theories regarding various characters, storylines, etc? Quite often I see someone refer to a theory that I've never heard of, and rather than posting everytime going, "er, what?" it would be nice if there was a place where the major ones, at least, were presented more or less coherently. For example, last night I was searching high and low for stuff about Ron possibly being a seer (a theory that, given my affection for Ron, I'm particularly fond of), but it was kind of a nightmare. >> Many theories live at Hypothetic Alley: http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/faq/hypotheticalley.html Many acronyms are defined at Inish Alley: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/databa se?method=reportRows&tbl=28 or http://tinyurl.com/6vvkg From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Mon Aug 9 04:48:42 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 04:48:42 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109405 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: > But why give all the narrative from the television? She > could have left out the bit about "Bonfire Night" or as it is also > called "Guy Fawkes Day". And that is a bit of odd coincidence as > well -- FAWKES happens to be the name of Dumbledore's phoenix. Question... what year(s) would it have to be, ignoring all other evidence but keeping it in the 1980-2000 timeframe, for July 31 to match up with the Bonfire night as celebrated in the UK? Just go with me here... Josh From catlady at wicca.net Mon Aug 9 04:51:30 2004 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 04:51:30 -0000 Subject: over 1000 posts, scroll down to see if any are interesting Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109406 Nora and Kneasy discussed fascism in several excellent posts. Nora, does the ideology of fascism *require* a cult of personality? It seems to me that sometimes The Dictator's line is like: "It's not about me; it's all about protecting our great nation from enemies. I'm just the one who was in the right place at the right time to take the necessary actions against the traitors and enemy spies [i.e. all members of all oppositions]." Wm. McLamb wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/107704 : << Don't Wizards have funerals? While Crouch jr.'s could probably be hushed up how could Crouch sr.'s and Cedric's? If I were Dumbledore I would have used these as opportunities to spread the word of you know who's return. >> Young Barty's confession mentioned that he transfigured his father's corpse into a bone and hid it by burying it. To me that means there was no Old Barty corpse to have a funeral for. Mandy wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/107832 : << However if Lucius doesn't emerge from Azkaban Fortress smelling of roses, all charges dropped, and a written apology from Minister Fudge himself, Mr. Malfoy isn't half a slippery as we've been lead to believe. >> I love that sentence! However, it led me to wonder -- how sure are we that the Dementors have left Azkaban? What would prolonged contact with Dementors do to Lucius's slipperiness? Just Carol wrote http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/107832 : << He was only about twenty-six when Voldemort was defeated at Godric's Hollow, and Voldemort was not anticipating defeat. Why would he have given his old school things to Lucius? My theory (okay, speculation) is that Lucius found the diary at Hogwarts as a schoolboy and kept it. He must have discovered *then* who Tom Riddle was and been ordered to keep the diary secret until he felt the need to use it. >> In my theory, one of the 'useful friends' TMR met at Hogwarts was a Malfoy. Presumably either Lucius's older brother or his father. It might not have been difficult for TMR to have wangled an invitation to come live at Malfoy Manor (which I imagine to be spacious) after leaving Hogwarts. I'm sure there is an excellent Dark Arts library at Malfoy Manor for TMR to begin his private research; the head of the Malfoy family would also be a very useful connection, and perhaps Malfoys gave him money to travel around (the world? Europe?) visiting Dark Wizards. In that theory, *all* TMR's old school things would have been at Malfoy Manor because he brought them with him when he moved in, and he never was interested enough in them to remove them. I think Dumbledore knows that, so his remark to Lucius about not handing out more of Lord Voldemort's old school things was quite relevant. About the diary, your theory is be more logical -- TMR should have hidden it in the Slytherin common room for an appropriate student to find and use, as its use is at Hogwarts, not at Malfoy Manor. But it seems to me that if schoolboy Lucius had contacted Diary!Tom, neither of them would have yet know that Lord Voldemort was soon to become famous, so they would have been more interested in re-opening the Chamber and killing 'mudbloods' than in saving the diary for future use. Valky wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/107853 : << Lucius the 'slick talking silver tongue' that he is, was able to engender the trust of Voldemort. In my own case, to be keeper (haha another keeper for book 7!) of his magical possessions. >> In my theory (above) TMR/LV was Lucius's godfather. He was enough of an influence on child Lucius to explain why Lucius is so *very* evil, and to me the gentleness of his scolding of Luicus at the graveyard circle shows paternal-like affection for Lucius. Moving on from baseless speculation to pure fanfic, I imagine that Lucius is head of the family at such a young age because his godfather helped him to murder his father, older brother(s), anyone ahead of him in the inheritance, and disguise it all as Death Eater terrorist attacks. << (I go on to say that he has a swelled head and thinks that he will rule the WW side by side with the victorious LV but we wont go into that now ;D) >> Oh, yes, except what is this 'side by side' stuff? He thinks he will be the only ruler and LV will be only his figurehead. Flop wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforG rownups/message/109041 : << I'd wondered why she chose Lucius (of all things!) for Mr. Malfoy (um... Light Bad-Faith?... That's a LITTLE odd!) >> 1) The Arthurian theory, as you explain. 2) Similar sound to Lucifer, whose name *means* "Light-bearer", as Geoff explained. 3) Connected in some way to his extremely fair coloring, shared by Draco. Several years ago I posted about all blondes in the series being bad guys -- Petunia and Dudley and Draco and Lockhart -- and was that a clue that Seamus will turn evil? After all, he spent a long time under the Sorting Hat, perhaps begging for Gryffindor while it really thought Slytherin would be a better choice. Then someone interfered by asking what about Hannah Abbot, who was "a pink-faced girl with blonde pigtails" when she was Sorted. Amey wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforG rownups/message/108083 : << "But I've told you, I had no idea!" Bagman called earnestly over the crowd's babble, his round blue eyes widening. "None at all! Old Rookwood was a friend of my dad's . . . never crossed my mind he was in with You-Know-Who! I thought I was collecting information for our side! And Rookwood kept talking about getting me a job in the Ministry later on ... " (GoF) Where was he collecting information from? Or more precisely, from whom??? And when did he became so important and clever to gather information? What am I missing here? >> Canon shows that Ludo's Quidditch achievements made him famous and popular. I go on to fantasize that he was *so* famous and popular that very rich and highly placed witches and wizards were eager to socialize with him, and invited him to high-society parties. Where some people were eager to impress him with how important they were by passing along tidbits of "classified" information that ordinarily he would have found too boring to pay attention to, but under Rookwood's guidance, he listened carefully and remembered what he had heard so that he could recite it back, even without understanding it. This is a sexless version of the beautiful (and secretly intelligent) female spy who uses seductive wiles to lure men who should know better into telling her their nation's secrets. Alice_loves_cats wrote of speculation of Regulus's hypothetical half-blood son in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/108091 : << But Dean Thomas is black (so probably not a Black). >> Until quite recent times, it was regarded, at least in USA, that if one parent is black, then the child is black. Julie wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/108120 : << Neville's problem is lack of confidence. His case actually makes me believe the Sorting Hat does the actual sorting, however much it may hem and haw, and give lip service to considering the student's preference. I'm sure Neville didn't think he was Gryffindor material, and expected to be sorted to Hufflepuff. But the Sorting Hat put him in Gryffindor anyway. (It makes me wonder if the long time it took to sort Neville was because of an ongoing argument between Neville and the Hat--"I'm sure I belong in Hufflepuff.", "Hmm. Perhaps, but you would also do well in Gryffindor.", "But I'm not brave enough!", "Courage reveals itself in many forms and deeds.", "But I'm not really good at anything. I'm just average.", etc, etc.) >> Yes! That is what I believe. And the Hat's final argument would be: "If you aren't brave, why are you arguing with a thousand year old magical artifact?" Magda wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/108302 : << Dumbledore says that the "Power the Dark Lord knows not" is love. That's why he didn't anticipate Lily's sacrifice for Harry. If Harry has this power, then he will be able to defeat the DL permanently. How to make sure Harry has this power? By letting him grow up as normally as possible, come to Hogwarts, make friends, discover the warmer emotions including real love (as we saw with Sirius). >> If that was DD's goal, he took a BIG risk placing Harry with the Dursleys. I understand the argument that DD had to place HP with them for the sake of physical protection (by living with his mothers's blood kin), but it risked HP learning Dursley values. ssgtkaras wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/108405 : << I'm probably overlooking this in the books. However, I am new to the series and was wondering if anyone could tell me the difference between a wizard and a warlock. >> None of us know for sure (or if someone does, they haven't told). Recent threads on the subject begin with the following posts: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/106697 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/message/23351 In those threads, Steve b_boymn suggests that 'wizards' are Western European and 'warlocks' are Eastern European. That doesn't explain why Dumbledore's title as chairman of the Wizengamot is Chief Warlock, and why Quidditch, a sport invented in England, is called 'the noble sport of warlocks'. My theory is that 'warlock' means a member of the wizarding parliament (which might be the Wizengamot, named as it is after the Saxon parliament, Witangemot). I assume that the word acquired additional meaning: as being chosen by your neighbors to represent them is something of an honor, 'warlock' came to mean a respected person, thus 'the noble sport of warlocks'; but public opinion of politicians being what it is, 'warlock' also came to mean a person full of hot air, which might explain the 'wild-looking' warlocks arguing over the latest issue of Transfiguration Quarterly at the Leaky Cauldron. Potioncat wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/108737 << Steve wrote: "Thank you, Fortescue, that will do," said Dumbledore softly. >> << Given DD's sweet-tooth, giving Fortescue a place of honor makes sense! (Assuming of course, the ancestor also had a sweet shop on Diagon Alley...) >> Of course I'm being far too serious about a sweet funny joke, but Old Fortescue's ice cream shop must have been before or after or on the side of being Headmaster, since the portraits in DD's office are all former Headmasters and Headmistresses. Josh wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforG rownups/message/108917 : << The negative answer to the choosing animagi form in a previous response was the World Book Day chat, I believe. She made some comment about working so hard for so long only to find that you most resemble some embarrassing creature. Look at the animagi you know: Prongs -> proud, big ego, Padfoot -> playful but loyal in the extreme, Wormtail -> sly and sneaky, Rita Skeeter -> a pest, Minerva - > prim and proper. >> Based on a person's Animagus form reflecting their personality, I figure Minerva is quite a sensual hedonist on her own time ... cats only *fake* being prim and proper. DuffyPoo wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/108944 : << My sincerest apologies. You all must think I'm nuts. I was intending that e-mail for a friend who asked me, "Are Harry Potter and the Lord of the Rings all part of the same story." So, as you can tell, I was trying to explain that they are NOT. >> IIRC, according to Tolkien, they *are*, and so are WWII and the Bible: all part of the story of good against evil. Carolyn wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/108963 : <> We might not thinkn so, but JKR might. Some clever listie once translated Hermione's next sentence as invoking all four Houses: "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. "Me!" said Hermione. "Books! And cleverness! There are more important things -- friendship and bravery and -- oh Harry -- be careful!" "Me!" said Hermione. "Ravenclaw! There are more important things -- Hufflepuff and Gryffindor and -- oh Harry -- Slytherin!" Nora wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforG rownups/message/109054 : << Nora notes that her favorite person in Theory Bay is Faith, who always comes out of Hurricane Jo with her haircut intact >> I'm very fond of Faith, who never requires me to understand those logic puzzles about "If DD lives in the red house and uses a Time Turner, in what color house does the Heir of Slytherin live?" But I'm pretty sure that at the end of PoA, Faith had to do a big job of 'pick herself up, brush herself off, and start all over again' -- a reader who believes the obvious never expected that Scabbers the boring pet rat was really a dead human wizard. And again at the end of GoF -- I never suspected Moody as bad guy the first read through, and even if I had, only a suspicious mind would have doubted that young Barty was really dead. Aggie wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/109062 : << IMO it would solve some of the mysteries as how DD KNOWS so much. He has a list, (12 hands I do believe the watch has) of the 12 people he wants to keep tabs on and then he just has to look at his watch to know where they are. >> Personally I think there's something astrological about Dumbledore's watch. To me, the 12 hands delineate the 12 Houses into which the heavens are divided and the planets go around the circumference. So he can both tell time from his watch (Hagrid being late to arrive at Privet Drive) AND read it like the centaurs read the sky. Jo Sturgess wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/109126 : << I suppose that Harry may follow in the marauders footsteps (pawprints?) and teach himself to transform. The marauders were focused by the desire to help Lupin and Harry, I suspect, is going to want to pass through that dratted veil in search of Sirius, might not be possible as a human. >> JKR said not: http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/arti cles/1999/1099-pressclubtransc.html SB: We're going to take a few more questions, and um, the next one is will Harry ever turn into a shape-changer like his father? JKR: Animagus. No, Harry's not in training to be an animagus, and if you've read book three, you won't know -- um, that's a wizard that's very, very difficult to do. They learn to turn themselves into animals. No, Harry is not, Harry is going to be concentrated elsewhere, he's not going to have time to do that. He's got quite a full agenda coming up, poor boy. Lorel wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/109168 : << Exactly. So why would this be any different for Sirius? He can get there, but not bring people with whom Peter had not shared the secret. Of course, it just occurred to me that within this setup, Sirius would be the only other person who could know, because otherwise everyone else would have known that Peter was the S-K. Hmmm, that's a big weakness in my theory. >> Just as Secret Keeper Dumbledore informed Harry of 12 Grimmauld Place by a written note, Peter could have informed Dunbledore of Godric's Hollow by a written note. If he had written the note in disguised handwriting, DD might not have recognized Peter's handwriting and simply thought Sirius was being overdramatic with disguised handwriting. It is possible that Peter handed these notes, said to be from Sirius, to DD, Hagrid, Remus, and maybe more Order members at an Order meeting... Even if one of them were LV's spy, not being Secret Keeper, they couldn't reveal the Potters to LV. Kemper wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/109331 : << DD wouldn't hire some evil man to work with youth, and a character can be unlikable and still be good because "it is our choices (snip) that show what we truly are." >> Dumbledore believes in second chances. That means, he believes that a person can STOP BEING EVIL -- he is willing to take some risk of hiring formerly evil people who appear to have given up evil. It isn't much bigger than the risk of hiring apparently good person who later decide to TURN EVIL. From catlady at wicca.net Mon Aug 9 05:19:23 2004 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 05:19:23 -0000 Subject: Counter Curses (was: What counts as Dark Magic? ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109407 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "iamvine" wrote: > This brings up an interesting point. Does _anybody_ know where > regular magic ends and Dark Magic begins? (snip) > Is Wilbert Slinkhard right to disapprove of counter-curses on > the grounds that they are curses too? Your whole question of What is Dark Magic is a great question to which I don't know the answer, but I do know that Slinkhard is simply *factually wrong*. In Potterverse, a counter-curse is NOT a curse; it is a only a defense against a curse. One that comes immediately to mind is Fake!Moody teaching the about the Killing Curse (Avada Kedavra): "Not nice," he said calmly. "Not pleasant. And there's no counter-curse. There's no blocking it. Only one known person has ever survived it, and he's sitting right in front of me." Also in GoF, we have Hermione helping Harry prepare for the Third Task: "He was still having trouble with the Shield Charm, though. This was supposed to cast a temporary, invisible wall around himself that deflected minor curses; Hermione managed to shatter it with a well placed Jelly-Legs Jinx. Harry wobbled around the room for ten minutes afterwards before she had looked up the counter-jinx." PS/SS: "At that moment Neville toppled into the common room. How he had managed to climb through the portrait hole was anyone's guess, because his legs had been stuck together with what they recognized at once as the Leg-Locker Curse. He must have had to bunny hop all the way up to Gryffindor tower. Everyone fell over laughing except Hermione, who leapt up and performed the countercurse. Neville's legs sprang apart and he got to his feet, trembling." And Quirrelmort's confession: ""No, no, no. I tried to kill you. Your friend Miss Granger accidentally knocked me over as she rushed to set fire to Snape at that Quidditch match. She broke my eye contact with you. Another few seconds and I'd have got you off that broom. I'd have managed it before then if Snape hadn't been muttering a countercurse, trying to save you." In the latter three examples, the counter-curse removes the effects of its specific curse (Jelly-Legs Jinx, Leg-Locker Curse, broomstick curse). The broomstick example shows Snape's counter-curse can remove the effects of Quirrelmort's curse while that curse is still being cast. Presumably if the counter-curse was cast powerfully enough and fast enough, it could remove the effects of the curse before they even occured, thus serving to *block* the curse entirely. So Fake!Moody's "no counter-curse, no way to block it" would be repetition for emphasis. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 05:27:03 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 05:27:03 -0000 Subject: Snape's avoidance of Voldemort' s name (Was:OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chap 2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109409 As usual, the part of my post that I'm most interested in getting a response to got snipped, so I'm trying again. I (Carol) wrote: > The name [Voldemort] clearly causes pain to Snape: I'm not sure that it does so for loyal DEs. In fact, my impression is that both Voldemort's name and the presence of a loyal DE (Barty Jr. in disguise) caused Snape's Dark Mark to burn because he's *dis*loyal to Voldemort and the Mark senses that disloyalty. Here's the canon for the name Voldemort, or the suspicion by a real DE that he's not loyal to Voldemort, causing Snape pain. First, there's the late night conversation with Crouch!Moody, witnessed by Harry in his invisibility cloak: "'Dumbledore happens to trust me!' said Snape through clenched teeth. 'I refuse to believe that he gave you orders to search my office!' "''Course Dumbledore trusts you,' growled Moody. 'He's a trusting man, isn't he? Believes in second chances. But me--I say there are spots that don't come off, Snape. Spots that never come off, d'you know what I mean?' "Snape suddenly did something very strange. He seized his left forearm convulsively with his right hand, as though something had hurt him." (GoF Am. ed. 472). Clearly it's the Dark Mark--and Crouch!Moody's reference to it--that's causing the pain. Snape, of course, still thinks he's speaking with Moody the auror at this point, and he's still convinced that it's Harry who broke into his office (the reference to searching his office refers to a different incident). But we, the readers, know who "Moody" really is and understand that his reasons for hating and distrusting Snape are very different from the real Moody's. Snape has just stated that Dumbledore trusts him, implying that the trust is merited and that that's where his loyalties lie. And the Dark Mark, when Crouch!Moody alludes to it, burns him painfully--in retribution, as I see it, for that loyalty to Voldemort's greatest enemy. The second incident that I recall (there may be others) occurs in OoP during the first occlumency lesson: "'How come I saw through the snake's eyes if it's Voldemort's thoughts I'm sharing?' "'*Do not say the Dark Lord's name!*' spat Snape. (Italics in original.) "There was a nasty silence. They glared at one another across the Pensieve. "'Professor Dumbledore says his name," said Harry quietly. "'Dumbledore is an extremely powerful wizard,' Snape muttered. "While *he* may feel secure enough to use the name. . . the rest of us. . .' He rubbed his left forearm, apparently unconsciously, on the spot where Harry knew the Dark Mark was burned into his skin." (OoP Am. ed. 532). This time the pain seems less intense, or he's better able to control his reaction (using much the same skills he would use as an occlumens, hiding his feelings and thoughts from others?), but nevertheless the pain seems directly connected with Voldemort's name. That in itself seems sufficient reason for Snape to call Voldemort the Dark Lord, but I also think that he wants to emphasize for Harry in particular how very dangerous--and Dark--Voldemort is. Not a foe to be faced lightly by a boy who thinks he's a Dark Wizard's equal. He is, IMO, trying to help Harry understand that in this scene. But to return to my main point: Hearing the name, or a reference to the mark placed by Voldemort himself on Snape's arm as a symbol of loyalty and a means of enforcing it, causes Snape pain. The question I have that I hope someone will answer is, do we have any indication that the loyal Death Eaters feel a similar pain? Clearly Crouch!Moody does not (at least in his polyjuiced form) because he freely taunts Snape about the Dark Mark--but he also says that "there are spots that never come off," so maybe his own Dark Mark is still there, even in that disguise, unaffected by his references to "spots" or to Death Eaters who walked free (as he, of course, did not). He isn't in Moody's body, after all. The real Moody is lying near death in his own trunk. I can't recall whether Crouch!Moody uses the name Voldemort, but he's unfazed by Harry's references to the Dark Mark and Death Eaters when they talk in his office (GoF Am. ed. 476). So--is it only Snape whose Dark Mark burns when it--or Voldemort--is referred to? And does it mean what I think it means, that the mark itself senses his disloyalty to Voldemort? Will someone please address this aspect of the question? Carol From cassin12004 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 8 22:30:35 2004 From: cassin12004 at yahoo.com (cassin12004) Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 22:30:35 -0000 Subject: Villainy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109410 Kneasy wrote: > > Dunno about you but I'm disappointed in Voldy. > > Seems to be more caricature than character. > > More cardboard cut-out than cut-throat. > > Which is a bit surprising > > > > Neri shakes head in bemusement: > Could it be that you are trying to make HP into something it isn't? > Could HP be a book about Harry Potter? Not about Voldy, and maybe > not even about Snape or DD's plan? Could Voldy be there mainly as a > challenge for Harry? I agree. Character interaction is the essence of the book. And straight evil characters are by definition pretty one dimensional. That is why the duplicitous Snape is so much more fun and interesting to read about. I get tired of the first glimpse of the Head Evil Guy of any story and he is killing or harming one of his own henchmen. But how much more do we need to know about Voldy than he is evil and dangerous especially to HP? Cassin From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Aug 9 07:01:46 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 07:01:46 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109411 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: RMM: I have a question then. Has anyone here had a book published? Does anyone here know that the book publisher has people called "editors" that go over the book for exactly these kinds of discrepancies? So, unless the editors are a bunch of bumble brains, they would be telling Jo: "You have some dates wrong here. Fix them or we will." But yet, the dates stay in the book the way they are. Why? Geoff: It depends, how assiduous the editors are in probing dates. First, let me say that I have a favourite book, not a fantasy book, which I read every couple of years or so, called "To Serve Them All My Days". I enjoy it, because it is about a teacher and is also set on Exmoor; as a teacher who spent many holidays on Exmoor and now lives there, it has always appealed to me. This book is absolutely riddled with time inconsistencies; the author regularly mixes up years and months but I have always shrugged my shoulders and pressed on. They don't affect the story line. It seems the editors let those through. As i said in a recent post, I seem to have stirred up a storm in a teacup because I made a casual passing reference off the cuff to a discrepancy in the days of the week. When I read the HP books, I do not go through, like some readers, looking for clues or oddities with a fine toothcomb. I read the books to /enjoy/ them. I first noticed the wrong date of Harry's birthday when I was researching something else and it interested me, (with my hat on as a former Maths teacher). Frankly, as many have said, it doesn't affect my view of the books. > RMM: > Secondly, I have pointed out that the July 31st date is ambiguous > based on English grammar. You have not countered with a grammatical > argument that supercedes mine. Geoff: Although I was a mainly a teacher of Maths and Computing, I did cover some English teaching in my earlier days. One of the things I recall emphasising with students was to be careful how they placed an adjectival phrase in a sentence in relation to the noun to which it referred as this could give rise to hilarious or completely misleading statements. I maintain that the placing the phrase "on 31st July" next to Gringotts makes that data refers to the break-in and not to the investigation. In previous posts, I have suggested possible alternative ways of wording the sentence to make the date refer to the latter. > > Geoff: > > I think there is another mistake over the day here. I would indeed > > take the memory of Hagrid over the weatherman for one glaringly > > obvious fact.... > > > > Hagrid may be considered a bit of a buffoon by some folk but > > Hallowe'en is a most important date in the Wizarding World calendar > - > > certainly in Hogwarts. Do you really think that he would so daft as > > to mix up a date of Hallowe'en with an everyday date like 27th > > October? > > RMM: > Well for that year, yes I would say that there would be a huge mixup. > > Consider the celebration going on that day!! Voldemort was gone! > Dumbledore's own words: "We've had precious little to celebrate these > last eleven years." Big celebrations happening 4 days before > Halloween. I say very easy to get them mixed up that year. > A ten year old memory could play tricks on the giant, whereas, Jo > narrated a math word problem into the very day to help us identify > the > exact time. Geoff: For a miilisecond, I thought you were agreeing with me.... Then I read on. :-) > > Geoff: > > The Lexicon certainly supports these dates. > > RMM: > I will grant you that. The lexicon and prevailing opinion are on your > side. :-) I have only my inner "voices" to support me. > Perhaps a little more Electro Shock therapy is called for here, even > though I just had my last round less than a week ago. Geoff: No comment. Absolutely no comment! From cassin12004 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 00:25:12 2004 From: cassin12004 at yahoo.com (cassin12004) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 00:25:12 -0000 Subject: DD as animagus (Re: Ron's Patronus (Warning Ron=DD)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109412 Cory wrote: > Furthermore -- and I'm not arguing against Ron=DD as a theory; I'm > not entirely sold one way or the other on that issue -- but if JKR > *is* going the Ron=DD route in the story, it seems to me that > inconspicuously revealing each of their patronuses is exactly the > type of clue that JKR *would* give, doesn't it? That would explain how Dumbledore is keeping such a close eye on Harry. But I would sooner believe that Dumbledore is Hedwig. (Hagrid picked that specific bird out himself.) Or I could believe that he is observing Harry through Fawkes and Harry's wand. Or through the frog cards. Cassin From ejblack at rogers.com Mon Aug 9 01:45:57 2004 From: ejblack at rogers.com (ejblack) Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 21:45:57 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] info on Luna Lovegood References: Message-ID: <002601c47db2$9e8b0c60$2680c645@blackc02b2gycq> No: HPFGUIDX 109413 Hi!, I joined the group a few days ago and have been lurking and looking around the files. Great stuff,all of it, but I have not been able to find any posts etc about Luna Lovegood. I have a strong feeling she is going to be a major character and would love to see some of your posts about her. For myself, I am a 50 year old artist/jeweler from Ottawa ON Canada, married to a marine biologist who is also a Potter fan. Jeanette / jcb54me [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From rubykelly at webtv.net Mon Aug 9 08:24:49 2004 From: rubykelly at webtv.net (rubyxkelly) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 08:24:49 -0000 Subject: Villainy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109414 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > > Kneasy wrote: > (smip/edit) I'm disappointed in Voldy. > > ...more caricature than character. > > More cardboard cut-out than cut-throat. > > > > > Neri shakes head in bemusement: > > Kneasy, I sometimes wonder why you still read HP. With your talent > you'd be making much better use of your time writing FF, or even your > own original FEATHERBOA fantasy, with a believable and chilling Evil > Overlord. You can already count on me buying a copy. I wouldn't be > able to resist it. > > Could it be that you are trying to make HP into something it isn't? > Could HP be a book about (warning: a really wild speculation ahead) > Harry Potter? (Alert! Snip/edit ahead!_ Not about Voldy, or Snape; DD's > plan? Could Voldy be there mainly as a > > challenge for Harry? Someone > for Harry to fight while not wrestling > with bothersome teenager friends & > rivals, system injustice, > grownups' prejudice, pressure from high > expectations, an abusive > family, lousy teachers, crucial exams, > hopes of future career, > winning the Quidditch cup, first dates, & several other petty > matters that sometimes occupy the mind & time of kids growing up? > > So if certain parts of the set are a bit flimsy at the seams, could > it perhaps be an indication of the author's priorities? > > Neri Kat/rxk: Oh, Neri you poor child! Next thing you're going to claim is that the LOYR was about some tiny guy trying to destroy a gold ring imbued with almoxt irresistable demonic magic in orefer to save his world & his beloved home from a horrific fate-only to suffer such physical & psychic trauma to body/mind/spirit that healing means leaving the home and friends & go live far from all that's dear/familiar for the rest of his life. Of course, MANY-indeed HORDES-realuze as I do that oy's ACTUALLY about Orlando Nl...er, I mean Legolas'... (heh, oops)...shimy blond hair & nice ass! I mean, geez Neri, whatever you're talking about souncx about as mezningful or appealing as a book where some kid tries to flee down a eiver on a raft to take a driend to freedom, or some kid watches her honourable and loving dad defend a man against a false charge in a corrupt, prejudiced place even rho' she's threatened because of it; or see some lonely, misfit kid struggle with adolescence & who's most comforting fantasy is of standing in a farmer's field protecting little children from tumbling off a cliff? Really! Can you imagine ANYONE not being vored stiff if any authour was doolish enough to WRITR storied with plots like THOSE??! Kmeasy0you have my email address-pleaassee let me know if you pen that dark-overlord-conspiravy book, or any dan fics!! (SERIOYSLY!) - KAT/rxk From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 9 09:01:24 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 05:01:24 -0400 Subject: Theory on Snape Message-ID: <001801c47def$7328dc90$7dc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109415 Saraquel "I have a big problem with this scene in PS (p140 UK pb) which implies that whatever Quirrel thought he was doing to Harry's broom, it didn't stop when Hermione knocked him over: It took perhaps 30 seconds for Snape to realise that he was on fire. A sudden yelp told her she had done her job. Scooping the fire off him into a little jar in her pocket she scrambled back along the row - Snape would never know what had happened. It was enough. Up in the air, Harry was suddenly able to clamber back on to his broom.' To me, this means that Harry couldn't clamber back onto the broom for a good 30 seconds after Hermione broke Quirrell's eye contact with Harry's broom. So what was going on here, were both Quirrel and Snape hexing Harry's broom and why was it important for Hermione to scoop the fire up again?" DuffyPoo: "No, no, no. I tried to kill you. Your friend Miss Granger accidentally knocked me over as she rushed to set fire to Snape at that Quidditch match. She broke my eye contact with you. I'd have managed it before then if Snape hadn't been muttering a counter-curse, trying to save you." (PS - The Man With Two Faces) I can't explain the 30 seconds, I'm afraid, maybe it takes that long for a jinx to subside. As to Hermine scooping up the fire, she wasn't trying to kill Snape, just slow him down. She's very good at making portable fires and had used one, kept in a jam jar, just a day or two before the Quidditch match to keep the Trio warm while standing outside during break/lunch. Snape approached them, at that time, and took the book HP had been reading, they were afraid he had seen the fire. Perhaps Hermione didn't what to be the suspect here. I expect Quirrell didn't report her setting fire to Snape because then he would have had to report himself. Saraquel" The jury's still out on, is Snape ESE? Can't tell you where, but I recently read that JKR has warned us about feeling too sorry for Snape! I also agree somewhat with Nora >I promised myself I was going to stay outta Snapethreads. We always >end up arguing unknown points of fact, and there are enough of those >that no one can decently argue interpretation, at the moment Snape is a pivotal character in understanding so much that I think JKR has deliberately kept us in the dark with him and we really do need more information before we can even think of pieceing things together. DuffyPoo: Yes, JKR has deliberately kept us in the dark about many things and many people, but that doesn't mean we can't have fun theorizing and speculating. Besides, I don't feel the least bit sorry for Snape, I don't see a great deal to feel sorry for him for. He didn't have to accept DD's idea to join the DEs (my theory). He made the decision to do so and got himself out of the need to do many nasty deeds by taking LV up on the offer to spy on DD. If you follow my posts at all, and why would you really, I very seldom post to Snape threads. For that matter, I very seldom read Snape threads - sorry to those who post about Snape regularly. I started working on this theory probably before I found this list. I was trying to figure out Snape for myself. If I had kept working on the theory instead of posting it when I did - I added to or deleted from it nearly every day for three or four weeks - I would probably have come around to a different conclusion. As I said, when I started working on the thing, I was convinced Snape was a double agent. Working both sides against the middle. In fact, I read something yesterday, in PoA that has nearly shattered my theory totally, but that doesn't matter. I'm not hanging on to with with my teeth. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cmw652 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 02:07:47 2004 From: cmw652 at yahoo.com (cmw652) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 02:07:47 -0000 Subject: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109416 Magda Writes.... > Probably we see Molly at her best around Harry. As you say, she does > indeed give him the unconditional maternal love that he hasn't had > since he was 15 months old. It's a heck of a lot more than she gives > her own family. > > Molly, Molly, Molly, - why do I dislike her? Let me list the ways: > > 1. She's a bad loser. When you argue with Molly, there's no "let's > agree to disagree" about it, it's war to the knife. She's losing the > fight with Sirius about what to tell Harry so she hurls the snotty > Azkaban comment at him (OOTP). > > 4. She says and does hurtful things. The Azkaban shot at Sirius was > mentioned above. > > Or how about the Easter Eggs she sent to Ron, Harry and Hermione in > GoF - Ron and Harry got huge chocolate/caramel things but Hermione > got a tiny little egg because Rita Skeeter had written an article > claiming that Hermione broke Harry's heart? > > Or Molly's comment when Ron becomes prefect? "That's everyone in the > family!" "What are we, next door neighbours?" says Fred/George. > Imagine, a comment so pointed and direct it even managed to get > through the twins' armour. I really think that comment - and the > unspoken but clear implications behind it - rival Snape's "I see no > difference" in terms of sheer callous cruelty. Now me: Magda, your post made me laugh-- and realize you create a good argument against anyone you dislike, so I hope you don't take my disagreeing personally! :D A lot of what you say is true if taken at face value. However, I have always valued "Intentions" when looking at actions. A lot of what Molly does can be seen as cruel, but I do not believe that is her always her intent. Some instances, such as the small Easter egg you listed above, are not okay. But I think that is JKR once again showing us that no one is perfect-- a theme that seems to be very important within these books. The world is not made up into good and bad people, and neither are her characters- they make mistakes, and do hurtful things. Molly is certainly not an exception. I would probably hate to have her as a mother. But, what is clear to me is that she DOES love her children-- Fred and George included. That is why she is so hard on them. It is not the best idea for parenting... in fact, if she weren't so controlling, I think her kids would be quite different. Still. She gives them a hard time because she cares for them, and doesn't want to see them seriously screw up. As for the comment she made at Sirius (which made me really mad, for the record), you really cannot take it out of context. Underneath her anger, Molly was concerned for Harry because she cares about him. Once again, not okay, but it isn't really what she meant, IMO. Her methods are bad, but her intentions are good (I know, I know, the road to hell is paved with good intentions...something my first grade teacher used to remind us of daily. And I don't think her intentions were good, so I hate her). In some kind of proof to all of this.... I would like to point out the scene in GOF where everyone comes home from the cup... Molly was so worried for everyone, ESPECIALLY Fred and George because she had been cruel to them earlier. So-- that is my defense of Molly. Sorry Magda. You put up a good argument though! CMW --who has every intention of going to bed, but will probably read 1000 more posts---- From shalimar07 at aol.com Mon Aug 9 02:08:00 2004 From: shalimar07 at aol.com (shalimar07 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 22:08:00 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Polyjuice was: Time-turning as literary device Message-ID: <7e.555bcfd9.2e483680@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109417 Does anyone ever wonder why Mrs. Figg's house always smells like cabbage? Could she really be someone else? Mary [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 05:05:03 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 05:05:03 -0000 Subject: Hermione incautious/dangerous books? In-Reply-To: <6.1.0.6.0.20040808182046.0344ca90@mail.catbirdco.us> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109418 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Michal wrote: > JKR seems to have shown us both the usefulness and dangers of this tool, > though less explicitly than with the time-turner. Hermione made an > assumption about the hair from Millicent's robes and paid the price. Is > this the only time (ha!) she's been incautious? I'll have to think about that. Well, I think it *was* incautious of her to run into library to check for the basilisk! (and she got petrified for it). Also, regularly using a time-turner took a toll on her because she didn't choose, but took all. Possibly something she had to experience I suppose... Recieving mail - (after that Rita Skeeter article and her hands getting into contact with uniluminated bubotuber pus)... ******** You know - Hermione DID know the levitating spell, but it was Ron who used it against the troll (knocking it out)... Did she not think that going into toilet to cry alone is dangerous (look what happened to poor Myrtle!). And all her reading... Ron mentions several dangerous books in CoS, being dubious of the Diary of Tom Riddle (which WAS dangerous, to Ginny in particular)... I doubt Hermione would stop to consider that a book could do her harm... And yet, Monster book of Monsters is the only dangerous book since then. (although, invisible book of invisibility can be considered as dangerous to a shop-keeper's budget - cost a fortune and you'll never find them) Finwitch From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 9 09:25:11 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 05:25:11 -0400 Subject: Mundungus Fletcher/Crookshanks Message-ID: <002a01c47df2$c5488b80$7dc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109419 > DuffyPoo: > Unfortunately, both Mundungus and Crookshanks were in the kitchen at dinnertime the first day HP arrives at 12 Grimmauld Place. Fred, George and Mundungus are laughing over a story Dung told about stolen toads, and Ginny was playing with Crookshanks with Butterbeer corks on the floor. Finwitch: "So what? How do we know that Mundungus hasn't made/stolen a time- turner? Remember, in HP, people CAN be in two (or three) places at the same time. And even if he'd be the um... 5th? unregistered animagus we've heard of, Crookshanks beeing half-kneazle would add something new: even half-magical creature *can* be an animagus form. So we'll get to Harry who'll turn into a phoenix or a golden griffin...!" DuffyPoo again: Mundungus stealing a time-turner I could buy, making one...I'm not so sure. However, here's this as posted in a previous reply to the same question, by James who is quoting from JKRs site. James: "Section: Rumours Crookshanks is an Animagus No, he's not, but he's not pure cat either. If you buy Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (all royalties to Comic Relief, which means you're helping some of the poorest children around the world) you might just be able to work out what Crookshanks really is." Crookshanks isn't an Animagus. Which is not to say that Mundungus isn't one as well, but I'd have a difficult time believing it from what we know about him. But at the very least, he's not Crookshanks. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 9 09:46:06 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 05:46:06 -0400 Subject: At least respect JKR Message-ID: <003301c47df5$b1531c50$7dc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109420 Samnanya- "And how exactly is Nick's deathday of 1492 one of her biggest mistakes? How can you say that the date is not CRITICAL in oop or later books?" DuffyPoo: First of all, I will only respond for myself, and not to the whole rant you posted. What I said and what HunterGren said, was intelligent, whether YOU think so or not. As to my comment regarding 1492, all I was saying was, if JKR hadn't put that - or any - specific date into the text, all this speculating about birthdays, dates the story started, etc, ETC., would not be possible. I never, once, indicated - or certainly never intended to - that 1492 is not, or may not, become very important. Nobody knew which 'dull, grey Tuesday' JKR was referring to in PS until we were given 1492 as reference in CoS. That is ALL I am saying. I have a great deal of respect for JKR. While I believe she is a very intelligent woman and a good writer, I don't think she walks on water, as some people do. She is able to make mistakes. She says herself she is no good at maths (and I admit, to me, that translates to dates as well). She gave us FLINT after all and Mark Evans. We've discussed the ancestor/descendent deal to death. And let's not go to the Prefects and House Points thing. Not to mention the fact that the Hogwarts Express leaves at 11 a.m. on Sept 1 every year...whatever day that may be, Sept 2 has always been a Monday. If you have any more to say to ME on this matter, I suggest you do so off list. Thanks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 05:14:19 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 05:14:19 -0000 Subject: Banned magic outside school? (Re: Wands and spells) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109421 Mandy Pandy: > And another thing - maybe these should have been three posts! - > Petunia says in PS that Lily was always showing off doing magic > tricks, turning tea cups into mice during the school holidays. Was > magic not banned during holidays as it is in Harry's experience? She could have been doing magic even if it WAS banned. Ministry simply didn't mind... OR she could have been doing Muggle-magic tricks (no real magic) to amuse her family. OR She may have had charmed teacups beforehand (that turned into mice without her using detectable magic) Finwitch From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 05:33:34 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 05:33:34 -0000 Subject: Weasley Accountant (was: Half-bloods, Pure-bloods, etc.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109422 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" wrote: >I can't imagine wizards having to go to a > muggle optometrist (especially a pureblood like James), so there must > be wizards who make them. I'd imagine its a lot simplier than muggle > optometry though. I'm sure it is. In a mugge shop, they must first study your eyes to get just exactly what kind of lenses you need, and then it'll take about a week before they're made! I think the wizards would at least use magic to re-shape the lenses instead of making new ones... and charm them so that rain won't blur them etc. Also, I think that wizard optometry would include glasses to be used to 'X-ray', used like a heat-camera... (and several other our looking equipment) And um... I'm not sure if they're very good at fixing eyes. They can, however, replace a lost eye with one that can see trough objects, invisibility cloaks etc. Not a bad change for Moody - and I think Moody would have chosen that magical eye instead of having his eyes fixed. Finwitch From kempermentor at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 05:34:24 2004 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 05:34:24 -0000 Subject: Theory on Snape - MASSIVE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109423 Kemper wrote: >> DD wouldn't hire some evil man to work with youth, and a character can be unlikable and still be good because "it is our choices (snip) that show what we truly are." << Alla responded: > Oh, Dumbledore would not hire some evil man to work with youth? You know what is coming, right? :o) Crouch!Moody, Quirrell, who brought Voldie to school and dumbledore failed to notice, etc.... Dumbledore does not know everything and I firmly maintain that Snape, if he is ESE! could conceal the truth from him. But, I don't really believe in ESE!Snape. I just believe in Dumbledore, who could be very stupid. < Kemper responds: Moody was hired before Crouch!Moody. I believe Quirrell accepted the job as well before he went out in the forest where LV was... though I'm not as positive on that one. Though Dumbledore can be tricked, he isn't stupid. From kempermentor at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 06:06:16 2004 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 06:06:16 -0000 Subject: Snape's avoidance of Voldemort' s name (Was:OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chap 2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109424 Carol wrote: (snip) So--is it only Snape whose Dark Mark burns when it--or Voldemort--is referred to? And does it mean what I think it means, that the mark itself senses his disloyalty to Voldemort? Will someone please address this aspect of the question? Kemper replies: I seem to recall Crouch!Moody using the name Voldemort when he's questioning Harry in his office before DD, MM and Snape stun him. And while I'm intrigued by the DM burning for those disloyal to LV, I'm not very convinced. Many don't like the name used in their presence. Ron comes to mind, and he does not have the DM branded (or whatever) to his arm. He is in obvious discomfort when Harry calls LV by name. I think it is the fanatical DEs who can say 'Voldemort' without fear as they believe blindly in his cause. The ones who aren't so coo- coo and know the evil that Voldemort can do, maybe they are a little less enthusiastic about saying 'Voldemort' aloud. Who wants to be the squeeky wheel and draw attention to the painful grease that's 'Crucio!'? From v_hayrabedian at yahoo.co.uk Mon Aug 9 09:41:33 2004 From: v_hayrabedian at yahoo.co.uk (v_hayrabedian) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 09:41:33 -0000 Subject: Snape as baddie (was: Snape and expulsion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109425 Meidbh wrote: > Then again, JKR did tell us not to get too fond of Snape (Book Day > talk with Stephen Fry). Much as I hate the thought I think he may > turn out to be a baddie after all... I'm not convinced by the 'Snape as baddie' theory. While he is certainly *capable* of playing both sides off against each other, I'm not sure that it would be the wisest thing for him from a personal point of view. And, whatever else you may think of him, Snape has always been able to look out for his own best interests. When the fake Mad-Eye Moody went for him in GoF (I'm convinced that there was more to it than simply searching Snape's office), Snape could have walked out. When Karkaroff conferred with him on whether or not to run, Snape could have gone with him. When Dumbledore asked him to spy on Voldemort, he could have said no. The fact that he didn't do any of these things points to one of two things: 1. a sense of honour (it's not unheard of, you know) 2. enlightened self-interest. It could very well be both,a ctually, but I'd wager that it's more the latter. If Snape is very much aware of what would be best for his own safety and yet chooses to disregard this, he must have a very good reason. If he really is a baddie and has been working for Voldemort all along, why the big play with Quirrell? In PoA, he was convinced that Black was guilty. If so, surely he wouldn't want to attack someone so favoured by Voldemort? For that matter, why reveal himself as a Death Eater to Fudge? Not many knew about the brand on his arm (Sirius certainly didn't) and revealing it could only have made things worse for him. I truly, honestly do not believe that Snape would be stupid enough to really be working for Voldemort. He has too much invested in the world around him, whether he realises it or not. And, as a matter of interest, who would have taught Snape Occlumency to a level capable of fending off Voldemort? I suspect that it was Dumbledore himself. I also suspect that Snape's Occlumency and Legilimency skills are nowhere near the equal of Dumbledore. No. Much as I hate to say, I think that what Rowling meant was that Snape's going to get himself killed, most likely in the seventh book. It would be exceedingly neat, in a tragically Greek sort of a way, of Snape gives his life for Harry's. Life debt paid, loose ends tied up, and Snape can be a hero (heroism being much easier to acknowledge posthumously). Woo. Er, yes. Also, I'm a newbie. First day, first post. Cheerful, ay? Vic. From cassin12004 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 01:33:08 2004 From: cassin12004 at yahoo.com (cassin12004) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 01:33:08 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore (was Re: Theory on Snape - MASSIVE) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109426 Alla: > Dumbledore does not know everything and I firmly maintain that > Snape, if he is ESE! could conceal the truth from him. But, I > don't really believe in ESE!Snape. I just believe in Dumbledore, > who could be very stupid. Bite your tongue! :) I think the nutty professor schtick is just a ruse. Because not even when Snape is waspishly angry does he radiate magical energy like a lighthouse beacon. Cassin From cassin12004 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 01:36:43 2004 From: cassin12004 at yahoo.com (cassin12004) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 01:36:43 -0000 Subject: An odd theory about Hedwig Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109427 Has anyone seen Hedwig and Dumbledore in the same place at the same time? Cassin From j.balfour at leedsmet.ac.uk Mon Aug 9 11:29:13 2004 From: j.balfour at leedsmet.ac.uk (Boolean) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 11:29:13 -0000 Subject: Neville's Wand Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109428 Just finished re-reading the battle scene in the Dept of Mysteries in OotP again, and have been thinking about dear Neville... It is revealed (sorry, book at home so no page refs.) that he has been using his father, Frank's, wand during his whole time at Hogwarts. As his grandmother constantly reminds him, he is "not as good as his father", but could part of the reason for this be to do with the fact that he is not using his own wand - one which 'picks' him, as Harry's did in PS? I know a lot of people have speculated that Neville's ineptness could be to do with having a memory charm placed on him as a child, after seeing his parents be tortured. However, Neville is good at Herbology - a subject which seems to rely less on wandwork than other subjects. As we have seen with Ron, a wand which is not personal to its owner will not work as well. Will we see an improvement once he has a new wand in HBP? From eloiseherisson at aol.com Mon Aug 9 11:43:34 2004 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloiseherisson at aol.com) Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 07:43:34 EDT Subject: Snape's avoidance of Voldemort' s name (Was:OOTP Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109429 Carol: > > The name [Voldemort] clearly causes pain to Snape: I'm not sure that > it does so for loyal DEs. In fact, my impression is that both > Voldemort's name and the presence of a loyal DE (Barty Jr. in > disguise) caused Snape's Dark Mark to burn because he's *dis*loyal to > Voldemort and the Mark senses that disloyalty. "Snape suddenly did something very strange. He seized his left forearm > convulsively with his right hand, as though something had hurt him." > (GoF Am. ed. 472). > > Clearly it's the Dark Mark--and Crouch!Moody's reference to it--that's > causing the pain. Eloise: Although I have theorised in the past (long, long ago) that the Dark Mark may be sensitive to the presence of other DEs and therefor act as a kind of recognition device (given that DEs sometimes operate masked) I am not at all convinced that it is felt at all except in response to a summons from Voldemort. In the above passage Snape clutches his forearm *as if* something had hurt him. Certainly, this *may* be an indication that the DM did actually hurt at that point, but if so, then why not earlier in the encounter, why only when Crouch!Moody refers to it? I always interpreted it as more of a psychological reaction. Having said that, I also think it's somewhat out of character for Snape to react that way, not in the sense that he never wears his heart on his sleeve, but in that he has spent years hiding his identity as a DE and years hiding his loyalty to Dumbledore *from* the DEs, so he should be practised enough not to react like that (physical pain or not) when Crouch!Moody called his trump like that. I think it is included as a measure of the level of discomfiture that Snape felt at that moment. He knew that Voldemort was regaining power. He must have known that shortly he was going to have to prove his worth to the Order again, that with Voldemort a player again, his own position, his own life were going to be jeopardised again. He knew that Moody (as he thought) had never trusted him and wanted evidence against him and so JKR shows him giving the instinctive reaction of covering up that evidence in a convulsive movement. Whilst it's rather a crude reaction for Snape, of course it's also necessary that the reaction is clear enough to be noted by Harry and thus related to the reader. I think that Crouch!Moody is deliberately testing the waters here with Snape. I think he's genuinely unsure of where his loyalties lie. When Snape clutches his Dark Mark, he simply laughs and tells him to get back to bed, enjoying the uncomfortable situation he's put him into. If that clutching of the arm indicated to him that Snape was disloyal to Voldemort, then I think that we might see some slightly more sinister or knowing reaction. Carol: >The second incident that I recall (there may be others) occurs in OoP > during the first occlumency lesson: > "'*Do not say the Dark Lord's name!*' spat Snape. (Italics in original.) > "'Dumbledore is an extremely powerful wizard,' Snape muttered. "While > *he* may feel secure enough to use the name. . . the rest of us. . .' > He rubbed his left forearm, apparently unconsciously, on the spot > where Harry knew the Dark Mark was burned into his skin." (OoP Am. ed. > 532). > > This time the pain seems less intense, but nevertheless the > pain seems directly connected with Voldemort's name. That in itself > seems sufficient reason for Snape to call Voldemort the Dark Lord, Eloise: Alternatively, we could simply accept Snape's explanation. Again, I'm not convinced that Snape *felt* anything at that moment but I'd be very worried about his carelessness if I didn't think it was merely a device for the reader's benefit. Carol: >but I also think that he wants to emphasize for Harry in particular how > very dangerous--and Dark--Voldemort is. Not a foe to be faced lightly > by a boy who thinks he's a Dark Wizard's equal. He is, IMO, trying to > help Harry understand that in this scene. Eloise: I'm possibly a little more cynical about this. Harry may have the foolhardiness of youth, but Snape must know by this time both that Harry actually is no fool and that potentially he *is* Voldmort's equal. I don't think he likes that one little bit. Of all the people marked out potentially to be the undoing of Voldemort, James Potter's son is the last one he would like it to be. I've said it before and I've said it again: I think Snape is jealous of Harry and this exchange is another example of his trying to put the upstart in his place (similar to the remark about finding out what Voldemort is saying to his followers being *his* job). How can he possibly think that Harry doesn't realise that Voldemort is very dangerous and very Dark? No. I think this little exchange is all about Snape and Harry. Carol: > But to return to my main point: Hearing the name, or a reference to > the mark placed by Voldemort himself on Snape's arm as a symbol of > loyalty and a means of enforcing it, causes Snape pain. The question I > have that I hope someone will answer is, do we have any indication > that the loyal Death Eaters feel a similar pain? Eloise: No, I don't think we do. But I'm not convinced that Snape feels physical pain, only that he demonstrates an awareness of its presence. > Kemper replies: > > I seem to recall Crouch!Moody using the name Voldemort when he's > questioning Harry in his office before DD, MM and Snape stun him. Eloise: Yes, he does. But only once and that before he's revealed his true identity to Harry. The rest of the time he too refers to Voldemort as the Dark Lord. Whilst I'm sure that Dumbledore is right in promoting the use of Voldemort's real name (and I find the exaggerated reactions of many of the characters, such as Ron and particularly Hermione very irritating) I think that Snape's continued use of the phrase "the Dark Lord" indicates an acknowledgement of the power which he at first hand knows him to wield, rather than an avoidance of any physical pain caused by his disloyalty. It's also probably a good thing that Snape *does* habitually use the term. Given that one isn't always completely sure of loyalties he wouldn't want to go carelessly suggesting to any DE or sympathiser in the know that he was talking to (or was overheard by) that he didn't acknowledge Voldemort's lordship. ~Eloise [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 9 11:48:36 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 07:48:36 -0400 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 Message-ID: <001901c47e06$ce6cb1f0$16c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109430 Geoff said: > Hagrid may be considered a bit of a buffoon by some folk but > Hallowe'en is a most important date in the Wizarding World calendar > certainly in Hogwarts. Do you really think that he would so daft as > to mix up a date of Hallowe'en with an everyday date like 27th > October? RMM: "Well for that year, yes I would say that there would be a huge mixup. Consider the celebration going on that day!! Voldemort was gone! Dumbledore's own words: "We've had precious little to celebrate these last eleven years." Big celebrations happening 4 days before Halloween. " DuffyPoo: The problem is, of course, that Hagrid was at the house even before "the Muggles started swarming around." He and Sirius were first on the spot of the incident. Even before the Muggles. Before anyone was alerted to what happened. Our favourite weatherman, Jim McGuffin said, "I don't know about that, but it's not only the owls that have been acting oddly *today.* Viewers as far apart as Kent, Yorkshire, and Dundee have been phoning in to tell me that instead of the rain I promised yesterday, they've had a downpour of shooting stars!" The shooting starts wouldn't have started until word got around, some time after the incident, but while it was still dark or no shooting stars would be seen (would they?) Hagrid knew it was Hallowe'en when he rescued HP, as Geoff pointed out, because it is a special day in the WW. The shooting stars and celebrations didn't start until the next day, sometime past midnight on Monday, in the early hours of the "dull, grey Tuesday morning our story starts", sometime after Hagrid had rescued HP from the rubble. Sometime after word got around that LV had killed James and Lily and HP had survived. [Sorry, Geoff, I couldn't resist. ;-) ] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Mon Aug 9 11:48:49 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 11:48:49 -0000 Subject: Villainy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109431 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > > Neri shakes head in bemusement: > > Kneasy, I sometimes wonder why you still read HP. With your talent > you'd be making much better use of your time writing FF, or even your > own original FEATHERBOA fantasy, with a believable and chilling Evil > Overlord. You can already count on me buying a copy. I wouldn't be > able to resist it. > Kneasy: Flatterer. Bet you say that to all the boring old farts you respond to. I may eventually try my hand at FF, though not yet awhile, not while there's plenty of mileage left in the true canon. And anyway, if I write the stuff, I don't get to have the sadistic pleasure of dissecting it, do I? Though I am toying with possible alternative endings - just in case JKR turns fluffy. But to get into that I'll need the plot developments from book 6 to extrapolate from. Neri: > Could it be that you are trying to make HP into something it isn't? > Could HP be a book about (warning: a really wild speculation ahead) > Harry Potter? Not about Voldy, and maybe not even about Snape or DD's > plan? Could Voldy be there mainly as a challenge for Harry? Someone > for Harry to fight while he's not busy wrestling with bothersome > teenager friends, bothersome teenager rivals, system injustice, > grownups' prejudice, pressure from high expectations, an abusive > family, lousy teachers, crucial exams, hopes of future career, > winning the Quidditch cup, first dates, and several other petty > matters that sometimes occupy the mind and time of growing up kids? > > So if certain parts of the set are a bit flimsy at the seams, could > it perhaps be an indication of the author's priorities? > Kneasy: No, I don't think that I'm trying to turn it into something it isn't. When the hero of any epic battles through dungeon, fire and sword I don't think it's unreasonable to examine and critique what it is that he's battling to defeat; just what it is that he's being measured against. We've expended an inordinate amount of words on Harry vs various subordinate villains - Snape, Malfoy (both of 'em), Umbridge - examining in great depth their motivations, methods, strengths, weaknesses, evilness quotient and, particularly with Snape, how he is *presented* as a character in the text. Why not also with who we are told is the worst of the lot and presumably the one who will present Harry with his greatest challenge? But IMO Snape, Malfoy and Umbridge are well enough described to be recognisable as individuals; not so Voldy. He seems to be presented as a *type*, a quick sketch - "Oh yes. We'll have the dead white skin, slits for a nose, don't forget the red eyes, the posturing and a tendency to throw a wobbly when he or his minions are thwarted." Where with the first three you or I could make a reasonable stab at predicting how they would react in a given set of circumstances I can't do that with Voldy. Except for the tantrum. I readily concede that the prime villain is always the most difficult cast member to write; a frightening, powerful and apparently indefatigable enemy that can be over-come in a satisfying and credible manner is not an easy thing to pull off. Perhaps I expect too much. In my years of reading and film watching I've drawn certain conclusions; the best enemies are either presented in convincing detail, with their thoughts, plans and responses as integral to the story, the author hoping that the readers will suspend disbelief and will miss the weak spots (Coeurl, say, or some of the better 'serial killer' novels) or they never actually appear at all (Sauron, for example). Voldy is somewhere between the two and without the inherent strengths of either. He's a persona in limbo looking for, needing, real substance. We have neither the satisfaction of delving into a mind steeped in evil and depravity (yes please!) nor the mystery and suspense of a forever unseen monster manipulating events from the shadows. An evil villain who is so feared by the entire WW that his name is never mentioned doesn't match a Voldy who has appeared four times and lost four times. Hopefully a *real* villain will turn up before it's all over. From pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 9 11:55:55 2004 From: pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net (pcaehill2) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 11:55:55 -0000 Subject: Snape as baddie (was: Snape and expulsion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109432 Vic wrote: [snip] > I'm not convinced by the 'Snape as baddie' theory. While he is > certainly *capable* of playing both sides off against each other, > I'm not sure that it would be the wisest thing for him from a > personal point of view. And, whatever else you may think of him, > Snape has always been able to look out for his own best interests. > When the fake Mad-Eye Moody went for him in GoF (I'm convinced > that there was more to it than simply searching Snape's office), > Snape could have walked out. When Karkaroff conferred with him on > whether or not to run, Snape could have gone with him. When > Dumbledore asked him to spy on Voldemort, he could have said no. > The fact that he didn't do any of these things points to one of > two things: > 1. a sense of honour (it's not unheard of, you know) > 2. enlightened self-interest. Pam responds: I'm with you, I don't think Snape is ever-so-evil. His emotional range is stunted, his interpersonal skills are (to put it mildly) underdeveloped, and he holds grudges indefinitely. But is he capable of a sense of honour? Imho, yes. I know his treatment of Harry has been abominable at times, and I do think he "shirked his duty" by stopping the occlumency lessons, but...there is some bond between him and Dumbledore, some reason for their mutual trust and loyalty, that has not yet been satisfactorily explained. And I don't think you can put it all down to the "Snape-was-in-love- with-Lily" or "Snape-hates-having-a-life-debt-to-James" motives: over and above his acts to save Harry's life is his loyalty to Dumbledore and the Order. Where does that come from? I think JKR will reveal more here. Pam From pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 9 12:02:59 2004 From: pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net (pcaehill2) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 12:02:59 -0000 Subject: Villainy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109433 > Kneasy wrote: [snip] > An evil villain who is so feared by the entire WW that his name is > never mentioned doesn't match a Voldy who has appeared four times > and lost four times. Hopefully a *real* villain will turn up > before it's all over. Pam agrees: Yes, and I nominate: Lucius Malfoy. (See my post 109265 on one reason why.) I think his characterization has been more fully developed than Voldemort's, his interactions with Harry more venomous, and his lust for power made even more evident than LV's. And I think he will be revealed as even more evil, and will disdain LV's personal vendetta for H. (since LV is allowing it to distract him from world domination and other things far more fun). From patientx3 at aol.com Mon Aug 9 12:05:04 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 12:05:04 -0000 Subject: Snape as baddie (was: Snape and expulsion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109434 Meidbh wrote: > Then again, JKR did tell us not to get too fond of Snape (Book Day > talk with Stephen Fry). Much as I hate the thought I think he may > turn out to be a baddie after all... Vic replied: >>I truly, honestly do not believe that Snape would be stupid enough to really be working for Voldemort. He has too much invested in the world around him, whether he realises it or not.<< HunterGreen: (welcome to the list!) I agree. As often as we remind ourselves that Dumbledore isn't infallible, he does get some things right, and I doubt he'd hire Snape on as a teacher and trust him with so many things if he had any doubts about Snape's loyalties (the answer to this riddle lies in the REASON Snape left the DE's, which appears to be extreme enough that even Voldemort appears to understand why he left). Snape could possibly be a double-agent, working for Voldemort, but not Dumbledore, but I don't see what he'd be getting out of it. As a teenager he mostly likely gained respect and self-importance out of being a DE, which he now gets from being on Dumbledore's side. Something had to have shown him first hand the danger of what Voldemort was doing which caused him to endanger his life by turning to Dumbledore. Vic continued: >>No. Much as I hate to say, I think that what Rowling meant was that Snape's going to get himself killed, most likely in the seventh book. It would be exceedingly neat, in a tragically Greek sort of a way, of Snape gives his life for Harry's. Life debt paid, loose ends tied up, and Snape can be a hero.<< HunterGreen: As much as I agree that Snape is going to not live through the series, I don't think that's what she was referring to. I took it to be a reference to things he did when he was still a death eater. We haven't heard anything about that part of Snape's life, other than him turning away from it when Voldemort was at the heighth of his power. If he joined the DE's right out of Hogwarts (because I doubt he was while he was still there, or he would have taken punishing Sirius into his own hands after the prank), then Voldemort fell when he was somewhere in his early 20's, thats about four or five years of DE servitude. With Lucius as a possible mentor, there might have been many things that Snape has done which are far worse than the sarcastic comments his students have to suffer through. From pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 9 12:11:55 2004 From: pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net (pcaehill2) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 12:11:55 -0000 Subject: Wands and spells In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109435 Mandypandy wrote: [snip] > Correct me if I've missed something, but having just > read GoF for the eighth time I realised that Harry, > when he is in the alleyway with Dudley, casts a > spell without his wand in his hand. Is this right? > He says 'lumos' and the wand tip lights up. I have > always assumed the wand has to be held my the person > casting the spell, otherwise why have a wand in the first place? Pam ponders: Wands may be a tool that focuses and directs magical power, but I don't think that they are always necessary for spells, etc. After all, we see DD doing quite well without a wand, as (I think) do some other professors. And wizarding children "do odd things" without wands all the time (think Harry on the roof of the school when chased by bullies, and of course Aunt Marge). I think students are usually a good deal more dependent on wands than Harry seems to be. This, to me, underscores his power, which is considerable (more than even he comprehends, as yet); it also underscores his skill level (which is considerably more advanced than most students his age). From lorelei3dg at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 12:30:16 2004 From: lorelei3dg at yahoo.com (lorelei3dg) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 12:30:16 -0000 Subject: Polyjuice was: Time-turning as literary device In-Reply-To: <7e.555bcfd9.2e483680@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109436 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, shalimar07 at a... wrote: > Does anyone ever wonder why Mrs. Figg's house always smells like cabbage? > Could she really be someone else? > > Mary > Lorel: I've read other people's suspicions about this; however, I thought she came across as simply a batty old lady - and it seems like batty old ladies' houses do smell like cabbage or other strange and off- putting odors. I believe she's a Squib, and is old enough to have gotten over it (unlike Filch, for example). It's nice to think that a Squib could be useful to the Order, as well - sort of fits DD's worldview (not just Wizards have something to contribute). From pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 9 12:29:39 2004 From: pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net (pcaehill2) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 12:29:39 -0000 Subject: ESE grandmother? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109437 Does anyone else get a funny feeling re: Neville's grandmother? I know she's been presented as loyal to Dumbledore, and a good guardian for Neville, but there are certain *vague impressions* I've been getting, perhaps from these details: --vulture on her hat --Neville fears her almost as much as he fears Snape --something a little cold in her tone when she speaks to N's mom at Mungo's (extremely subjective reaction, I know) --not overly active in encouraging magical ability in N. when young (it's Uncle Algie who keeps after N. on this, I believe) Could it be possible, even minisculy so, that N's grandmother is a death-eater? That she condoned the torture of N's parents (and perhaps betrayed their whereabouts to LV?)??? That she visits St. Mungo's in order to ensure that they are still unable to incriminate her or recover and fight LV again (or even perpetuate their insanity, by giving a 'booster' spell)? And that she is the one to put the memory charm on Neville (and keep it up)??? Just a thought. From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Aug 9 13:35:54 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 13:35:54 -0000 Subject: Villainy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109438 Kneasy wrote: > So - an outline for an evil villain:- Pippin: Kneasy, you do realize you've described EverSoEvil!Lupin to the toenail, don't you? People will think it's a conspiracy! Kneasy: > Understandable and/or credible ambitions that appear achievable. An original motivation that rings true (animus to your father turning one into a world tyrant just doesn't hack it).< Pippin: How about breaking or discrediting the wizarding hegemony? "I mean, it's the same kind of nonsense as werewolf segregation, isn't it? It all stems from this horrible thing wizards have of thinking they're superior to other creatures."-Hermione, to Lupin, OOP ch9 Kneasy: > Intelligence in the villain predicates intelligent actions within the plot Pippin: ESE!Lupin has plotted quite intelligently so far. Nobody has even suspected him, apart from James and Sirius, and look what happened to them. And Snape of course, but he suspects everybody. I foresee a juicy episode in Book Seven where Harry will have to decide whether to trust Lupin or Snape. He will make the wrong choice and pay dearly for it. Kneasy: > Why concentrate solely on the hero? Why not knock off the hero's friends and supporters? That really would be evil and there are too many Weasleys anyway.< Pippin: Lupin:" - look, I can't promise no one's going to get hurt, nobody can promise that, but 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..." OOP ch 9 Wanna bet? Kneasy: > Nasty habits that chime with primitive personal fears. War doesn't do it, it's not aimed at you the reader *personally*; but imagining being ripped open and having your heart eaten can make your toes curl. So could selling Ginny to the Goblins as sushi-on-the-hoof, but controlling Belgium is a yawn.< Pippin: Werewolf. Nuff said. Kneasy: > Ranting and posturing is out. Cold and implacable is in. He might be a nutter, but if he doesn't *appear* to be reasonable how's he going to attract followers?< Pippin: No ranting and posturing from Lupin. He barely raises his voice. However, rousing the rabble requires a certain amount of rabble rousing. Fortunately there are others to do that for him. Lucius can organize the rallies. Kneasy: > Potential problems will be foreseen and taken into account. He's supposed to be bright, isn't he?< Pippin: ESE!Lupin's worry over potential problems is signified by his Boggart. ?That's no moon, it's a space station... er, prophecy orb Kneasy: > If he intends "taking over" he must have some idea of why he wants it and what he's going to do with it when he's got it. Anybody know? It would help greatly if the reader knew what it was that Harry was actually saving from his evil clutches. If he captures or corners the hero, expect the hero to die except in *very* exceptional one-off circumstances. (The conflict of wands works for Harry vs Voldy; Harry also escaping the ravening horde of DEs doesn't wash.)< Pippin: --ahhh, but ESE!Lupin *wants* Harry to get away. Only Harry can destroy Voldemort, n'est-ce pas? But he mustn't do it until Voldemort has drawn together that army of creatures whom all fear and wiped out organized wizardry. Pippin ESE!Lupin debuted in post 39362 The Evil Overlord list may be found at www.eviloverlord.com From sherriola at earthlink.net Mon Aug 9 13:40:27 2004 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 07:40:27 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: At least respect JKR In-Reply-To: <003301c47df5$b1531c50$7dc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: <001e01c47e16$6f2766d0$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 109439 Samnanya- "And how exactly is Nick's deathday of 1492 one of her biggest mistakes? How can you say that the date is not CRITICAL in oop or later books?" DuffyPoo: First of all, I will only respond for myself, and not to the whole rant you posted. What I said and what HunterGren said, was intelligent, whether YOU think so or not. As to my comment regarding 1492, all I was saying was, if JKR hadn't put that - or any - specific date into the text, all this speculating about birthdays, dates the story started, etc, ETC., would not be possible. I never, once, indicated - or certainly never intended to - that 1492 is not, or may not, become very important. Nobody knew which 'dull, grey Tuesday' JKR was referring to in PS until we were given 1492 as reference in CoS. That is ALL I am saying. I have a great deal of respect for JKR. While I believe she is a very intelligent woman and a good writer, I don't think she walks on water, as some people do. She is able to make mistakes. She says herself she is no good at maths (and I admit, to me, that translates to dates as well). She gave us FLINT after all and Mark Evans. We've discussed the ancestor/descendent deal to death. And let's not go to the Prefects and House Points thing. Not to mention the fact that the Hogwarts Express leaves at 11 a.m. on Sept 1 every year...whatever day that may be, Sept 2 has always been a Monday. Sherry now I think that every great creative person stirs up debate about their work. How many times do actors or musical entertainers get criticized or praised to the skies? It's part of the whole mystique. Why should an author be any different. i've never read one post on this list that treats JKR disrespectfully or bashes her in any way. Even my all time favorite author ever made mistakes in his very few books, that I smile fondly over when I read the books for the millionth time. It's actually a mark of the affection we have for the stories, that makes us look at everything, trying to figure it all out and to understand why or when. I'm not as detail oriented and don't care as much about the mistakes as some others, but I never find those speculations or questions to be showing disrespect for JKR. In fact, I think it shows how much the people posting those questions love and read the books. I think JKR must be thrilled to read it all. It's never done in a sneering kind of way. Sherry G From blackgold101 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 13:40:24 2004 From: blackgold101 at yahoo.com (Marci) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 13:40:24 -0000 Subject: ESE grandmother? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109440 "pcaehill2" wrote: > Does anyone else get a funny feeling re: Neville's grandmother? I > know she's been presented as loyal to Dumbledore, and a good > guardian for Neville, but there are certain *vague impressions* I've > been getting, perhaps from these details: > > --vulture on her hat > --Neville fears her almost as much as he fears Snape > --something a little cold in her tone when she speaks to N's mom at > Mungo's (extremely subjective reaction, I know) > --not overly active in encouraging magical ability in N. when young > (it's Uncle Algie who keeps after N. on this, I believe) > > > Could it be possible, even minisculy so, that N's grandmother is a > death-eater? That she condoned the torture of N's parents (and > perhaps betrayed their whereabouts to LV?)??? That she visits St. > Mungo's in order to ensure that they are still unable to incriminate > her or recover and fight LV again (or even perpetuate their > insanity, by giving a 'booster' spell)? And that she is the one to > put the memory charm on Neville (and keep it up)??? > > Just a thought. This is the impression I got of Neville's gran... In her eyes, Neville does not measure up to his dad. I won't say Neville fears her in the same way he does Professor Snape. However, his lack of confidence and magical ability are likely a result of her doubts in him to begin with. I think her visits to Frank are legit, and therefore Alice by default. If that Drooble's wrapper is a huge clue in the form of a little thing, I don't think all those wrappers are coming from Nana. Marci (Who can't wait for the aftermath of Frank's wand being destroyed.) From blackgold101 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 13:56:45 2004 From: blackgold101 at yahoo.com (Marci) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 13:56:45 -0000 Subject: Neville's Wand In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109441 "Boolean" wrote: > Just finished re-reading the battle scene in the Dept of Mysteries in > OotP again, and have been thinking about dear Neville... > > It is revealed (sorry, book at home so no page refs.) that he has > been using his father, Frank's, wand during his whole time at > Hogwarts. As his grandmother constantly reminds him, he is "not as > good as his father", but could part of the reason for this be to do > with the fact that he is not using his own wand - one which 'picks' > him, as Harry's did in PS? > > I know a lot of people have speculated that Neville's ineptness could > be to do with having a memory charm placed on him as a child, after > seeing his parents be tortured. However, Neville is good at > Herbology - a subject which seems to rely less on wandwork than other > subjects. As we have seen with Ron, a wand which is not personal to > its owner will not work as well. Will we see an improvement once he > has a new wand in HBP? I guess I just sort of responded in another post about the same thing. Neville's wand. Yes, Neville excells in Herbology, which does not rely on wands. However, neither does potions. I think he does poorly there because of Snape basically. It's not Neville and not even totally the fact that he was using Frank's wand. Would Harry really be less inept if he was using his father's wand? Charlie's wand worked for Ron until he broke it. I'm not one who believes Neville suffers from a memory charm from seeing his parents tortured. He was a year old. Did Harry get one too??????? His mom died in front of him, no? Neville needs lest pestoring and pushing from Nana. Neville needs his own wand. He'll finally get it and a nice confidence boost. I hope... Marci From naama_gat at hotmail.com Mon Aug 9 14:08:55 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 14:08:55 -0000 Subject: Villainy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109442 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith wrote: > Dunno about you but I'm disappointed in Voldy. > Seems to be more caricature than character. > More cardboard cut-out than cut-throat. > Which is a bit surprising; JKR's pulled off a deliciously nasty piece > of work in Snape but seemed unable to go a step further and produce an > equally convincing evil mastermind. > snip most of post> > Firstly - he must have ambitions that make sense. > Voldy needs to sort out his priorities here. > He wants to be immortal. ( Why? What is the point? To any thinking > person immortality isn't a boon, it's a curse. Immortality (of various kinds) has been sought by most religions. Why do you suddenly find Voldemort irrational for wanting it? > snip> > > According to JKR (or so I've been told) he wants to *yawn* rule the > world. Oh dear. No chance. In other tales there's always this McGuffin > thingy - a ring, an amulet, the bicycle clips of power, that enable > you to make others "bend to your will," whatever that means. But it > generally works on a wholesale basis. Wear it and whole nations grovel. > This time there's Voldy and a few dozen half-assed half-wits with > delusions of adequacy who can't even subdue half a dozen school kids > without cocking it up. > changed order of paragraphs> > As presented in the books Voldy isn't a world threat, he's a local > problem. In the 5 years covered by the books Voldy and his acolytes > have killed about 20 (if you include the 13 Muggles). Hardly impressive > from the most evil coterie around, is it? Voldy as a renegade in a > small, hidden sub-section of society that works on a different basis to > ours is fine. Expanding into the RW where RW systems and logic are our > everyday currency is a mistake IMO. I'm not sure where you got your numbers from. In any case, I don't see the relevancy here. A successful coup doesn't necessarily invovle mass killings - well targeted political assasinations may be far more effective. And when Voldemort takes over the WW, the Muggle world won't present a problem. It is part of the Potterverse logic that Muggles and their technology are practically powerless before magic. Voldemort doesn't need nations to grovel before him - just the wizards of each nation. > > Nah. Spiteful and targeted revenge for imagined childhood slights is > one thing - stretching it to a lust for world domination is a bit > much, even in these days of ersatz pop psychology. I find it a bit strange your talking of *imagined*childhood slights. You are talking still of Tom Riddle, right? His father abandonment was not imagined, was it? He did actually let his own son grow up in an orphanage, neglected, loveless and possibly actively abused. And what *could* cause a lust for world domination? I mean, most people want power to some degree, but over the entire world? Can you really imagine a healthy, sane person setting world domination as his life's goal? I disagree also with your dismissive "ersatz pop psychology." I read some of Alice Miller's impressive analysis of Hitler's and Stalin's life, and IMO there's nothing ersatz about it. I found it extremely persuasive. > > So - an outline for an evil villain:- > > Understandable and/or credible ambitions that appear achievable. > > An original motivation that rings true (animus to your father turning > one into a world tyrant just doesn't hack it.)> You have a supernatual world, with supernatural beings in it - what real sense does it make if it isn't, on some level, metaphorical? HP (and any good fantasy story) doesn't really make sense if you fail to interpret it, on some level, as a morality play. Voldemort is not only an evil human being, he is also Evil. And you can't make a bad man into Evil if you give him understandable/credible motivations (lots of money? lots of women? you get Hugh Hefner - creepy maybe, but not quite sending chills of horror down your spine). For Voldemort to be Evil, he has to convincingly embody the darkest impulses people have and fear. His quest for an immortality for which he pays his humanity is exactly that kind of archetypal desire/fear. > > If he intends "taking over" he must have some idea of why he wants it > and what he's going to do with it when he's got it. Anybody know? It > would help greatly if the reader knew what it was that Harry was > actually saving from his evil clutches. He is Tyranny and Cruelty. We know that he upholds an ideology of wizard-blood purity. We know (from Dobby's speech in CoS) that in the VWI creatures such as house elves were treated worse. We know he stands for killing and torturing Muggles for fun. I thought it clear that this was what Harry was saving the WW from. Naama From jferer at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 14:17:11 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 14:17:11 -0000 Subject: At least respect JKR In-Reply-To: <003301c47df5$b1531c50$7dc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109443 DuffyPoo:"I have a great deal of respect for JKR. While I believe she is a very intelligent woman and a good writer, I don't think she walks on water, as some people do. She is able to make mistakes. She says herself she is no good at maths (and I admit, to me, that translates to dates as well). She gave us FLINT after all and Mark Evans." I support you. JKR is a wonderful storyteller; she isn't the 9/11 Commission. She never, in her wildest dreams, thought that we would overprocess tiny little factoids the way we have and will keep on doing. She's said so. I've always been struck by the parallels between JKR and Arthur Conan Doyle, the creator of Sherlock Holmes. He was wildly popular in his lifetime, setting many publishing records. He struggled with his readers for "ownership" of his character and stories, to the point that they wouldn't let him kill his character off when he got tired of him. (People wore black armbands and accosted Doyle in the street.) He inspired a huge active fan discussion base (I used to send in money for Holmes "fanzines," a few purple mimeographed pages of fan writing and discussion, and yes, fanfiction. A `zine that lasted a year was a big success.) And, most important for this discussion, Doyle made many factual inconsistencies and what we call Flints today. The debates rage on still, over a hundred years later. My copy of /The Annotated Sherlock Holmes/ is about two and a half inches thick, and nothing's been settled. So it's no knock on JKR that she commits numerous inconsistencies in details. It's the story and the characters that count, and she's wonderful where it matters. Haven't you ever loved someone and laughed at their little quirks? That's us and JKR. Jim Ferer, who predicts Steve Van der Ark will be the editor of /The Annotated Harry Potter/ some day. Delivery by motor freight will be required. From meriaugust at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 14:23:03 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 14:23:03 -0000 Subject: The Voices & The Dementors - PoA In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109444 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Josh Warren" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "charme" > wrote: > > Charme: > > > > Did anyone else other than me notice that when Harry has > his "episodes" > > during his perceived or actual Dementor attacks, the words the > voices say > > change somewhat? > > How about the easy to buy theory that a 15 mos old's perception is > what it is? No concrete words actually stuck, but a partial meaning > did... > > Josh Or perhaps these different bits are small pieces of the same exchange? One coming a little later than the other. After all, Harry hears his Dad, too, and by the time the above peices of cannon have been spoken, James is surely dead in the next room, or whatever. It is entirely possible that there was even more to this exchange between LV and Lily, and that LV and James excahnged words before the murders. The fact is we still don't really know what happened on that fateful Halloween night, something I hope will be rectified in the future! Meri From jferer at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 14:32:33 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 14:32:33 -0000 Subject: Neville's Wand In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109445 Boolean:" It is revealed (sorry, book at home so no page refs.) that he has been using his father, Frank's, wand during his whole time at Hogwarts. As his grandmother constantly reminds him, he is "not as good as his father", but could part of the reason for this be to do with the fact that he is not using his own wand - one which 'picks' him, as Harry's did in PS?" Some part, sure. I would guess that you could use your parent's wand better than a total stranger's. The more like your parent you are, the less the wand mismatch. But it's still not Neville's very own wand, the wand that picked him. Boolean:"Will we see an improvement once [Neville] has a new wand in HBP?" We're going to see an improvement no matter what, I think. Neville has so much come into his own he will be reborn. He's a 100% proven Gryffindor hero now. The seeds were there when he defied his own friends in PS/SS and they have born fruit now. A new wand will be a great new touch. Like Marci, I don't think Neville had a memory charm. He lost his parents and was brought up by this formidable grandmother, around people who hung him out windows because he didn't measure up in the magic department. Do we need a magical explanation? I don't think so. Other people seem to get obliviated without these big long term effects. Whatever happens, we're going to see a new Neville, and the Dark Side better look out. Jim Ferer From grace701 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 14:36:53 2004 From: grace701 at yahoo.com (grace701) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 14:36:53 -0000 Subject: Hermione incautious/dangerous books? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109446 finwitch wrote: > > Well, I think it *was* incautious of her to run into library to check > for the basilisk! (and she got petrified for it). > > Also, regularly using a time-turner took a toll on her because she > didn't choose, but took all. Possibly something she had to experience > I suppose... > > Recieving mail - (after that Rita Skeeter article and her hands > getting into contact with uniluminated bubotuber pus)... > > ******** > > You know - Hermione DID know the levitating spell, but it was Ron who > used it against the troll (knocking it out)... Did she not think that > going into toilet to cry alone is dangerous (look what happened to > poor Myrtle!). > > And all her reading... Ron mentions several dangerous books in CoS, > being dubious of the Diary of Tom Riddle (which WAS dangerous, to > Ginny in particular)... I doubt Hermione would stop to consider that > a book could do her harm... And yet, Monster book of Monsters is the > only dangerous book since then. (although, invisible book of > invisibility can be considered as dangerous to a shop-keeper's > budget - cost a fortune and you'll never find them) > > Finwitch Hermione did not run to the library to check *for* the basilisk, but to educate herself on it. It is rather incautious of the staff to leave any children unattended since the first two attacks. And Hermione did not go inside the girls' lavatory knowing that there was a dangerous troll on the loose in the school. She was there all day crying because of Ron's comment and was not in the Great Hall when Quirrel made this announcement. Grace From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 9 14:37:57 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 10:37:57 -0400 Subject: ESE grandmother? Message-ID: <001201c47e1e$773d6f10$5962acce@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109447 pcaehill2 said: "Could it be possible, even minisculy so, that N's grandmother is a death-eater? That she condoned the torture of N's parents (and perhaps betrayed their whereabouts to LV?)??? That she visits St. Mungo's in order to ensure that they are still unable to incriminate her or recover and fight LV again (or even perpetuate their insanity, by giving a 'booster' spell)? And that she is the one to put the memory charm on Neville (and keep it up)???" DuffyPoo: Oh, my gosh, I hope not! I thought she was just a concerned Grandmother. She's seen what happened to her son and his wife and is over-protecting Neville. She made the comment about Neville, in front of Harry, Ron, Hermione, and Ginny, that, "He's a good boy but he hasn't got his father's talent, I'm afraid to say." How embarrassing for poor Neville. She keeps him down to keep him from feeling powerful enough to, possibly, follow in his father's footsteps. Perhaps she would have even preferred Neville be a Squib than have to worry about him becoming an Auror like Frank. Maybe she gave him Frank's wand knowing he would never amount to much using it, instead of using one of his own. Remember, Neville said "My gran's always said You-Know-Who would come back one day." (Rats, you can use that for your theory, too, can't you? ;-) Well, I'm going to continue with mine anyway. ) She knew LV was going to come back and doesn't want to lose any more of her family to him. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From navarro198 at hotmail.com Mon Aug 9 14:41:06 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 14:41:06 -0000 Subject: ESE grandmother? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109448 pcaehill2 wrote: Does anyone else get a funny feeling re: Neville's grandmother? I know she's been presented as loyal to Dumbledore, and a good guardian for Neville, but there are certain *vague impressions* I've been getting, perhaps from these details: --vulture on her hat --Neville fears her almost as much as he fears Snape --something a little cold in her tone when she speaks to N's mom at Mungo's (extremely subjective reaction, I know) --not overly active in encouraging magical ability in N. when young Could it be possible, even minisculy so, that N's grandmother is a death-eater? That she condoned the torture of N's parents (and perhaps betrayed their whereabouts to LV?)??? That she visits St. Mungo's in order to ensure that they are still unable to incriminate her or recover and fight LV again (or even perpetuate their insanity, by giving a 'booster' spell)? And that she is the one to put the memory charm on Neville (and keep it up)??? Just a thought. --- Marci wrote: This is the impression I got of Neville's gran... In her eyes, Neville does not measure up to his dad. I won't say Neville fears her in the same way he does Professor Snape. However, his lack of confidence and magical ability are likely a result of her doubts in him to begin with. I think her visits to Frank are legit, and therefore Alice by default. If that Drooble's wrapper is a huge clue in the form of a little thing, I don't think all those wrappers are coming from Nana. --- Bookworm: I have always viewed Mrs. Longbottom as a very domineering old matriarch who idolizes her martyred son, and who probably did not approve of his choice of wife. Because Neville's talent isn't as apparent as his father's, Grandmother sees him as weak and insists on controlling his life. If he is constantly told he doesn't measure up, it is easy to understand Neville's lack of confidence. Whether or not we believe she put a memory charm on Neville, I believe she is capable (both physically and morally) of doing something like that to "protect" Neville. Frank Longbottom was powerful enough to become an auror, as was Alice. Alice was probably no shrinking violet, herself, which would lead to difficult relations with her mother-in-law. This could explain Grandmother's condescending tone to Alice in St. Mungos. As for the vulture on the hat ? I put that in the same category as old ladies who wear fox stoles with the fox's head still attached (seen a few years ago in the lobby of a posh hotel) ? she's from a different age and is eccentric. I definitely agree. I'm looking for great things from Neville. Ravenclaw Bookworm From meriaugust at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 14:40:53 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 14:40:53 -0000 Subject: An odd theory about Hedwig In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109449 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cassin12004" wrote: > Has anyone seen Hedwig and Dumbledore in the same place at the same > time? > > Cassin I'm not sure, but if you are implying that Hedwing is DD's animagus form I must respectfully disagree, for a few reasons: 1: We have no concrete evidence that DD is in fact an animagus. That doesn't mean he isn't, and it isn't unreasonable to think he is, because he was after all the Transfiguration professor back in the day, but we have no evidence whaotsover that he might be. 2: If Hedwig is DD, then DD would be with Harry practically all summer, meaning that he wouldn't be at Hogwarts, wouldn't be vacationing, nothing. He'd either be running letters for Harry or be locked up at the Dursley's house by Uncle Vernon. Surely someone would have come to rescue DD from that prediacament. 3: What would be the purpose of DD being Hedwig? So he can keep an eye on Harry? He's got spies and helpers and spells a plenty that can do that for him. To help keep Harry informed about what's going on the WW? Well, he didn't do that at all, did he. And DD doesn't need to use spells or cloaks to be able to sneak around places. We know that from SS: "I don't need a cloak to become invisible." So why would he need to become an owl? 4: Also, Hagrid picked out Hedwig from the Eyelops Owl Emporium. Was DD just sitting there waiting to be picked up by Hagrid? IIRC, Hagrid decided at the very last minute to buy Harry Hedwig, and after that Hedwig was at Privet Drive with Harry till term started. With all that was going on at Hogwarts that year, DD would surely have been missed. So, in conclusion, I do not believe that DD=Hedwing, but am fully willing to eat my words if I be proven wrong. Meri, who also doesn't buy the Ron=DD theory, either... From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Mon Aug 9 15:15:24 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 15:15:24 -0000 Subject: info on Luna Lovegood In-Reply-To: <002601c47db2$9e8b0c60$2680c645@blackc02b2gycq> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109450 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ejblack" wrote: > I have not been able to find any posts etc about Luna Lovegood. I > have a strong feeling she is going to be a major character and > would love to see some of your posts about her. Luna does present a rather interesting character. She has been described by JKR as the anti-Hermione... who I personally feel is the secondary protagonist (isn't there another word for this?) in this story, as opposed to DD or Ron. What is most interesting is how quickly she has been set up as a major character within the space of the last handful of chapters in OotP. However, I don't think she's going to play that centric of a role, except for having an emotional tie she can share with Harry and Neville (loss of a parent) and the support that can bring, or a *cringe* shippy role that cannot be discussed further without posting many various warnings. Overall, I feel the MoM Sextet will now supplant the Trio as the centric group... owing to Ginny's reemergence and Neville's newfound purpose... it only makes sense that Luna will also remain a member of this expanded core group... but not supplant Hermione and/or Ron in overall importance. Josh From griffin782002 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 11:39:19 2004 From: griffin782002 at yahoo.com (sp. sot.) Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 04:39:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Veil Room at MoM in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040809113919.99625.qmail@web90003.mail.scd.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109451 macfotuk at yahoo.com wrote: to my post 109302) > vmonte responds: > > Interesting post. I think that Harry mentioning Sirius's name was > probably a forshadowing of his death via veil. Yes I do too, Just not sure if JKR is simply being Shakespearian/ironic in having Harry 'pre-figure' Siruis' death, or else alluding to his strong divination abilites that others have credited him with, or else as I stated that he might have 'given' the veil a victim's name, i.e. Sirius. > think that he hears Ron talking to him from the veil? Something > like: 'Ron is that you?' and then Ron: 'I'm here mate.' I think that Ron actually walks around from behind the veil. This really creeped me out by the way. Griffin782002 now: I suggest to fellow members taking a short break and go to the countryside for a couple of days. This is actually how I had this idea, while travelling with my family on last Friday afternoon. I think that most believe that the veil is somehow a executioning device, hence the name Chamber of Death. But I think for such a purpose they have the Dementors, and I believe there were on Ministry's side during the First WW. Petunia recalls Lily's discusion 'with that awful boy' (whoever it was) and they were present in the trials of ex-D.E.'s, which I think should have taken place about a year or two after G.H. And can someone explain me how a veil can kill and what a courtroom is doing in a top secret department? I had expressed my thoughts that the veil and the arch might be some kind of entrance to the Underworld. But of course, what is it doing down there? I haven't dismmised the idea. I happened to remember that some people in the R.W. tried to study death. Some concluded that at the time of death the body is 21 grams lighter, which is believed to be the departure of the soul. So, what if they are doing the same in D.o.M.? Study death, just as the were trying to study intelligence by keeping the brains. It is a mystery, isn't it? A gate to the Underworld for souls. And what can happen if an alive and healthy person falls though it? I still like the idea of seeing him return as suprisingly as Gandalf, although I know Gandalf wasn't human. A bit spooky, don't you think? Griffin782002 From colleengordon1 at msn.com Mon Aug 9 13:49:19 2004 From: colleengordon1 at msn.com (starlandcolleen) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 13:49:19 -0000 Subject: info on Luna Lovegood In-Reply-To: <002601c47db2$9e8b0c60$2680c645@blackc02b2gycq> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109452 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ejblack" wrote: > > " I joined the group a few days ago and have been lurking and looking around the files. Great stuff,all of it, but I have not been able to find any posts etc about Luna Lovegood. I have a strong feeling she is going to be a major character and would love to see some of your posts about her." > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] starlandcolleen: Welcome ej, from another newbie who just joined on Harry's birthday. I am in Edmonton and am an artist/clothing designer and mother to twin daughters (2 yrs) who are the joy of our lives. I just noticed a Luna reference yesterday while re-reading GoF. After taking the portkey to the World Cup, Arthur asks if there are any others from their area coming through that portkey. He is told that the Lovegoods have already been there for a week (cheap seats) and that one other family couldn't get tickets. (Sorry for not having exact quotes as I don't have the text available at the moment.) I can't recall the exact number of portkeys that have been set up, but it's not that many, and I think we can assume that one portkey "station" services a fairly large area. Therefore, I reason that Luna is Ron's neighbor! Not only that, but the Lovegood's are one of only 3 other families who live in the Weasley's vicinity. Despite this, Ron doesn't know who Luna is until he is in 5th year. (Although Ginny does.) I would love to hear thoughts on this either supporting or deconstructing my interpretation of this passage, or, any other thoughts on Luna, who I agree is going to play a major role. From macfotuk at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 14:43:58 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 14:43:58 -0000 Subject: Petunia, Dudley and WW - Hatred? Cover-up? Latent Ability? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109453 On the basis that there are no new thoughts under the sun and that it is impossible to pin down to what extent much trawling of HP speculation on the internet might influence one's thinking, I have the following offerings/speculations/observations about Petunia Dursley and Dudley based on the shockwave revelations in OotP's opening chapters. 1. Petunia knows about Dementors. She knows from 'that boy' telling 'her' about them. On first reading I naturally thought, like Harry and most readers I suspect, that she is referring to James and Lily. I know there are theories that these two in fact are NOT Lily or James but when I first read them (located a few pages before this post - sorry for not being able to quote/specify them) I thought they were stretching the imagination at best. However, although dementors have clearly existed in the WW forever I'm sure I've read in the books (probably PoA) that it was Fudge who first went into league with them to use them as guards at Azkhaban, much against DD's inclinations. Fudge didn't become MoM until well after James and Lily's demise (GoF and Barty Crouch Sr backstory), so has JKR made another mistake (delieberate or otherwise)? If not, then Petunia has had contact with wizards SINCE Harry's arrival on her doorstep and if so WHO? Also WHY (when she and Vernon are so against wizards and magic). While I could understand that Petunia might really be OK (the lady doth protest too much?), why should she live with such an obvious git as Vernon? Vernon can't possibly be 'OK' with wizards because of what we hear of his attitudes (unprompted) during the very opening chapter (of SS/PS). If Petunia is living with someone she actually disagrees with, possibly cannot even bear (not unusual in the real world!) then there has to be a plot reason. It will be interesting to see if, and how, JKR answers the FAQ poll at her website about the meaning of Dumbledore's howler 'remember my last'. Also, JKR has said someone finds (or reveals) their magical powers late in life - might this be Petunia? 2. Dudley was almost kissed by a dementor - at least the way JKR wrote the scene in the alleyway. Why? why? why! What has Dudley ever done to a dementor? I know Dementors exist to suck all the happiness out of wizards and even muggles and that these two were probably rogue dementors (even by normal ESE dementor standards), but why would they go so far as to resort to the worst possible punishment in the wizard world (WW)? They can normally be 'trusted' simply to terrorise and subdue (yes to the point of madness after prolonged contact), but not normally to kill, otherwise nobody in Azhkaban would ever survive the experience. To answer my own question it may be that Umbridge had authorised them to kill Harry (with a kiss) to shut him up and that therefore any witness would need taking out too. Even so, the scene leaves it open that Dudley may have been targeted for some other, as yet unrevealed, reason. From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Mon Aug 9 15:29:23 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 15:29:23 -0000 Subject: Villainy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109454 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "rubyxkelly" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > > Neri shakes head in bemusement: > > Could HP be a book about Harry Potter? > Kat/rxk: Oh, Neri you poor child! > Next thing you're going to claim is that the LOYR was about some tiny guy trying to destroy a gold ring imbued with almoxt irresistable demonic magic... Actually, it is an easy arguement to say that Harry Potter (and many other such off-topic volumes as misabbreviated above) are about how one person... and specifically in these cases, one otherwise insignificant-seeming such person (reference TMR's quotes down in the Chamber)... can make the journey internally and externally to realize a destiny that saves the world as a whole, and in the process discovering more than just his own sense of self and selfworth (important enough in itself!), but also about the greater world around him, his friends and the importance thereof, and that there are different levels of evil (i.e. the world is shades of gray, not just B&W). Meanwhile... take this journey, wrap it up in a nice long plot, and make sure the grayscale is tipped with pure blackness on one end (the big bad), but ensure that our hero does not fully remain pure white, as that can only be achieved by exorcising the darker elements during the trials of the journey. For kicks, toss in a somewhat redeamable evil guy and an older, knowledgable 'white' guy that is oft misunderstood, and not quite perfect. Gee... George Lucas would recognize this very same forumla! :) Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Mon Aug 9 15:47:03 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 15:47:03 -0000 Subject: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109455 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cmw652" wrote: > A lot of what you say is true if taken at face value. However, I > have always valued "Intentions" when looking at actions. A lot of what > Molly does can be seen as cruel, but I do not believe that is her > always her intent. Ahh... the road to hell, and all that... :) Yes, absolutely Molly is very well intentioned, but she's certainly a terror... and I'm still counting her among the short list Harry is going to tell off rather convincingly in the nearer chapters of HPB. She deserves it! It isn't the lack of perfection that is ever a problem. All of us needs someone to (metaphorically or not) come up and gives us a slap or a kick in the pants when we've lost all objectivity in judging and choosing our own actions. Molly's only experience with this in the past... 25 years more or less? ...has been Percy's leaving, but Percy is clearly in the wrong, so it doesn't do much good. I personally look to the wrongs of Molly has JKR not only showing how concerned a mother should be, but also how there is definitely a line of going too far. If JKR lives the lessons she teaches in these passages, her children will be very lucky. Josh From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Mon Aug 9 15:54:56 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 15:54:56 -0000 Subject: Villainy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109456 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "naamagatus" wrote: > > Immortality (of various kinds) has been sought by most religions. Why > do you suddenly find Voldemort irrational for wanting it? > Kneasy: Really? I thought it was immortal *afterlife* they were all panting for. > Naama: > I'm not sure where you got your numbers from. In any case, I don't > see the relevancy here. A successful coup doesn't necessarily invovle > mass killings - well targeted political assasinations may be far more > effective. And when Voldemort takes over the WW, the Muggle world > won't present a problem. It is part of the Potterverse logic that > Muggles and their technology are practically powerless before magic. > Voldemort doesn't need nations to grovel before him - just the > wizards of each nation. > Kneasy: 13 muggles Quirrell (arguably) Bertha Jorkins Frank Bryce Barty Crouch Snr Cedic Diggory Broderick Bode (probably) Sirius Black (probably) The Potters don't count; that happened before the books started. You'll note that there aren't any "well-targeted political assinations" and none apparently planned. If he actually wanted hordes of Dark Magic capable hench-wizards he'd be recruiting at Durmstrang, not in hiding in the UK. In fact, if he was all that powerful, he wouldn't be in hiding at all. Voldy couldn't take over a whelk stall let alone a society. He's thrashing about achieving absolutely nothing. Every time he pops his head above the parapet he gets it handed to him. He's a loser. And that is exactly the point I'm trying to make - he is NOT credible as the most evil, sneaky, extremely powerful, Dark Magic wielding terror merchant in the WW. > Naama: > I find it a bit strange your talking of *imagined*childhood slights. > You are talking still of Tom Riddle, right? His father abandonment > was not imagined, was it? He did actually let his own son grow up in > an orphanage, neglected, loveless and possibly actively abused. > Kneasy: Tough. Means little. How many rejected orphans start a war? Or is it just the magical ones? Naama: > And what *could* cause a lust for world domination? I mean, most > people want power to some degree, but over the entire world? Can you > really imagine a healthy, sane person setting world domination as his > life's goal? I disagree also with your dismissive "ersatz pop > psychology." I read some of Alice Miller's impressive analysis of > Hitler's and Stalin's life, and IMO there's nothing ersatz about it. > I found it extremely persuasive. > Kneasy: Hitler and Stalin were opportunists. They each filled a power vacuum, replaced ineffectual political leaders, in Stalins case because Lenin was ill and dying. Both of them were part of the political process *before* showing what their true agendas would mean. Both of them had a recognisable, tracable political development. It was most definitely not "Nobody loves me; I think I'll take over the world." Voldy is an object lesson in how not to succeed. > Naama: > You have a supernatual world, with supernatural beings in it - what > real sense does it make if it isn't, on some level, metaphorical? HP > (and any good fantasy story) doesn't really make sense if you fail to > interpret it, on some level, as a morality play. Voldemort is not > only an evil human being, he is also Evil. And you can't make a bad > man into Evil if you give him understandable/credible motivations Kneasy: Read Solzhenitsyn. He makes the point that you can, because a truly evil person believes he is doing things for the best - he's saving his country from a terrible fate etc. etc. He cannot see that the ends he envisages do not justify the means used. Hence fascism, communism, the Terror after the French Revolution. All of them were intended to be *beneficial* to the society. But the price to be paid was extortionate. Voldy doesn't care about anybody except Voldy. From sherriola at earthlink.net Mon Aug 9 16:16:17 2004 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 10:16:17 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <002e01c47e2c$337c9540$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 109457 Josh said Ahh... the road to hell, and all that... :) Yes, absolutely Molly is very well intentioned, but she's certainly a terror... and I'm still counting her among the short list Harry is going to tell off rather convincingly in the nearer chapters of HPB. She deserves it! It isn't the lack of perfection that is ever a problem. All of us needs someone to (metaphorically or not) come up and gives us a slap or a kick in the pants when we've lost all objectivity in judging and choosing our own actions. Molly's only experience with this in the past... 25 years more or less? ...has been Percy's leaving, but Percy is clearly in the wrong, so it doesn't do much good. I personally look to the wrongs of Molly has JKR not only showing how concerned a mother should be, but also how there is definitely a line of going too far. If JKR lives the lessons she teaches in these passages, her children will be very lucky. Josh Sherry replies The one thing that stands out to me about Molly is how much her family adores her! Sure the kids get mad and irritated with her, but then, doesn't every child get irritated with their parents? But even so, it's always clear to me that every one of them loves her, feels completely comfortable around her, even enough to argue with her from time to time. And she so obviously loves all of them, or her boggart wouldn't be seeing her family dead. Some people just have different ways of showing their love. Of course, we don't see it, but I bet if one of the kids got something like the flu, Molly would be at their bedside, with the wizard version of chicken soup and stories and hugs and kisses. The overbearing, bossy mother is such a character in books and movies, that it has become a clich?. When I was in high school, I dropped a class, because I was failing it. I had never failed a class before. My dad set a high priority on education, and I would never have wanted to bring home a report card with a failed class! That didn't make him an unloving father. We know that Hermione threatens Fred and George with telling their mother, but I never got the impression they were truly afraid of their mother overall. They may not always want her to know what they are up to, and I consider that a totally normal part of being teenagers, almost legal age. I'm sure every Weasley would fight to protect Molly and be devastated if something happened to her. sherry G From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Mon Aug 9 16:25:21 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 16:25:21 -0000 Subject: Neville's Wand In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109458 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Boolean" wrote: > Just finished re-reading the battle scene in the Dept of Mysteries in > OotP again, and have been thinking about dear Neville... > > Will we see an improvement once he > has a new wand in HBP? As the assumably more wealthy Longbottom was using a handmedown wand the same as Ron, one must assume that it is actually a fairly regular practice. Perhaps this have-your-own-wand is a bit of salesmanship by Ollivander? :) Regardless... even if there is a slight improvement due to the wand itself, Neville has _already_ improved... his performance in the DA meetings post-jailbreak testify to that. He simply needed a reason to surpass himself that could overcome years of Gran's doubts and putdowns. While IMHO Neville did as well as Harry and Hermione in the DoM... anything lacking can easily be attributed to the fact that this was his _first_ battle. True, only Harry had thus far dealt with DEs in any way, but this was Neville's first time to be in harm's way. Josh From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Mon Aug 9 16:30:27 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 16:30:27 -0000 Subject: Sunday, Sept. 1st In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109459 I've heard about thins "little mistake" a few times, and I was wondering where it comes from: "the impossibility of September 1st always being on a Sunday" Where in canon does it say that the students "always" come back to Hogwarts to start fall term on a Sunday? I guess I've missed that. ~Yb From lysandrabellargus at yahoo.co.uk Mon Aug 9 16:33:44 2004 From: lysandrabellargus at yahoo.co.uk (Sandra) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 16:33:44 -0000 Subject: HP translations- the name 'Hogwarts' Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109460 Hi, lots of fantastic threads as usual and I just have one quite simple question , totally unrelated to them all! Over the weekend I have read an article in a German newspaper (die ZEIT) about a study into the different translations of HP. In the Netherlands they seem to go quite far and translate a lot of the names of places and people. I thoroughly enjoy reading the original British English versions of HP but now this article has pointed me to one occasion where I may have missed a connotation of a name completely: Hogwarts! Which 'die Zeit says derives from hog = pig and warts. I did not know the word hog before this article, but I have looked it up now and it seems to have other meanings in addition to pig. I am now curious what, for a native English speaker (especially British), are the things which spring to mind when they first read the name 'Hogwarts'. What 'image' does it create, and is it so completely unsuitable for this school as the German translation suggested by 'die ZEIT' (Schweinewarze) would be? I have checked the HP Lexicon and it says: "The name "Hogwarts" is actually the name of a flower. JKR said: "Ideas come from all sorts of places and sometimes I don't realise where I got them from. A friend from London recently asked me if I remembered when we first saw Hogwarts. I had no idea what she was talking about until she recalled the day we went to Kew Gardens and saw those lilies that were called Hogwarts. I'd seen them seven years before and they'd bubbled around in my memory. When Hogwarts occurred to me as a name for the school, I had no idea where it came from." (SMH) " So I guess translating names in HP is really a very difficult bit, as most names have a meaning or at least their sound evokes a certain aspects of the person or place. Any comments appreciated Sandra (who LOVES words in general and the names in HP) From maritajan at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 16:39:37 2004 From: maritajan at yahoo.com (Marita Jan) Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 09:39:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Sunday, Sept. 1st In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040809163937.52073.qmail@web12103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109461 I believe that in every book, the letters they get from Hogwarts mention catching the train on September 1. I don't remember it giving the day of the week, just the date. Funny, though, I never caught the next day/first day of classes always being Monday, though. Which, of course, is impossible. The discrepency doesn't really bother me. I've always thought that to really enjoy a book, you had to suspend reality for a bit, that what's true in my world might not be true in the world the author is creating. So, if JKR wants September 2 to be Monday every year, then it's Monday every year to me. MJ --- Bex wrote: > I've heard about thins "little mistake" a few times, and I was > wondering where it comes from: > > "the impossibility of September 1st always being on a Sunday" > > Where in canon does it say that the students "always" come back to > Hogwarts to start fall term on a Sunday? I guess I've missed that. > > ~Yb > > ===== -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Need a real estate professional? Visit my site at www.maritabush.com With Marita, great service comes first.....and lasts! __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now. http://messenger.yahoo.com From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 16:40:06 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 16:40:06 -0000 Subject: At least respect JKR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109462 DuffyPoo wrote: I have a great deal of respect for JKR. While I believe she is a very intelligent woman and a good writer, I don't think she walks on water, as some people do. She is able to make mistakes. She says herself she is no good at maths (and I admit, to me, that translates to dates as well). She gave us FLINT after all and Mark Evans." Jim responded: I support you. JKR is a wonderful storyteller; she isn't the 9/11 Commission. She never, in her wildest dreams, thought that we would overprocess tiny little factoids the way we have and will keep on doing. She's said so. I've always been struck by the parallels between JKR and Arthur Conan Doyle, the creator of Sherlock Holmes. He was wildly popular in his lifetime, setting many publishing records. He struggled with his readers for "ownership" of his character and stories, to the point that they wouldn't let him kill his character off when he got tired of him. (People wore black armbands and accosted Doyle in the street.) He inspired a huge active fan discussion base (I used to send in money for Holmes "fanzines," a few purple mimeographed pages of fan writing and discussion, and yes, fanfiction. A `zine that lasted a year was a big success.) vmonte now: I support you too, Duffypoo. I love the Harry Potter books and I think that JKR is a wonderful storyteller. IMO none of us would be here discussing our theories if the books were garbage. vivian - also a Sherlock Holmes fan From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Mon Aug 9 16:59:29 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 16:59:29 -0000 Subject: Dangerous!Hermione? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109463 I won't comment on Hermione's "foolhardiness," since I think she's got a good head on her shoulders, except when she's working herself to death or emotionally panicking, but I read this little editorial at Mugglenet: http://www.mugglenet.com/editorials/editorials/edit-jaworski.shtml It's about Hermione being under the Imperius curse in OotP. I personally think that in each spot, she's reflecting on something she heard, or formulating a theory based on what's just developed, or just getting emotional... What does everyone think? ~Yb From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 17:08:10 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 17:08:10 -0000 Subject: ESE grandmother? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109464 pcaehill2 wrote: Does anyone else get a funny feeling re: Neville's grandmother? I know she's been presented as loyal to Dumbledore, and a good guardian for Neville, but there are certain *vague impressions* I've been getting, perhaps from these details: --vulture on her hat --Neville fears her almost as much as he fears Snape --something a little cold in her tone when she speaks to N's mom at Mungo's (extremely subjective reaction, I know) --not overly active in encouraging magical ability in N. when young (it's Uncle Algie who keeps after N. on this, I believe) vmonte responds: I don't know; Neville's grandmother is peculiar. Whenever I think of Gran I see her as Snape in a dress. Was this some kind of foreshadowing on JKR's part? You know, "a wolf in sheep's clothing." Was she once a DE? I hope we don't find out that Snape's undercover work is that he is impersonating Neville's grandmother. HAHA--just kidding. vivian From omphale at onetel.com Mon Aug 9 17:17:27 2004 From: omphale at onetel.com (saraquel_omphale) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 17:17:27 -0000 Subject: HP translations- the name 'Hogwarts' In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109465 > Sandra asked > Over the weekend I have read an article in a German newspaper (die Hogwarts! > Which 'die Zeit says derives from hog = pig and warts. I did not know > the word hog before this article, but I have looked it up now and it > seems to have other meanings in addition to pig. > > I am now curious what, for a native English speaker (especially > British), are the things which spring to mind when they first read > the name 'Hogwarts'. What 'image' does it create, and is it so > completely unsuitable for this school as the German translation > suggested by 'die ZEIT' (Schweinewarze) would be? Yep, it's as rough as it sounds. (from a English English speaker) Image: hmmm something hairy, grunty, smelly, muddy and generally fairly ugly. The German is a literal translation, I think. But,Hog, to me, conjours pictures of wild boar rather than domestic pigs. My German is not good enough to know whether the same distinction applies to the word Schweine. Warts, for anyone unfamiliar with the word, these are the small raised growths of hard skin often found on the hands, and which are caused by a virus I think. Anyway, to me the word always conjours images of Oliver Cromwell, the first Protector, who signed the death warrant for King Charles I and led the Parliamentarians in the English Civil War of the 1660's, because he famously had warts on his nose. Yes he established the first democracy, but he later got a bit mired down in the rampant politics of the period, a good guy with unfortunate facial disfigurements and a bit of power streak. But I digress, warts is also a common feature asigned to witches in folklore, and along with moles (the brown body markings not the digging variety) were sometimes considered in the witch hunt era, (16th & 17th Century) to be nipples on which the devil sucked. If you were named as a witch by someone, you were examined to see if you had these markings (moles or warts)on your body, if so, you were doomed to the ducking stool (strapped to a chair and lowered into the river - if you survived you were obviously a witch with magic powers, if you died, well, they got it wrong, you were obviously innocent, but oh dear never mind, God would pardon you) or burnt at the stake. I would recommend the very famous play, The Crucible, which is about the Salem witches (I think? no doubt our American friends will put me right) and was actually written at the time of the McCarthy trials. Hope that goes someway to answering your query Saraquel From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 17:36:17 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 17:36:17 -0000 Subject: Villainy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109466 > Kneasy wrote: > > Though I am toying with possible alternative endings - just in case > JKR turns fluffy. But to get into that I'll need the plot developments > from book 6 to extrapolate from. > Neri: I don't think JKR's ending will be too fluffy for me or for most readers, but I'm almost certain it will be too fluffy for you. Lets face it - JKR is not a true FEATHERBOA. She does revel in deceit and illusion, and she has a wonderful sarcastic humor, but she is not interested in the mechanics of evil, or with war and torture as an art form. She doesn't appreciate gore and she won't litter the stage with bodies just to get more oomph out of her dramatic effects. If I were you I'd write the FEATHERBOA version of HP before it loses its market value. > > Kneasy: > No, I don't think that I'm trying to turn it into something it isn't. > > When the hero of any epic battles through dungeon, fire and sword I > don't think it's unreasonable to examine and critique what it is that he's > battling to defeat; just what it is that he's being measured against. > > We've expended an inordinate amount of words on Harry vs various > subordinate villains - Snape, Malfoy (both of 'em), Umbridge - examining > in great depth their motivations, methods, strengths, weaknesses, > evilness quotient and, particularly with Snape, how he is *presented* > as a character in the text. Why not also with who we are told is the > worst of the lot and presumably the one who will present Harry with his > greatest challenge? > Neri: The subordinate villains are interesting because they still retain a considerable amount of humanity. Snape is interesting because he's human (you know what I mean, Pippin. He may not be human in the biological sense but he has human flaws and virtues). Draco was interesting mainly because we thought he might redeem himself. As this possibility seems less and less likely in recent books he also becomes less and less interesting. His current job is merely to be nasty and get zapped. Snape and Umbridge are both well portrayed because JKR almost certainly based them on nasty teachers she knew. Unfortunately she didn't know any mad dictators or serial killers. Voldy made the proverbial deal with the devil: lots and lots of power for the price of his humanity. The minute he lost his humanity, JKR lost her interest in him. He is now an empty shell, a cardboard Dark Lord, and only exists to get the plot going and supply the good guys with an archenemy. The only 3D aspect of Voldy is his Tom Riddle aspect, the rejected and abused kid before he made his final deal with the devil. BTW, I predict we will see more of Tom. We are now conveniently installed with a direct link into Voldy's mind, and we can receive flashbacks from his childhood the same way we received Snape's childhood memories in the Occlumency lessons. But the current- day Voldy will probably remain a cardboard villain because JKR finds ultimate evil boring. So your possession theory is true in the thematic level, but I doubt we'll see it in the plot level because it doesn't look like JKR is much interested in developing her Dark Lord(s). She still has many of her favorite subjects to develop and only 2 more books to go. Neri, regretfully noting that www.eviloverlord.com is not in working order. Could evil overlords be out of mode these days? From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Mon Aug 9 17:47:53 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 17:47:53 -0000 Subject: Petunia, Dudley and WW - Hatred? Cover-up? Latent Ability? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109467 macfotuk wrote: > 1. Petunia knows about Dementors. She knows from 'that boy' > telling 'her' about them. On first reading I naturally thought, like > Harry and most readers I suspect, that she is referring to James and > Lily. I know there are theories that these two in fact are NOT Lily > or James but when I first read them (located a few pages before this > post - sorry for not being able to quote/specify them) I thought they > were stretching the imagination at best. However, although dementors > have clearly existed in the WW forever I'm sure I've read in the > books (probably PoA) that it was Fudge who first went into league > with them to use them as guards at Azkaban, much against DD's > inclinations. Fudge didn't become MoM until well after James and > Lily's demise (GoF and Barty Crouch Sr backstory), so has JKR made > another mistake (deliberate or otherwise)? Yb responds: I wnet over that section again after I finished the book, and I came up with a different idea: Petunia knows more than she's telling about the WW. I can see two reasons for her explanation: She is unconsciously melding two memories together, one of James and Lily and one of someone else telling her about the Dementors at Azkaban, /OR/ she is covering. She says "They guard the wizard prison, Azkaban." Then she says she overheard it from "her and that awful boy." I think she learned it from someone from the WW that she's been in contact with. Vernon wouldn't be thrilled if he found out she was having any contact with "that kind," so she comes up with a lie, fast. She probably knows much more than she's letting on. macfotuk also wrote: > Also, JKR has said someone finds (or reveals) their magical powers > late in life - might this be Petunia? Yb: This has been a pretty common thought, though several other possible or admitted Squibs could be the case as well. I like the thought of Petunia being a Squib, but just barely, and if the Red Hen is right about the inheritance of magic, it isn't surprising that the Evans' had a magical daughter and a not-quite-so-magical one. Red Hen theory: http://www.redhen-publications.com/Magic%26Wizards.html macfotuk: > 2. Dudley was almost kissed by a dementor - at least the way JKR > wrote the scene in the alleyway. Why? why? why! What has Dudley > ever done to a dementor? I know Dementors exist to suck all the > happiness out of wizards and even muggles and that these two were > probably rogue dementors (even by normal ESE dementor standards), > but why would they go so far as to resort to the worst possible > punishment in the wizard world (WW)? They can normally be 'trusted' > simply to terrorise and subdue (yes to the point of madness after > prolonged contact), but not normally to kill, otherwise nobody in > Azkaban would ever survive the experience. To answer my own > question it may be that Umbridge had authorised them to kill Harry > (with a kiss) to shut him up and that therefore any witness would > need taking out too. Even so, the scene leaves it open that Dudley > may have been targeted for some other, as yet unrevealed, reason. Yb for one last time: First, let me make one little point: the Dementor's Kiss is not intended to kill, just suck out your soul. But IMO, yes, the primary intent was to shut Harry up, or at least make sure he couldn't get back into Hogwarts (if he chased the dementors off, he's be expelled for using his wand). Note how conniving the MoM is in trying to keep DD away from the hearing: they want to make /sure/ Harry stays out of Hogwarts and gets his wand snapped. He's less trouble to them that way. Dudley may have been in the wrong place at the wrong time. The dementors go after anyone with a soul, muggle or wizard, and they seem to feed off emotions, like how Dudley was feeling after hanging out with his gang and then ruffling Harry's feathers. The reason for 2 dementors instead of one? Someone may have known that Harry can produce a Patronus. Of course, doing so with one dementor is hard, but with 2, it is probably much harder. Plus, the spare may have been for any unfortunate witnesses that were non-muggles. Dudley just happened to be there, and the other dementor needed something to do, sooo... some random thoughts, ~Yb From romulus at hermionegranger.us Mon Aug 9 18:26:42 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 18:26:42 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109468 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Josh Warren" wrote: Josh: > > Question... what year(s) would it have to be, ignoring all other > evidence but keeping it in the 1980-2000 timeframe, for July 31 to > match up with the Bonfire night as celebrated in the UK? > > Just go with me here... > > Josh RMM: Do you mean October 31st being on the Tuesday mentioned in book PS/SS? That would be 1989, 1995, and 2000. July 31s on Tuesdays appear in 1984, 1990, and 2001. RMM www.hermionegranger.us From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Mon Aug 9 18:28:02 2004 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 18:28:02 -0000 Subject: School cut-off date WAS:Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109469 Udderpd wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> In the PoA Dumbledore refers to Harry and Hermione as two thirteen year old wizards. Making her the youngest of the trio and her birth year 1980. <<<<<<<<<<<<<< "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, if you read Dumbledore's meaning that way, then yes they were both 13 yrs old at the time. However, there is another way that Dumbledore can refer to them as "two thirteen year olds". He can be referring to them as "two thirteen year olds" in the same manner that he refers to them as "two 3rd years". [Argument based on PoA screenplay including Ron among "13-yr-olds."] [Argument that it would be more "clever" for Hr's parents to name her Hermione had she been born in 1979 rather than 1980] <<<<<<<<<<<<<< It's hard to tell whether you are trying to say that the story (backstory?) would be better if Hermione had been born in 1979, or whether you are actually arguing that Rowling intended for Hermione to have been born that year. As far as the author's intent goes, I thought that the issue had been resolved by the CoS DVD timeline. Doesn't it give 9/13/92 as Hermione's 12th birthday? Perhaps I'm misremembering. Anyhow, I can believe that JKR might have slipped up and had DD refer to Hermione using the wrong age, but I have a hard time believing that she reviewed the timeline and missed the age reference. -- Matt P.S. I had thought that Rowling's comment about Hermione's parents trying to be clever was in reference to the obscurity of the name, not to any particular significance: "[I]t's a name from Shakespeare; it's in 'A Winter's Tale'.... [I]t just seems the sort of name that a pair of professional dentists who liked to prove how clever they were -? do you know what I mean -? gave their daughter a nice unusual name that no one can pronounce! I mean, parents do that." from 10/20/1999 Press Club interview, reproduced on Quick Quotes. From romulus at hermionegranger.us Mon Aug 9 18:42:23 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 18:42:23 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: <001901c47e06$ce6cb1f0$16c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109470 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > > DuffyPoo: > The problem is, of course, that Hagrid was at the house even before "the Muggles started swarming around." He and Sirius were first on the spot of the incident. Even before the Muggles. Before anyone was alerted to what happened. > > Our favourite weatherman, Jim McGuffin said, "I don't know about that, but it's not only the owls that have been acting oddly *today.* Viewers as far apart as Kent, Yorkshire, and Dundee have been phoning in to tell me that instead of the rain I promised yesterday, they've had a downpour of shooting stars!" The shooting starts wouldn't have started until word got around, some time after the incident, but while it was still dark or no shooting stars would be seen (would they?) > Hagrid knew it was Hallowe'en when he rescued HP, as Geoff pointed out, because it is a special day in the WW. The shooting stars and celebrations didn't start until the next day, sometime past midnight on Monday, in the early hours of the "dull, grey Tuesday morning our story starts", sometime after Hagrid had rescued HP from the rubble. Sometime after word got around that LV had killed James and Lily and HP had survived. RMM: And if the text was left to just that, I would agree 100%. However, Jim the weatherman also mentions that Bonfire Night doesn't occur until next week. Jim said this on a Tuesday, and if Tuesday is November 1st, since it was the night before that Voldemort killed the Potters, then Bonfire Night would be Saturday. Is Saturday considered part of "next week"? Or is it considered part of "the weekend"? Secondly, Hagrid, Harry, nor ANYONE else is mourning the loss of Harry's parents on the Halloween celebrations that are occurring during the 5 books. Not a single mention is made of the anniversary of Harry's loss. Nor for that matter is the BIG event of Voldemort's downfall celebrated on any of those Halloweens. RMM www.hermionegranger.us PS Correction: Yes, it is Jim the weatherman, not Ted. I had the electrodes crossed circuited when I read that part. :-) From macfotuk at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 14:13:01 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 14:13:01 -0000 Subject: Neville's Wand In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109471 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Boolean" wrote: > Just finished re-reading the battle scene in the Dept of Mysteries in > OotP again, and have been thinking about dear Neville... > > It is revealed (sorry, book at home so no page refs.) that he has > been using his father, Frank's, wand during his whole time at > Hogwarts. As his grandmother constantly reminds him, he is "not as > good as his father", but could part of the reason for this be to do > with the fact that he is not using his own wand - one which 'picks' > him, as Harry's did in PS? > > I know a lot of people have speculated that Neville's ineptness could > be to do with having a memory charm placed on him as a child, after > seeing his parents be tortured. However, Neville is good at > Herbology - a subject which seems to rely less on wandwork than other > subjects. As we have seen with Ron, a wand which is not personal to > its owner will not work as well. Will we see an improvement once he > has a new wand in HBP? This is not a theory new to the internet (a search found it all over), but yes it seems solid. It seems clear after DD's discussion of the prophecy with Harry and the other snippets about the Longbottoms elsewhere in the books that Neville's role and strength as a wizard will continue to build. JKR said somewhere that a character will find their wizard powers very late in life and this might have been referring to Neville, though other candidates include Petunia Dursley (Evans as was) or Dudley or even Arabella Figg or Argus Filch. From macfotuk at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 14:53:58 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 14:53:58 -0000 Subject: Barty Crouch Jr/Dementor's Kiss/Zombie Attacks to Come? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109472 I haven't read the end of GoF in a long while, but since a recent post I made was about the dementor's kiss, it got me to thinking - what happened to Barty Crouch Jr's body? I think it was Lupin in PoA told Harry that the kiss is worse than death because it releases the soul forever (it is lost - though who knows where?)and leaves a body in which the blood still flows and heart still beats. Hereafter, I'll call this a zombie. How long can such a body last? Is it a proper zombie? Would it need to eat/be fed? Can it move on its own and if not can it be possessed or controlled by witchcraft/wizardry? Can we expect LV to release the dementors in order to have an army of immortal zombies? Now this really WOULD be evil - (don't know if it's ESE enough to satisfy Kneasy though?). From macfotuk at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 15:09:02 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 15:09:02 -0000 Subject: Villainy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109473 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > > Kneasy wrote: > > Dunno about you but I'm disappointed in Voldy. > > Seems to be more caricature than character. > > More cardboard cut-out than cut-throat. > > Which is a bit surprising > > > > > > > Neri shakes head in bemusement: > > > Could it be that you are trying to make HP into something it isn't? > Could HP be a book about (warning: a really wild speculation ahead) > Harry Potter? Not about Voldy, and maybe not even about Snape or DD's > plan? Could Voldy be there mainly as a challenge for Harry? Someone > for Harry to fight while he's not busy wrestling with bothersome > teenager friends, bothersome teenager rivals, system injustice, > grownups' prejudice, pressure from high expectations, an abusive > family, lousy teachers, crucial exams, hopes of future career, > winning the Quidditch cup, first dates, and several other petty > matters that sometimes occupy the mind and time of growing up kids? > > So if certain parts of the set are a bit flimsy at the seams, could > it perhaps be an indication of the author's priorities? > > Neri All of the above agreed neri, but kneasy has a point that Voldemort is not yet 'evil enough'. Predictions say he'll be WORSE this time than before, yet presently there's little evidence of that. The books yes at the simplest level are about a brave boy and his fight against evil. Evil has to be beaten in each book (sorry kneazy) and JKR does quite a good job of making it seem that Harry only just manages it by luck or being assisted. Harry and LV are Holmes and Moriarty (not that I've read Conan Doyle, so may be on thin ice). They battle and neither wins, though yet another dastardly plot is foiled by the hero. Don't Holmes and Moriarty disappear in the final book during a battle to the death? (Yes - see http://www.devonlife.co.uk/sections/mag/article.cfm? id=51&yid=1) From manawydan at ntlworld.com Mon Aug 9 18:56:56 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 19:56:56 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Villainy References: <1092073110.24083.83897.m20@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <005e01c47e42$a4d54c80$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 109474 Kneasy noted: >Voldy couldn't take over a whelk stall let alone a society. He's thrashing >about achieving absolutely nothing. Every time he pops his head >above the parapet he gets it handed to him. He's a loser. And that >is exactly the point I'm trying to make - he is NOT credible as the >most evil, sneaky, extremely powerful, Dark Magic wielding terror >merchant in the WW. It wouldn't necessarily address his ability as a wizard. He could still be the most evil, powerful one, just deficient in the sneaky department. Let's take that a step further. We've seen Voldemort a number of times and all of them feature him doing the evil overlord bit. Plenty of moustache-twiddling and mwaa-ha-ha but not very good on the strategy front. Nonetheless, we know that, the first time around, his conspirators convulsed the WW, in the British Isles, at least, to the extent that people are terrified even to speak his name. Does it therefore follow that actually the DE terror took place in _spite_ of, rather than because of, Voldemort's strategic abilities? Did he, among his inner circle, have wizards who were actually much better than he was at that side of things? Are they still around today? I'll grant you that the fight at the Ministry doesn't show them in a particular effective light, even given the circumstances that they may have been trying to take them alive. But then skill at strategy and brute force aren't necessarily the same thing. Interesting to wonder whether there would have been the same result if (say) Lucius had planned the ambush and Voldemort had done the fighting... Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Mon Aug 9 18:59:15 2004 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 18:59:15 -0000 Subject: Hermione's birthday (was School cut-off date; was Riddle and Grindelwald/1945) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109475 --- "Matt" wrote: > As far as the author's intent goes, I thought that the > issue had been resolved by the CoS DVD timeline. Doesn't > it give 9/13/92 as Hermione's 12th birthday? Perhaps > I'm misremembering. Sorry, I meant 9/19/92. And sorry about the incessant references to the timeline as well.... From yahoogroups at catbirdco.us Mon Aug 9 18:08:24 2004 From: yahoogroups at catbirdco.us (Michal) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 11:08:24 -0700 Subject: Squashed magic was: blood types, Dudley In-Reply-To: References: <6.1.0.6.0.20040804100910.0356beb0@mail.catbirdco.us> Message-ID: <6.1.0.6.0.20040809105811.06945280@mail.catbirdco.us> No: HPFGUIDX 109476 At 05:31 PM 8/4/04, you wrote: >--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Michal wrote: > > > Heritage | 100% Wizard | Mixed | 100% Muggle > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Ability | > > Magical | pureblood | half-blood | muggle-born > > Squashed | | Dudley? | > > No Magic | squib | muggle? | muggle > >Cyndi asks; > >By the way, did you intentionally choose the word "squashed" because >it was so similar to "squib", or was that a very happy accident? Michal replies: The Dursleys talked about "squashing" magic out of Harry, I think. I could be remembering the wrong word. There are, after all, so very many words in the five volumes to date! Thinking again of the squashed category, Voldemort was pretty squashed for ten or twelve years. Is it magic to take over a rat or snake body? Or should we consider him "handicapped" or "ill" (almost typed "sick" but he's that even when he's fully functional!)? From yahoogroups at catbirdco.us Mon Aug 9 18:30:00 2004 From: yahoogroups at catbirdco.us (Michal) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 11:30:00 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Both Spies... In-Reply-To: References: <20040805233113.41925.qmail@web42004.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.0.6.0.20040809111431.02d87d70@mail.catbirdco.us> No: HPFGUIDX 109477 At 09:07 PM 8/8/04, you wrote: >Carol responds: >.....But I think Snape >was already teaching at Hogwarts, hired at the beginning of the term, >when the Potters were murdered on October 31. He might, however, have >sensed a change (or changes) in the Dark Mark that alerted him that >something was terribly amiss and alerted Dumbledore that way. One way >or another, I think he's connected with telling Dumbledore the news >and that's why Dumbledore trusts him. But I don't think Snape knew >that Peter was a spy, much less the Secret Keeper. Michal comments: If (very minuscule "if") Snape is a double agent whose loyalties are with DD and Voldemort is unaware of this long-ago shift in loyalties, it seems to me that Snape's being widely known as a DE would be unlikely. After all, as a teacher at Hogwarts, he spends most of his time on campus and would not often be able to instantly apparate to Voldemort's side when called. I would imagine they have another way to set up meetings when Snape's absence from school would go unnoticed. Regarding Pettigrew, either Snape must not have seen him in suspicious circumstances or he would have told DD OR Snape was unaware that the Potters were in danger. We have canon that he knew that Pettigrew was friends with Potter and company. As for Pettigrew being aware of Snape's double role, either he never saw Snape with Voldemort, or he did see them together but hadn't yet figured a way to use the information for his own advantage. Pettigrew is not the type to volunteer information unless it gets him something he wants at the moment. It would be an interesting plot development if Wormtail rats on Snape to Voldemort. From cruthw at earthlink.net Mon Aug 9 18:42:04 2004 From: cruthw at earthlink.net (caspenzoe) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 18:42:04 -0000 Subject: GG/Weasleys' In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109478 > > SSSusan asked: > > > Caspen, can you tell me where I missed the description of GG as a > > > redhead? > > > > > > Yb thinks: > > I think the relationship of Godric Gryffindor and red is being > > established by all the reds mentioned with Gryffindor. > > Granted there is no canon to > > support GG having red hair, but maybe red wasn't just his favorite > > color? > > > Martha thinks, > > I don't know if the red headed Weasleys are actually related to GG, > but it's a very good thought :) > > I've always thought that deep purple represented royalty at least in > some Christian traditions. Now I think that red represents emotion, > boldness, bravery and shivelry. It also represents love... red > represents everything that is expressed with great pation and > truth. Maybe I just love the color. :) > > Martha Thanks for the comments on my red-head speculation. In response to Susan, no, I don't know of any cannon that specifies that GG was a red-head (in fact, I don't know of any cannon giving physical descriptions of any of the founders, although we know that GG owns a ruby encrusted sword). I was going purely on color association; in the HP series, red is the color of Gryffindor (together with gold - associated with royalty). In addition, however, the lion, it's totem/symbol, is traditionally associated with royalty. I think that all of the Weaseley's whose Hogwarts houses we know are in Gryffindor, but please correct me if I'm wrong there. The Weaseleys do have a name association with a legendary King, and Ron's name can be interpreted to have such an association. In addition, we have the "Weasely is our King" anthem that I interpret as foreshaodowing on JK's part. I agree with Martha that red also represents "emotion, boldness, bravery and chivalry...love, and passion...." I don't know about "truth." Although the color purple is associated with royalty in Roman history, I believe red is more closely so associated in Britsh history - but I could be wrong. I believe that purple is also associated with nobility of a more spiritual sort in some Christian traditions. In American higher education, purple represents law. Another interesting fact I noted while re-reading COS is that DD's original hair-color is auburn - a variation of red - for whatever it's worth. Just a pet theory about the Weaseley's really. Fun, 'til it's shot down by JKR or otherwise. Caspen From romulus at hermionegranger.us Mon Aug 9 19:19:48 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 19:19:48 -0000 Subject: School cut-off date WAS:Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109479 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Matt" wrote: Matt: > It's hard to tell whether you are trying to say that the story > (backstory?) would be better if Hermione had been born in 1979, or > whether you are actually arguing that Rowling intended for Hermione to > have been born that year. RMM: I am arguing that Hermione, being born in 1979, would hold a higher degree of "cleverness" than if she was born in 1980. Matt: > > P.S. I had thought that Rowling's comment about Hermione's parents > trying to be clever was in reference to the obscurity of the name, not > to any particular significance: > > "[I]t's a name from Shakespeare; it's in 'A Winter's Tale'.... [I]t > just seems the sort of name that a pair of professional dentists who > liked to prove how clever they were -? do you know what I mean > -? gave their daughter a nice unusual name that no one can > pronounce! I mean, parents do that." RMM: I'm sorry, but are you saying that because the name is obscure, then it is clever of the parents just because it is obscure? Is that what Jo is saying in her answer above? I think not. She states: "[I]t just seems the sort of name that a pair of professional dentists who liked to prove how clever they were..." It is not because of the obscurity of the name, it is because of what the name represents to these two professional dentists that makes it clever. And if Hermione Granger was born on September 19, 1979, then the cleverness of these dentists naming her "Hermione" would be VERY CLEVER indeed. However, if Hermione Granger was born on September 19, 1980, then it was only 25% as interesting, or clever, that they had done so. On a side note: If that is the exact quote from Jo above in regard to her answer, then all I have to say is -- did you see that quick change of subject in her answer?????? She was giving too much away and then realized it. She ends with "gave their daughter a nice unusual name that no one can pronounce! I mean, parents do that." WOW!!! She goes from dentists being clever to parents giving their kids unpronounceable names!!! RMM www.hermionegranger.us From omphale at onetel.com Mon Aug 9 19:34:02 2004 From: omphale at onetel.com (saraquel_omphale) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 19:34:02 -0000 Subject: Mystery of Caradoc Dearborn Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109480 Does anyone else share my obsession with Caradoc Dearborn, the one who "vanished six months after this, we never found his body..." in the picture (OotP p158 UK hb edition). Now there's a open ended clue if ever I saw one. I do believe he is the HBP in book 6, due to his name: Caradoc was one of King Arthur's knights who was the son of Arthur's niece (therefore a princess and him a prince) whose father was a wizard. He suffered the misfortune of having a life sucking snake attach itself to his arm and went into hiding - eventually he was rescued by his true love .... for full details of the story see http://www.bartleby.com/182/107.html Now the question for me is, where has Caradoc (the final c is either not pronounced or is more a soft ch, as in the German Kirche, at the end, it's a welsh name btw, echos of Lily) been hiding all this time and why. Because that's what I've got to explain if he really is going to be the HBP. Unfortunately, I have not got a clue what he has been doing. His surname has two possible interpretations: Lovingly born or expensively born - that could be expensive, not in a financial context but at a personal cost. Well that's as far as I can support my gut feeling - which is pretty well not at all. But I'll fly the lone flag for Caradoc as HBP until book 6 is published, which, IMO the publishers will hope will be in time for Christmas and so privately, do I. I'm facing a very long plane journey at the end of the year and my dream would be to have book 6 to while away the time. Saraquel From romulus at hermionegranger.us Mon Aug 9 19:46:35 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 19:46:35 -0000 Subject: At least respect JKR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109481 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > > vmonte now: > I support you too, Duffypoo. I love the Harry Potter books and I > think that JKR is a wonderful storyteller. IMO none of us would be > here discussing our theories if the books were garbage. > > vivian - also a Sherlock Holmes fan RMM: I agree wholeheartedly as well. However, we have to distinguish what is going on here, or else we are really wasting our time theorizing on the books. First, do we have a solid basis for theorizing about the outcome of the books, the meanings underlying the narrative, and whatever "hints" or "clues" have been inserted into the stories? If the answer is YES, then ANY and ALL ambiguities that appear in the narrative have to be considered. Correct? This means that we are allowed to consider any and all dates and times with an eye for discovering the significance of them. Yes, we see that many dates and times are incorrect. This can throw us immediately into the mindset -- well Jo is bad at math, she said so, so we must ignore any and all dates and times. We have also seen where a red herring name like Evans has been speculated upon and then Jo tells us that it was an inadvertent move on her part to name the character Evans. So, does this now push our mindset into the area that says -- well, Jo is bad at names, she said so, therefore we must ignore any and all instances where ambiguities show up in regards to names. Place names would then fall into this category and any other name as well. If we continue down this path, then what are we left with? Hints and clues to what? Are ANY of them valid clues or hints anymore? The whole thing becomes a fruitless search for the truth, because that is what we are doing when we theorize. Does Jo not tell us to try to figure out what is going on if our wits are about us? Therefore, we can trust in Jo Rowling to give us valid hints and clues in everything including dates, times, places, and names, even though she has made mistakes in all these areas. RMM www.hermionegranger.us From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Aug 9 20:22:55 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 20:22:55 -0000 Subject: Mystery of Caradoc Dearborn In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109482 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "saraquel_omphale" wrote: > Does anyone else share my obsession with Caradoc Dearborn, the one > who "vanished six months after this, we never found his body..." in > the picture (OotP p158 UK hb edition). Now there's a open ended clue > if ever I saw one. I do believe he is the HBP in book 6, due to his > name: Caradoc was one of King Arthur's knights who was the son of > Arthur's niece (therefore a princess and him a prince) whose father > was a wizard. He suffered the misfortune of having a life sucking > snake attach itself to his arm and went into hiding - eventually he > was rescued by his true love .... for full details of the story see > http://www.bartleby.com/182/107.html Now the question for me is, > where has Caradoc (the final c is either not pronounced or is more a > soft ch, as in the German Kirche, at the end, it's a welsh name btw, > echos of Lily) been hiding all this time and why. Jen: Yes! I share your interest in this character. Two canon thoughts to support his return: 1) The only other person in the series who supposedly died, but no body was found, was Peter Pettigrew and 2) Caradoc's passing mention in OOTP was much like the passing referance to Sirius in Book 1. As to whether he's the HBP, well....I'm still going with Dumbledore as my first choice. But I might upgrade my second choice from Godric Gryffindor to Caradoc with your information! There's just so little to go on like you said. And it does seem a *little* late to introduce a major character, one who will have a whole book named for him, but...JKR likes twists, so it's a possibility. Luna certainly got some major page time in OOTP even if the Book wasn't named after her. Saraquel: But I'll fly the lone flag for Caradoc as HBP until > book 6 is published, which, IMO the publishers will hope will be in > time for Christmas and so privately, do I. I'm facing a very long > plane journey at the end of the year and my dream would be to have > book 6 to while away the time. Jen: That would be wonderful to have the POA DVD released in November and Book 6 in December! I tend to think it will be next June though, since the releases have always been in summer. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 9 20:26:58 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 16:26:58 -0400 Subject: Imperio'd Hermione (was Dangerous!Hermione?) Message-ID: <000e01c47e4f$391f3840$b762d1d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109483 ~Yb "It's about Hermione being under the Imperius curse in OotP. I personally think that in each spot, she's reflecting on something she heard, or formulating a theory based on what's just developed, or just getting emotional... What does everyone think? " DuffyPoo: I agree with you, Yb. Hermione was thinking about something she'd just heard, read, etc. The author of the article made a good arguement but took most of the incidents out of context, I think. For example, the incident going into Hogsmeade. The Trio had been discussing HP's run-in with Filch over the Dungbombs, which he had just thought to mention to them. Harry said maybe Malfoy had tipped off Filch, but Hermione was sceptical. "And she remained deep in thought all the way to the outskirts of Hogsmeade. 'Where are we going, anyway?' Hary asked. "The Three Broomsticks?' 'Oh -- no,' said Hermione, coming out of her reverie... " Easy to explain, she was still thinking about the Dungbomb incident and who may have tipped off Filch and why, and Harry's asking where the meeting was going to be brought her back to earth. We've all been in a similar position, I'm sure. (I know I am when I'm theorizing about the Potterverse. My poor husband must think I'm lost in space some days!) It was Hermione after all who figured out the mail/Hedwig was being intercepted. It was the Monday after the Hogwarts Hog's Head adventure that Hedwig arrived at History of Magic class. Harry takes her to Professor Grubbly-Plank, then meets Ron and Hermione outside for break. "Well, I was just saying to Ron ... what if someone had tried to intercept Hedwig? I mean, she's never been hurt on a flight before, has she?" and she went on to hope no one had read the note from Snuffles, then "but I don't really see how we can warn him not to come without 'that' being intercepted, too! Besides, on the page previous to the trip into Hogsmeade is, "Right," said Harry, *vaguely,* his mind still on Sirius. We're all vague at times, even dear Hermione. In OotP, the darkness is deepening, after all, and Hermione has lots more to think about, IMO. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com Mon Aug 9 20:29:36 2004 From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 20:29:36 -0000 Subject: Villainy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109484 > Kneasy wrote: > Dunno about you but I'm disappointed in Voldy. > Seems to be more caricature than character. > More cardboard cut-out than cut-throat. > boyd: As usual, Kneasy, I agree with your starting point: LV is not exactly the most successful villain in the history of fiction. And that also causes me much vexation. However, I have a slightly different take on why, and therefore a way of dealing with the frequent annoyances that come with delving into this aspect of the series. First off, we must remember that, at least initially, this was a children's series. Whether the more recent books target an older demographic is a bit beside the point when set against the backdrop of JKR's primary readership, the kids. So she can't make her villain too scary, too competently evil, or too successful in hurting the protagonist; that'd be fairly tough on kids who may identify closely with Harry. Second, from a plot perspective, JKR has needed Harry to defeat LV a few times. That's her plot, a stright defeat of LV by Harry, right? Sure, he gets a little help from friends, but he's still the one standing up to LV despite his fear. So if LV were really ultra-powerful and ultra-smart, the series would be impossible to write as she wants it. Third, she has really given LV just a couple of tragic flaws in an otherwise apparently ungodly arsenal of weapons. The weapons: tremendous wizarding power possibly second only to DD, near-immortality, willingness to kill on a whim, a band of similarly-minded followers, a reputation so fearful that most won't even say his name, and only one being with the power to stop him in Harry. Couple those powers with the relative uselessness of the WW and muggle institutions and press and you have a formidable foe. His flaws? He apparently becomes a bit impulsive near the time of his victory, and therefore misses clues to his looming defeats. Really, aren't GH, the cemetary, the DoM, Quirrel!Mort all examples of him jumping the gun in expecting a victory? The other flaw: he has not yet used terror tactics to their potential. That may change now that he and his DEs have appeared at the DoM. Or perhaps not. What is his motivation? To rule? To kill others? To rid the world of mudbloods? I doubt all of those. I think he's selfish, sure, which would make it nice to have the WW in his thrall, but his main goal is, I believe, true immortality. He's not there yet, thanks to this Potter kid who somehow can kill him according to a prophecy. But he's close. So is LV a weak evil villain? A bit. But then again JKR also has to fit in the many other plots of this series, so poor LV gets less face time than in many typical good vs. evil stories. --boyd but wouldn't it be great if LV and the DEs come out swinging in 6? From srae1971 at bellsouth.net Mon Aug 9 20:33:11 2004 From: srae1971 at bellsouth.net (Shannon) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 16:33:11 -0400 Subject: Ron's Fate? Message-ID: <4117DF87.4010801@bellsouth.net> No: HPFGUIDX 109485 I've been thinking about the various people reasoning why Ron will die. But something has occurred to me when I think about all the things people point to as foreshadowing for his eventual death. In every instance that I can think of, there is something that indicates a negation, or an element of uncertainty of some sort. Let me try to make sense of this. In SS, we have the chess game. Many have speculated that Ron's sacrifice of himself in that game foreshadows a more final sacrifice later. But...Ron wasn't dead, of course. The key here was that Harry didn't know. He didn't stop to check if Ron was alive or not. In PoA, there's the thing at the Christmas dinner. Trelawney is reluctant to join the table because it would be 13 then, and the first person to get up would be the first to die. Ron and Harry get up at the same time. A death omen that seemed to come true for Sirius, but here again, uncertainty. Neither Ron nor Harry knew which of them got up first, and it's possible they stood at the exact same time. In GoF, Harry thinks that if he can't get to Ron in time in the second task, Ron is going to die. Of course, we learn later that Ron was in no real danger. But once again, Harry is left in uncertainty regarding Ron's fate, and Ron turns out fine. The other that comes to mind, thanks to a post earlier to this list, is a couple of incidents in OoP, one being Harry calling Ron's name, thinking he hears Ron's voice from behind the veil. But Ron simply steps around from the other side of it, saying, "I'm here." That to me seems to follow the same pattern Then there is the "die Ron die" quote, which Ron himself negates, in a way, by claiming if he ever saw that in his tea leaves he'd ignore it completely. He never has done that, I don't think, with any of his other seemingly prophetic jokes. So here's what I think. I think that something is going to happen to Ron to make Harry believe that he is dead. Or at the least, be uncertain of whether he is alive or dead. The belief that Ron is dead will be just as effective, to Harry, as Ron actually being dead. The quote from JKR (which I cannot find at the moment) that said "As if I'd kill Harry's best friend" just won't let me believe she's actually going to kill him. Those are just a few examples that came to mind, but it seems like quite an unusual pattern. Is this just a product of my desperation for Ron to live or does anyone else see something in this? Shannon From t.forch at email.dk Mon Aug 9 20:44:23 2004 From: t.forch at email.dk (Troels Forchhammer) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 22:44:23 +0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: At least respect JKR In-Reply-To: <003301c47df5$b1531c50$7dc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20040809221532.020ed5d0@pop3.norton.antivirus> No: HPFGUIDX 109486 At 05:46 09-08-04 -0400, Cathy Drolet wrote: >Samnanya- >"And how exactly is Nick's deathday of 1492 one of her biggest >mistakes? How can you say that the date is not CRITICAL in oop or >later books?" > > >DuffyPoo: >First of all, I will only respond for myself, and not to the whole >rant you posted. What I said and what HunterGren said, was >intelligent, whether YOU think so or not. > >As to my comment regarding 1492, all I was saying was, if JKR hadn't >put that - or any - specific date into the text, all this speculating >about birthdays, dates the story started, etc, ETC., would not be >possible. Not to mention that the whole plethora of conflicting date information would be a whole lot less confusing -- there is, in the rest of the books -- nothing that implies that any specific year is intended, and actually the dating based on Sir Nicholas' deathday cake is one that is particularly inconsistent with the rest of the dating evidence. > I never, once, indicated - or certainly never intended to - that 1492 is >not, or may not, become very important. Nobody knew which 'dull, grey >Tuesday' JKR was referring to in PS until we were given 1492 as reference >in CoS. That is ALL I am saying. If you don't wish to indicate that, then I will. I do think that putting a specific year on Sir Nicholas' deathday cake was a mistake, and I am, for myself, convinced that Rowling does not intend for the books to occur in any particular span of years, but rather that they occur in some generic 'about now' of our time. It is, IMO, very noteworthy that in OotP she avoided at least two very obvious 'opportunities' for confirming the dating when she quoted a text /except/ for the actual year, where she gave a relative date in the narrative text. The death of Regulus Black is one example, the other I'm thinking of is the prophecy record, about which we're told: "In spidery writing was written a date of some sixteen years previously, and below that: /S.P.T. to A.P.W.B.D. Dark Lord and (?)Harry Potter/" (OotP-34 'The Department of Mysteries') An obvious chance to settle the dating issue once and for all -- all she had to do was to give the actual date instead of the relative date as Dumbledore later repeats the relative dating ("On a cold, wet night sixteen years ago"). If anyone's interested in the various clues to the dating, the best analysis I have seen is, in all modesty, my own, which can be read at and >I have a great deal of respect for JKR. While I believe she is a very >intelligent woman and a good writer, I don't think she walks on water, >as some people do. Rowling is, IMO, a brilliant story-teller, and she has, with the Harry Potter books, told us a beautiful and captivating story. I have seen criticism of her language, which I don't feel competent to evaluate, but this has come also from critics who admire the story and what she has otherwise achieved. >She is able to make mistakes. She says herself she is no good at maths (and >I admit, to me, that translates to dates as well). ;-) Dare I mention the question of the number of students at Hogwarts? Rowling's sub-creation is wonderfully detailed, and in general quite consistent, but there are some definite weaknesses in the consistency when it comes to matters generally dealt with in the natural sciences (and math). It must, I agree, be possible to both respect and admire Rowling for her wonderful gift of story-telling, the skill and devotion that she has put into the magical world of Harry Potter, while at the same time recognising the weaknesses in the stories. It does not detract from the stories to point out the inconsistencies or weaknesses; rather I feel that it emphasises her strengths since they are obviously more than sufficient to overcome what weaknesses the story and the sub-creation has. While I have, in the above, referenced two of my own essays on two of these weaknesses, I would never have devoted the time and passion (and, let me face it, obsession) on such works without feeling that the books are still wonderful despite these weaknesses, and still worth both my devotion and obsession. In short: revealing the weaknesses puts focus and emphasis on the strengths. Troels Forchhammer From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Mon Aug 9 20:35:54 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 20:35:54 -0000 Subject: Release Prediction (WAS Re: Caradoc Dearborn) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109487 Saraquel wrote: > > But I'll fly the lone flag for Caradoc as HBP until > > book 6 is published, which, IMO the publishers will hope will be > > in time for Christmas and so privately, do I. I'm facing a very > > long plane journey at the end of the year and my dream would be > > to have book 6 to while away the time. > > And Jen said: > That would be wonderful to have the POA DVD released in > November and Book 6 in December! I tend to think it will be next > June though, since the releases have always been in summer. Yb's turn: I think we have a good long wait ahead of us, like summer or even (gasp!) fall of next year. No one announced a release date for OotP until 6 months beforehand, so if it was due out by Christmas, we'd probably already know it was coming as of a month or two ago. Sorry, Saraquel, but you may have to settle for OotP again. (or a good whodunit!) ~Yb, really not wanting to burst someone's bubble... From patientx3 at aol.com Mon Aug 9 20:41:25 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 20:41:25 -0000 Subject: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109488 Josh wrote: >> Ahh... the road to hell, and all that... :) Yes, absolutely Molly is very well intentioned, but she's certainly a terror... and I'm still counting her among the short list Harry is going to tell off rather convincingly in the nearer chapters of HPB. She deserves it!<< HunterGreen: But does she deserve it *from Harry*? She's the closest thing to a mother that Harry has ever known (Lily can't count because he barely even remembers her). And many of the things she's done to her own children (listed in the original post, like playing favorites) Harry hasn't had to experience. The worst thing I can think of her doing to him is when she tried to stop Sirius from telling him anything. And that, IMO, was something she did to *Sirius* (don't get me started on that either...). Yes, he did tell Ron and Hermione off several times in OotP, but that (for lack of a better way to put it) was because they're his friends. Meaning that they're the people he's the closest with, and therefore most comfortable airing his frustration on. (not really fair, I know, but I don't really blame Harry for it). From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Mon Aug 9 21:00:39 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 21:00:39 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109489 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: > Josh: > > Question... what year(s) would it have to be, ignoring all other > > evidence but keeping it in the 1980-2000 timeframe, for July 31 to > > match up with the Bonfire night as celebrated in the UK? > > RMM: > Do you mean October 31st being on the Tuesday mentioned in book PS/SS? > That would be 1989, 1995, and 2000. 89 or 95 could fit in for when she wrote that particular passage... perhaps she simply consulted her current-year's calendar? Oops! :) Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Mon Aug 9 21:04:36 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 21:04:36 -0000 Subject: School cut-off date WAS:Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109490 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: > And if Hermione Granger was born on September 19, 1979, then the > cleverness of these dentists naming her "Hermione" would be VERY > CLEVER indeed. However, if Hermione Granger was born on September > 19, 1980, then it was only 25% as interesting, or clever, that they > had done so. OK... that's twice now... what does 1979 (in your mind) have to do with cleverness? Keep in mind that JKR came up with this name in the 1990s, so... *shrug* Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Mon Aug 9 21:11:51 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 21:11:51 -0000 Subject: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109491 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" wrote: > Josh wrote: > >> Ahh... the road to hell, and all that... :) Yes, absolutely Molly > is very well intentioned, but she's certainly a terror... and I'm > still counting her among the short list Harry is going to tell off > rather convincingly in the nearer chapters of HPB. She deserves it! << > > HunterGreen: > But does she deserve it *from Harry*? She's the closest thing to a > mother that Harry has ever known (Lily can't count because he barely > even remembers her). 1) do you agree that Molly would do well to evaluate her own actions and words better? 2) do you agree that Molly will need to have something pointed out before she's able to do so? 3) do you agree that Harry is the only one who would, would dare, and would be well-received by Molly? There ya go :) Josh From snow15145 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 21:12:51 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 21:12:51 -0000 Subject: ESE grandmother? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109492 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pcaehill2" wrote: > Does anyone else get a funny feeling re: Neville's grandmother? I > know she's been presented as loyal to Dumbledore, and a good > guardian for Neville, but there are certain *vague impressions* I've > been getting, perhaps from these details: > > --vulture on her hat > --Neville fears her almost as much as he fears Snape > --something a little cold in her tone when she speaks to N's mom at > Mungo's (extremely subjective reaction, I know) > --not overly active in encouraging magical ability in N. when young > (it's Uncle Algie who keeps after N. on this, I believe) > > > Could it be possible, even minisculy so, that N's grandmother is a > death-eater? That she condoned the torture of N's parents (and > perhaps betrayed their whereabouts to LV?)??? That she visits St. > Mungo's in order to ensure that they are still unable to incriminate > her or recover and fight LV again (or even perpetuate their > insanity, by giving a 'booster' spell)? And that she is the one to > put the memory charm on Neville (and keep it up)??? > > Just a thought. Snow: Gram is an interesting character, here is my take on the subject. Neville's Gram being of pureblood lineage may have at some time in the past leaned towards (like the Blacks) what she thought was Voldemort's main objective, which was to have a pureblood society. Gram, not understanding the power game that Voldemort's intention actually was, realized too late to what extreme Voldemort would go to, until his cronies came around and annihilated the minds of her son and his wife. (Some people never get the clear message until it happens in their own backyard) Because of Gram's initial prejudice against non-purebloods, her son Frank may have been at odds with his mother which led to her self-guilt over what eventually happened to them. Gram accuses Neville in St. Mungos of being ashamed of his father, which Neville replied simply that he was not, but maybe Gram was. Psychologically, people tend to blame others for that which they themselves are to blame for. Although Gram speaks highly of Frank, I think she may be harboring a bit of anger towards Frank for what happened. I don't think Gram is or was a death eater, only a misdirected soul with a prejudice. Having already lost her son to a cause that was not hers to begin with, she may have vowed to protect Neville by attempting to secure that Neville not even be accepted into the magical world. Uncle Algie saw things in a different light and, doing the opposite of Vernon with Harry, forced his magical inclinations to surface. Gram was so upset she cried when Neville finally showed talent but Neville thought she was crying for joy. One of her greatest attempts from here on was to play on Neville's unworthiness as a wizard. Surely if she kept his self-esteem to a degrading level he would not become like his father and meet with his father's ultimate demise. Gram already lost her son she doesn't want to lose her grandson too. Gram must see a lot of her son Frank in Neville to take such measures to constantly remind him how unlike his father he is. But is he? From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Mon Aug 9 21:18:34 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 21:18:34 -0000 Subject: Hermione: '79 or '80? (Was Re: School cut-off date) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109493 Josh asked: > OK... that's twice now... what does 1979 (in your mind) have to do > with cleverness? Yb: This was a blip in a much earlier post. September 19, 1979 was a Wednesday, the day of Mercury. Hermione's initials are HG (Hg), the Periodic Table symbol for Mercury. I don't know where the "25% as clever" thing keeps coming from, though. ~Yb From patientx3 at aol.com Mon Aug 9 21:20:01 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 21:20:01 -0000 Subject: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109494 Josh [on the subject of Harry telling off Molly] wrote: >>1) do you agree that Molly would do well to evaluate her own actions and words better? 2) do you agree that Molly will need to have something pointed out before she's able to do so? 3) do you agree that Harry is the only one who would, would dare, and would be well-received by Molly?<< HunterGreen: I just don't see why he'd say that would have an impact on her. As extreme as her behavior might get sometimes, I don't think its THAT extreme that major changes need to take place. Yes, she's overbearing, but that I think has to do with her being a constant worrier, and there is no one that's going to rid her of that. She plays favorites, but she's been shown first-hand that 'golden' Percy turned his back on his family the moment he wasn't supported (and yet, even *that* didn't teach her the lesson, I don't think Harry telling her is going to make her feel differently). However, if you do think that major changes need to take place, and that an argument needs to spark this, how about Arthur? He's her husband after all, and he's known her longer than most of the characters. I think if Harry were to do something like that to her it would be rather cruel and ungrateful, she's been nothing but good to Harry (her own children are a different matter...). From snow15145 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 21:27:10 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 21:27:10 -0000 Subject: Release Prediction (WAS Re: Caradoc Dearborn) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109495 Jen said: > That would be wonderful to have the POA DVD released in > November and Book 6 in December! I tend to think it will be next > June though, since the releases have always been in summer. Yb's turn: I think we have a good long wait ahead of us, like summer or even (gasp!) fall of next year. No one announced a release date for OotP until 6 months beforehand, so if it was due out by Christmas, we'd probably already know it was coming as of a month or two ago. Sorry, Saraquel, but you may have to settle for OotP again. (or a good whodunit!) ~Yb, really not wanting to burst someone's bubble... Snow: I doubt we'll have the wait we did from the release date to actually having the book. A lot of publicity last time caused a lot of trouble with someone stealing books and telling the ending before the public was able to buy the book. It would be safest to allow the shortest amount of time between announcement and actual sales. It may be wishful thinking but I really agree with the December prediction and I'm making my prediction that the announcement will be towards the end of September. It would be a bit hard on Jo with the upcoming arrival of the new baby if she were to wait till spring or summer. I see her putting out the book to get us off her back for a bit so she can enjoy the baby for a few months anyway. From artcase at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 21:29:37 2004 From: artcase at yahoo.com (artcase) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 21:29:37 -0000 Subject: HP translations- the name 'Hogwarts' In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109496 This reminds me of Monty Python a bit, Yes, a bit... Sir Bedivere: How do you know she's a witch? Peasant A: She has got a wart... *snip for space* Peasant B:She turned me into a newt Sir Bedivere: A Newt? Peasant B: (sheepishly) I got better... What about all the references in Disney's The Sword and the Stone to the Wart, Merlin's affectionate name for Arthur? Amy --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "saraquel_omphale" > > SNIP SNIP... > > Yep, it's as rough as it sounds. (from a English English speaker) > Image: hmmm something hairy, grunty, smelly, muddy and generally > fairly ugly. The German is a literal translation, I think. But,Hog, > to me, conjours pictures of wild boar rather than domestic pigs. My > German is not good enough to know whether the same distinction > applies to the word Schweine. > > Warts, for anyone unfamiliar with the word, these are the small > raised growths of hard skin often found on the hands, and which are > caused by a virus I think. Anyway, to me the word always conjours > images of Oliver Cromwell, the first Protector, who signed the death > warrant for King Charles I and led the Parliamentarians in the > English Civil War of the 1660's, because he famously had warts on his > nose. Yes he established the first democracy, but he later got a bit > mired down in the rampant politics of the period, a good guy with > unfortunate facial disfigurements and a bit of power streak. But I > digress, warts is also a common feature asigned to witches in > folklore, and along with moles (the brown body markings not the > digging variety) were sometimes considered in the witch hunt era, > (16th & 17th Century) to be nipples on which the devil sucked. If you > were named as a witch by someone, you were examined to see if you had > these markings (moles or warts)on your body, if so, you were doomed > to the ducking stool (strapped to a chair and lowered into the river - > if you survived you were obviously a witch with magic powers, if you > died, well, they got it wrong, you were obviously innocent, but oh > dear never mind, God would pardon you) or burnt at the stake. I > would recommend the very famous play, The Crucible, which is about > the Salem witches (I think? no doubt our American friends will put me > right) and was actually written at the time of the McCarthy trials. > > Hope that goes someway to answering your query > Saraquel From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 21:34:19 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 21:34:19 -0000 Subject: What can we do about JKR's mistakes? (was: At least respect JKR) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109497 > RMM asked: > > we can trust in Jo Rowling to give us valid > hints and clues in everything including dates, times, places, and > names, even though she has made mistakes in all these areas? Neri: On this very subject, I must mention that I recently found evidence for another name mistake of JKR. I believe (with good reasons) that three characters ? Wormtail, Crouch Sr and Crouch Jr ? saying the name "Voldemort" in PoA and GoF are all editorial mistakes. The reasons are detailed in: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/109098 I think RMM is right. JKR's mistakes are another danger to the HP theoretician, a danger that even JKR herself did not consider. On the one hand, the existence of mistakes cannot be denied. OTOH this can't stop us from theorizing, and we shouldn't assume that any detail that doesn't fit with our theory is a mistake. The good news are that JKR will probably be glad to correct most of the mistakes in her website. The problem is only how to get them to her attention. Since JKR mentioned that she sometimes uses the HP Lexicon for reference, here is an idea for Lexicon Steve: have a web page in the Lexicon with a list of all suspected mistakes, put a conspicuous link to it in the main Lexicon page, and hope JKR will see them and (if they are indeed mistakes) respond to them in her website. You could call this web page "Oy! Jo!" Neri From jferer at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 21:39:56 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 21:39:56 -0000 Subject: At least respect JKR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109498 RMM: "This means that we are allowed to consider any and all dates and times with an eye for discovering the significance of them. Yes, we see that many dates and times are incorrect. This can throw us immediately into the mindset -- well Jo is bad at math, she said so, so we must ignore any and all dates and times." No, but we often try to wring an answer out of too little information. Many things have to be laid aside in the hope new information will come in. We can't make a connect-the-dots drawing with two dots, one of which turned out to be fly droppings. In the 1700's there was a French natural philosopher named Cuvier who claimed he could describe an animal fully from just one bone. If this bone is like this, than the next one must be like so, and therefore the next one from that is thus, on an on until he described the whole animal. Of course he didn't succeed. The farther out from the starting point he got the more the uncertainties multiplied until his new creature was nonsense. He was trying for too many conclusions out of too little data. RMM:"If we continue down this path, then what are we left with? Hints and clues to what? Are ANY of them valid clues or hints anymore? The whole thing becomes a fruitless search for the truth, because that is what we are doing when we theorize." Back to Harry. If we overprocess small clues, or names like Evans, it's not gonna work. The person who comes up with a hypothesis is the first one who should be looking for objections to it. Some hypotheses just can't be taken further until more information comes in. All is not lost. I think reading Harry Potter as history and looking at the characters works better. For example, the events of the battle at the Ministry, the outing of Voldemort, and Dumbledore's and Harry's restoration in the public mind says that Fudge is toast. Things that make sense in our world make sense in Harry's, and vice versa. JKR leaves clues, but not, I believe, such tiny ones. Shouldn't we have realized that when Sirius invaded the dorm and cut up Ron's curtains without harming any human that something was strange about that? Once Crouch!Moody was revealed, the disturbance at his house made sense. Anything else like that? Finally: how many of these elaborate theories with cute acronymic names turn out? How many have gone through the Veil of Dead Theories, never to be seen again? Jim Ferer From lcolbert at netins.net Mon Aug 9 21:52:31 2004 From: lcolbert at netins.net (lene) Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 16:52:31 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Release Prediction (WAS Re: Caradoc Dearborn) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200408091652.31783.lcolbert@netins.net> No: HPFGUIDX 109499 One thing to bear in mind is that for most publishing houses, there is at least 9-12 months needed between the time they receive the completed book to the time it is actually published and ready to put out on the shelves. Last I heard, JKR is still working on the book, so I doubt it would have time to get to her publisher and get edited, etc., by this Christmas. Sorry! Lene' From romulus at hermionegranger.us Mon Aug 9 21:55:47 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 21:55:47 -0000 Subject: Animagi theories Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109500 Here are some Animagi theories. Perhaps these have already been discussed here. 1. As Dumbledore once taught Transfiguration, he is most likely an animagus. What would be his form? I speculate that he is a phoenix. And as the head of the Order of Good Guys....er...I mean the Phoenix, that would make sense. 2. Snape, being the powerful wizard he is, is most likely a Rabbit or Hare. I speculate this based on the following evidence. From OotP: <<"But Sirius snorted. 'I don't need to look at that rubbish, I know it all.' This'll liven you up, Padfoot,' said James quietly. 'Look who it is...' Sirius's head turned. He became very still, like a dog that has scented a rabbit. 'Excellent,' he said softly. 'Snivellus.'>> Now we know Sirius Black refers to himself as Snuffles. And he calls Snape "Snivellus", which term is based on "snivel" which is synonymous with "snuffle" and "sniffle". Rabbits definitely "sniffle" and "snivel". And Jo says, knowing that Black is a dog, "like a dog that has scented a rabbit" -- the rabbit being Snape! [Yes, of course, Jo could have been quite off base with her dog and rabbit, when she should have been thinking dogs and foxes!!] 3. As the proof is there for the fact that Voldemort's animagus form being a snake; after all, Harry bit into Mr. Weasley; and we know that Hermione Granger's form is an otter; this information adds more support to my theory that Hermione Granger's Otter will CONSUME the snake Voldemort. Yes, otters eat snakes. RMM www.hermionegranger.us From yswahl at stis.net Mon Aug 9 22:10:23 2004 From: yswahl at stis.net (samnanya) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 22:10:23 -0000 Subject: At least respect JKR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109501 Neri You could call this web page "Oy! Jo!" Samannya What some may see as "Oy! Jo!" i see the anagram "O! Joy!" Thats why there are different points of view. You cannot call anything a mistake or not until the series is concluded. Mark (not evans) my words ..... 1492 will turn out to be very significant in books 6 and 7 (as hinted at in oop) From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Mon Aug 9 22:19:42 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 22:19:42 -0000 Subject: Release Prediction (WAS Re: Caradoc Dearborn) In-Reply-To: <200408091652.31783.lcolbert@netins.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109502 Lene' wrote: > One thing to bear in mind is that for most publishing houses, there > is at least 9-12 months needed between the time they receive the > completed book to the time it is actually published and ready to > put out on the shelves. Last I heard, JKR is still working on the > book, so I doubt it would have time to get to her publisher and get > edited, etc., by this Christmas. Sorry! Yb: Agreed, though I think the publishers may expedite the process as much as possible. I'd really like to know just where she is in the writing process. Revising rough draft, final editing before publisher, finishing touches, or still writing the &$@#ed thing! ~Yb From romulus at hermionegranger.us Mon Aug 9 22:23:27 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 22:23:27 -0000 Subject: At least respect JKR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109503 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" wrote: > Samannya: > Thats why there are different points of view. > You cannot call anything a mistake or not until the series is > concluded. Mark (not evans) my words ..... 1492 will turn out to be > very significant in books 6 and 7 (as hinted at in oop) RMM: How is 1492 referred to in OotP? RMM www.hermionegranger.us From shrtbusryder2002 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 22:39:47 2004 From: shrtbusryder2002 at yahoo.com (Jason) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 22:39:47 -0000 Subject: Release Prediction (WAS Re: Caradoc Dearborn) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109504 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bex" wrote: > Lene' wrote: > > One thing to bear in mind is that for most publishing houses, there > > is at least 9-12 months needed between the time they receive the > > completed book to the time it is actually published and ready to > > put out on the shelves. Last I heard, JKR is still working on the > > book, so I doubt it would have time to get to her publisher and get > > edited, etc., by this Christmas. Sorry! > > Yb: Agreed, though I think the publishers may expedite the process as > much as possible. I'd really like to know just where she is in the > writing process. Revising rough draft, final editing before > publisher, finishing touches, or still writing the &$@#ed thing! > > ~Yb Jason: I was bored enough the other day to try and figure it out mathematically... even though thats not really possible. It was spurred by JKRs comment that she doesnt foresee any baby related delays which led me to believe that she plans to be finished writing before the kid is born. On to the math... I started with the 3 years it took for us to get OoP. During those 3 years she wrote 38 chapters of Oop and 98 pages of FB and QTTA. AND she had a baby. So, I checked in OoP and noticed that the first 5 chapters cover 97 pages. So, 38 chapters of OoP and about 5 Chapters worth of charity books. 42 Chapters and a baby in 36 months. I subtracted about 6 months for the baby delays to get 30 months. So, 42 chapters. I figure that comes out to 1.4 chapters per month (including editing and publishing). So another book of 38 chapters should take 27 months. But, she also said she didn't expect HBP to be as long as OoP, so maybe only 35 chapters which, by my crazy and probably not so accurate calculations, could be done in 25 months which would put the publication about next July. Since she seems to release the books on or around June 21, they could probably get the book out by......... June 21, 2005. Now, feel free to laugh or ridicule.. or correct the math..(how long does a baby delay a woman anyway?) Jason From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Mon Aug 9 22:43:56 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 22:43:56 -0000 Subject: Squashed magic was: blood types, Dudley In-Reply-To: <6.1.0.6.0.20040809105811.06945280@mail.catbirdco.us> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109505 Michal wrote: > Thinking again of the squashed category, Voldemort was pretty > squashed for ten or twelve years. Yb ponders: This got me thinking on a completely different tangent. Tom never knew his mother, and he probably never met his father, plus his father didn't stick around long after finding out that "the girl" (Tom's mother) was a witch, and pregnant (wonder which scared him more?) So how did Tom discover he was the heir of Slytherin? It's not like there are any family trees lying around Hogwarts, and I doubt the family line had been traced in a library book. ~Yb, just wondering From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 23:02:08 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 23:02:08 -0000 Subject: Mystery of Caradoc Dearborn In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109506 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: >Snip snip< On Caradoc Dearborn: Two canon thoughts to support his return: 1) The only other person in the series who supposedly died, but no body was found, was Peter > Pettigrew and 2) Caradoc's passing mention in OOTP was much like the > passing referance to Sirius in Book 1. > mhbobbin writes: hem hem. hem hem. I'm afraid there are at least two other missing bodies. 1) Sirius. Where's the body? Not to drag that up again but missing bodies are always suspicious and 2)Benjy Fenwick--"he copped it too we only ever found bits of him" (Bits reminds me of Pettigrew's finger). So i just want to throw them on the pile of suspiciously missing bodies. But i agree that Caradoc is someone to watch out for. ANyone with a snake on his arm might have a real interesting story to tell. As For the release of Book Five on June 21: Do we think that was coincidental? I think it was a big clue---all those Stonehenge type references-- so adding the Summer Solstice to it. But I wonder if she will wait one minute past whenever the book is ready considering the rabid (but enthusiastic) readership after her! Not to mention the fortunes of at least two publishing houses and a screenwriter who ought to be ready for Book Six soon too. Wonder if she feels any pressure? I am torn between hoping JKR will hurry it up and worry that she will rush and disappoint. Sigh. Mhbobbin From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 00:39:39 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 00:39:39 -0000 Subject: Wizard/Muggle "Radar" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109507 > > Carol > > Draco seems certain in GoF that the DEs who are tormenting the > > Muggle Roberts family will instantly recognize Hermione as a > > Muggleborn and subject her to the same treatment, so I think some > > such "radar" does exist, only maybe in the opposite way to what > > Kristen is suggesting. > Nora: > It's an interesting subject; but I always read Draco as basically > being rather hateful and snotty here, and blustering in an attempt > to be 1) intimidating 2) appear more in the know about what is going > on. Given that the blood distinctions don't have any actual > existence in reality in the Potterverse (I think this is part of how > the world works, and would love to talk this point out a little more--but reading her current comments on blood, this seems pretty > canonical), this makes a lil' more sense. > Carol: > > > > It also seems that Tom Riddle could identify the Muggleborns at > > Hogwarts even in Diary!Tom form, and evidently the basilisk could, > > too. And yet it seems likely that this radar doesn't extend to > > Half-bloods, since Tom himself probably passed as a pureblood at > > Hogwarts, making sure that his Slytherin friends knew nothing of > > the Muggle orphanage he returned to every summer. > Nora: > Tom Riddle was handsome and it seems, pretty well liked and popular--there's that ...odd closeness to Hagrid, too. I wouldn't be > surprised that he had the information on the social background of > his fellow students, as it doesn't seem to be kept terribly secret > in the present day. Tom knows who is a 'Mudblood', then, and can > take his vengeance upon those select few. Carol again: That doesn't account for the Muggleborns who were petrified in CoS, and I'm not sure that Tom was "close" to Hagrid--I think he was patronizing him and tricking him through a use of his first name that *seemed* friendly but was really contemptuous. Also, I'm not sure we can brush all this aside based on JKR's rather hastily posted response on her website (complete with the "Lily's grandparents" error). That aside, though, because it would be too complex and time-consuming to get into the Muggleborn aspects of the argument now (especially since I'd have to argue that JKR's intentions and assumptions are not necessarily substantiated by the canonical evidence of the books), I want to return to the original question of whether Arthur or any other pureblood could detect a wizard posing as a Muggle or vice versa. I don't think we've yet seen any witch or wizard misidentify a Muggle--McGonagall, for example, doesn't hesitate to label Petunia and baby Dudley as "not us"--Muggles of the worst kind, in her view. And of course, no one has any difficulty identifying the Muggles at the WQC--they're the ones assigning the camping spaces. (Nobody really seems to know how to dress as a Muggle, though--not even Arthur, which is more than a bit odd, IMO.) But--and I'm finally getting to the point I want to make--whether or not a wizard can recognize a Muggle on sight or through some sort of wizard "radar," it clearly *is* possible to put a Muggle-detecting charm on an object and recognize them in that way. Hogwarts and the QWC have Muggle-deterring charms, and the Rumours section of JKR's website advertises Muggle-deterring gates that emit alarms (cackles, screeches, etc.) at the touch of a nonmagical finger. So in theory, at least, if Arthur or an auror--or a DE--wanted to determine (for whatever reason) whether a person was a Muggle or a witch/wizard, he could carry around a small Muggle detector, a charmed device that detected the presence or absence of magic in the person it was aimed at. Or he could just place a wand in the person's hand and ask him to swish it in the air. If it emits sparks, he's a wizard. If not, he's a Muggle--or a Squib. Which raises the question: Would a Muggle-deterring gate alarm go off if a Squib touched it? I don't think it would, since Filch is not affected by the anti-Muggle charms around Hogwarts. (Or maybe he can't leave the grounds because he wouldn't be able to find them again without the help of a witch or wizard?) Admittedly, none of this relates to the detection of Muggleborns, who obviously *are* magical regardless of their "blood," so maybe Draco really was full of hot air and Tom had some means of identifying them other than his own instinctive recognition of "Mudbloods." But Muggles are another matter. Clearly *they* can be both detected and deterred, if not by a built-in wizard radar, then through charmed objects that detect the presence or absence of magical ability, even at a distance, like the MoM radar or the Hogwarts quill. Carol From adanabbett at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 00:47:07 2004 From: adanabbett at yahoo.com (Adan) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 00:47:07 -0000 Subject: Animagi theories In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109508 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: snip> > 2. Snape, being the powerful wizard he is, is most likely a Rabbit > or Hare. > Now we know Sirius Black refers to himself as Snuffles. And he calls > Snape "Snivellus", which term is based on "snivel" which is > synonymous with "snuffle" and "sniffle". > Rabbits definitely "sniffle" and "snivel". > And Jo says, knowing that Black is a dog, "like a dog that has > scented a rabbit" -- the rabbit being Snape! [Yes, of course, Jo > could have been quite off base with her dog and rabbit, when she > should have been thinking dogs and foxes!!] > Hee! I can see where you get this, but Snape an ickle wittle bunny wabbit? Well... maybe Bunnicula. and we know > that Hermione Granger's form is an otter; this information adds more > support to my theory that Hermione Granger's Otter will CONSUME the > snake Voldemort. Yes, otters eat snakes. Hermione's Patronus is an otter. I don't think there's canon to say that the Patronus and the Animagus can NOT be the same thing, but there's nothing to say that they are, either. Adan From vincent.maston.ml at free.fr Mon Aug 9 15:45:00 2004 From: vincent.maston.ml at free.fr (Vincent Maston) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 17:45:00 +0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Petunia, Dudley and WW - Hatred? Cover-up? Latent Ability? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41179BFC.3060302@free.fr> No: HPFGUIDX 109509 macfotuk at yahoo.com a crit : > To answer my own question it may > be that Umbridge had authorised them to kill Harry (with a kiss) to > shut him up and that therefore any witness would need taking out too. No, sucking Harry's soul out would on the contrary make him quite believable to the world. I think that Umbridge instructed the dementors to kiss someone else in front of Harry, so he'd have to use magic, and thus, be expelled from Hogwarts. Since Dudley was with him at that moment, he got targetted, it might as well have been the milkman or Elton John, if he'd been there. -- I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by. Douglas Adams From karen.lyall at blueyonder.co.uk Mon Aug 9 22:13:48 2004 From: karen.lyall at blueyonder.co.uk (karenlyall666) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 22:13:48 -0000 Subject: School cut-off date WAS:Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109511 I've been lurking for a while having a lot on my mind what with the wedding less than three weeks away, but anyway... I didn't think I had anything to contribute to this thread as I'm not employed in education. Then I realised. JKR is writing in Scotland and has taught for a period in Scotland (at my old school none the less). Sorry list elfs its late and here's my point. Myself (born April 17, 1976) and a few of my friends (born March, October & December 1976) were all in the same year throughout our school careers. I'm not aware if this system has changed or not, but it would appear, from my experience that Scottish school year intakes from January 1st to December 31st. If (like myself) a child would turn 5 in the 1981 calender year then they would all be in the same year. I know from other friends that if a child was born late in the year and it was decided they were 'a young 4' then they would be held back, and effectively start school a year later. Hopefully this helps, or maybe it just muddies the water more, who knows. karen signing off a post that was way longer than she intended. karenlyall666 From cruthw at earthlink.net Mon Aug 9 23:03:35 2004 From: cruthw at earthlink.net (caspenzoe) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 23:03:35 -0000 Subject: Animagi theories In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109512 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: > Here are some Animagi theories. Perhaps these have already been > discussed here. > > 1. As Dumbledore once taught Transfiguration, he is most likely an > animagus. What would be his form? I speculate that he is a phoenix. > And as the head of the Order of Good Guys....er...I mean the Phoenix, > that would make sense. > > 2. Snape, being the powerful wizard he is, is most likely a Rabbit > or Hare. > RMM Interesting theories RMM! Don't entirely agree, and some seem more than a bit speculative: DD as a phoenix? He's already got Fawkes; Harry has Hedwig, but his patronus is not an owl. My personal speculation for DD is that his patronus is a bee; at the risk of becomming terribly and undisputably boring, I'll bet Ron eventually produces a lion patronus. Never mind all that however; your comment that really interests me is this: "Snape, being the powerful wizard he is, is most likely a Rabbit or Hare." Say what? Why is that? I'm aware that certain shaman traditions, namely native American, but perhaps some Asian, regard the rabbit, and/or hare, as powerful - or at least clever - but these hardly seem likely to crop up in Snape's background (to me at least). There's been a lot of discussion here about whether Snape might be able to transform himself into a bat or bird of some kind, but this is the first pitch for a rabbit/hare I've seen (not that I've been here that long, so I hope you'll forgive me if I've missed something). In any case, please expand! Very curious, Caspen From mietoesarepink at comcast.net Mon Aug 9 22:58:41 2004 From: mietoesarepink at comcast.net (Maren Gest) Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 16:58:41 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Animagi theories References: Message-ID: <001501c47e64$6a54fac0$6501a8c0@C3P0> No: HPFGUIDX 109513 We only know that Hermione's Patronus is an otter, we can't speculate that her animagi form is an otter, after all we don't even know if she's an animagus. From BlissInvestigations at hotmail.com Mon Aug 9 23:56:51 2004 From: BlissInvestigations at hotmail.com (Adrian Bliss) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 23:56:51 +0000 Subject: At least respect JKR Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109514 Samannya: > > Thats why there are different points of view. > > You cannot call anything a mistake or not until the series is > > concluded. Mark (not evans) my words ..... 1492 will turn out to be > > very significant in books 6 and 7 (as hinted at in oop) > >RMM: >How is 1492 referred to in OotP? I've just started a re-read myself and was wondering the same thing Is it not the aniversery of Sir Nicks Deathday? In book two it was his 500th deathday, making 1492, as many have pointed out before me, the year he died. From jody at sonicchocolate.com Tue Aug 10 00:18:35 2004 From: jody at sonicchocolate.com (jmcnarland) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 00:18:35 -0000 Subject: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109515 I really have to disagree with the talk about Molly being so awful. Even just on the surface, you have to take into account that she has (so far) survived three teenaged boys (although not a lot is said about the older boys as kids, they WERE teenaged boys after all) and still has to get through the twins, Ron and Ginny. Fred and George were almost definitely not a bed of roses as children (I can't back that up canonically right now but I think we might all agree on that). Teenagers can make crazy things come out of your mouth sometimes... "Because I said so!" makes absolutely no sense but I've said it to mine. I also don't think that she plays favorites, I think that she treats them as individuals. The twins would have gone completely wild had they recieved the same kind of approval that Percy did and Ron hadn't (until recently) started to show what kind of things he was going to be capable of at Hogwarts. Should she treat him like the twins just in case or give him a chance to develop first? I think that the worst of her sharp tongue and caution can be chalked up to worry and stress. She's an adult, she's in the Order so she knows a lot of what's going on and the risks that they're facing. She's a mother, she has a huge heart, she is terrified for the people that she loves and feels helpless to protect them. I can only support this with: (OotP, pp.160-161) "'Riddikulus!' Harry's body vanished. A silvery orb hung in the air over the spot where it had lain. Lupin waved his wand once more and the orb vanished in a puff of smoke. 'Oh - oh - oh!' gulped Mrs. Weasley, and she broke into a storm of crying, her face in her hands. 'Molly,' said Lupin bleakly, walking over to her. 'Molly, don't...' Next second, she was sobbing her heart out on Lupin's shoulder. 'Molly, it was just a Boggart,' he said soothingly, patting her on the head. 'Just a stupid Boggart...' 'I see them d-d-dead all the time!' Mrs. Weasley moaned into his shoulder. 'All the t-t-time! I d-d-dream about it...' Sirius was staring at the patch of carpet where the Boggart, pretending to be Harry's body had lain. Moody was looking at Harry, who avoided his gaze. He had a funny feeling Moody's magical eye had followed him all the way out of the kitchen. 'D-d-don't tell Arthur,' Mrs. Weasley was gulping now, mopping her eyes frantically with her cuffs. 'I d-d-don't want him to know... being silly...' Lupin handed her a handkerchief and she blew her nose. 'Harry, I'm so sorry. What must you think of me?' she said shakily. 'Not even able to get rid of a Boggart...' 'Don't be stupid,' said Harry, trying to smile. 'I'm just s-s-so worried,' she said, tears spilling out of her eyes again. 'Half the f-f-family's in the Order, it'll b-b-be a miracle if we all come through this... and P-P-Percy's not talking to us... what if something d-d-dreadful happens and we-ve never m-m-made it up with him? And what's going to happen if Arthur and I get killed, who's g-g-going to look after Ron and Ginny?'" Reading about her kneeling on the floor crying as the Boggart showed her exactly what it would look like to see her children dead was enough to make me cry on a City Transit bus on my way home from work. I think that she should be given a little slack. Long for a first post... Sorry Jody From zanelupin at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 00:54:30 2004 From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 00:54:30 -0000 Subject: Petunia, Dudley and WW (and dementors) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109517 macfotuk wrote: > > However, although dementors have clearly > > existed in the WW forever I'm sure I've read in the books > > (probably PoA) that it was Fudge who first went into league with > > them to use them as guards at Azkaban, much against DD's > > inclinations. Fudge didn't become MoM until well after James and > > Lily's demise (GoF and Barty Crouch Sr backstory), so has JKR > > made another mistake (deliberate or otherwise)? Yb responded: > I wnet over that section again after I finished the book, and I > came up with a different idea: Petunia knows more than she's > telling about the WW. I can see two reasons for her explanation: > She is unconsciously melding two memories together, one of James > and Lily and one of someone else telling her about the Dementors > at Azkaban, /OR/ she is covering. She says "They guard the wizard > prison, Azkaban." Then she says she overheard it from "her and > that awful boy." I think she learned it from someone from the WW > that she's been in contact with. KathyK: I looked for a reference to Fudge being the one who put the dementors in charge of Azkaban. I'm afraid I didn't find one. Of course, I may have missed it... While I was looking, though, I did come across evidence that *contradicts* Fudge being the one who put them in charge of Azkaban. After reading OoP last summer, I couldn't decide whether or not the dementors were involved at all in the first war with Voldemort. At the time I concluded that there was no way the the dementors could have been allied with the Ministry for the first war. It didn't make sense to me considering what we know about the nature of the dementors. I thought they either were not involved at all in the conflict for some reason or else they were on the side of LV, which also didn't make sense to me since that would mean the Ministry was employing creatures who had been loyal to Voldemort to guard people who were...loyal to Voldemort. I have now reversed my previous conclusion. I believe the dementors were guarding Azkaban at least since the events of Halloween 1981 and probably even earlier than that. We know Fudge didn't become Minister for Magic until sometime after baby Harry defeated Voldemort. According to the _Quibbler_ in OoP, Fudge has been Minister for five years (OoP Ch 10, US ed. p 192). The dementors were helping the Ministry before that. Have a look at the GoF Pensieve scene. Dementors appear at Karkaroff's name-naming and six dementors escorted the Longbottom's attackers (GoF Ch 30, US ed. p 586 and 594). The trials Harry witnesses in the pensieve all take place after LV's defeat and before Fudge became Minister and the dementors were already guards. But we can place the association between the Ministry and the dementors further back than that, I believe. 1. Sirius makes the comment, "And I wasn't the only one who was handed straight to the dementors without a trial." (GoF Ch 27, US ed. p 527) To me this implies dementors guarded Azkaban at the time Sirius was captured shortly after Godric's Hollow. But if that's not enough to say they were allied with the Ministry during the first war, combining what Sirius says above with the below, I think it's a pretty fair bet they were around during the first war. 2. Dumbledore's comment to Moody in the pensieve: "I have long felt the Ministry is wrong to ally itself with such creatures." (GoF Ch 30, US ed. p 588) This sounds like the dementors have been around for a while, at least for a part of the first war. Now, I don't know why the dementors would choose to ally with the Ministry over LV considering their nature and Dumbledore's comment at the end of GoF that they wouldn't remain loyal to Fudge (Ch 36, US ed. p 707) but it does seem likely they were Azkaban guards during the first war. Therefore, it is entirely possible that Petunia was telling the truth that she heard about the dementors in the way she says she did: By eavesdropping on Lily and James (I believe Petunia is talking about them despite it not being explicitly stated in the text). She is a nosy one, after all. She doesn't need to have been in contact with the WW since receiving Harry to make her knowledge of the WW plausible. However, this doesn't mean I particularly believe her knowledge comes from such an obvious source. This is purely my own impression not based on much in canon but I got the impression, like Yb and others, that Petunia knows more about the WW than Vernon thinks and is in a hurry to cover herself when she spits out "her" and "that boy." However, I don't believe she has had much, if any, contact with the WW independent of Harry. Rather I am very fond of the theory that she's been snooping through Harry's things and has been reading his copies of the _Daily Prophet_. I can't for the life of me remember who owns that theory but I like it very much. The most likely source of Petunia's knowledge of the WW continues to be Lily. Lily's experience with mixing the Muggle and Wizarding Worlds was much more positive than Harry's. Her parents were proud of her. Where Harry was discouraged from even mentioning anything to do with magic, Lily was bringing home frog spawn and practicing her magic during holidays. Lily didn't have to live her life in secret. It's likely Petunia picked up heaps of knowledge about the WW by merely snooping around her own sister while they were growing up. macfotuk: > > To answer my own question it may be that Umbridge had authorised > > them to kill Harry (with a kiss) to shut him up and that > > therefore any witness would need taking out too. KathyK: I believe that is *exactly* what happened. I think Umbridge wanted Harry out of the picture permanently and she is certainly ruthless enough to have the dementors administer The Kiss to Harry. Dudley was just a bonus for them, an extra treat... KathyK, who has no doubt Mrs. Dursley is All Muggle From dfrankiswork at netscape.net Tue Aug 10 00:57:41 2004 From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 00:57:41 -0000 Subject: Snape's choice of memories for the pensieve In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109518 Marty asked: > "but isn't it curious that this is one of his worst memories that he > wants to keep hidden? What about all the stuff that he is doing for > DD, and his life prior to becoming Potions master - especially while > a DE?" Meidbh: > Agreed. > I always felt this was a little disappointing as a worst memory. I > assumed JKR was writing to the kids on this one, that she had a > momentary lapse of imagination. Could Snape's life post Grey > Underwear Incident really have been so dull? > > Maybe there *is* more to it than meets the eye...but what?? I take it at face value that that incident is Snape's worst memory, but that it's not the underwear part that makes it so. I believe that what makes it so painful for Snape is that Lily Evans offered him help, and he refused it, and called her a 'mudblood', too. Later he came to see this as the crucial incident which pushed him towards Voldemort, and he has never really forgiven himself for allowing his prejudice and anger to get in the way of an earlier opportunity to get on the right path. So, to answer Marty's point, this incident *is* him becoming a DE; whatever he did later is traced, by him in his memory, to this choice he made. To me that makes psychological sense: it is not our experiences, but our responses to them, that shape us, and when we get those responses wrong, those are our worst memories. David From eeyore5497 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 17:24:35 2004 From: eeyore5497 at yahoo.com (Michelle Horcher) Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 10:24:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: At least respect JKR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040809172435.28531.qmail@web12209.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109520 Vivian wrote: > I support you too, Duffypoo. I love the Harry Potter books and I > think that JKR is a wonderful storyteller. IMO none of us would be > here discussing our theories if the books were garbage. Michelle Cheers! Here, here!!! JKR is the most amazing author I have ever read (aside from Agatha Christie)! Her detail is beyond compare! Sometimes I get a headache from reading all the posts and OBSESSING about what the next book holds in store for us!!! It's all very confusing but I LOVE solving mysteries and JKR has magically entwined the WW & mystery stories all into one!!! Peace to all!!! From eeyore5497 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 9 18:54:41 2004 From: eeyore5497 at yahoo.com (Michelle Horcher) Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 11:54:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Mundungus Fletcher / Crookshanks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040809185441.22669.qmail@web12210.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109521 Inge wrote: > Plus - wouldn't Hermione wonder where Crookshanks were if he were > to disappear all summer to go wathcing Harry? Michelle: True, Hermione would miss him all summer however, I believe that Crookshanks has befriended other Animagi before (Sirius) and how do we know, there might be 2 Crookshanks. P.S. Crookshanks is only PART Kneazle (see FAQ). Peace. From cruthw at earthlink.net Mon Aug 9 19:17:56 2004 From: cruthw at earthlink.net (caspenzoe) Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 19:17:56 -0000 Subject: Colors (red&green) (was Re: GG/Weasleys') In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109522 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > Caspen wrote: > I think that they [the Weasleys], with their red hair are the > prime candidates for an heirship relationship with Gryffindor, and > not the Potters. vmonte responds: > I want the Weasleys to be related to GG but it really is a tough > call. On JKR's website she mentions how redheads and weasels are > always associated with evil/bad things, and that she thinks they > are getting a bad rap. If the books are about making the right > choices in life, I wonder what JKR will write regarding this issue. > Are the Weasleys related to SS but choose to value GG's ideology? > Or does Harry look like Tom Riddle because he is related to SS but > has chosen to be like GG? > > There is also the whole problem with Tom being the last > heir/descendent thing... (Is he heir or descendent?)....> Actually, another idea has occurred to me, because I too am having a hard time squaring DD's choices determinate doctrine with the whole heirship/kinship/blood theme. I'm wondering if, borrowing somewhat from Hans' theories regarding the HP series' relationship to the symbolism of an alchemical wedding, if the whole red/green, hair color/eye color/house colors dichotomies don't symbolize some pending alchemical wedding of Gryffindor/Slytherin houses/culture for the wizarding world at large, of which Harry is simply the integral piece/player/symbol? I haven't fleshed any of this idea out, and am still trying to become more educated regarding alchemical symbolism, but these colors along with black and white are so prominent in the books that they seem to beg to be analyzed thematically. Caspen From snow15145 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 01:33:30 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 01:33:30 -0000 Subject: Release Prediction (WAS Re: Caradoc Dearborn) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109523 > Jason: > > I was bored enough the other day to try and figure it out > mathematically... even though thats not really possible. It was > spurred by JKRs comment that she doesnt foresee any baby related > delays which led me to believe that she plans to be finished writing > before the kid is born. On to the math... > > I started with the 3 years it took for us to get OoP. During those 3 > years she wrote 38 chapters of Oop and 98 pages of FB and QTTA. AND > she had a baby. > > So, I checked in OoP and noticed that the first 5 chapters cover 97 > pages. So, 38 chapters of OoP and about 5 Chapters worth of charity > books. 42 Chapters and a baby in 36 months. I subtracted about 6 > months for the baby delays to get 30 months. So, 42 chapters. I > figure that comes out to 1.4 chapters per month (including editing > and publishing). So another book of 38 chapters should take 27 months. > > But, she also said she didn't expect HBP to be as long as OoP, so > maybe only 35 chapters which, by my crazy and probably not so > accurate calculations, could be done in 25 months which would put the > publication about next July. Since she seems to release the books on > or around June 21, they could probably get the book out by......... > > June 21, 2005. > > Now, feel free to laugh or ridicule.. or correct the math..(how long > does a baby delay a woman anyway?) > > Jason Snow: Here are a couple of interesting responses from JKR during an interview with Jeremy Paxton: BBC News Thursday, 19 June 2003 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/3004594.stm JEREMY PAXMAN: You mentioned in the previous books you finished one and immediately started the next. Have you started the sixth one? JK ROWLING: Yeah. JEREMY PAXMAN: How far are you into it? JK ROWLING: Not that far because I had a baby. But yeah, I started it when I was still pregnant with David. And I actually did get some writing done the other day, and that's not bad going considering he's only ten weeks. So he's pretty full time at the moment. But yeah I did a bit more the other day. AND JEREMY PAXMAN: So you didn't have writer's block. The reason this book has been - what three years.... Three years since the last one isn't it? Why has it taken so long? JK ROWLING: Well it hasn't. JEREMY PAXMAN: Huh? JK ROWLING: Well it hasn't. The book didn't take that long You may want to get your calculator out again, Jason. Could be sooner than your calculations! From cassin12004 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 00:17:10 2004 From: cassin12004 at yahoo.com (cassin12004) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 00:17:10 -0000 Subject: info on Luna Lovegood In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109524 Josh wrote: > Overall, I feel the MoM Sextet will now supplant the Trio as the > centric group... owing to Ginny's reemergence and Neville's > newfound purpose... it only makes sense that Luna will also remain > a member of this expanded core group... but not supplant Hermione > and/or Ron in overall importance. I agree with Josh. JKR likes to write Luna, so I think that she should be appearing quite a bit in the next books. And I would love to see her in them. (Of course, at this point I would love to read anything Harry Potter!) Cassin from South Carolina, 35, Design Engineer, Father of two, All Potter fans in this house. From cassin12004 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 00:35:15 2004 From: cassin12004 at yahoo.com (cassin12004) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 00:35:15 -0000 Subject: An odd theory about Hedwig In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109525 > Cassin wrote: > > Has anyone seen Hedwig and Dumbledore in the same place at the > > same time? Meri: > snip > So, in conclusion, I do not believe that DD=Hedwing, but am fully > willing to eat my words if I be proven wrong. > Meri, who also doesn't buy the Ron=DD theory, either... True. DD would have a hard time hiring teachers while he's stuck in a cage on Privet Drive. But I would sooner believe that than I would that Ron=DD. (I'm also ready to eat my words about that.) DD=Hedwig was a shot from the hip, but how is DD watching HP? Cassin From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Aug 10 01:54:40 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 01:54:40 -0000 Subject: Mystery of Caradoc Dearborn In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109526 Jen: > Two canon thoughts to support his return: 1) The only other person > in the series who supposedly died, but no body was found, was Peter > > Pettigrew and 2) Caradoc's passing mention in OOTP was much like > the > passing referance to Sirius in Book 1. > mhbobbin writes: > hem hem. hem hem. I'm afraid there are at least two other missing > bodies. 1) Sirius. Where's the body? Not to drag that up again but > missing bodies are always suspicious and 2)Benjy Fenwick--"he copped > it too we only ever found bits of him" (Bits reminds me of > Pettigrew's finger). So i just want to throw them on the pile of > suspiciously missing bodies. Jen: Oh, you're right--I wasn't thinking it through. Of course JKR said herself post-OOTP that she'd "killed a character" so unless she was lying (doubt it), was referring to someone not yet revealed as dead, or is about to introduce reincarnation in Potterverse, Sirius is indeed toast. Now about Benjy. He and Caradoc could've faked their deaths & gone in hiding together. Or the two are totally unrelated. Out of two missing bodies, you'd think at least one would return, yes? Whatever happens, we have canon reasons to be suspicious when a body is mysteriously missing. I'm voting for Caradoc, because the missing body-part bits of Benjy Fenwick would just be a replay of Peter's finger. From jell at es.co.nz Tue Aug 10 01:02:45 2004 From: jell at es.co.nz (Justin) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:02:45 +1200 Subject: Dementors, Dudley, Umbridge (Re: Petunia, Dudley and WW - Hatred? Cover-up? Latent Ability?) In-Reply-To: <41179BFC.3060302@free.fr> References: <41179BFC.3060302@free.fr> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109527 macfotuk at yahoo.com a ?crit : > > To answer my own question it may be that Umbridge had authorised > > them to kill Harry (with a kiss) to shut him up and that therefore > > any witness would need taking out too. Vincent Maston wrote: > No, sucking Harry's soul out would on the contrary make him quite > believable to the world. I think that Umbridge instructed the > dementors to kiss someone else in front of Harry, so he'd have to > use magic, and thus, be expelled from Hogwarts. > > Since Dudley was with him at that moment, he got targetted, it might > as well have been the milkman or Elton John, if he'd been there. I don't think the Dementors were ever meant to kiss Harry. They were sent with the knowledge that Harry could do the Patronus and that two were no threat to him. He would do the magic, and get expelled (with a nice article in the DP about crazy HP using magic away from school), and one of the ministry's problems would be solved. The fact the the Dementors attacked Dudley shows just how uncontrollable and dangerous the guardians of Azkaban really are. Justin From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 02:14:16 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 02:14:16 -0000 Subject: The chess game in SS/PS, quidditch, and Snape's potion puzzle... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109528 I'm embarrassed to say that I read SS only after I read GoF--and only because I couldn't wait for the next HP book (OOTP) to come out. I started reading the HP series after I saw the SS movie, and I started with book two?a big mistake. Anyway, I believe I missed some important clues by not reading the books in order. The Chess Game: The chess game represents the second war against Voldemort. (I'm not the only person who believes this theory, it's been mentioned by many fans and writers.) "I think," said Ron, "we're going to have to be chessmen." Page 281, SS, U.S. version Ron walks over to a black knight and asks if they have to join him to get across the board--the knight nods his head. Ron turns to Harry and Hermione: Page 282 "This needs thinking about ." He said. "I suppose we've got to take the place of three of the black pieces " "Harry and Hermione stayed quiet, watching Ron think. Finally he said, "Now, don't be offended or anything, but neither of you are good at chess?" Ron knows that he is the strategist (not Hermione or Harry). Harry has survived every book because he is quick on his feet and relies heavily on his natural talent and instincts. Hermione is very intelligent, but she is not a good strategist. (All you have to do is see how successful she is at liberating the house elves.) "We're not offended," said Harry quickly. "Just tell us what to do." "Well, Harry, you take the place of that bishop, and Hermione, you go next to him instead of that castle." "What about you?" "I'm going to be a knight," said Ron. Three chess pieces listen to Ron and walk off the board. Do these pieces represent characters from the first war? (Who were the knight, castle, and bishop then? We can probably guess.) Interesting that Hermione is a castle and that Ron is a knight. Isn't a knight's job to protect his castle? Also, Ron's position in Quidditch is that of Keeper. The Keeper tries to prevent the other team from making any goals?he's the Gryffindor protector. The knight in chess never moves in a direct manner but weaves back and forth between other pieces. (Chess is a game of strategy that is usually won in small steps. I believe that Dumbledore is the strategist of the HP series and is manipulating events in the story but in small steps/ways.) The bishop has long-range ability (especially towards the end of a game when there are more open spaces), which enables it to make extended penetrating attacks which are impossible for the Knight. This gives the Bishop an end-game advantage (according to several chess player websites). (Think of Harry's Seeker position in Quidditch. The other players can only score 10 points per goal, but if Harry catches the snitch he gets 150 points, and the game is over. The Seeker is key to winning the game.) We know that Dumbledore is already setting Harry up to take on Voldemort in the final confrontation. Harry as bishop also makes sense since he often moves diagonally (remember in the CoS movie when Harry uses flu-powder and says diagonally instead of Diagon Ally?) not like the castle/rook, which only moves in straight lines (sounds like straight-laced Hermione to me). "White always plays first in chess," said Ron, peering across the board. "Yes...look " A white pawn had moved forward two squares. (Wormtail?) "Harry?move diagonally four squares to the right." "Their first real shock came when their other knight was taken. The white queen smashed him to the floor and dragged him off the board, where he lay quite still, facedown." This knight represents Sirius Black who was killed by the queen Bellatrix. Who is the queen on the Order's side? Ginny? (I believe that Ginny is being set-up for something. She is the only child that has had direct contact with Tom Riddle/Voldemort, and like Harry, and has also shared thoughts with the evil guy. Another interesting point is that Ginny also played Harry's position in Quidditch and may eventually take over Harry's position against Voldemort at some crucial moment. Will she step in to save Harry like he saved her? Is she a metamorphmagus or an animagus? "Had to let that happen," said Ron, looking shaken. "Leaves you free to take that bishop, Hermione, go on." This is disturbing because it implies that if Ron is Dumbledore (due to time-travel) that Dumbledore knew Sirius was going to die. Who does Hermione take down? Malfoy? Page 283 The game continues with the white pieces showing no mercy every time a black piece is taken. Ron loses a lot of black chess pieces. "Twice, Ron only just noticed in time that Harry and Hermione were in danger. He himself darted around the board, taking almost as many white pieces as they had lost black ones." "We're nearly there," he muttered suddenly. "Let me think?let me think " The white queen turned her blank face toward him. "Yes " said Ron softly, "it's the only way I've got to be taken." "NO!" Harry and Hermione shouted. "That's chess!" snapped Ron. "You've got to make some sacrifices! I take one step forward and she'll take me?that leaves you to checkmate the king, Harry!" "But?" "Do you want to stop Snape or not?" "Ron?" "Look, if you don't hurry up, he'll already have the stone!" There was no alternative. "Ready?" Ron called, his face pale but determined. "Here I go?now, don't hang around once you've won." He stepped forward and the white queen pounced. She struck Ron hard across the head with her stone arm, and he crashed to the floor?Hermione screamed but stayed on her square?the white queen dragged Ron to one side. He looked as if he'd been knocked out. Shaking, Harry moved three spaces to the left. (Seven spaces mentioned altogether--for the 7 school years?) Notice that Ron looked as though knocked out, not still and facedown like Sirius. I think this means that Ron will be taken out of the war, but not killed. (Or that Dumbledore will be killed, but not Ron.) I think there will be a point in time that Ron is "knocked" into the past. Yes, that dreaded time-travel crops up again. We may think that Ron has died but he has not. Hermione and Harry will have to continue in the present war without Ron. It's interesting to note that the castle and bishop in chess are considered end game pieces. The next room (after they walk through the room with the unconscious troll) is Snape's potion puzzle. The potion test also gives clues to the rest of the books. There are seven bottles representing 7 years and if you read the bottle descriptions some could also be HP characters. Page 285 "Danger lies before you, while safety lies behind, Two of us will help you, whichever you would find, One among us seven will let you move ahead, (Harry drinks this to get to Voldemort.) Another will transport the drinker back instead, (Hermione drinks this to return to Ron.) Two among our number hold only nettle wine, Three of us are killers, waiting hidden in line. Choose, unless you wish to stay here forevermore, To help you in your choice, we give you these clues four: First however slyly the poison tries to hide You will always find some on nettle wine's left side; (The poison hides next to something benign.) Second, different are those who stand at either end, But if you would move onward, neither is your friend; Third, as you see clearly, all are different size, Neither dwarf nor giant holds death in their insides; (Dobby and Hagrid?) Fourth, the second left and the second on the right Are twins once you taste them, though different at first sight. (The bottles don't look alike but hold the same potion contents: Ron=Dumbledore?) "Brilliant," said Hermione. "This isn't magic?it's logic?a puzzle. A lot of the greatest wizards haven't got an ounce of logic, they'd be stuck here forever." "But so will we, won't we?" "Of course not," said Hermione. "Everything we need is here on this paper. Seven bottles: three are poison; two are wine; one will get us safely through the black fire, and one will get us back through the purple." (This is probably a coincidence but there are also 7 people on a Quidditch team. Each team has three Chasers, a Keeper, two Beaters and a Seeker. Look at the seven potion bottles: Three are poison:3 chasers, two are wine: 2 beaters, one potion goes forward: Seeker, and one potion goes backward: Ron as Keeper?) I believe that Hermione will figure out something important in book six or seven. She may be starting to piece something together already. The potion test was set-up by Snape. Will she figure out something important about Snape? Remember how she figured out what Lupin was, but did not mention it to the boys until she believed they were in danger? During the potions test Hermione figures out that the smallest bottle will move the player forward (will Dobby help Harry?), and a rounded bottle at the right end of the line will propel the person backward. (Since Hermione uses this to go back to Ron in SS/PS, I think this represents Hermione eventually time- traveling to the past to find Ron.) Someone may find a way to help Hermione get back to him. Below is an interesting read about the potions puzzle at the HP Lexicon: Prefect Marcus. The Riddle of the Potions http://www.hp-lexicon.org/essays/es...tionriddle.html vivian - who is somewhat afraid of being attacked for posting this idea. From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 02:24:43 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 02:24:43 -0000 Subject: Figgy (was Re: Polyjuice was: Time-turning as literary device) In-Reply-To: <7e.555bcfd9.2e483680@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109529 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, shalimar07 at a... wrote: > Does anyone ever wonder why Mrs. Figg's house always smells like cabbage? > Could she really be someone else? > > Mary > > mhbobbin writes: Yes Absolutely I wonder. And she seems to have an odd association with Perkins who works with Mr. Weasley. It is Perkins who lends the tent to Mr. Weasley that --oh so oddly--looks like Mrs. Figg's flat and smells like cats. And speaking of Perkins--isn't it odd that Professor Binns calls Harry //Perkins// in Chapter 17 OOtP, when Hedwig comes to the window. P. 357 Scholastic. Odd how this minor character keeps poppy up. And on this subject, why can't Mrs. Figg see dementors? She's not all that convincing in the Ministry hearing. And Squibs ARE supposed to be able to see dementors. Yeah, better keep an eye on Figgy. (I hope you have a hundred eyes becuz there's so many odd characters to keep eyes on. ) mhbobbin From ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 03:15:46 2004 From: ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com (A.J.) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 03:15:46 -0000 Subject: Colors (red&green) (was Re: GG/Weasleys') In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109530 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "caspenzoe" wrote: I'm wondering if, borrowing somewhat > from Hans' theories regarding the HP series' relationship to the > symbolism of an alchemical wedding, if the whole red/green, hair > color/eye color/house colors dichotomies don't symbolize some > pending alchemical wedding of Gryffindor/Slytherin houses/culture > for the wizarding world at large, of which Harry is simply the > integral piece/player/symbol? Thinkpotter.com posits something very much along this line, since the seventh step of alchemy is coagulation. You can find the essays on that web site, though not all of them are up yet. Definitely interesting that you see this type of concept too. A.J. From ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 03:25:31 2004 From: ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com (A.J.) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 03:25:31 -0000 Subject: The chess game in SS/PS, quidditch, and Snape's potion puzzle... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109531 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > I'm embarrassed to say that I read SS only after I read GoF-- I believe I missed some > important clues by not reading the books in order. > > The Chess Game: > "Their first real shock came when their other knight was taken. The > white queen smashed him to the floor and dragged him off the board, > where he lay quite still, facedown." > > This knight represents Sirius Black who was killed by the queen > Bellatrix. > This is disturbing because it implies that if Ron is Dumbledore (due > to time-travel) that Dumbledore knew Sirius was going to die. Who > does Hermione take down? Malfoy? > Notice that Ron looked as though knocked out, not still and facedown > like Sirius. I think this means that Ron will be taken out of the > war, but not killed. > > vivian - who is somewhat afraid of being attacked for posting this > idea. Embarrassed? Afraid? Wow, you just came up with that now after reading COS? I read the theory of the points pasted above a year or more ago on a site analyzing the Chess Game as predictor for the upcoming war/series and linked to from a site supporting time-travel Dumbledore!Ron. The writer, like you, saw the downed knight as Sirius and the queen as Bellatrix, and also that Ron didn't seem dead like Sirius and might have time traveled or otherwise been taken out of the game. So, others have noted the potential symbolism in the chess game in the same way as you. I'm sorry I don't have a url here, but it must be standard in the group's essays... A.J. From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 04:11:37 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 04:11:37 -0000 Subject: Mystery of Caradoc Dearborn In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109532 mhbobbin writes: hem hem. hem hem. I'm afraid there are at least two other missing bodies. 1) Sirius. Where's the body? Not to drag that up again but missing bodies are always suspicious and 2)Benjy Fenwick--"he copped it too we only ever found bits of him" (Bits reminds me of Pettigrew's finger). So i just want to throw them on the pile of suspiciously missing bodies. Jen: Oh, you're right--I wasn't thinking it through. ...snip... Now about Benjy. He and Caradoc could've faked their deaths & gone in hiding together. Or the two are totally unrelated. Out of two missing bodies, you'd think at least one would return, yes? Whatever happens, we have canon reasons to be suspicious when a body is mysteriously missing. I'm voting for Caradoc, because the missing body-part bits of Benjy Fenwick would just be a replay of Peter's finger. vmonte responds: Bits of him, hmmmm. Does a werewolf tear it's victims to bits? I really don't believe in ESE Lupin by the way but I think we are going to get more information about Moody's photograph--and that Order party. Who's idea was it to have an Order party? And to take pictures? I wonder if the DEs got their future victims because someone passed them a copy of this photograph. vivian From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 04:39:41 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 04:39:41 -0000 Subject: Godric Gryffindor based on Christian Saint Godric Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109533 vmonte: Well you learn something new every day. One of the HP lexicon essays mentioned that GG was based on St. Godric (a saint I never heard of even though I'm Catholic--sad to admit this). Anyway, I looked him up on the web and it states that Saint Godric was the oldest of three children born to a freedman Anglo-Saxon farmer. In his youth he was a sailor who was known to drink, fight, chase women, con customers, and was even referred to as a pirate. He converted while visiting Lindisfarne during a voyage, and was inspired by the life of Saint Cuthbert. He was noted for his close familiarity with wild animals, and had supernatural visions--he had the gift of prophecy! Saint Godric is usually represented as a very old hermit dressed in white, kneeling on grass and holding a rosary, with a stag by him. If the Weasley's are blood related to GG I wonder if one of them will be a Seer/Prophet? Ron perhaps? vivian http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/saintg6t.htm From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Aug 10 04:40:47 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 04:40:47 -0000 Subject: The chess game in SS/PS, quidditch, and Snape's potion puzzle... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109534 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > The chess game represents the second war against Voldemort. > "I think," said Ron, "we're going to have to be chessmen." Page 281, SS, U.S. version >Ron walks over to a black knight and asks if they have to join him to get across the board--the knight nods his head. Valky: I LOVE this subject! Personally I believe that when JKR comments that she *almost* gave it all away in PS/SS she alludes to this very part of the book where I think she gives *almost everything* away. Now to start, I note that you missed something. **Ron approaches the Knight and asks if they have to join him to get across the board - the knight nods his head.** You noted subliminal meaning to everyline *but* this one. I don't know about others but, to me, the asking seems crucial. Maybe not so much the fact that Ron did the asking, although I am sure thats valuable to the understanding, but moreso the question. 'Do we..er.. have to join you to get across.' Ok so if I combine forms of your breakdown of the sequence with my own breakdown of this line. RON asks a very important question of somebody before book six. It is the Black Knight that he approaches, so therefore we might assume that it could be Sirus or It could also be himself that he is asking. Both make some sense. What do you think? > Vmonte: > "Well, Harry, you take the place of that bishop, and Hermione, you > go next to him instead of that castle." > "What about you?" > "I'm going to be a knight," said Ron. >> "Their first real shock came when their other knight was taken. The white queen smashed him to the floor and dragged him off the board, where he lay quite still, facedown." > > This knight represents Sirius Black........ Valky: Yes, I like this analogy, and the statement that follows from Ron 'Had to let that happen......' lends a lot of creedence to it in the way it echoes JKR's own voice regarding Sirius. It also follows, in your next statement about the three pieces leaving to make way for the trio, that they represent people from the first war. (I would probably have to rearrange and copy, paste, repeat your post all day to have perfect continuity here.) So saying that, if the Black Knight fallen in the game *is* Sirius (this is almost a given!) then the three other pieces are also people from the first War. Vmonte: > Three chess pieces listen to Ron and walk off the board. Do these > pieces represent characters from the first war? (Who were the > knight, castle, and bishop then? We can probably guess.) > Valky: Yes I would say that they probably do. And I am pretty sure that the Longbottoms are in that three somewhere, which could be a strong indicator of who exactly they are. In my own musing I like to draw a parrallel between Alice and Hermione. I base this mostly on the way apparently meek and simple Alice could defy LV. I assume that Alice has a "wild streak" contradicting her everyday persona much like Hermione does. Anyway, it could very well be Lily and James also which is probably where you were heading with that and I would like to hear thoughts from everyone about this topic. Vmonte: > > A white pawn had moved forward two squares. (Wormtail?) > "Harry?move diagonally four squares to the right." > Sirius Black was killed by the queen Bellatrix. > > Who is the queen on the Order's side? Ginny? (I believe that Ginny > is being set-up for something. > Ginny also played Harry's position in Quidditch and may eventually > take over Harry's position against Voldemort at some crucial > moment. Will she step in to save Harry like he saved her? Is she a > metamorphmagus or an animagus? > Valky: I was very PRO -super!Ginny at one stage not long ago, so I agree that her character has been set a stage for an important role in the end battle. I think that the points you make here are the best ones. ie 1 Ginny has seeker potential (though she would prefer to be a chaser) and 2 she has shared minds with Voldemort. Almost as though Ginny is the unwitting apprentice!Harry of the books. I agree that for a brief and glittering Moment Ginny will have to *be* Harry but I can not offer much more in terms of a context there. Maybe next week something will come to mind. In the meantime this is a good discussion that's been missing from the boards recently, hope that it takes off again. Vmonte: > "Had to let that happen," said Ron, looking shaken. "Leaves you free to take that bishop, Hermione, go on." > Who does Hermione take down? Malfoy? Valky: First I snipped Ron=DD but not for any personal objection, it's all good. The thing that stands out for me here is the question who does Hermione take down. I suspect you mean Lucius here considering the reference to Bishop. That would be quite a poetic Justice as Lucius represents the antithesis of Hermione's causes, Lucius is a bigot of extreme proportions. I doubt you are wrong in matching Hermy against Lucius, what I'd like to note is what that means. I don't think this would or could be just a wand war here. Ron allows the Knight to die to leaving Hermione a clear run to the bishop. Translate: JKR-Ron Allows Sirius to slip through the veil, allows Kreacher to be the bad guy, allows Harry to lose his Paternal figure et al.... The effect this has is to remove a danger in the path of Hermione taking down Lucius Malfoy. What was the danger in the path of Hermione's tirade against bigotry, her own bigotry perhaps? Either/Or what I am saying is that a battle between Hermione and Lucius is going to be a battle of wit and cunning, politics and of course the power of influence. Gosh your post is so long and diverse I will have to respond to the rest later, I really must be going. Best to All Valky From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 05:09:46 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 05:09:46 -0000 Subject: The chess game in SS/PS, quidditch, and Snape's potion puzzle... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109535 I vmonte wrote: Sirius Black was killed by the queen Bellatrix. Who is the queen on the Order's side? Ginny? (I believe that Ginny is being set-up for something. Ginny also played Harry's position in Quidditch and may eventually take over Harry's position against Voldemort at some crucial moment. Will she step in to save Harry like he saved her? Is she a metamorphmagus or an animagus? Valky: I was very PRO -super!Ginny at one stage not long ago, so I agree that her character has been set a stage for an important role in the end battle. I think that the points you make here are the best ones. ie 1 Ginny has seeker potential (though she would prefer to be a chaser) and 2 she has shared minds with Voldemort. Almost as though Ginny is the unwitting apprentice!Harry of the books. I agree that for a brief and glittering Moment Ginny will have to *be* Harry but I can not offer much more in terms of a context there. Maybe next week something will come to mind. In the meantime this is a good discussion that's been missing from the boards recently, hope that it takes off again. vmonte again: Yes, she played two roles while playing Quidditch!!! Interestingly, a the queen chess piece is also very versatile. It combines the powers of both the rook and the bishop. It can move horizontally, vertically, or on the diagonal! In a sense, it's like the king (silently represented by Dumbledore) in that it can move in any direction. vivian From sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com Tue Aug 10 05:12:01 2004 From: sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com (Amey Chinchorkar) Date: 10 Aug 2004 05:12:01 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore and Hedwig Message-ID: <20040810051201.3524.qmail@webmail30.rediffmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109536 - Cassin - Has anyone seen Hedwig and Dumbledore in the same place at the same - time? Amey: Frankly, I don?t believe ?Dumbledore is Hedwig? theory, but still I am in particular mood to argue with someone today. So here goes - From: "meriaugust" - 1: We have no concrete evidence that DD is in fact an animagus. Amey: How many unregistered Animagus are there in ground? 4 at least till now. Lack of evidence does not mean absence of it in WW, sometimes it means it will surface later. - 2: If Hedwig is DD, then DD would be with Harry practically all - summer, meaning that he wouldn't be at Hogwarts, wouldn't be - vacationing, nothing. He'd either be running letters for Harry or be - locked up at the Dursley's house by Uncle Vernon. Surely someone - would have come to rescue DD from that prediacament. Amey: We don?t have any canon that he goes on vacations, either. Also, why would he want someone to come and rescue him? ?He has means to watch Harry, more closely than Harry imagines?. What better than being with him all the time? Also, he can get out of the house with letters Harry gives and then hand it to his oen Snow owl to be handed over to the addressee. Quite ingenious, totally Dumbledorish - 3: What would be the purpose of DD being Hedwig? So he can keep an - eye on Harry? Amey: Exactly. Harry is important, irrespective of whatever Snape says. - 4: Also, Hagrid picked out Hedwig from the Eyelops Owl Emporium. Was - DD just sitting there waiting to be picked up by Hagrid? IIRC, - Hagrid decided at the very last minute to buy Harry Hedwig, and - after that Hedwig was at Privet Drive with Harry till term started. - With all that was going on at Hogwarts that year, DD would surely - have been missed. Amey: Hmm here I am at a loss. But then, Hagrid told Dumbledore that they were going to buy Harry?s school things, so he had time. Or better still, he switched with the real Hedwig in after Harry arrived in school. - So, in conclusion, I do not believe that DD=Hedwing, but am fully - willing to eat my words if I be proven wrong. - Meri, who also doesn't buy the Ron=DD theory, either... Amey: I also don?t believe Ron=Dumbledore. Ron is not genious enough or crack enough. But then Hedwig is suspiciously even clever for an owl. We have many people telling Harry "Very smart owl you've got there,?. Suspicious, of course. If you want to keep abreast JKR, you have to see any whiff of suspicion as a full proof. I wouldn?t be surprised if Hedwig is (at least sometimes) Dumbledore (channeling his spirit???) or somebody else recruited to keep an eye on Harry. (Rowena Ravenclaw anybody??) Amey [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From omphale at onetel.com Tue Aug 10 05:42:40 2004 From: omphale at onetel.com (saraquel_omphale) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 05:42:40 -0000 Subject: JKRs Baby WAS Release Prediction In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109537 > > Jason: Since she seems to release the books > on > > or around June 21, they could probably get the book out by......... > > > > June 21, 2005. > > > > Now, feel free to laugh or ridicule.. or correct the math..(how > long > > does a baby delay a woman anyway?) > > Granma Saraquel responds Being not only a mother, but actually a grandmother, I'd say I was qualified to talk about this one. My guess is that she was at least 3 months pregnant when she made the announcement. Normally you won't get a doctor to confirm your pregnancy until you have missed at least two periods (7-8 weeks) and you are recommended not to consider yourself pregnant until at least 8 weeks and preferably 12 weeks, because most foetus' actually don't make it to this stage, i.e. you are quite likely to miscarry early on. I can't remember the exact date she put the notice in, but let's say mid-July (perhaps someone with the date can correct me). That leaves 6 months until the baby is born - mid January at the earliest, possibly mid-Feb at the latest, I'd say. By the last month, you feel much like a stranded whale and turning over in bed is about as much as you can manage, also there is Christmas. If she is saying that baby things are not going to interrupt the process, then the editing and final proofing stages are going to have to happen before Christmas. My guess, is that she is finishing off the book at the moment. The publishers, I imagine, would definitely like it to be on the shelf for Christmas because of the marketing opportunities - whether that's a possibility, I don't know and would bow to others superior knowledge. Lene seems to think it could take another 9 months - I think that the publishers could expedite that somewhat for HP! Look, hell - I want a good read on the plane to Oz, otherwise it's watching 10 films back to back, and there's no way I'm going through Hong Kong again - that really is the most surreal airport in the world! :-) Saraquel From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 05:44:38 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 05:44:38 -0000 Subject: Ancestor / descendant (Re: Chamber of Secrets - The Unexplained) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109538 > Snow: > This is JKR's answer in a Scholastic interview October 16, 2000 > > Harry Potter for grownups again! Is Voldemort the last remaining > ancestor of Slytherin, or the last remaining descendent of Slytherin? > > > "Ah, you spotted the deliberate error. Yes, it should > read "descendent." That's been changed in subsequent editions. > (Keep hold of the "ancestor" one, maybe it'll be valuable one day!)" > > > Hope this helps! Pat responded: > > I'm going to correct myself here. > > I checked my hard back and my paperback again, and here's the really > weird thing. In the hardback, (US, p.332) it says descendant--and > the date is 1999. In the paperbook, (US, p. 332) it says ancestor-- > and that one was actually later--printed in 2000. So we are still > left with the question of why they would change it incorrectly. > Odd, but very interesting--especially since she said deliberate > mistake. Carol: That *is* odd. But I think that "deliberate mistake" is one of JKR's little jokes--like preferring to have Marcus Flint repeat a year than confess that she made an error. Or sending her family and herself to South America in false mustaches rather than confess that she gave Mark Evans the same name as Lily without realizing that the readers would jump to wrong conclusions. You don't make a deliberate mistake--it's a contradiction in terms, an oxymoron. But to change "descendant" *back* to "ancestor" makes no sense at all. Maybe the paperback and the hardback are based on different editions/printings? Carol, who apparently has the same paperback you do, the 15th printing from September 2000 (with "ancestor" on p. 332). It does, however, say "text copyright 1999. . . ." From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 06:16:13 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 06:16:13 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109539 RMM wrote: > Secondly, please note the ages of most of the DeathEaters. They are > mostly of James Potter's age or less. Carol: Actually, we have canon to prove that Lucius Malfoy is five or six years older than the Marauders and Snape (42 at the end of GoF), Bellatrix is three years older than Sirius, who last saw her when he was about fifteen and (apparently) just ending his fourth year, and Nott is rather elderly (JKR's website). Karkaroff is also older, white-haired by the time he shows up at the Tri-wizard tournament. Rabastan and Rodolphus are probably close to Bellatrix's age. Crabbe and Goyle have sons Harry's age and are probably slightly older than James would be (he got married young and died at only 21 or 22). Rookwood, Avery, Dolohov, et al seem older as well, mid-forties at a guess. Only Barty Jr. and Regulus Black appear to be younger than the Marauders and Snape. I'm wondering what canon evidence you're using to draw this conclusion, other than Regulus' age, which I don't dispute. We don't know, though, how old he was when he joined or when he died, or even how much younger he was than Sirius, who would be about 36 at that point and 21 when Regulus died. Regulus might have been 20; he could have joined at 18, after Hogwarts. Barty Jr. was about 19 when he was arrested, but he, too, could have joined after leaving Hogwarts. Note that *only he* is described in the Pensieve scene as being a "boy"; the Lestranges (whose names Harry doesn't yet know) are described as a woman and two men. It looks to me as if Snape, if he were still loyal, would be the youngest living Death Eater. We don't know when he was recruited, but I'm guessing that he, too, was recruited right after he left Hogwarts, by his older friends who were already Death Eaters, most prominently Lucius Malfoy. Carol, who wonders if RMM has seen JKR's reaction to the suggestion that Lily might have been a Death Eater From Meliss9900 at aol.com Tue Aug 10 06:16:18 2004 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 02:16:18 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Human transfiguration is taught in 6th year... Message-ID: <45.12b2393d.2e49c232@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109540 In a message dated 08/06/2004 03.01 Central Daylight Time, jo.sturgess at btopenworld.com writes: > Something Harry > finds in the Chamber is very significant after all! > > Jo > > Umm I read her comment JKR: The link I mentioned between books two and six does not, in fact, relate to the 'Half-Blood Prince' (because there is no trace left of the HBP storyline in 'Chamber'.) Rather, it relates to a discovery Harry made in 'Chamber' that foreshadows something that he finds out in 'Prince'. IMO the word Chamber in her comment isn't actually referring to the physical Chamber but is a reference to the book's name. She tends to use a word from the book's title when referring to them as opposed to using the initials It could be anything that Harry learns about (discovers) COS. He discovers the prejuidice against Muggleborns in COS that could connect to whatever he learns in HBP. Melissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Koinonia2 at hotmail.com Tue Aug 10 06:24:27 2004 From: Koinonia2 at hotmail.com (koinonia02) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 06:24:27 -0000 Subject: The chess game in SS/PS, quidditch, and Snape's potion puzzle... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109541 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > The Chess Game: > The chess game represents the second war against Voldemort. *very big snip* > "That's chess!" snapped Ron. "You've got to make some sacrifices! >I take one step forward and she'll take me?that leaves you to >checkmate the king, Harry!" > "But?" > "Do you want to stop Snape or not?" > "Ron?" > "Look, if you don't hurry up, he'll already have the stone!" "K": I'm sorry to say I can only reply to one thing. I loved your post. First off, I'm a huge Snape fan but I must admit I've been putting together a list of reasons why I believe my favorite character is nothing more than a pawn. :-( Pawn: A person used by another to gain an end. Wouldn't you know one of my reasons involves a chess game between Harry and Ron in OoP. Ron and Harry are playing chess when Mrs. Weasley walks in the room and tells Harry that Professor Snape is there to see him. Harry at first doesn't pay attention to what Molly has said. Harry and Ron continue with their chess game. So let's look at that scene once again: "Harry dear, said Mrs. Weasley, poking her head into his and Ron's bedroom..." snip "Professor Snape would like a word with you." Harry did not immediately register what she had said. One of his castles was engaged in a violent tussle with a pawn of Ron's, and he was egging it on enthusiastically. snip "Squash him --- **squash him**, he's only a pawn, you idiot. Sorry, Mrs. Weasley, what did you say?" "Professor Snape, dear." oop/ch 24/pg 517/us This is what happens next: Harry's mouth fell open in horror. He looked around at Ron, Hermione, and Ginny, all of whom were gaping back at him. Crookshanks, whom Hermione had been restraining with difficulty for the past quarter of an hour, leapt gleefully upon the board and set the pieces running for cover, squealing at the top of their voices. "Snape?" said Harry blankly. "Professor Snape, dear..." Yes, the most exciting character in the book is nothing more than a pawn. ::sigh:: Here are just a couple more chess games I remember. ~Ron also started teaching Harry wizard chess. snip Harry played with chessmen Seamus Finnigan had lent him, and they didn't trust him at all. He wasn't a very good player yet and they kept shouting different bits of advice at him, which was confusing. "Don't send me there, can't you see his knight? Send *him*, we can afford to lose *him*." ~ ss/ch 12/pg 199/us ~Harry fretted about this next to the fire in the Gryffindor common room, while Ron and Hermione used their time off to play a game of wizard chess. "For heaven's sake, Harry," said Hermione, exasperated, as one of Ron's bishops wrestled her knight off his horse and dragged him off the board. "Go and *find* Justin if it's so important to you." cos/ch 11/pg 197-198 Let me also say I do believe the time turner will play a big role but I still don't buy into the Ron=Dumbledore bit. "A Very Sad K" ~"Oh, I dunno..." said Harry desperately, who could not remember dreaming anything at all over the last few days. "Let's say I dreamed I was...drowning Snape in my cauldron. Yeah, that'll do..." Ron chortled as he opened his Dream Oracle. "Okay, we've got to add your age to the date you had the dream, the number of letters in the subject...would that be 'drowning? or 'cauldron' or 'Snape'? From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 06:42:24 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 06:42:24 -0000 Subject: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109542 > Geoff: > Whoops! > > Correcting my own post. What I meant to say was that his {Tom Riddle's] 16th birthday must have fallen early in his Fifth Year - theoretiacally he could have been 16 as early as 01/09/42. Carol notes: Or 09/01/42 for us Americans. September 1 either way. (01/09/42 looks like January 9, 1942 from this side of the Atlantic, which could confuse people trying to follow your argument.) He does say that he was in his fifth year when the basilisk appeared and that he preserved his sixteen-year-old self in the diary, beginning in June of the same year he framed Hagrid, which I take to be 1943 since Harry finds the diary in 1993. So my assumption is that he had turned 16 by June 1943, but there's no need for a date as early as September 1. In fact, most students would have turned 16 by the end of their fifth year. Neville and Harry, with their July birthdays, are exceptions. Carol From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Aug 10 06:52:32 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 06:52:32 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109543 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Josh Warren" wrote: > > RMM: > > Do you mean October 31st being on the Tuesday mentioned in book > PS/SS? > > That would be 1989, 1995, and 2000. > > 89 or 95 could fit in for when she wrote that particular passage... > perhaps she simply consulted her current-year's calendar? Oops! :) > > Josh Geoff: The thought had crossed my mind that she might have taken the day for the year in which she was writing. There is a point here that, if you are going to be absolutely spot on with the day on which a date fell, you need to take time to calculate it. I said the other day that I only noticed the discrepancy with 31/07/91 when I was researching something else to do with dates; to work out that information means either fiddling with paper and pencil - or as the idea suddenly dawned on me last week - using the calendar facility on my computer!! Just to underline my position. I accept the dates given by characters in PS, i.e. Harry's birth date being 31/07/80 and Voldemort's attack being on Hallowe'en 1981. I curently don't see any reason why Jo Rowling should sprinkle red herrings in that area... From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 07:13:47 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 07:13:47 -0000 Subject: Molly-- Thoughts from a different perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109544 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" wrote: > Josh wrote: > >> Yes, absolutely Molly is very well intentioned, but she's certainly a terror... and I'm still counting her among the short list Harry is going to tell off rather convincingly in the nearer chapters of HPB. She deserves it!<< > HunterGreen: > But does she deserve it *from Harry*? She's the closest thing to a > mother that Harry has ever known (Lily can't count because he barely > even remembers her). And many of the things she's done to her own > children (listed in the original post, like playing favorites) Harry > hasn't had to experience. > > ...edited... > > Huntergreen Asian_lovr2: I'm going to bend the rules a little bit with some fan fiction. I could just ramble on and on trying to make my point, but I think this bit of FF will do it in fewer words ...or at least I hope it will, not that often that I succeed at 'fewer words'. SCENE: Summer time, late night at the Burrow, Harry and Hermione have come for a visits. All this kids are there including Charlie, Bill, and Percy. They have just demolished one of Molly's great meals when Harry gets an attack of the Blues; a sudden melancholy feeling that he can be with people, but he can never be a part of them. He can never truly be one of them. To cheer him up, the Weasley perform a ceremony in the kitchen that makes Harry an official member of the Weasley family. It's not about legal documents, this is an affair of the heart and the spirit. . . . . . . . . . As their tears slowed, Ron and Harry slowly broke their embrace, and wiped their eyes. Mrs. Weasley looked up at the clock, "Look at the time now, you four, outside and start cleaning up. And you, Harry! I swear you are going worry me to death. Why if I didn't know Ron was there to help you, I'd probably be dead already. Chasing monsters, fighting wizards and never with a concern that I'm here worrying myself sick." Harry had tears streaming down his cheeks again, but he had a smile so wide it almost broke his face. She was scolding him. For the first time ever she was scolding him. If that didn't make it official, Harry didn't know what did. Mrs. Weasley turned to the sink and fiddled with pots and pans, Harry could hear her sniffling as she muttered to herself, " ....... ungrateful ....... work my fingers to the bone ........ never a minutes peace ......... going to be the death of me ....." Mrs. Weasley spun around and fixed them in a glare, "...and you two, why I swear if I get any more owls from the school about you two, I don't know what I'll do. I thought Fred and George set the record, but at the rate you two are going you'll have that record beat in no time. And believe me that is one record you will not enjoy breaking. Now off to bed with you. And try to keep it quiet, I swear you were stampeding elephants last night. Go on now. Get going." That was like the voice of angels to Harry, the sweet sound of a mother's love. . . . . . . . . . . . . . See my point? One thing you do not want from Molly is cold stoney silence, THEN you are in real trouble, like DEAD MAN trouble. As long as Molly is expressing herself, you know she cares, and you know life is normal at the Weasley house. In a large house like the Weasley's, especially with that many brothers, you learn to express yourself. If you don't, you get lost in the crowd, and your needs are never met. Being the youngest boy, to some extent, that's what's happened to Ron. And, imagine what a mad house Molly had to manage when most of the boys were at home; babies to feed, keeping track of Fred and George, mediating all the wars that typically break out between brothers. I don't think THAT is a house that can be ruled by a mother with a soft gentle voice and an unassuming manner. Molly had to be hard and fast to keep the chaos to a minimum. This is not a family that sits in brooding silents and lets their emotions fester. They flair up, get it out, then move on with life as normal. That's actually a reasonably healthy approach. Well, if I want to stick to my 'few words' vow, I better stop now. Steve/asian_lovr2 From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 10 07:55:28 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 03:55:28 -0400 Subject: Release Prediction Message-ID: <001501c47eaf$6754e510$76c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109545 Lene': "One thing to bear in mind is that for most publishing houses, there is at least 9-12 months needed between the time they receive the completed book to the time it is actually published and ready to put out on the shelves. Last I heard, JKR is still working on the book, so I doubt it would have time to get to her publisher and get edited, etc., by this Christmas. Sorry!" DuffyPoo: Throwing my personal opinion (which counts for nothing) into the ring. I'm not expecting it until - at least - Christmas of 2005. I'm only hoping that, since she says books six and seven are so inter-connected, she said six is like writing the first half of a novel, that maybe book seven won't be too far behind book six. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 10 08:19:47 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 04:19:47 -0400 Subject: Figgy Message-ID: <002201c47eb2$cd210bf0$76c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109546 mhbobbin "And on this subject, why can't Mrs. Figg see dementors? She's not all that convincing in the Ministry hearing. And Squibs ARE supposed to be able to see dementors." DuffyPoo: "Incidentally, can Squibs see Dementors?" [Fudge] added. "Yes, we can!" said Mrs Fgg indignantly. - can't really blame her for being indignant, Fudge is, after all, the M for M and he doesn't know if Squibs can see Dementors? With regard to her being unconvincing in her description, perhaps it is down to being nervous in front of a gang of witches and wizards who don't give a 'fig' about Squibs. Whether she described the appearance of Dementors well, as Madam Bones said, "She certainly described the effects of a Dementor attack very accurately." And while Mrs. Figg describes the Dementors as 'running' when actually they 'glide' we can all remember that they 'flew' in the .....oops, sorry, not supposed to mention the 'm' word! ;-) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eeyore5497 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 05:13:37 2004 From: eeyore5497 at yahoo.com (Michelle Horcher) Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 22:13:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Animagi theories In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040810051337.9043.qmail@web12210.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109547 RMM: > > 1. As Dumbledore once taught Transfiguration, he > > is most likely an animagus. What would be his form? > > I speculate that he is a phoenix. And as the head of > > the Order of Good Guys....er...I mean the Phoenix, > > that would make sense. > > > > 2. Snape, being the powerful wizard he is, is > > most likely a Rabbit or Hare. > > I'm still kind of new here. There was another post regarding "Lily/Unicorns". I wasn't sure whether to reply to that or this one, because I'm curious (forgive me if this has been discussed before). Could Lily be an Animagi which is a Unicorn? Would love some thoughts on this. Michelle would is obessesed with HP & Unicorns. From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 08:02:35 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 08:02:35 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore and Hedwig In-Reply-To: <20040810051201.3524.qmail@webmail30.rediffmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109548 > Amey: > We don't have any canon that he goes on vacations, either. Also, why would he want someone to come and rescue him? "He has means to watch Harry, more closely than Harry imagines". What better than being with him all the time? Also, he can get out of the house with letters Harry gives and then hand it to his oen Snow owl to be handed over to the addressee. Quite ingenious, totally Dumbledorish Finwitch: Well, there's just one fault I see: Hedwig is a girl! I don't think that animagus can change his sex... What else do we *know* of Albus on how he could keep an eye on Harry? 1) He doesn't need a cloak to become invisible. (he *tells* Harry so in the first book! - after he has just done it) (and mind you, CoS it is mentioned Hogwarts library has an invisibility *section*, so I'd guess there are LOTS of ways to be invisible). So he could be there, just that he'd be invisible. (probably staying at Mrs Figg's at that...) 2) The Chocolate Frog Cards. Two of Albus Dumbledrore are mentioned in the first book (unfortunately, the frog jumped out of the window). Combine this with how the portraits can move from one picture to another... I'm positive that Albus has one in his office (and trough it, it's easy to keep track on students who have another card...) So no need flying around, pretending to be an owl... Hedwig an animagus? Hedwig might or might not be an animagus. (But if she is, she'd be who? Rowena Ravenclaw, someone said - she lived a 1 000 years ago - think not. She might, however, be a descendant of Rowena. Dumbledore animagus? I think that Albus Dumbledore is likely to be an animagus, considering he used to be a Transfiguration teacher, and is *one of the greatest wizards*. One against: Hermione didn't find him on the list of "Animaguses of this century". Then again, Dumbledore is about 150, so he'd not likely be on that list, even if he *was* registered... And one other thing: Ministry keeps track on the magic. Can Albus Dumbledore do the same? Last: How does that blood-protection work? Does it help Albus know how Harry is doing? One more thought: Harry's glasses. They could be charmed to work like a camera... Finwitch From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 10 09:33:40 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 05:33:40 -0400 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 - Again Message-ID: <004d01c47ebd$1f7d4a80$76c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109549 RMM: "And if the text was left to just that, I would agree 100%. However, Jim the weatherman also mentions that Bonfire Night doesn't occur until next week. Jim said this on a Tuesday, and if Tuesday is November 1st, since it was the night before that Voldemort killed the Potters, then Bonfire Night would be Saturday. Is Saturday considered part of "next week"? Or is it considered part of "the weekend"? Secondly, Hagrid, Harry, nor ANYONE else is mourning the loss of Harry's parents on the Halloween celebrations that are occurring during the 5 books. Not a single mention is made of the anniversary of Harry's loss. Nor for that matter is the BIG event of Voldemort's downfall celebrated on any of those Halloweens." DuffyPoo: Where in the world do you live, RMM? My weathermen/newscasters/sportscasters make mistakes all the time. If I paid strict attention, I could venture a guess and say at least once a day on the 6 o'clock news, alone. Perhaps, just perhaps, JKR has Jim, the weatherman, saying, 'Perhaps people have been celebrating Bonfire Night early -- it's not until next week, folks," intentionally, as a diversion, or to show that weathermen make mistakes, too! A red herring if you like. You see, as I'm sure you've guessed, I think Hagrid is smart enough (much as Umbridge probably thinks he is not...half-breed and all that) that he knows what day he took Harry from the rubble. Perhaps he had to leave, or miss, the Hogwarts Hallowe'en celebrations to go get him. He knows the attack was on Hallowe'en or why tell HP so...he's not confunded or confused by other celebrations. The celebrations over LV's 'demise' didn't start until after Hagrid rescued Harry. Jim McGuffin aside, Hagrid WAS THERE! I don't celebrate/mourn/whatever else it could possibly be called the day my parents died and I knew them for 34 and 37 years. HP didn't really 'know' his parents. Mourning would be pointless in his case. Why, on earth, would anyone else in the school mourn James and Lily's deaths? Why would anyone, DD in particular, want to remind HP of his parents' deaths every year? He wouldn't. Nobody is mouring the loss of anybody on any date. Not just Hallowe'en. Neville has the most to mourn here, his parents no longer recognize him, and we don't see him crying all over the school, heck, apart from HP, none of the rest of his friends knew anything about his parents until mid-fifth year. (Interesting to note that Arthur had never mentioned this to Ron/Ginny.) As most people in the WW don't truly believe LV's 'really, truly, once and for all, gone' I'm not surprised they're not celebrating. Most wizards/witches are still afraid of speaking his name lest it bring him back from where-ever he's at, why throw a party in his honour and truly 'tempt fate?' What if he showed up in the middle of the party? We also have to remember that there are children in the school who would be celebrating James and Lily's demise, despising 'the boy who lived', mourning LV's downfall, and wouldn't want to participate in a celebration of LV's 'passing,' on Hallowe'en or any other day. While Professor McGonagall said that, "I wouldn't be surprised if today [Nov 1st] was known as Harry Potter day in future," it obviously hasn't happened yet - so there's no reason to celebrate. Especially now that "He's baaack!" What may well be celebrated, though, is whatever day LV is vanquished for good by whoever does it. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 10:11:58 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 10:11:58 -0000 Subject: Mystery of Caradoc Dearborn In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109550 --- > > Jen: > > Whatever happens, we have canon reasons to be suspicious when a body > is mysteriously missing. I'm voting for Caradoc, because the missing > body-part bits of Benjy Fenwick would just be a replay of Peter's > finger. > > vmonte responds: > > Bits of him, hmmmm. Does a werewolf tear it's victims to bits? I > really don't believe in ESE Lupin by the way but I think we are going > to get more information about Moody's photograph--and that Order > party. Who's idea was it to have an Order party? And to take > pictures? I wonder if the DEs got their future victims because > someone passed them a copy of this photograph. > > mhbobbin: I hadn't thought much about the photograph but there are a number of mysteries it brings up--as you indicate. And then there's DD's brother--only time Moody ever met him. Yes, Harry was unsettled by the photograph and now so am I. Does seem odd to take a picture of a secret group. mhbobbin From lunabrite79 at hotmail.com Tue Aug 10 09:10:21 2004 From: lunabrite79 at hotmail.com (luna) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 09:10:21 -0000 Subject: Molly-- Thoughts from a different perspective In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109551 > Josh wrote: > > >> Yes, absolutely Molly is very well intentioned, but she's > certainly a terror... and I'm still counting her among the short > list Harry is going to tell off rather convincingly in the nearer > chapters of HPB. She deserves it! << > Steve wrote: > > SCENE: > Summer time, late night at the Burrow, Harry and Hermione have come > for a visits. All this kids are there including Charlie, Bill, and > Percy. They have just demolished one of Molly's great meals when > Harry gets an attack of the Blues; a sudden melancholy feeling that > he can be with people, but he can never be a part of them. He can > never truly be one of them. To cheer him up, the Weasley perform a > ceremony in the kitchen that makes Harry an official member of the > Weasley family. It's not about legal documents, this is an affair of > the heart and the spirit. > > Molly is a terror? I've never seen that, I think she is a loving mother and wife, and an absolute doll, bless her soul for raising all those kids too. But, alas I must disagree with everyone in the post, Harry can never truly be a part of anyones already made family, he is too much of an outsider besides the fact that he is an orphan.. He is looked at as more of an icon or an entity than just an orphan boy, it is pertinent that his character remain aloof to a certain extent... The Ootp is a type of family, but they weren't ready made before Harry came along and he feels some belonging there. Though the Weasleys love Harry, he'll never be a Weasly, it's just unfathomable in real terms. By the way I'm lunabrightest and I'm so glad to find a lot more adults who are really interested in Harry Potter. I look forward to exploring the site and discussing ideas with you all... *Toodles*luna From patientx3 at aol.com Tue Aug 10 10:29:09 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 10:29:09 -0000 Subject: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109552 Caesian wrote: >>[snip]He suggests, in fact, that it is the other way around - parents owe their children the sacrifices they make to raise them and help them in the world, but children must be allowed to grow beyond the bounds of their parents beliefs and lives. But then there is something to be said for felial piety - on this one I must agree that Harry really does owe Molly a good telling off.<< HunterGreen: For what though? I can certainly see a reason why Ron or Fred or George might want to tell Molly off, but I don't see what on earth she has done to Harry. Remember, she owes nothing at all to Harry, she's not his mother, she's the mother of his best friend (we don't see Hermione's parents doing anything for Harry). She isn't motherly to Harry because she has to be, she is because she chooses to be. Its something that Harry needs, and she's one of the few people to step in and give it to him. Very few adults actually reach out to Harry, which is the only way he developes any sort of relationship with them since he never reaches on his own. She doesn't go as far as Sirius (who makes the effort to write to Harry), but she still treats him almost as if he were one of her own children (and she does already have quite a number of children to deal with), which is very admirable. Harry telling her off for "something" would be very cruel. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Aug 10 11:39:30 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 11:39:30 -0000 Subject: The chess game in SS/PS, quidditch, and Snape's potion puzzle... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109553 > "K": > I'm a huge Snape fan but I must admit I've been putting > together a list of reasons why I believe my favorite character is > nothing more than a pawn. :-( > > Pawn: A person used by another to gain an end. > > Wouldn't you know one of my reasons involves a chess game between > Harry and Ron in OoP. Ron and Harry are playing chess when Mrs. > Weasley walks in the room > and tells Harry that Professor Snape is there to see him. Harry at > first doesn't pay attention to what Molly has said. Harry and Ron > continue with their chess game. > "Harry dear, said Mrs. Weasley, poking her head into his and Ron's > bedroom..." > "Professor Snape would like a word with you." > Harry did not immediately register what she had said. One of his > castles was engaged in a violent tussle with a pawn of Ron's, and > he was egging it on enthusiastically. > "Squash him --- **squash him**, he's only a pawn, you idiot.Sorry, > Mrs. Weasley, what did you say?" > > "Professor Snape, dear." > oop/ch 24/pg 517/us > > Yes, the most exciting character in the book is nothing more than a pawn. ::sigh:: > ~Harry fretted about this next to the fire in the Gryffindor common room, while Ron and Hermione used their time off to play a game of wizard chess. > > "For heaven's sake, Harry," said Hermione, exasperated, as one of > Ron's bishops wrestled her knight off his horse and dragged him off the board. "Go and *find* Justin if it's so important to you." > cos/ch 11/pg 197-198 > Valky: REALLY Good "K"! By this comparison are you saying that Justin Finch-Fletchley is one of the two pieces mentioned here on the board? I am seriously intrigued. From ejblack at rogers.com Tue Aug 10 11:33:59 2004 From: ejblack at rogers.com (ejblack) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 07:33:59 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Animagi theories/Snapes References: Message-ID: <002101c47ecd$edf57b20$2680c645@blackc02b2gycq> No: HPFGUIDX 109554 "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: snip> > 2. Snape, being the powerful wizard he is, is most likely a Rabbit > or Hare. > >Hee! I can see where you get this, but Snape an ickle wittle bunny >wabbit? Well... maybe Bunnicula. Maybe he is the small white bunny from hell from the Monty Pyhon movie "Quest for the Holy Grail" Personally I cannot see Snape's animagi as a rabbit. I have a feeling the shape has something to do with self-image or with personality traits. Either you go with Snape's troubles self-image and have him as a slug or go with his personality and have him as a hard hitting (and competant!) creature like a wolverine. PS Now that I have said it, I LIKE the idea of Snapes as a wolverine; they are solitary, with black greasy hair, and totally vicious and focused in a fight. Jeanette [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 12:38:42 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 12:38:42 -0000 Subject: The chess game in SS/PS, quidditch, and Snape's potion puzzle... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109556 K wrote: First off, I'm a huge Snape fan but I must admit I've been putting together a list of reasons why I believe my favorite character is nothing more than a pawn. :-( Pawn: A person used by another to gain an end. Wouldn't you know one of my reasons involves a chess game between Harry and Ron in OoP. Ron and Harry are playing chess when Mrs. Weasley walks in the room and tells Harry that Professor Snape is there to see him. Harry at first doesn't pay attention to what Molly has said. Harry and Ron continue with their chess game. So let's look at that scene once again: "Harry dear, said Mrs. Weasley, poking her head into his and Ron's bedroom..." "Professor Snape would like a word with you." Harry did not immediately register what she had said. One of his castles was engaged in a violent tussle with a pawn of Ron's, and he was egging it on enthusiastically. "Squash him --- **squash him**, he's only a pawn, you idiot. Sorry, Mrs. Weasley, what did you say?" "Professor Snape, dear." oop/ch 24/pg 517/us vmonte replies: K your post is awesome! I have another chess game scene. Page 217 SS "...Harry headed straight back to the Gryffindor common room, where he found Ron and Hermione playing chess. Chess was the only thing Hermione ever lost at, something Harry and Ron thought was very good for her." (Again we are told that Hermione is not a good strategist.) "Don't talk to me for a moment," said Ron when Harry sat down next to him, "I need to concern--" He caught sight of Harry's face. "What's the matter with you? You look terrible." "Speaking quietly so that no one else could hear, Harry told the other two about Snape's sudden, sinister desire to be a Quidditch referee. "Don't play," said Hermione at once. "Say you're ill," said Ron. "Pretend to break your leg," Hermione suggested. "Really break your leg," said Ron. (Dumbledore also ends up going to this match by the way.) "I can't," said Harry. "There isn't a reserve Seeker. If I back out, Gryffindor can't play at all." "At that moment Neville toppled into the common room." (Harry states that he can't back out because they will lose the game and Neville walks in. Hmmmmm, Prophecy about two boys anyone?) "How he had managed to climb through the portrait hole was anyone's guess, because his legs had been stuck together with what they recognized at once as the Leg-Locker Curse. He must have had to bunny hop all the way up to Gryffindor tower." (Reminds me of DoM fight at the end of OOTP.) vivian From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 12:47:54 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 05:47:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] re: over 1000 posts, scroll down to see if any are interesting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040810124754.97819.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109557 --- "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: >>Magda wrote in >>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/108302 : >>Dumbledore says that the "Power the Dark Lord knows not" is love. >>That's why he didn't anticipate Lily's sacrifice for Harry. If Harry >>has this power, then he will be able to defeat the DL permanently. >>How to make sure Harry has this power? By letting him grow up as >>normally as possible, come to Hogwarts, make friends, discover the >>warmer emotions including real love (as we saw with Sirius). >> >If that was DD's goal, he took a BIG risk placing Harry with the >Dursleys. I understand the argument that DD had to place HP with them >for the sake of physical protection (by living with his mothers's >blood kin), but it risked HP learning Dursley values. Yes, but that was precisely what Dumbledore knew he had to do. He KNEW he HAD to take that risk because only by successfully overcoming that early adversity of life with the Dursleys would Harry be able to confront Voldemort successfully. That's why he's so keen to let Harry be a "normal" kid without telling him too much about his ultimate fate. The older Harry gets and the more challenges he overcomes using his own resources, the stronger he gets in terms of magic. Coupled with the essential goodness of his character (Magic + Virtue), he's developing nicely into a good wizard capable of defeating Voldemort. And keep in mind, Dumbledore doesn't realize there are only two more books. He thinks that Harry can reach adulthood before he confronts Voldemort. What would have been the result of Harry knowing too young about the prophecy? He might have freaked out. He might have determined to learn all about strong magic so that he'd be ready for the final battle - and in the process submerging all his better feelings in a quest for revenge against his parents' murderer. In short, he wouldn't have developed the love he needs to prevail. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 12:55:20 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 05:55:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's avoidance of Voldemort' s name (Was:OOTP Chapter Discussions, Chap 2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040810125520.76215.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109558 > So--is it only Snape whose Dark Mark burns when it--or > Voldemort--is > referred to? And does it mean what I think it means, that the mark > itself senses his disloyalty to Voldemort? > Will someone please address this aspect of the question? > > Carol I think you're right. Coupled with a guilty conscience, the Dark Mark does give Snape a feeling of pain or at least heightened sensitivity when he confronts references to Voldemort or his followers. Just like Harry's scar, in fact. In fact, since it's clear in OOTP that the adult members of the Order suspect that it's at least possible that Harry is being "possessed" somehow by Voldemort, I wonder if Snape didn't expect to actually confront Voldemort in Harry's mind during the occlumency lessons. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Aug 10 13:14:31 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:14:31 -0000 Subject: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109559 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Geoff: > > Whoops! > > > > Correcting my own post. What I meant to say was that his {Tom > Riddle's] 16th birthday must have fallen early in his Fifth Year - > theoretiacally he could have been 16 as early as 01/09/42. Carol: > Or 09/01/42 for us Americans. September 1 either way. (01/09/42 looks > like January 9, 1942 from this side of the Atlantic, which could > confuse people trying to follow your argument.) Geoff: The flip side of that argument is that 09/01/42 looks like 9th January 1942 from /our/ side of the pond which could confuse people..... Carol; > He does say that he was in his fifth year when the basilisk appeared > and that he preserved his sixteen-year-old self in the diary, > beginning in June of the same year he framed Hagrid, which I take to > be 1943 since Harry finds the diary in 1993. So my assumption is that > he had turned 16 by June 1943, but there's no need for a date as early > as September 1. In fact, most students would have turned 16 by the end > of their fifth year. Geoff: All students will have turned 16 by the end of their Fifth Year - see my comment in message 109294. From naama_gat at hotmail.com Tue Aug 10 13:49:15 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:49:15 -0000 Subject: Villainy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109560 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "naamagatus" wrote: > > > > Immortality (of various kinds) has been sought by most religions. Why > > do you suddenly find Voldemort irrational for wanting it? > > > Kneasy: > Really? I thought it was immortal *afterlife* they were all panting for. What's the difference? Remaining for all eternity your own self - isn't that what immortality is? Besides, if you look at Christian eschatological accounts, it's about the (also) resurrection of the body, not just the immortality of the soul (which is eternal, anyway). > > Naama: >. A successful coup doesn't necessarily invovle > > mass killings - well targeted political assasinations may be far more > > effective. > snip> > The Potters don't count; that happened before the books started. > > You'll note that there aren't any "well-targeted political assinations" > and none apparently planned. True. I thought you were talking about VWI. >If he actually wanted hordes of Dark > Magic capable hench-wizards he'd be recruiting at Durmstrang, not > in hiding in the UK. In fact, if he was all that powerful, he wouldn't > be in hiding at all. It is specifically said that Voldemort fears Dumbledore. Indeed, we see that Dumbledore, apparently without breaking much sweat, beat Voldemort in their duel. The story is about Evil trying to take over, not Good trying to overthrow established Evil. > > > Naama: > > I find it a bit strange your talking of *imagined*childhood slights. > > You are talking still of Tom Riddle, right? His father abandonment > > was not imagined, was it? He did actually let his own son grow up in > > an orphanage, neglected, loveless and possibly actively abused. > > > Kneasy: > Tough. Means little. How many rejected orphans start a war? Or is > it just the magical ones? Well, change "magical" to "charismatic" or "politically talented", and yes, it's true. Lets put it differently, how many talented, charismatic people become crazy, cruel dictators? > > > Naama: > > You have a supernatual world, with supernatural beings in it - what > > real sense does it make if it isn't, on some level, metaphorical? HP > > (and any good fantasy story) doesn't really make sense if you fail to > > interpret it, on some level, as a morality play. Voldemort is not > > only an evil human being, he is also Evil. And you can't make a bad > > man into Evil if you give him understandable/credible motivations > > Kneasy: > Read Solzhenitsyn. He makes the point that you can, because a truly > evil person believes he is doing things for the best - he's saving his > country from a terrible fate etc. etc. He cannot see that the ends he > envisages do not justify the means used. Hence fascism, communism, > the Terror after the French Revolution. All of them were intended to > be *beneficial* to the society. But the price to be paid was extortionate. > Voldy doesn't care about anybody except Voldy. As far as I know, Solzhenitsyn didn't write fantasy stories. *Of course* in real life people don't set out in a self-conscious way to be Evil. That's precisely why historical figures don't collapse to metaphores. Even Hitler didn't intend to be evil - he sincerely believed that ridding the world of Jews was necessary; that he was doing it for the good of the German nation. JKR, however, is writing a fantasy story. In Voldemort she is trying, I think, to do something very interesting: have a typical supernatural Evil figure, who doesn't have supernatural origins (like Sauron). This is someone who used to be a regular human being, and through deliberate choice became Evil incarnate. By having an unremittingly evil figure like him (who hasn't a single good, human impulse, as you point out), she marks out very starkly the all-important theme of choice. I think what I'm trying to say is that you can't have a completely evil figure who is *not* single-dimensional (in other words, a caricature). I agree with Neri (I think) who said that JKR is interested in Tom Riddle, not in Voldemort. Also for the reader - how interesting is it to look at a painting that is just black paint? However, for the metphorical, symbolic level of the story to work, she does need a totally evil figure. Naama From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 13:53:54 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:53:54 -0000 Subject: The chess game in SS/PS, quidditch, and Snape's potion puzzle... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109561 AJ wrote: Embarrassed? Afraid? Wow, you just came up with that now after reading COS? I read the theory of the points pasted above a year or more ago on a site analyzing the Chess Game as predictor for the upcoming war/series and linked to from a site supporting time-travel Dumbledore!Ron. The writer, like you, saw the downed knight as Sirius and the queen as Bellatrix, and also that Ron didn't seem dead like Sirius and might have time traveled or otherwise been taken out of the game. So, others have noted the potential symbolism in the chess game in the same way as you. vmonte responds: Hi AJ. The chess game has been discussed by many people, and writers, who agree that the game is a symbolic metaphor for the war against Voldemort. I read SS a week after GoF came out and began putting together my theory of Ron=DD because of it. I know that others have have also come up with this theory (although most people seem against it, and time-travel.) Back in December when I joined this group I posted my theories about the quidditch game, the roles of people in the war, and of Ron=DD. Interestingly, a few days after I posted the Ron=DD theory, another post came up discussing the same theory. This poster had been working on the Ron=DD theory as well. (I eventually found out that many other fans had also come to this conclusion.) This person's post lead to a series of posts back and forth between people regarding time-travel, etc. I seem to be in the minority though about how time-travel actually works. I believe that time-travel can actually change history, while many fans do not. I think that the chess game is also a clue as to how Dumbledore uses time-travel. When Dumbledore changes his strategy/influences history he must factor in a whole set of considerations. I think that he is very cautious when he uses time- travel because changing history may not always work in your favor. I'm going to use GoF as an example. Let's say that DD specifically influenced events during GoF to change the outcome. Let's say that DD knew something bad was going to happen to Harry during the tournament. (He would know because he was first Ron and Ron would have witnessed these events already.) This time around DD changes his strategy and creates the age limit so that Harry cannot be entered into the game. Unfortunately, like chess, once you change your strategy, your opponent will have to compensate--in other words they also change their strategy (fake! Moody finds a way to enter Harry into the game. This leads to two Hoggarts players: Cedric & Harry. And it is because of DD's direct meddling with history that Cedric is killed, IMO.) So, here is the problem. Once either opponent changes strategy, even the smallest little thing, you create new experiences. Once something new happens, you are now working with the unknown. DD must always then restrategize to keep himself ahead of his opponent and the game. There are always risks, and people will always die. Vivian From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Tue Aug 10 14:33:02 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 14:33:02 -0000 Subject: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - But Why? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109562 Hi all! Feels good to be back after another long break, lol... Before I become completely forgotten, will drop a post and fly away... I started reading CoS, second time round. I have been noticing much more details and insights than before, I'm glad. Then something occurred to me. Apologies for lack of exact quotation, but when Snape is lecturing them about damaging the Whomping Willow, he describes it as "old and valuable". Also Harry's description has it "ancient tree". But why? We know it was planted the year Lupin came to Hogwarts. So that will be about 24-25 years ago. It must have come from somewhere else -- I suppose that's a common sense, tree of that magnitude will take quite a long time to grow. So how old of trees are thought to be 'ancient'? Any botanist? And why valuable? Sure, it provides the entrance to Shrieking Shack, but is there more than meets the eye? It rings a pair of odd bells, seeing how Snape describes it 'valuable'. Severus Snape, of all people, who would love to squash it if possible, I bet. Any thoughts? Brenda From eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk Tue Aug 10 14:47:13 2004 From: eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk (iamvine) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 14:47:13 -0000 Subject: Time-turning as literary device (was: Just a comment about Lupin's malady) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109563 Replying to an old message I should have seen before: Eleanor wrote sometime last week: > > Also I don't know if you've ever thought about it this way, but > > there are two basic ways for JKR to use a plot device: > > > > 1) Harry uses it to do something clever, or someone else uses it > > with his knowledge. > > 2) Someone else uses it, probably against Harry, and he and the > > readers are surprised when he finds out. > > > > We've had Polyjuice Potion used both ways - first by Harry and Ron, > > then by Crouch Jr. We've only had the Time-Turner used in sense 1 > > (I don't count Hermione using it to manage her timetable, because > > that was mainly setup too). SSSusan replied: > Thanks, Eleanor, for these thoughts. I actually kind of *like* the > thought that Fred could pretend to be both himself & George while > George goes off to do something. :-) On the other hand, wouldn't > that break DD's "rule" that the person doing the time-turning can't > see himself? Eleanor now: Yes, but I don't see that that rule is absolutely necessary. The crucial thing is to not contradict what happened the first time. If you saw yourself, then when time-travelling you must let yourself be seen again, and you must do the same thing. This could be hard. If you simply keep out of your other self's way, you have fewer obligations and more freedom. SSSusan: > Anyway, I also think it's interesting that you've split the possible > uses into Harry (and co.) using the "device" or someone else using > the "device" *against* Harry. You're right that this might make TT > more interesting if it were to reappear. > > I still have a problem with the idea that Harry & Hermione didn't > *change* the past--or, as you said, "or rather, they could only > change things they assumed had happened, but turned out really not to > have done." Now, it is very possible indeed that I just don't have a > clue what you're talking about bec. I don't do well with the TT > concept in general, but it does seem to me that Harry indeed changed > the past. I can get myself royally convoluted in trying to explain > this, but when Harry saw what he thought was his dad creating the > stag patronus which drove away the Dementors and saved Sirius & > himself, wasn't that Harry going back to *change* the past? Or am I > just misconstruing your meaning with "changing the past"? Eleanor: Sorry. I have been trying to analyse, for my own amusement, the different rules of time travel in several different stories, and this probably does tend to make me incomprehensible. What I was trying to say is that people don't know everything about the past. We are not all-seeing. When Harry was in the Shrieking Shack, he did not actually know whether Buckbeak was dead or alive. He only assumed. He also assumed he saw his father conjure a Patronus. Just suppose for a moment that only the bits of the past that Harry really knew about were fixed, and the rest was fluid until he found out more about it. Kind of like Schroedinger's cat, which is not really alive or really dead until you find out which. In the fluid area, there was room for Harry's time-travelling self to act. Depending on what he did when time-travelling, his original assumptions about Buckbeak and James could have turned out to be right or wrong. Maybe if he hadn't gone down to the lake and performed the Patronus Charm himself, it would have turned out to really be his father, and he could have met James's ghost. That would have changed the story a bit! That's the real meaning of Dumbledore's "You must not be seen": Don't go out of the fluid area. Don't contradict anything that you knew had happened. If Harry had tried to go into Hagrid's hut when his earlier self was there, something bad would have happened. Or maybe something would have materialised to stop him doing it. I don't know. Please understand that I'm not trying to say anything about physics here, or even really about the laws of the HP universe. I suppose I'm working somewhere in between the HP universe and whatever was going on in JKR's head when she wrote it. I don't think I can explain it any better than that. Back to your question: If by "changing the past" you mean "going to the past and doing something that made a difference to someone", yes, they did that. They rescued Sirius and Buckbeak. That was the point of going back. Harry conjuring the Patronus was the same sort of thing, only not planned. If you think Harry really changed the past, i.e. made history happen differently from how it originally did, then you have to suppose there was a timeline where he didn't conjure the Patronus. Then you'd have to explain why he thought he'd seen someone do it and how he got away from the Dementors. I think we're intended to assume Harry did see himself, and that all the things he did in the past had always happened, but he just didn't know about them. I hope this makes a bit more sense! Eleanor From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Aug 10 15:18:54 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 15:18:54 -0000 Subject: Villainy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109564 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith wrote: > The problem is that most villains are set up to lose; it's a given - > evil never triumphs, and it won't in HP either. No matter how powerful and intelligent, no matter that he has overwhelming technological (or magical) advantage and an army of ruthless killers at his beck and call, it makes no difference. Even if the hero has nothing but a bent pocket knife and a piece of string, the baddy goes down. > > To do this the author must force him into committing egregious or even farcical mistakes. He has to - otherwise how could he possibly lose? < Pippin: Okay, in fantasy fiction the mistakes are laughable--why not? There's no practical value in knowing that a Death Star's exhaust vents may be unshielded or that a carelessly programmed portkey might take you back to its origin. No only that, any mistake that allows the defeat of the villain is going to look stupid in retrospect. But the folk wisdom is sound. Instead of adopting a similarly destructive technology or recruiting ruthless killers on your own behalf, you wait for the bad guy to overextend himself and make a mistake. He will, because the very paranoia which powers his quest to become invulnerable and suppress all opposition also tempts him to overlook seemingly insignificant threats. Of course this involves your side holding out while taking staggering losses -- but that's what being a good guy is all about, right? Kneasy: > What are his wider ambitions? In reality we only have a vague idea, and that from Hagrid, " Getting supporters.....Taking things over." A bit vague for a manifesto. And since I can't remember Voldy coming out with any of the standard give-away phrases during any foaming-at-the-mouth carpet-chewing episodes; it makes you wonder if Hagrid's to be trusted in this.< The threat of genocide hangs over the Potter books the way the threat of nuclear conflagration hangs over James Bond's skirmishes with SMERSH. Ian Fleming didn't have to go into detail about mutual assured destruction and Rowling doesn't have to go into detail about what happens if the guys in the robes and the hoods get into power. The threat is stronger for being unspoken. However, the WW is not Godwinized and sees the threat differently: "You're scared for yourself, and your family and your friends. Every week, news comes of more deaths, more disappearances, more torturing ... the Ministry of Magic's in disarray, they don't know what to do, they're trying to keep everything from the Muggles, but meanwhile, Muggles are dying too. Terror everywhere...panic...confusion...that's how it used to be." --GoF ch 27 Kneasy, are you saying that's not scary? Pippin From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 15:20:03 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 15:20:03 -0000 Subject: Time-turning as literary device (was: Just a comment about Lupin's malady) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109565 Eleanor responding to SSSusan's post: If by "changing the past" you mean "going to the past and doing something that made a difference to someone", yes, they did that. They rescued Sirius and Buckbeak. That was the point of going back. Harry conjuring the Patronus was the same sort of thing, only not planned. If you think Harry really changed the past, i.e. made history happen differently from how it originally did, then you have to suppose there was a timeline where he didn't conjure the Patronus. Then you'd have to explain why he thought he'd seen someone do it and how he got away from the Dementors. I think we're intended to assume Harry did see himself, and that all the things he did in the past had always happened, but he just didn't know about them. I hope this makes a bit more sense! vmonte: Perhaps, the reason the PoA time-line (in which Harry and Hermione time-traveled) appears to look as though H&H never changed history (we see Harry before he TTs saving himself, Buckbeak appears to have never been killed, etc.) is only because DD's strategy always worked in this instance. Dumbledore knew that H&H would be successful, and the events unfold as though it had always happened in this manner. vmonte From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 15:24:38 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 15:24:38 -0000 Subject: over 1000 posts, scroll down to see if any are interesting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109566 << Steve wrote: "Thank you, Fortescue, that will do," said Dumbledore softly. >> << Given DD's sweet-tooth, giving Fortescue a place of honor makes sense! (Assuming of course, the ancestor also had a sweet shop on Diagon Alley...) >> "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: Of course I'm being far too serious about a sweet funny joke, but Old Fortescue's ice cream shop must have been before or after or on the side of being Headmaster, since the portraits in DD's office are all former Headmasters and Headmistresses. Neri adds: Just as a possible prediction, if you were in Diagon Ally and all of the sudden you needed quick help from DD, running to the Fortescue ice cream shop would be a good bet. There is probably a portrait of Fortescue-the past-headmaster hanging in the apartment above the shop. Neri From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Tue Aug 10 16:15:27 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 16:15:27 -0000 Subject: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109567 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" wrote: > HunterGreen: > For what though? I can certainly see a reason why Ron or Fred or > George might want to tell Molly off, but I don't see what on earth > she has done to Harry. > Remember, she owes nothing at all to Harry, she's not his mother, > she's the mother of his best friend (we don't see Hermione's parents > doing anything for Harry). She isn't motherly to Harry because she > has to be, she is because she chooses to be. Its something that Harry > needs, and she's one of the few people to step in and give it to him. > Very few adults actually reach out to Harry, which is the only way he > developes any sort of relationship with them since he never reaches > on his own. She doesn't go as far as Sirius (who makes the effort to > write to Harry), but she still treats him almost as if he were one of > her own children (and she does already have quite a number of > children to deal with), which is very admirable. Harry telling her > off for "something" would be very cruel. Ok, I'll back off on the terminology. Molly and every other adult has, in OotP, come out not smelling so much of roses, in Harry's view. Everyone knew more about his own freakin' destiny than himself. His overprotection has led to Sirius' death, and Molly's dislike for Sirius was made quite clear, and every attempt at protection in Harry's experience has failed: his parents' fidelis charm, Gringotts, the faculty, Fluffy et al, the faculty again, Azkaban, dementors, the Ministry on several occasions, and the Order. Molly is over-protective, and Harry is definitely on a countdown to explode at all this protection. Dumbledore and Molly are the two worst instigators. Over-protection can quite deductively be seen as the quickest way to get Harry killed... and there's no way he'll be able to fulfill his destiny if he's locked in the bowels of Gringotts under a fidelis. He needs to demand to be treated as an adult member of the Order. Snape and Molly will be the loudest objections... and I look forward to Harry's response. :) It's not that she isn't nice, concerned, etc. It is that she takes it too far and passes back into negative territory... petty, scathing, etc. on occasion. She needs an attitude adjustment on when to back off. Someone else had asked why Arthur could take this job? Well... he would be the best person to do it, if he hadn't had almost all ability beaten out of him over 20+ years of marriage. Harry, being the outsider, can present a more objective view. The very fact that his telling her off would be obscene is _exactly_ the kind of "Huh? What?" it would take to go introspective long enough to see the problem. Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Tue Aug 10 16:35:47 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 16:35:47 -0000 Subject: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - But Why? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109568 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Brenda M." wrote: > Apologies for lack of exact quotation, but when Snape is lecturing > them about damaging the Whomping Willow, he describes it as "old and > valuable". Also Harry's description has it "ancient tree". > > But why? > > We know it was planted the year Lupin came to Hogwarts. So that will > be about 24-25 years ago. It must have come from somewhere else -- I > suppose that's a common sense, tree of that magnitude will take quite > a long time to grow. So how old of trees are thought to > be 'ancient'? Any botanist? > > And why valuable? Sure, it provides the entrance to Shrieking Shack, > but is there more than meets the eye? It rings a pair of odd bells, > seeing how Snape describes it 'valuable'. Severus Snape, of all > people, who would love to squash it if possible, I bet. Valuable, possibly, because it guards the entrance to the only secret tunnel of which he is aware? Whomping Willows might also be rare, at least in the UK. *shrugs* Old.. well, I'm sure it wasn't a young seedling when it was planted, else it wouldn't have been able to guard the tunnel entrance very effectively. Also, I'm sure Snape wouldn't want to unnecessarily connect its planting to the beginning of James' tenure at Hogwarts, as it might tempt the rule-breaker's curiosity. :) Josh From eloiseherisson at aol.com Tue Aug 10 16:36:08 2004 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloise_herisson) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 16:36:08 -0000 Subject: HP translations- the name 'Hogwarts' In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109569 Sandra: > I have checked the HP Lexicon and it says: > "The name "Hogwarts" is actually the name of a flower. JKR > said: "Ideas come from all sorts of places and sometimes I don't > realise where I got them from. A friend from London recently asked me > if I remembered when we first saw Hogwarts. I had no idea what she > was talking about until she recalled the day we went to Kew Gardens > and saw those lilies that were called Hogwarts. I'd seen them seven > years before and they'd bubbled around in my memory. When Hogwarts > occurred to me as a name for the school, I had no idea where it came > from." (SMH) " I hesitate at present to suggest that perhaps JKR made a mistake here...;-) Well, not exactly a mistake as such. Although I have no doubt that the sound of the name stuck in her mind from this encounter at Kew, in fact the flower is spelled "Hogwort", not "Hogwart" (and therefore pronounced "hogwurt"). "Wort" is a common flower name suffix and is simply Middle English for "plant". Clearly this punned itself with "hog" and "wart" in her mind. The other name for it is the Woolly Croton and it actually hails from the US (Edwards Plateau and South Texas Plains). For information on the flower, go to: http://www.herbage.info/tej/files/H408.htm#18 ~Eloise From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 10 16:37:21 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 12:37:21 -0400 Subject: Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - But Why? Message-ID: <001601c47ef8$50ad4b60$25c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109570 Brenda "Apologies for lack of exact quotation, but when Snape is lecturing them about damaging the Whomping Willow, he describes it as "old and valuable". Also Harry's description has it "ancient tree". And why valuable? Sure, it provides the entrance to Shrieking Shack, but is there more than meets the eye? It rings a pair of odd bells, seeing how Snape describes it 'valuable'. Severus Snape, of all people, who would love to squash it if possible, I bet." DuffyPoo: Snape says, "I noticed, in my search of the park, that considerable damage seems to have been done to a very valuable Whomping Willow." No mention of old. Lockhart calls them 'exotic plants' and claims to have 'met several' on his travels On a quick look-through I didn't see where Harry describes the tree as ancient, but I don't doubt it's there. I thought Snape's valuable meant rare and that's how I've always thought of it. I don't necessarily believe Lockhart when he says he's met several, as I'm quite sure he doesn't know how to get kelpies out of a well, either. ;-) Since it appears to be a 'magic' tree, I suppose it could grow at any rate or have an engorgement charm placed on it to speed the process along like Hagrid's pumpkins. Maybe it just looks ancient. Just my two cents on the matter. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dfrankiswork at netscape.net Tue Aug 10 16:49:29 2004 From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 16:49:29 -0000 Subject: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - But Why? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109571 Brenda wrote: > Apologies for lack of exact quotation, but when Snape is lecturing > them about damaging the Whomping Willow, he describes it as "old and > valuable". Also Harry's description has it "ancient tree". > > But why? I can't speak about the age (see Duffy Poo's post) but surely it is valuable because Harry has damaged it? Snape wants to magnify the seriousness of what Harry and Ron have done, so suddenly the tree is 'very valuable'. If it had been Draco who had smashed into it, no doubt Snape would have stressed the resilience of the tree instead. Its magical qualities may make it valuable, too, as we don't know how easy they are to grow. David From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Tue Aug 10 16:54:24 2004 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 16:54:24 -0000 Subject: School cut-off date WAS:Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109572 JKR on Hermione's name: > > "[I]t's a name from Shakespeare; it's in 'A Winter's > > Tale'.... [I]t just seems the sort of name that a > > pair of professional dentists who liked to prove how > > clever they were -? do you know what I mean -? gave > > their daughter a nice unusual name that no one can > > pronounce! I mean, parents do that." RMM: > I'm sorry, but are you saying that because the name is > obscure, then it is clever of the parents just because > it is obscure? Yes. More precisely, I think JKR was trying to say that Hermione's parents were pretentious, or overly-intellectual, not that the choice of name was "interesting." > On a side note: If that is the exact quote from Jo > above in regard to her answer, then all I have to say is > -- did you see that quick change of subject in her > answer?????? She was giving too much away and then > realized it. She ends with "gave their daughter a nice > unusual name that no one can pronounce! I mean, parents > do that." WOW!!! She goes from dentists being clever to > parents giving their kids unpronounceable names!!! I did indeed think the last part was signficant; that's why I quoted it. I, however, don't have to work as hard as you to read significance into a "change of subject," because I don't think she changed the subject at all. Rather, I think JKR's entire response was poking fun at parents who choose an obscure name (in this case a literary one) in an effort to be "clever," and end up with ... an obscure name no one can pronounce. -- Matt From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk Tue Aug 10 17:12:22 2004 From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 17:12:22 -0000 Subject: Parallel between the Potions Puzzle and the DADA teachers? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109573 There have been so much theorising about what the bottles in Snape's riddle symbolise - Dave Whitley's essay and an excellent post by dcgmck, for example, compare them to the players of a Quidditch team and to the books (# 106768) and are so close to a hunch of mine that I'm almost hesitant to draw further parallels. Anyway, I'm just throwing this development out to the lions (fellow list-members, I meant to say) for discussion. Three of the bottles are poison. Two of them are nettle wine (duds, if you will). One of them is aimed backwards, at the past. One of them is aimed forwards, at the future and Voldemort. Granted, the potion bottles could symbolise almost anything that comes in groups of seven (like a Quidditch team), but I'm going to try it out on the seven DADA teachers. For the sake of this argument, I'm going to suppose (and I don't think it's unreasonable), that there are going to be two more DADA teachers at Hogwarts, the last of whom may or may not be Snape. (I'm leaning towards the latter - if Dumbledore doesn't think it's good for him to teach DADA under fourteen years of peace, I doubt he's going to change his mind after Voldemort has returned. And Harry is out of the reckoning.) DADA teachers symbolised by the bottles of Poison: Quirrell, Crouch Jr and Umbridge. DADA teacher symbolised by nettle wine: Lockhart. (Besides, after enough alcohol you're going to feel like you've had your memory modified.) :-) DADA teacher symbolising the past: Lupin. (This is somewhat open to interpretation: it was Lupin who taught Harry the Patronus charm and gave him incentives to grow, but he was also the one who provided Harry with the first personal connection to his dead parents.) This leaves one "nettle wine" teacher and the one who will guide Harry to his goal, in other words Voldemort. On the other hand, if these assumptions are correct, the "poison" quota is filled. The most probable scenario, I think, is: Book 6: Nettle wine. Fudge may still cause difficulties. I can all too easily picture a scenario where the Hogwarts staff and students want Lupin to return while the Ministry and the Board of Governors back some gormless individual whose only advantage is *not* being a werewolf. On the other hand, if Dumbledore changes his mind about Snape and DADA, Snape could be the one who finds himself as being subjected to prejudice. Book 7: The crucial one. I hope for a competent teacher who could both create new hope in Harry and lead him against Voldemort. Thoughts, anyone? Alshain From paulag5777 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 17:18:40 2004 From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 10:18:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - But Why? Message-ID: <20040810171840.32914.qmail@web40005.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109574 10Aug04 Brenda wrote: "...but when Snape is lecturing them about damaging the Whomping Willow, he describes it as "old and valuable". ... And why valuable? Sure, it provides the entrance to Shrieking Shack, but is there more than meets the eye? ...seeing how Snape describes it 'valuable'. Severus Snape, of all people, who would love to squash it if possible, I bet. Any thoughts?" Paula now: Great post, Brenda! I does pay to re-read. But, why would you bet that Snape would be willing to squash the Whomping Willow--any cannon support for this? Actually, when one looks at the simple face value of Snape's quote--referring to the tree as valuable, remembering Snape's expertise in Potions and his desire to teach Defense Against the Dark Arts, the bells that would obviously ring, at least for me, would be some use of the tree's leaves and/or bark in a potion that will prove to be significant in the future. Anyone else have ideas? Paula Gaon Happy Birthday, Everyone!: http://www.cafeshops.com/bft/287569 HP Con Fans, See Something REALLY Special at: https://www.cafeshops.com/bft/216705 See Mythical Magical Creatures at: http://www.cafeshops.com/bft/311142 --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From melclaros at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 17:22:40 2004 From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 17:22:40 -0000 Subject: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - But Why? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109575 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "davewitley" <> I can't speak about the age (see Duffy Poo's post) but surely it is > valuable because Harry has damaged it? Mel: Oh? Why is that? Because now it can be sold on Wizarding ebay as something "the boy who lived" broke? David: Snape wants to magnify the > seriousness of what Harry and Ron have done, Mel: There is no reason to magnify the seriousness of what Harry and Ron have done. McGonnogal makes it clear that what they have done is exceptionally serious. The willow is only PART of what they've done and a minor one at that. As is grand-theft auto. What they've DONE is expose the WW to muggles. Any other student would have been expelled. Harry *can't* be expelled (which Snape knows) because his life would be in danger--and it would ruin the plot. Ron can't be expelled simply because it would ruin the plot. David: . If it had been Draco who had smashed into it, > no doubt Snape would have stressed the resilience of the tree > instead. Mel: You have canon to back this up? David: > Its magical qualities may make it valuable, too, as we don't know > how easy they are to grow. Mel: It's most likely that its magical qualities make it valuable. PERIOD. 'Ancient' is Harry's description and probably comes from his impression of what it looks like--old and gnarly? Certainly large. Snape says "old". Old is a relative term. I don't have the book in front of me and HATE quoting from the films, but in CoS-The Movie, Snape states the tree has 'been here since before you were born.' No one mentions Draco at all, even in the film. Melpomene From averyhaze at hotmail.com Tue Aug 10 17:39:40 2004 From: averyhaze at hotmail.com (onnanokata) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 17:39:40 -0000 Subject: Regulus Black's son the HBP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109576 Erika wrote: What if Regulus was trying to get out because he had fallen in love with a Muggle. What if he had a son? His son would be a Half Blood and a "prince", not in the literal sense. He would be the Half Blood Prince that would try to claim Sirius' inheritance! What do you guys think of my wild theory? -Erika HedwigsTalons wrote: Erika - I think this is a great theory! That would make Regulus' child potentially Harry's age or a bit older. (Unless Regulus never died, and then the child could be younger.) If the child is 15 or older, where has he been going to school? Will he transfer to Hogwarts? HedwigsTalons Angel wrote: How about it turns to be Dean Thomas? In her edits, Jo told us that Dean's father is a wizard (without the knowledge of Dean's mother) and was killed by death eaters. Interesting enough is that this pcs of information was cut from the Chamber of Secrets. - Angel Alice wrote: But Dean Thomas is black (so probably not a Black). Rita Prince Winston wrote in: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/109406 Until quite recent times, it was regarded, at least in USA, that if one parent is black, then the child is black. Dharma replies: Rita, This is a very good observation. JK Rowling really never gives any information about the families of the students who are ethnic minorities. We have no idea if any of their families are multi- ethnic or not. We don't even know the Wizarding heritage of these students, with the exception of Dean. Is she leading us towards particular assumptions, or are these omission insignificant? Dharma From dk59us at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 17:41:48 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 17:41:48 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore and Hedwig In-Reply-To: <20040810051201.3524.qmail@webmail30.rediffmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109577 Uncertain who wrote this (meriaugust?), quoted by Amey: >> - 4: Also, Hagrid picked out Hedwig from the Eyelops Owl >> - Emporium. Was DD just sitting there waiting to be picked up by >> - Hagrid? IIRC, Hagrid decided at the very last minute to buy > >> - Harry Hedwig,and after that Hedwig was at Privet Drive with >> - Harry till term started. With all that was going on at >> - Hogwarts that year, DD would surely have been missed. Then Amey: > Hmm here I am at a loss. But then, Hagrid told Dumbledore that they > were going to buy Harry's school things, so he had time. Or better > still, he switched with the real Hedwig in after Harry arrived in > school. Now Eustace_Scrubb nitpicks: While Hagrid says that he will buy Harry an owl as a birthday present, in the book (PS/SS, Canadian pb ed., pp. 62-63), there's no canon here that states that Hagrid _picked_ the owl. They both go into Eeylops and emerge with Hagrid...we aren't told the details of what goes on within. Of course in the..hem, hem..adaptation in a medium that we don't discuss on the main list..this detail is changed, as Hagrid does get Hedwig while Harry is with Mr. Ollivander. So, did Hagrid steer Harry towards Hedwig? I don't think there's any real canon either for or against, since we don't go into the store with them. Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From ladyramkin2000 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Aug 10 17:46:14 2004 From: ladyramkin2000 at yahoo.co.uk (ladyramkin2000) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 17:46:14 -0000 Subject: Molly - Thoughts on a witch Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109578 HunterGreen wrote: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109579 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > Eleanor responding to SSSusan's post: > If by "changing the past" you mean "going to the past and doing > something that made a difference to someone", yes, they did that. > They rescued Sirius and Buckbeak. That was the point of going back. > Harry conjuring the Patronus was the same sort of thing, only not > planned. > > If you think Harry really changed the past, i.e. made history happen > differently from how it originally did, then you have to suppose there > was a timeline where he didn't conjure the Patronus. Then you'd have > to explain why he thought he'd seen someone do it and how he got away > from the Dementors. I think we're intended to assume Harry did see > himself, and that all the things he did in the past had always > happened, but he just didn't know about them. > > I hope this makes a bit more sense! > > vmonte: > > Perhaps, the reason the PoA time-line (in which Harry and Hermione > time-traveled) appears to look as though H&H never changed history > (we see Harry before he TTs saving himself, Buckbeak appears to have > never been killed, etc.) is only because DD's strategy always worked > in this instance. Dumbledore knew that H&H would be successful, and > the events unfold as though it had always happened in this manner. Eleanor: But they didn't follow Dumbledore's strategy. Harry let himself be seen. Or do you think he really saw someone else originally, or that his memory was changed, or something? Eleanor From dk59us at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 18:13:35 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 18:13:35 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore and Hedwig In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109581 finwitch wrote: > What else do we *know* of Albus on how he could keep an eye on > Harry? > > 2) The Chocolate Frog Cards. Two of Albus Dumbledrore are mentioned > in the first book (unfortunately, the frog jumped out of the > window). Combine this with how the portraits can move from one > picture to another... I'm positive that Albus has one in his > office (and through it, it's easy to keep track on students who > have another card...) Eustace_Scrubb: The chocolate frog cards are an interesting possibility. But would they work the same for other living wizards and witches portrayed? Can the members of the Weird Sisters keep tabs on Harry that way, too? What if Harry keeps his Chocolate Frog cards in a shoebox under his bed? Does he have to carry his Dumbledore card around with him for it to work? (a small nitpick: I think the only time a chocolate frog jumps out the window is in the ...hem, hem...adaptation in a medium not to be discussed on the main list...hem, hem...end nitpick) finwitch added: > One more thought: Harry's glasses. They could be charmed to work > like a camera... Eustace_Scrubb: Again, an interesting idea...there certainly seems to be something important about the fact that Harry wears glasses. And DD seems to be worried that Voldemort might be able to see using Harry's eyes in OoP. Does this mean that LV and DD can both be seeing what Harry's up to through different magical means? Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From romulus at hermionegranger.us Tue Aug 10 18:18:19 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 18:18:19 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109582 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > RMM wrote: > > > Secondly, please note the ages of most of the DeathEaters. They are > > mostly of James Potter's age or less. > > > Carol: > Actually, we have canon to prove that Lucius Malfoy is five or six > years older than the Marauders and Snape (42 at the end of GoF), > Bellatrix is three years older than Sirius, who last saw her when he > was about fifteen and (apparently) just ending his fourth year, and > Nott is rather elderly (JKR's website). Karkaroff is also older, > white-haired by the time he shows up at the Tri-wizard tournament. > Rabastan and Rodolphus are probably close to Bellatrix's age. Crabbe > and Goyle have sons Harry's age and are probably slightly older than > James would be (he got married young and died at only 21 or 22). > Rookwood, Avery, Dolohov, et al seem older as well, mid-forties at a > guess. Only Barty Jr. and Regulus Black appear to be younger than the > Marauders and Snape. > > I'm wondering what canon evidence you're using to draw this > conclusion, other than Regulus' age, which I don't dispute. RMM: Yes, after making the statement above regarding the DEs being Potter's age or less, I found those examples of Malfoy etal that showed that they were 4-6 years older than Potter. I have adjusted my thinking on this issue. My thoughts are that the Death Eaters were a POPULAR movement at one time. Most of the pure blood families were very much behind what Voldemort was preaching. [See Sirius Black's statements in OotP] Secondly, I believe that the Death Eaters were being recruited while at school. Look at Regulus Black, he joined up very likely when he was still at school, since he died while still a teenager. The timeline for the Death Eaters recruitment would fall between the years 1970 and 1978. Yes, Karkaroff is much older, and he (and Dolohov) probably joined with Voldemort while Voldemort was "travelling far and wide". Chances are Voldemort spent some time at Durmstrang recruiting, and teaching as well. Durmstrang, after all, specializes in the Dark Arts. Chances are that Voldemort taught as well at Hogwarts. Granted, he was muched changed, and "hardly anyone at all" recognized him to be Tom Riddle, but he did not show his dark side until later. I think he was a POPULAR guy in the early days of the movement. After all, movements do not start up with following someone that is abhorent or unpopular. We only look at them with abhorence and dislike after their fall. The war did not start as soon as he showed up. That is not how any strong political movement begins, grows, and ends. There is a start based on an idea that gains a following, the movement grows and prospers all the while gaining new adherents to the cause, and then, once the movement reaches a certain point, the "true colours" start to come out. Malfoy would have been entering his 6th year at Hogwarts, or there abouts, in 1970. The other Slytherins like Crabbe and Goyle, likewise, or sometime thereafter. The Marauders entered school in 1971, and they would be entering their 6th year in 1976. We know that Sirius Black is pureblood, Remus Lupin a halfblood. We speculate that Pettigrew is a pureblood, and we further speculate that James Potter is a pureblood. This would make the Marauders even more POPULAR at school, since they are now associated with a POPULAR movement like the Death Eaters. I will go out on a limb and say that Dumbledore himself may have ventured into the ranks of the Death Eaters. See his comment in GoF: <<"It's coming back . . . Karkaroff's too . . . stronger and clearer than ever..." "A connection I could have made without assistance," Dumbledore sighed, "but never mind.">> Dumbledore needed no "assistance" to realize that Voldemort was coming back -- his own scar was getting stronger and clearer as well. [of course, any counter argument as regards DD would be appreciated] At any rate, Purebloodism was a big political movement, and many were caught up in it. Carol: > > Carol, who wonders if RMM has seen JKR's reaction to the suggestion > that Lily might have been a Death Eater RMM: I do not know JKR's reaction to this suggestion. However, I do not claim it. I believe Lily saved James in the end. I believe that James joined the Death Eaters, rose in rank to the very top, vied with Snape to gain the admiration and respect of Tom Riddle, and in the end "defied" Voldemort -- which defiance led to his death. Remember what Voldemort said to Harry? To paraphrase: I killed James but your mother need not have died. And what happens to those that reject Voldemort after being close to him? I believe the "mud blood" Lily Evans Potter turned James from Voldemort's influence. RMM www.hermionegranger.us From romulus at hermionegranger.us Tue Aug 10 18:28:05 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 18:28:05 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 - Again In-Reply-To: <004d01c47ebd$1f7d4a80$76c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109583 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > > DuffyPoo: > Where in the world do you live, RMM? My weathermen/newscasters/sportscasters make mistakes all the time. RMM: As regards the weather yes, but dates and such do not fall into the forecasting of the weather. DuffyPoo: > Jim McGuffin aside, Hagrid WAS THERE! RMM: Yes, he was, but Jim said it in 1981, and Hagrid remembered it 10 years later. I remember my father's death which occured close to his birthday. However, I do not have the exact day of his death, but when I refer to his death I connect it with his birthday. It is a mnemonic, plain and simple. DuffyPoo: > > While Professor McGonagall said that, "I wouldn't be surprised if today [Nov 1st] was known as Harry Potter day in future," it obviously hasn't happened yet - so there's no reason to celebrate. Especially now that "He's baaack!" What may well be celebrated, though, is whatever day LV is vanquished for good by whoever does it. RMM: Well, they sure were celebrating that day!! RMM www.hermionegranger.us From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 10 18:41:06 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 18:41:06 -0000 Subject: Time-turning as literary device (was: Just a comment about Lupin's malady) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109584 SSSusan previously stated: > > I actually kind of *like* > > the thought that Fred could pretend to be both himself & George > > while George goes off to do something. :-) On the other hand, > > wouldn't that break DD's "rule" that the person doing the time- > > turning can't see himself? Eleanor [replying to an old message I should have seen before] now: > Yes, but I don't see that that rule is absolutely necessary. The > crucial thing is to not contradict what happened the first time. If > you saw yourself, then when time-travelling you must let yourself be > seen again, and you must do the same thing. This could be hard. If > you simply keep out of your other self's way, you have fewer > obligations and more freedom. SSSusan: No problem that your response is late, Eleanor; I'm behind again, too. Anyway, I guess my question is, are you *hypothesizing* that the rule isn't an absolute necessity? (That "they're more like guidelines," to draw a phrase from Pirates of the Caribbean.) Or is there something in canon which makes you pretty certain that a TT! character can see him/herself without problem as long as their actions are consistent? Because I guess I took the warning more literally. PLEASE forgive if this is movie contamination, but as many times as I've read the books, I have two little kids and so have seen the movies multiple times, too. Does Hermione in canon!PoA say they CAN'T see themselves, and then uses the example of what would Harry think if he barged into Hagrid's hut and saw himself (that is, he'd think he was mad)? If that's not canon, then I don't have as much problem with your statement that the rule isn't absolutely necessary. If it *is* canon, then I guess my objection still stands. SSSusan previously: > > I still have a problem with the idea that Harry & Hermione didn't > > *change* the past--or, as you said, "or rather, they could only > > change things they assumed had happened, but turned out really not > > to have done." Now, it is very possible indeed that I just don't > > have a clue what you're talking about bec. I don't do well with > > the TT concept in general, but it does seem to me that Harry > > indeed changed the past. I can get myself royally convoluted in > > trying to explain this, but when Harry saw what he thought was > > his dad creating the stag patronus which drove away the Dementors > > and saved Sirius & himself, wasn't that Harry going back to > > *change* the past? Or am I just misconstruing your meaning > > with "changing the past"? Eleanor: > What I was trying to say is that people don't know everything about > the past. We are not all-seeing. When Harry was in the Shrieking > Shack, he did not actually know whether Buckbeak was dead or alive. > He only assumed. He also assumed he saw his father conjure a > Patronus. Just suppose for a moment that only the bits of the past > that Harry really knew about were fixed, and the rest was fluid > until he found out more about it. Kind of like Schroedinger's cat, > which is not really alive or really dead until you find out which. > In the fluid area, there was room for Harry's time-travelling self > to act. Depending on what he did when time-travelling, his original > assumptions about Buckbeak and James could have turned out to be > right or wrong. Maybe if he hadn't gone down to the lake and > performed the Patronus Charm himself, it would have turned out to > really be his father, and he could have met James's ghost. That > would have changed the story a bit! > > That's the real meaning of Dumbledore's "You must not be seen": > Don't go out of the fluid area. Don't contradict anything that you > knew had happened. > > If by "changing the past" you mean "going to the past and doing > something that made a difference to someone", yes, they did that. > They rescued Sirius and Buckbeak. That was the point of going > back. Harry conjuring the Patronus was the same sort of thing, only > not planned. > > If you think Harry really changed the past, i.e. made history happen > differently from how it originally did, then you have to suppose > there was a timeline where he didn't conjure the Patronus. Then > you'd have to explain why he thought he'd seen someone do it and > how he got away from the Dementors. I think we're intended to > assume Harry did see himself, and that all the things he did in the > past had always happened, but he just didn't know about them. > > I hope this makes a bit more sense! SSSusan: Well...um...er.... I was doing pretty well with the first paraphraph, about Schroedinger's cat, but by the end here, you lost me again. BUT that's more because I don't like/do well with time- turning than with any problem in your explanation, believe me. I do appreciate your taking the time to try me again and only wish my brain worked more this way so I could grasp it better! Siriusly Snapey Susan, back again after a camping trip that ended with an emergency visit to the doctor to get my husband 14 stitches in his mangled finger. From sophierom at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 18:42:33 2004 From: sophierom at yahoo.com (sophierom) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 18:42:33 -0000 Subject: To Molly and Arthur's Defense Was:Re: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109585 Josh wrote: Someone else had asked why Arthur could take this job [of telling off Molly for her overprotective behavior and other "faults."] Well... he would be the best person to do it, if he hadn't had almost all ability beaten out of him over 20+ years of marriage. Sophierom: Okay, I feel I must come to the defense of both Molly and Arthur! :-) From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 10 18:51:35 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 18:51:35 -0000 Subject: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109586 Josh: > Ok, I'll back off on the terminology. Molly and every other adult > has, in OotP, come out not smelling so much of roses, in Harry's > view. Everyone knew more about his own freakin' destiny than > himself. His overprotection has led to Sirius' death, and Molly's > dislike for Sirius was made quite clear.... SSSusan: This a.m. when I caught a glimpse of what threads have been running the last few days, I thanked my lucky stars that I was away when this one began and so didn't get drawn into it. But now.... Do you really think Molly DISLIKED Sirius, or just that she questioned his ability to be a mature, responsible guardian for Harry? I know she made that one really nasty remark to Sirius about his not having been able to do much for Harry for 12 years, seeing as how he'd been locked away in Azkaban [ouch!], and I chalked that up to 1) the stress of the situation and 2) her worry over Harry listening *too much* to rash Sirius. But I don't think I'd go so far as to say she DISLIKED him. Do others have thoughts on this? Josh: > He needs to demand to be treated as an adult member of the Order. > Snape and Molly will be the loudest objections... and I look > forward to Harry's response. :) SSSusan: I totally agree that Harry needs to be quite forthcoming from here on in, concerning just what he's willing to stand for and what he's not. I've posted before that DD needs to come TOTALLY clean on whatever he knows now. If Harry's going to be expected to take on this very horrible, very adult burden, then he has every right to demand that he be treated as an adult. I concur, also, that it will be tough for Molly to let go and go along with filling Harry in/allowing him to be considered an adult member of the Order. But Snape? Do you really think he'll object? I'd love to hear more on that. Josh: > Someone else had asked why Arthur could take this job? Well... he > would be the best person to do it, if he hadn't had almost all > ability beaten out of him over 20+ years of marriage. SSSusan: I don't DARE touch this one, because I'm afraid I won't be able to control my language. :-) Suffice it to say that I think it's totally unfair and way beyond what we've seen. Siriusly Snapey Susan From sophierom at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 18:53:07 2004 From: sophierom at yahoo.com (sophierom) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 18:53:07 -0000 Subject: To Molly and Arthur's Defense Was:Re: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109587 Sophierom: Oops! How embarrassing. Didn't mean to post that yet ... sorry about the short post. Anyway, what I meant to say in the previous post was that I think both Molly and Arthur have done a fairly good job with Harry so far in the series. I think what we're expecting of the two of them is somewhat akin to what Harry was expecting of his father or Dumbledore - perfection! Yes, Molly seems to wear the pants in the family, so to speak, but Arthur actually does step up in critical situations (don't have my book with me right now, but OOTP scene where Molly and Sirius are arguing, doesn't Arthur quietly contest Molly's overprotective -ness and argue that Harry should hear what's going on? Or, am I just imagining this? Sorry for the uninformed nature of the post, but honestly, I wasn't sure I was going to post and then I accidentally hit reply and now I feel the need to say something!) Also, has Arthur really had his spirit "beaten" out of him, as Josh suggested in a previous post? Or, has Arthur recognized that Molly is best equipped to run the ship, so to speak? He's always running around at the Ministry. it seems only fair that Molly take control of the day to day activities at the house. My last inane comment (i really am sorry about this whole posting fiasco!): I think Molly, if she's going to be brought down a notch (and I'm not sure that she needs it), will be moved more by actions than by words. So, Harry or anyone else telling her off doesn't seem like it would be that effective. Perhaps Percy will be caught up in Fudge's demise or, even worse, caught in some sort of Death Eater situation (not as a DE himself but, as others have suggested, perhaps he'll be a sort of Bagman character of this new war). Perhaps then she'll realize that those children she's been trying to "set straight" (Fred and George, for example) may have better sense than her perfect child (like Percy). Okay, sorry one last time about posting when I wasn't really prepared to do so. Please just ignore! Best, Sophierom From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 19:00:38 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 19:00:38 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109588 > RMM: I believe that > James joined the Death Eaters, rose in rank to the very top, vied > with Snape to gain the admiration and respect of Tom Riddle, and in > the end "defied" Voldemort -- which defiance led to his death. Alla: I apologise, I REALLY do not mean to look down upon your arguments. But I have to ask you this again. Could you give me ONE quote from canon, confirming that James was a DE. Am I understanding you correctly that you are not even claiming that James was influenced by Dark Arts. You are claiming that James was a Death Eater. That is a huge leap, IMO. Now, please don't get me wrong. Even though I am a big fan of Sirius and I do like Marauders, I never claimed that they are perfect, but being flawed human beings and being a DE are two very different things, IMO From Ali at zymurgy.org Tue Aug 10 19:03:10 2004 From: Ali at zymurgy.org (Ali) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 19:03:10 -0000 Subject: School cut-off date WAS:Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109589 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "karenlyall666" wrote: > I've been lurking for a while having a lot on my mind what with the wedding less than three weeks away, but anyway... Good Luck! > I'm not aware if this system has changed or not, but it would appear, from my experience that Scottish school year intakes from January 1st to December 31st. If (like myself) a child would turn 5 in the 1981 calender year then they would all be in the same year. > Ali responds: In most of the arguments involving Hermione's age, it has generally been assumed that JKR followed the English school system rather than the Scottish system, although I think that the number of NEWTs to be studied does sound more like Scottish Highers than A'Levels (or certainly A'Levels when JKR took them!) I choose to believe that JKR followed the English system because she spent 5 years laying out the books outline which all I happened I think prior to her teaching in Scotland - at that stage her experience was based around the English system. I'm supported in my argument by the fact that the Hogwart's year begins on September 1st rather than in mid-August as happens in Scottish schools plus, the 7 year secondary school follows the English exam/school system. The other problem with following the Scottish system is that Angelina Johnson would be in a different year to the Weasley Twins as her birthday is in October and their's is on April Fool's Day. Truthfully, the only canon linked to Hermione's age is Dumbledore calling Harry and Hermione two 13 year old wizards. But, other canon evidence seems to point away from a school cutoff point much later than the English one. People have argued that Halloween is the cutoff, which could work or that Hermione has been advanced a year. Again, this is a possibility and something which JKR might argue given Hermione's talent. Despite the fact that I used to argue at ever possible opportunity that Hermione was older than Harry - to conform to English school procedure, I now think it's another of these topics which JKR simply didn't think all the way through. She may well have meant Hermione to be younger than Harry, but I simply don't think that she did all the number crunching to make it all consistent. Ali From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Tue Aug 10 19:21:20 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 19:21:20 -0000 Subject: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109590 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > I concur, also, that it will be tough for Molly to let go and go > along with filling Harry in/allowing him to be considered an adult > member of the Order. But Snape? Do you really think he'll > object? I'd love to hear more on that. Oh, Snape would object to being on any kind of equal status with Harry. Canonical evidence would be his gloating nature when he makes sure that Harry knows that keeping up with LV's activities is _his_ job, and not Harry's. > Josh: > > Someone else had asked why Arthur could take this job? Well... he > > would be the best person to do it, if he hadn't had almost all > > ability beaten out of him over 20+ years of marriage. > > SSSusan: > I don't DARE touch this one, because I'm afraid I won't be able to > control my language. :-) Suffice it to say that I think it's totally > unfair and way beyond what we've seen. So you've seen Arthur react to Molly's ire by not a) backing down immediate (that was very wrong boys!) or 2) speaking very quietly? And yeah... I'm exageratting a bit here and there, but what better way to stoke the fires? :) Josh From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Tue Aug 10 19:30:46 2004 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 19:30:46 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109591 Just read your spoiler-theory on the group. Well - Im very curious - but alas! at the same time not very bright - at least not bright enough to figure out what you meant with the "birthdate of Lily" and the "shared-with-a-friend-thing" - or the "graveyard at Hogwarts" - or the "definitions of all twelve"- thing - or the "reason why you think Harry will not have to kill anyone after all". Please please! I really don't want to know - hate spoilers - but your post really caught my attention (I just wasn't smart enough to figure out your clues) and I need to know :-) Please explain a little more about this theory of yours? Thanx :-) Inge ------ --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arielock2001" wrote: > SPOILER AHEAD! > > NEW BIG THEORY IN THE FOLLOWING POST! > > Possibly revealed in the graveyard at Hogwarts... > > This theory isn't dependent on Harry seeing his parent's graves, > but it would be a very convenient way for JKR to convey this > information. > > DON'T READ THIS IF YOU DON'T LIKE SPOILERS!!! > > Because I just can't stand it anymore... > > I've been stewing on this theory for about seven months and > haven't said anything because I am so sure I am right, I didn't > want to spoil anyone's fun. The question marks are because > the years are unknown. The dates are in British format. > > If it wasn't just a joke from JKR and/or AC, and there is a > graveyard at Hogwarts, that may be where she is planning on > revealing this: > > SPOILER!!!! SPOILER!!!!! > > James Potter > Born ??/??/?? > Died 31/10/?? > > Lily Evans Potter > Born 30/9/?? > Died 31/10/?? > > History likes to repeat itself in this series: > It's a birthday she shared with a friend. > > Our boy won't have to kill anyone. > The definitions of all twelve can be found in your home LibraRy. > Save time: start at the end and work back. > > _______Think about it_______ > > You saw it here first, August 10th 2004 > I could be wrong now, but I don't think so. > Arianna (smiling serenely) > > P.S. Forgive me, Jo. From shirley2allie at hotmail.com Tue Aug 10 19:41:57 2004 From: shirley2allie at hotmail.com (Shirley) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 19:41:57 -0000 Subject: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - But Why? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109592 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "melclaros" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "davewitley" <> I can't speak > about the age (see Duffy Poo's post) but surely it is > > valuable because Harry has damaged it? > > Mel: > Oh? Why is that? Because now it can be sold on Wizarding ebay as > something "the boy who lived" broke? Shirley: I'm wondering about your reasoning here, also. I haven't noticed people breaking down door to start a business of Harry Potter memorabilia.... (at least, not in the wizarding world) However, I can confidently add that the whomping willow is 11 years younger than Professor Lupin, as he states in PoA that the Whomping willow was planted the year he started at Hogwarts (and later goes on to say that it was planted *because* he started at Hogwarts). So, it's probably in the neighborhood of 30 years old, give or take a year. From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Aug 10 19:52:42 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 19:52:42 -0000 Subject: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109593 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Josh Warren" wrote: > > Ok, I'll back off on the terminology. Molly and every other adult > has, in OotP, come out not smelling so much of roses, in Harry's view. Everyone knew more about his own freakin' destiny than himself. His overprotection has led to Sirius' death, and Molly's dislike for Sirius was made quite clear, and every attempt at protection in Harry's experience has failed: his parents' fidelis charm, Gringotts, the faculty, Fluffy et al, the faculty again, Azkaban, dementors, the Ministry on several occasions, and the Order.< Pippin: Every protection fails sooner or later. It's quite a leap to say that because the protection failed eventually, it was never needed at all. Is there canon that anyone, aside from Dumbledore, knew more about Harry's destiny than Harry? The best anyone but Dumbledore could have given Harry was partial knowledge of the prophecy.That wouldn't have helped Harry. It would only have misled him and fired his curiosity to know the rest, just as it did Voldemort. But I don't believe there's any canon that anyone else in the Order knew even that much--a fleeting glance between Sirius and Lupin is the only hint. Josh: > Molly is over-protective, and Harry is definitely on a countdown to explode at all this protection.< Pippin: Oh, *that* will prove how mature he is. The wise response is Bill's--he listens politely to Molly, then does what he thinks best. Harry does the same, and always has. He'd have to regress quite a bit to think he needed to gain his independence by telling off Molly. That wouldn't be unrealistic in terms of an actual teenager, but it'd be a bit boring for the reader. We've seen enough angry Harry, haven't we? Josh: > It's not that she isn't nice, concerned, etc. It is that she takes it too far and passes back into negative territory... petty, scathing, etc. on occasion. She needs an attitude adjustment on when to back off.< It's true that in her blind zeal to protect Harry she sometimes is unjust to others, but her friends understand that. There is no indication that either Sirius or Hermione held it against her. When Molly took against Hermione, Harry calmly and gently set her straight. It would have been nice for Hermione's sake if he had thought to do it sooner, of course. Molly doesn't *keep* making nasty remarks to Sirius, there was only the one. And it'd be silly for Harry to blame her for keeping him in the dark. She was the most vocal about it, but *all* the adult members of the Order were agreed--there was nothing stopping any of them, Sirius and Lupin included, from taking Harry aside and telling him whatever they knew. Pippin From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 20:05:42 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 20:05:42 -0000 Subject: Time-turning as literary device (was: Just a comment about Lupin's malady) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109594 vmonte: Perhaps, the reason the PoA time-line (in which Harry and Hermione time-traveled) appears to look as though H&H never changed history (we see Harry before he TTs saving himself, Buckbeak appears to have never been killed, etc.) is only because DD's strategy always worked in this instance. Dumbledore knew that H&H would be successful, and the events unfold as though it had always happened in this manner. Eleanor: But they didn't follow Dumbledore's strategy. Harry let himself be seen. Or do you think he really saw someone else originally, or that his memory was changed, or something? vmonte responds: I always understood Hermione's comment about wizards that have killed their past and future selves via time-travel as meaning: 'Wizards that have messed around with time-travel have accidentaly killed themselves because they did not realize that the person they were seeing was actually themselves.' It would be like Moody bumping into another version of himself. Would he wait to ask questions or would he assume that it was a DE and accidentaly kill himself? Harry happens to look like his father, and he assumed that it was his father that was saving him. The Harry that was being attacked by the dementors was really in no position to actually harm himself. So I think that Dumbledore's comment to Hermione, in this instance, was to make sure that no one else, besides themselves, spotted them. DD doesn't want both versions of Harry and Hermione to be spotted by a DE because they might then realize that time-travel was being used. That's all Voldemort needs to get his hands on, a time-turner. What a mess that would be. From chrissilein at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 20:05:31 2004 From: chrissilein at yahoo.com (Lady Of The Pensieve) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 20:05:31 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109595 Hi, what do you want to tell us? I don?t understand what you mean, sorry. Chrissi --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arielock2001" wrote: > SPOILER AHEAD! > > NEW BIG THEORY IN THE FOLLOWING POST! > > Possibly revealed in the graveyard at Hogwarts... > > This theory isn't dependent on Harry seeing his parent's graves, > but it would be a very convenient way for JKR to convey this > information. > > DON'T READ THIS IF YOU DON'T LIKE SPOILERS!!! > > Because I just can't stand it anymore... > > I've been stewing on this theory for about seven months and > haven't said anything because I am so sure I am right, I didn't > want to spoil anyone's fun. The question marks are because > the years are unknown. The dates are in British format. > > If it wasn't just a joke from JKR and/or AC, and there is a > graveyard at Hogwarts, that may be where she is planning on > revealing this: > > SPOILER!!!! SPOILER!!!!! > > James Potter > Born ??/??/?? > Died 31/10/?? > > Lily Evans Potter > Born 30/9/?? > Died 31/10/?? > > History likes to repeat itself in this series: > It's a birthday she shared with a friend. > > Our boy won't have to kill anyone. > The definitions of all twelve can be found in your home LibraRy. > Save time: start at the end and work back. > > _______Think about it_______ > > You saw it here first, August 10th 2004 > I could be wrong now, but I don't think so. > Arianna (smiling serenely) > > P.S. Forgive me, Jo. From vincent.maston.ml at free.fr Tue Aug 10 14:38:36 2004 From: vincent.maston.ml at free.fr (Vincent Maston) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 16:38:36 +0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - But Why? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4118DDEC.6060806@free.fr> No: HPFGUIDX 109596 Brenda M. a crit : > Apologies for lack of exact quotation, but when Snape is lecturing > them about damaging the Whomping Willow, he describes it as "old and > valuable". Also Harry's description has it "ancient tree". > [snip snip, said the scissors] > > And why valuable? Sure, it provides the entrance to Shrieking Shack, > but is there more than meets the eye? It rings a pair of odd bells, > seeing how Snape describes it 'valuable'. Severus Snape, of all > people, who would love to squash it if possible, I bet. > > Any thoughts? Well, for dear old Snape, anything is good enough to punish Potter. If Ron and him had crashed into a big block of cement, he would have said it to be the most beautiful and enchated big block of cement ever, I think... -- I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by. Douglas Adams From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 10 20:31:37 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 20:31:37 -0000 Subject: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch + Snape's objections In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109597 Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: > > I concur, also, that it will be tough for Molly to let go and go > > along with filling Harry in/allowing him to be considered an > > adult member of the Order. But Snape? Do you really think > > he'll object? I'd love to hear more on that. Josh: > Oh, Snape would object to being on any kind of equal status with > Harry. Canonical evidence would be his gloating nature when he > makes sure that Harry knows that keeping up with LV's activities is > _his_ job, and not Harry's. SSSusan: Except I think that we can assume that Snape--along with all the other Order members--now understand that Harry MUST be considered of equal status, if not higher, because of his position to Voldy, i.e., kill or be killed (if DD is right). At the end of OotP, Hermione & Ron don't yet know about the content of the prophecy, but given that DD let Harry listen to it and discussed it with him, isn't it safe to assume that he will or has informed the Order members? Snape will never like having Harry, a mere stroppy, rule-breaking, arrogant teen (in Snape's eyes) being treated as a full-fledged adult, but I don't think he'll openly balk at it either. I think there was a *lot* going on in that scene between Snape & Harry that you've cited, and I don't think we necessarily know exactly what Snape was thinking just then. "Gloating" isn't the word I'd have used...though you could be right. My initial interpretation (still open to revision) was that Snape spoke in a manner so as to impress upon Harry, emphatically, that his statement was correct. This doesn't mean that Snape thinks Harry doesn't have an important role to play in the war, but just that he wants Harry to recognize that Snape has an important role to play, too, and that their roles are *different*. So, in my take, it's not gloating so much as emphasizing something he wants to sink in to Harry's (sometimes hard) head. Josh: > So you've seen Arthur react to Molly's ire by not a) backing down > immediate (that was very wrong boys!) or 2) speaking very quietly? SSSusan: Indeed, I have. Just as I've seen him provide information to Harry (in PoA) against Molly's wishes and as I've seen him "override" her (or watched her give in, depending on one's preference for interpreting the scene) by disagreeing with her over Fred, George & Harry's being allowed to ask questions of Sirius & the Order members. Arthur's a grown-up; he "allows" whatever he wants to allow to happen. I believe he allows Molly to vent, because it's in her nature to need to do so now & again [somewhat like yours truly]. He then has been seen to calmly, quietly expresses his views. Speaking quietly, taking time in replying--these can be smart moves when in a disagreement with someone more volatile. And Molly may be upset in the end, but she HAS backed down, which tells me that she listens to Arthur, in spite of the level of noise she puts forth. :-) Siriusly Snapey Susan From sopraniste at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 16:41:10 2004 From: sopraniste at yahoo.com (sopraniste) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 16:41:10 -0000 Subject: Molly - Thoughts on a Witch In-Reply-To: <20040808224127.41815.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109598 Magda: > Or how about the Easter Eggs she sent to Ron, Harry and Hermione in > GoF - Ron and Harry got huge chocolate/caramel things but Hermione > got a tiny little egg because Rita Skeeter had written an article > claiming that Hermione broke Harry's heart? The same Rita Skeeter > who prints lies about Arthur (whose name she consistently gets wrong) > but can suddenly be trusted 100% about Hermione? And when Molly > comes to Hogwarts she's cold and unfriendly to Hermione until Harry > (not the most sensitive guy on the planet) loudly tells her that > Hermione has never been his girlfriend. Flop: Okay, I have no problem with most of what you said, but the Easter Egg thing plays into something else I've been tossing around in my head since GoF. Rita Skeeter goes out of her way to stir up trouble, everybody KNOWS that, and yet *it still works*!!! Sorry, I'm not at home right now, so I'll have to approximate my references again. Basically, just before the last task, Molly tells Amos Diggory off for blaming Harry for what RS wrote about the Triwizard Champions, because everybody knows that RS tries to stir up trouble, but then Harry has to turn around and remind her of the same thing very soon thereafter??? That's not Molly being mean-spirited, there's something else going on there. Personally I think it has something to do with that Quick Quotes Quill of hers, but I guess we won't find out for sure until she's allowed to write freely again.... Say... that's coming up, isn't it?... 8^) Flop From sopraniste at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 17:22:25 2004 From: sopraniste at yahoo.com (sopraniste) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 17:22:25 -0000 Subject: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109599 > HunterGreen: > Yes, she's overbearing, but that I think has to do with her being a constant > worrier, and there is no one that's going to rid her of that. This may have come up already, but I just wanted to know if anyone else noticed Molly's paranoia about people she loves dying while they're upset with her? It came up first in GoF, when the DM was conjured at the Quidditch World Cup, and she freaked out, because she had just yelled and F&G, and then there was her Boggart in OotP. Now, bearing in mind that JKR tells us on her website that Molly's maiden name was Prewett, what bet her Prewett relatives were killed by the DEs while there were unresolved differences between them and Molly?... Flop From eeyore6771 at comcast.net Tue Aug 10 19:04:06 2004 From: eeyore6771 at comcast.net (Pat) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 19:04:06 -0000 Subject: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - But Why? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109600 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Brenda M." wrote: > Hi all! > ... when Snape is lecturing > them about damaging the Whomping Willow, he describes it as "old and > valuable". Also Harry's description has it "ancient tree". > > But why? > > We know it was planted the year Lupin came to Hogwarts. So that will > be about 24-25 years ago. It must have come from somewhere else -- I > suppose that's a common sense, tree of that magnitude will take quite > a long time to grow. So how old of trees are thought to > be 'ancient'? Any botanist? > > And why valuable? > > Any thoughts? > > Brenda Pat here: In the book, Harry never says ancient, and Snape never says old, just valuable. Here's the quote, after Snape reads from the paper that they were seen by six or seven muggles: "I noticed, in my search of the park, that considerable damage seems to have been done to a very valuable Whomping Willow." (US paperback, Chap. 5, p. 79) I don't know about this particular willow (which, in the movie, looks nothing like the willows I've seen--but they are referred to as weeping willows, so maybe this is a different type), but they do seem to be fast growing trees, if they have a good underground water source. More than likely, the thing that makes it valuable is it's location and it's ability to attack. But that's one of those things that has been implied and not really spelled out in detail. Besides, the fact that Harry damaged anything gave Snape the opportunity to yell at him and dream of his being expelled--so that would make it valuable in Snape's eyes--no? Pat From eeyore6771 at comcast.net Tue Aug 10 19:24:13 2004 From: eeyore6771 at comcast.net (Pat) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 19:24:13 -0000 Subject: Wands and spells In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109601 Mandypandy wrote: > [snip] > > Correct me if I've missed something, but having just > > read GoF for the eighth time I realised that Harry, > > when he is in the alleyway with Dudley, casts a > > spell without his wand in his hand. Is this right? > > He says 'lumos' and the wand tip lights up. I have > > always assumed the wand has to be held my the person > > casting the spell, otherwise why have a wand in the first place? > > Pam ponders: > > Wands may be a tool that focuses and directs magical power, but I > don't think that they are always necessary for spells, etc. After > all, we see DD doing quite well without a wand, as (I think) do some > other professors. And wizarding children "do odd things" without > wands all the time (think Harry on the roof of the school when > chased by bullies, and of course Aunt Marge). > Pat here: Yes, wandless magic does seem to run throughout the books. The first time we see it is when Harry sets the snake on Dudley at the zoo, without knowing what he is doing. Then Hagrid asks him if he hasn't ever done anything that he couldn't explain--his hair growing back after the bad haircut from Petunia, ending up on the roof to escape Dudley at school, etc. Dumbledore does wandless magic quite a lot. And Harry seems to be showing some aptitude for it as well--as you point out, when he says lumos and the wand tip lights but isn't in his hand. So it does look like the wand is mainly for focusing energy or whatever to do the magic. The other part in OotP, is when Snape is giving Harry occlumnency lessons. He tells him to concentrate and he won't have to waste his energy yelling, and can repell Snape's mind without using his wand. That's probably the most direct thing we have that says wandless magic is possible. We don't know, though, whether it's possible for all wizards or just for those with some extraordinary powers--such as DD and apparently, Harry. Then there is the whole issue of the house elves who can't have wands but do a fair amount of magic anyway--Dobby with the dessert, sealing the barrier at the train, apparating and disapparating (even inside Hogwarts), and also blasting Lucius in COS when he threatens Harry after he (Dobby) has been freed. It has always seemed odd that some people seem to do magic outside of school and don't get in trouble for it--Lily, for one, but also the Weasleys, who go off practicing flying on brooms. Perhaps it has to do with the type of magic they are doing, or how close they live to muggles--and Harry seems to be very close, so anything he does might be noticed. Pat From yahoogroups at catbirdco.us Tue Aug 10 20:04:01 2004 From: yahoogroups at catbirdco.us (Michal) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:04:01 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - But Why? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.1.0.6.0.20040810124713.02e0c0a0@mail.catbirdco.us> No: HPFGUIDX 109602 Shirley wrote: >However, I can confidently add that the whomping willow is 11 years >younger than Professor Lupin, as he states in PoA that the Whomping >willow was planted the year he started at Hogwarts (and later goes on >to say that it was planted *because* he started at Hogwarts). So, >it's probably in the neighborhood of 30 years old, give or take a >year. Michal: Ah, but would a seedling be able to keep students out of the secret passage? Don't think so. It would have to be big to hide the opening to the secret passage. It's expensive but not impossible for mature trees to be (trans)planted. With magical help, it would probably be easier. It seems most likely to me that a youngish-but-big willow was transplanted and magically/ordinarily nourished with the tree being at least as old as Lupin (and possibly much older). For the WW to be Lupin's age -11, a seed or cutting would have to have been planted and magically encouraged to grow almost instantly (certainly less than a month unless DD was planning Lupin's attendance for a long time) to a size large enough to both protect and conceal the secret passageway. This seems less likely to me. Maybe Neville or Professor Sprout knows. Maybe some Time Turner magic was used, she cackles gleefully. From luzzatto at via-rs.net Tue Aug 10 20:04:53 2004 From: luzzatto at via-rs.net (Carla M. Luzzatto) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 17:04:53 -0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: At least respect JKR Message-ID: <001401c47f15$4d70b7d0$2301a8c0@mami> No: HPFGUIDX 109603 Samnanya wrote: > I have read a lot of theories on this site that I don't agree with, > but at least they respected the material and the author. > And clearly one of my biggest mistakes is getting all worked up over > this................. > And think of this ....... > She has written five of the seven books in the series, and virtually > NOTHING HAS BEEN GIVEN AWAY! This site alone has generated close to > 50,000 posts since the last book was published. How many authors are > good enough to pull that off??? Are you two ? MamiBunny now: I agree with Samnanya about the magnitude of this work. It is one of a kind in attracting so many readers and adoring fans from around the world, including people of all ages, who are expecting the next book and theorizing about the plot, all while the story is still being written. A work in progress is being examined in detail by thousands of people at the same time, on the Internet, in discussion groups, in book clubs, at school, etc. I don't think any author has experienced this before. When Conan Doyle wrote Sherlock Holmes' adventures in the newspapers, he received many letters from the fans, agreeing and disagreeing with the plot. But not as many as JKR! And when Tolkien wrote "Lord of the Rings", he finished the whole work before releasing it. And C.S. Lewis' "Chronicles of Narnia" doesn't have such an intricate, complex plot as HP does. I think it is a great, great work, unique in its dimensions of simultaneous readership, interactivity (whether desired or not), complexity of the plot, complexity of the symbolism (so many archetypes!) and, after all, so much fun! I have my theories too, and make some attempts to analyze aspects of the books. I love to do it, because it makes me think about philosophical questions. Following the discussions of this group has been very important to my efforts. But, IMHO, of course, it is overanalyzing things excessively to want everything to make sense. This is a story: beautiful, complex, but still a story. The author has the poetic license to write it the way she wants to. Cheers, Mamibunny --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.733 / Virus Database: 487 - Release Date: 2/8/2004 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Tue Aug 10 20:45:54 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 20:45:54 -0000 Subject: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109604 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Pippin: > Every protection fails sooner or later. It's quite a leap to say that > because the protection failed eventually, it was never needed at > all. Is there canon that anyone, aside from Dumbledore, knew > more about Harry's destiny than Harry? Voldemort knew the first part of the prophesy... and it stands to reason that DD wouldn't keep this much info from his own people when they are risking their lives to a) protect Harry and b) the prophesy itself. More over, yes... as DD admit himself, it would have done a LOT of good even if he'd only said that this thing in the DoM that Voldemort wants, he can only get it by going himself (and risking exposure to being back) or if Harry takes it off the shelf himself, and that for no reason should Harry go there. > Josh: > > Molly is over-protective, and Harry is definitely on a countdown > to explode at all this protection.< > > Pippin: > Oh, *that* will prove how mature he is. The wise response is > Bill's--he listens politely to Molly, then does what he > thinks best. Harry does the same, and always has. He'd have to > regress quite a bit to think he needed to gain his independence > by telling off Molly. That wouldn't be unrealistic in terms of an > actual teenager, but it'd be a bit boring for the reader. We've > seen enough angry Harry, haven't we? Not saying it would be mature, necessarily, but Harry does have a right to be angry. You can't dispute that. A good part of the living hells of his life are quite attributible to the good guys in the guise of protecting him. The Dursleys; 'nuf said. I think it is fair to assume that the beginning of HPB will have PowderKeg!Harry, and we can either leak that pressure off slowly, or in an explosion. Slowly gets us a whole book of Angry!Harry, so... yes, I agree with you, and thus we need an explosion. :) Also, Molly's mothering isn't exactly helpful here. Harry's a multiple-times orphan, of sorts. His parents are dead. His secondary guardian, Sirius, is now dead. His actual guardians, the Dursleys, hate him for existing. His headmaster, Dumbledore has failed him multiple times in fundamental ways. Harry is not going to stand for being called a child any longer, and things have simply gone to far for him to act fully like an adult in response. Self-contradictory I know, but that's the long and short of it. Molly might not be the one to receive the anger. It might be the Order as a whole. It might just be Dumbledore (lemondrop Harry?), or it might be Snape. But the one to open their mouth first will wish they hadn't. > She was the most vocal about it, but *all* the > adult members of the Order were agreed--there was nothing > stopping any of them, Sirius and Lupin included, from taking > Harry aside and telling him whatever they knew. It's just the overall contribution. You're not expecting a 16 yo to act completely rationally, are you? :) Sirius and Lupin _tried_ to give him a whiff of info, but were constrained by Dumbledore from telling all, of course. Molly objected on her own, and only brought in DD as a last resort. Hmm... we do have to wonder if Molly knows even the partial prophesy, or is she the same as DD in that she's hoping that despite all the evidence, that Harry won't have to fulfill it until he's an adult? Molly not knowing the partial wouldn't contradict my above statement, as she wasn't one of the ones guarding it. Josh From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Aug 10 20:51:12 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 20:51:12 -0000 Subject: Parallel between the Potions Puzzle and the DADA teachers? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109605 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "alshainofthenorth" wrote: > > Three of the bottles are poison. > Two of them are nettle wine (duds, if you will). > One of them is aimed backwards, at the past. > One of them is aimed forwards, at the future and Voldemort. > > Granted, the potion bottles could symbolise almost anything that > comes in groups of seven (like a Quidditch team), but I'm going to > try it out on the seven DADA teachers. For the sake of this > argument, I'm going to suppose (and I don't think it's > unreasonable), that there are going to be two more DADA teachers > at Hogwarts, the last of whom may or may not be Snape. (I'm > leaning towards the latter - if Dumbledore doesn't think it's good > for him to teach DADA under fourteen years of peace, I doubt he's > going to change his mind after Voldemort has returned. And Harry > is out of the reckoning.) > > DADA teachers symbolised by the bottles of Poison: Quirrell, > Crouch Jr and Umbridge. > > DADA teacher symbolised by nettle wine: Lockhart. (Besides, after > enough alcohol you're going to feel like you've had your memory > modified.) :-) > > DADA teacher symbolising the past: Lupin. > (This is somewhat open to interpretation: > > This leaves one "nettle wine" teacher and the one who will guide > Harry to his goal, in other words Voldemort. On the other hand, if > these assumptions are correct, the "poison" quota is filled. Valky: Wooooaaaah good stuff AL! You know, I don't think you're misconstruing the potions at all by adding a parrallel. Rather I think that the sequence of sevens was intended from the start and that certain things were always meant to be following it. The DADA teachers *of course* are among those things. Does this alleviate your concerns, because it *is* a really brilliant point that you have made. I must concur with you on Snapes chances *under DD* of gaining the DADA position. However, somehow I think he still will get there in the end. You have said that an *innocuous* DADA teacher is one of the two 'yet to come', but I have a feeling that a twist is in order. We have been given to percieve Umbridge as 'poison' with JKRs description of her (Poisoned honey) and her proximity to evil doing. However essentially she was not *directly* involved in the leading of Harry to Voldemort. Which is why I must debate that the *duds* have come and gone. What we have left, I think, is the seeker/forward teacher and the last bottle of Poison. Hmmmmm does that make Snape's chances look higher to you? From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Tue Aug 10 20:54:08 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 20:54:08 -0000 Subject: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - But Why? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109606 Hi everyone, Thank you for replying to my post, very generous of you!! And thank you Paula for the compliment! *blush* I just wanted to clarify something: some posters (Pat, DuffyPoo, KathyK, etc) have pointed out that Snape never says 'old' and Harry never describes as 'ancient tree'. I have also noticed that the references they made came from US edition, whereas I got mine from UK version... Sigh, why must they make changes if the books are already in English? And I'm afraid Lexicon Steve is also using the US edition for his HP encyclopedia, sigh... Brenda From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 21:02:44 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 21:02:44 -0000 Subject: Parallel between the Potions Puzzle and the DADA teachers? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109607 Valky: Wooooaaaah good stuff AL! You know, I don't think you're misconstruing the potions at all by adding a parrallel. Rather I think that the sequence of sevens was intended from the start and that certain things were always meant to be following it. The DADA teachers *of course* are among those things. Does this alleviate your concerns, because it *is* a really brilliant point that you have made. I must concur with you on Snapes chances *under DD* of gaining the DADA position. However, somehow I think he still will get there in the end. You have said that an *innocuous* DADA teacher is one of the two 'yet to come', but I have a feeling that a twist is in order. We have been given to percieve Umbridge as 'poison' with JKRs description of her (Poisoned honey) and her proximity to evil doing. However essentially she was not *directly* involved in the leading of Harry to Voldemort. Which is why I must debate that the *duds* have come and gone. What we have left, I think, is the seeker/forward teacher and the last bottle of Poison. Hmmmmm does that make Snape's chances look higher to you? vmonte responds: This is really good stuff! I think Snape's chances at becomming DaDa teacher are getting better and better. (And I wish I had seen the post from July. I always miss the great posts!) vivian From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Tue Aug 10 21:19:34 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 21:19:34 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109608 >>> Arianna wrote: > SPOILER!!!! SPOILER!!!!! > > James Potter > Born ??/??/?? > Died 31/10/?? > > Lily Evans Potter > Born 30/9/?? > Died 31/10/?? > > History likes to repeat itself in this series: > It's a birthday she shared with a friend. > > Our boy won't have to kill anyone. > The definitions of all twelve can be found in your home LibraRy. > Save time: start at the end and work back. <<< Brenda: Are you trying to give us some sort of riddle? ;P Spoilers are welcome here (as far as I can see), I have been exposed to SO many (conspiracy) theories that I have gone numb. Special gratitude to Kneasy here, who I might add sounds unmistakenly like Moody ('Constant Vigilance!!') Needless to say I am very disappointed that I will *not* be surprised when Lupin turns out EverSoEvil, many thanks to Pippin. *friendly hiss* (sorry, couldn't resist ^_^) 1. Where did you find Lily's birthday, was that in the books? 2. Why do you have the year of death in question marks? Unless you suspect they died after the attack of Godric's Hallow. 3. "History likes to repeat itself in this series" -- what 'history' are we talking about here? The plot that 'matters' in death/evil conquer will somehow must include Voldemort, IMO. Are you drawing similaries between Tom Riddle, Lily and Harry? 4. "It's a birthday she shared with a friend" -- are you saying Lily and her friend were both born on Sept 30? Who do we know that were born on that day? And we have yet to see Lily's friends specifically named in canon. Where are you getting these from? 5. "The definitions of all twelve can be found in your home Library" - - are you talking about the astrology and the names of 12 horoscopes? Please give us insights. And no, no one will take it away from you, hehe. Brenda, who has claimed: - Sirius dated Rita Skeeter's sister (lol, just a dream I had) - Snape became an orphan during his years at Hogwarts - time-turner uses the math behind Einstein's Theory of Relativity (in the process of writing this essay, don't tear it away yet!) From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Aug 10 21:27:41 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 21:27:41 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 - Again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109609 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" DuffyPoo: > > Jim McGuffin aside, Hagrid WAS THERE! > > RMM: > Yes, he was, but Jim said it in 1981, and Hagrid remembered it 10 > years later. > I remember my father's death which occured close to his birthday. > However, I do not have the exact day of his death, but when I refer > to his death I connect it with his birthday. > It is a mnemonic, plain and simple. Geoff: 40 years ago this year, I lost a close uncle. I remember exactly when he died because he passed away on Christmas Day. Had he died on the 18th December or the 28th, I might have more trouble but his death on 25th December 1964 was a landmark date I shall never have trouble remembering. Likewise Hagrid. If he were not certain, he might have said "Ten years ago, round about Hallowe'en....." He targets the date specifically: "on Hallowe'en ten years ago..." The death of the Potters was one of those moments which would remain etched in your mind - like: "What were you doing when you heard that Kennedy had been killed or that the Princess of Wales was dead?" In the same way, Harry surprisingly remembers that his birthday is on 31st July when his memory is jogged by seeing the date in the Daily Prophet. From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Aug 10 21:38:53 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 21:38:53 -0000 Subject: At least respect JKR In-Reply-To: <001401c47f15$4d70b7d0$2301a8c0@mami> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109610 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carla M. Luzzatto" wrote: MamiBunny: > I agree with Samnanya about the magnitude of this work. It is one of a kind in attracting so many readers and adoring fans from around the world, including people of all ages, who are expecting the next book and theorizing about the plot, all while the story is still being written. A work in progress is being examined in detail by thousands of people at the same time, on the Internet, in discussion groups, in book clubs, at school, etc. I don't think any author has experienced this before. When Conan Doyle wrote Sherlock Holmes' adventures in the newspapers, he received many letters from the fans, agreeing and disagreeing with the plot. But not as many as JKR! And when Tolkien wrote "Lord of the Rings", he finished the whole work before releasing it. Geoff: Bear in mind though that, in Conan Doyle's day and also in Tolkien's day, there was no Internet. I have a suspicion that, if the Philosopher's Stone had appeared in, say, 1988, there would probably be as much interest as there is today, but the amount of material which appears on HPFGU and the many other sites just wouldn't exist because there would not be the facilities for such groups. Take Tolkien as an example. His fan following really took off in the 1960s after the row over the pirated US editions which put put his books before the public in a big way, but big fan groups could only really interchange ideas via conventions or through fan club magazines etc. We have come to expect immediate feedback to what we say because of the Net. This is a phenomenon of modern technology and not of the gifts of the author. From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Tue Aug 10 21:44:58 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 21:44:58 -0000 Subject: Time-turning as literary device (was: Just a comment about Lupin's malady) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109611 > SSSusan: > I guess my question is, are you *hypothesizing* that > the rule isn't an absolute necessity? (That "they're more like > guidelines," to draw a phrase from Pirates of the Caribbean.) Brenda now: Nice example, SSSusan!! Love that movie! ["Wedding! I love weddings! Drinks all around!"] Great analogy with Schroedinger's cat, Eleanor!! But it can be extended even further to *any* elements of literature that we don't know everything about. Plot, time-line, characterization, etc. That is precisely *why* we have ESE! and conspiracy theories running wild - - whatever is not told in canon are "fluid". Sure, we can draw logic from what we know to fill in the gap, but just look at how Peter fooled WW for 12 years. But my thoughts on "you must not be seen" during time-turning: IMO it IS more like a guideline, especially to a first-time user. Imagine, if Hermione bumped into herself, would she necessarily jump to conclusion that it was some dark arts and alarm herself? My bet is that she would at least pause to consider the possibility of it being her future self. She is smart enough to figure that out, especially after having used it all throughout the term. Harry in PoA has no idea time-turners even exist, so if he saw himself then things will go weary. Same with Dumbledore -- if he indeed time-travelled many times as some suspects, then even if he saw himself he might think that it is another replica of him. Which can be potentially dangerous if it *was* a result of dark arts. Brenda From jmmears at comcast.net Tue Aug 10 22:01:35 2004 From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 22:01:35 -0000 Subject: Scottish school cut-off dates- Hermione's birthday riddle solved? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109612 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sarah_haining" wrote: > I tend to stay out of timeline subjects as they usually just make my > head hurt, but I might be able to help here. But please be patient > if this isn't all that useful! :) > > Bookworm is right - the cut off date for the school year may well be > the 31st of August in ENGLAND but that is not the case in Scotland. > > Scottish school cut-off dates are at the end of February/start of > March (not sure of the exact date). This would easily allow for all > of the trio to be born in 1980, with Hermione as the youngest of the > three, no? > > Hope this helps. The problem with Hermione's year of birth is not only reconciling it with the standard English school cut-off date, but with the fact that Angelina Johnson becomes 17 in October of her sixth year. Angelina came over to them, sat down, and said, "Well, I've done it! Just put my name in!" "You're kidding!" said Ron, looking impressed. "Are you seventeen, then?" asked Harry. "'Course she is, can't see a beard, can you?" said Ron. "I had my birthday last week," said Angelina GoF, chapter 16. If the cut-off were at the end of February/beginning of March, then Angelina should have been a seventh year student in GoF and left school at the end of that year. The only way that Hermione could be younger than Harry is if the cut-off date falls between her birthday (Sept 19) and Angelina's (3rd week in October). It's possible that Hogwarts cut-off falls somewhere during that 4 week period but it doesn't seem very likely. In spite of the timeline in the Lexicon and the CoS video, I still think that Hermione is the oldest of the trio. It's not really very important, but unless JKR can explain that Hermione received a special exception to enter Hogwarts a year ahead of schedule, or says that Hogwarts cut-off is October 1, then that timeline is yet another Flint. Jo Serenadust, lobbying for "Old" Hermione since 2001 From yahoogroups at catbirdco.us Tue Aug 10 20:47:36 2004 From: yahoogroups at catbirdco.us (Michal) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:47:36 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Animagi theories In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.1.0.6.0.20040810134523.071a59f0@mail.catbirdco.us> No: HPFGUIDX 109613 At 02:55 PM 8/9/04, RMM wrote: >As the proof is there for the fact that Voldemort's animagus form >being a snake; after all, Harry bit into Mr. Weasley; Michal: Voldemort was possessing is pet/sidekick snake. At the time he hadn't regained his body yet. Wouldn't it be difficult/impossible to transform if you don't have much of a body? From arielock at aol.com Tue Aug 10 22:08:52 2004 From: arielock at aol.com (arielock2001) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 22:08:52 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109614 Wow. I was not expecting the flood of emails! LOL I tried so hard to write a tough riddle that I think I made it too tough. I was afraid it was too obvious... OK. 1. I believe that we will find out that Lily's birthday is September 30th. This would make her a Libra. Where on earth am I getting this date, you ask? 2. Let me add a few words to the riddle: "History likes to repeat itself in this series: It's a birthday she shared with a friend WHO IS STILL ALIVE. Our boy won't have to kill anyone. The definitions of all twelve MONTHS can be found in your home LibraRy. Save time: start at the end and work back." Then reread the prophesy. Yes, It does seem very "so what" at first, but if I am right, it completely changes the outcome of the series. Thanks for playing! I'll clarify more in a few days. Arianna http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/faq_view.cfm?id=23 Section: F.A.Q. (SPOILER WARNING) Q.The prophecy Harry hears in Dumbledore's office suggests to me that both he and Voldemort will have to die, is that true? A. Both Madam Trelawney and I worded the prophecy extremely carefully and that is all I have to say on the subject! --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arielock2001" wrote: > I've been stewing on this theory for about seven months and > haven't said anything because I am so sure I am right, I didn't > want to spoil anyone's fun. The question marks are because > the years are unknown. The dates are in British format. > > If it wasn't just a joke from JKR and/or AC, and there is a > graveyard at Hogwarts, that may be where she is planning on > revealing this: > Lily Evans Potter > Born 30/9/?? > Died 31/10/?? From romulus at hermionegranger.us Tue Aug 10 22:20:20 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 22:20:20 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109615 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > Alla: > > I apologise, I REALLY do not mean to look down upon your arguments. > But I have to ask you this again. Could you give me ONE quote from > canon, confirming that James was a DE. RMM: I have inferential and circumstantial evidence that shows that James Potter was a Death Eater. I do not have CONFIRMATION, for then we would not be in the realm of speculation. I believe I stated in my earlier post that I was speculating. Secondly, Death Eaters, in the early days were POPULAR. You see, the problem here is this. Everyone now knows that the Death Eaters and Voldemort are EVIL. The first war has come and gone, Voldemort has re-assembled his minions, or what is left of them, and a 2nd war is on its way. However, the Marauders and the rest of them lived during the time BEFORE and during the first war. The Death Eaters, by Sirius Black's own words, were POPULAR. It was POPULAR to join the Death Eaters. One may or may not have had a EVIL DESIRE or EVIL INTENTION when joining. Death Eaters were POPULAR. Real world example: Nazism was POPULAR at one time. People joined because it was the POPULAR thing to do. Today, in hindsight, we see the EVILNESS of Nazism. But then, at that time, one did not see it. > Am I understanding you > correctly that you are not even claiming that James was influenced by > Dark Arts. You are claiming that James was a Death Eater. That is a > huge leap, IMO. RMM: James and the rest of the Marauders were totally intrigued by their curiosity. The Dark Arts tempts the curious. Alla: > Now, please don't get me wrong. Even though I am a big fan of Sirius > and I do like Marauders, I never claimed that they are perfect, but > being flawed human beings and being a DE are two very different > things, IMO RMM: Yes, if you look at it in hindsight, that is my viewpoint too. But, we cannot put ourselves and our hindsight into the shoes of the Marauders who were there living the early days of Death Eater -ism. RMM www.hermionegranger.us From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 22:22:13 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 22:22:13 -0000 Subject: Animagi theories In-Reply-To: <20040810051337.9043.qmail@web12210.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109616 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Michelle Horcher wrote: > > I'm still kind of new here. There was another post > regarding "Lily/Unicorns". I wasn't sure whether to > reply to that or this one, because I'm curious > (forgive me if this has been discussed before). Could > Lily be an Animagi which is a Unicorn? Would love some > thoughts on this. > > Michelle would is obessesed with HP & Unicorns. Asian_lovr2: It really is a lovely thought, but I can't find much support for it. Becoming a Animagus is a difficult and dangerous thing to do, and very few adult wizards would attempt it without the aid of several powerful, knowledgable, and experienced wizards/witches. The only reason Sirius, James, and Peter were able to do it, is because they, or at least James and Sirius, were some of the most briliant student to ever come through Hogwarts. Also, don't forget that Hermione check the Registry of Animagi for the last 1000 years, and I'm sure she would have remembered seeing Lily Evans-Potter. Although, IF Lily were an animagus, a unicorn seems a reasonable possiblity, and more likely, her Patronus guardian form would probably be a Unicorn. Just a thought. Steve/asian_lovr2 From romulus at hermionegranger.us Tue Aug 10 22:26:24 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 22:26:24 -0000 Subject: Scottish school cut-off dates- Hermione's birthday riddle solved? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109617 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "serenadust" wrote: > Jo Serenadust, lobbying for "Old" Hermione since 2001 RMM: Jo, I wish I met you back then! I am an "Old" Hermione advocate as well, and I think for very important reasons: http://www.hermionegranger.us/pages/hermepower.htm RMM www.hermionegranger.us From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Aug 10 22:28:16 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 22:28:16 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109618 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arielock2001" wrote: > Wow. I was not expecting the flood of emails! LOL I tried so hard > to write a tough riddle that I think I made it too tough. I was > afraid it was too obvious... > OK. > 1. I believe that we will find out that Lily's birthday is September 30th. This would make her a Libra. Where on earth am I getting this date, you ask? > 2. Let me add a few words to the riddle: > > "History likes to repeat itself in this series: > It's a birthday she shared with a friend WHO IS STILL ALIVE. > Our boy won't have to kill anyone. > The definitions of all twelve MONTHS can be found in your home > LibraRy. > Save time: start at the end and work back." > > Then reread the prophesy. > > Yes, It does seem very "so what" at first, but if I am right, it > completely changes the outcome of the series. > > Thanks for playing! I'll clarify more in a few days. > Arianna > > http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/faq_view.cfm?id=23 > > Section: F.A.Q. > (SPOILER WARNING) > Q.The prophecy Harry hears in Dumbledore's office suggests to > me that both he and Voldemort will have to die, is that true? > A. Both Madam Trelawney and I worded the prophecy extremely > carefully and that is all I have to say on the subject! > > Valky: arrrrgh! Still lost I am afraid! I guessed you meant Months (or Moons) so I already looked them up just to be sure. September means seventh month. From September on to the last month they are all numerically named. I don't get it. How can the most meaningless of month names be the meaningful ones????? Lily shares her birthday with someone alive? Still lost...... .....born as the seventh month dies...... Ohhhh Oh OH OH !!! Pick me Pick me! Are you saying that the LV vanquisher was born when Lily died? Ummmm I'm still lost....... From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 22:29:34 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 22:29:34 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore and Hedwig/ Chocolate Frog Cards. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109619 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Eustace_Scrubb" wrote: > finwitch wrote: > > > > What else do we *know* of Albus on how he could keep an eye on > > Harry? > > > > 2) The Chocolate Frog Cards. > Eustace_Scrubb: > The chocolate frog cards are an interesting possibility. But would > they work the same for other living wizards and witches portrayed? Asian_lovr2: One small problem with the Chocolate Frog Cards. I keep my portraits on the wall, I keep my trading cards in a box. Hard to keep an eye on Harry if the card is stashed in a box all the time. One further comment, picture/photos don't seem to have the same level of inteligence, awareness, or mobility as enchanted portrait characters. Just a thought. Steve/asian_lovr2 From romulus at hermionegranger.us Tue Aug 10 22:33:10 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 22:33:10 -0000 Subject: Animagi theories In-Reply-To: <6.1.0.6.0.20040810134523.071a59f0@mail.catbirdco.us> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109620 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Michal wrote: > At 02:55 PM 8/9/04, RMM wrote: > >As the proof is there for the fact that Voldemort's animagus form > >being a snake; after all, Harry bit into Mr. Weasley; > > Michal: > Voldemort was possessing is pet/sidekick snake. At the time he hadn't > regained his body yet. Wouldn't it be difficult/impossible to transform if > you don't have much of a body? RMM: Are you saying that Voldemort did not have a body in OotP? <> [from CHAPTER TWENTY-ONE -The Eye of the Snake] RMM www.hermionegranger.us From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Aug 10 22:34:20 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 22:34:20 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109621 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > Lily shares her birthday with someone alive? > Still lost...... > > .....born as the seventh month dies...... Ohhhh Oh OH OH !!! > Pick me Pick me! > > Are you saying that the LV vanquisher was born when Lily died? > > Ummmm I'm still lost....... Valky again: Ariana..... You mean Luna, dont you...... From squeakinby at tds.net Tue Aug 10 22:48:00 2004 From: squeakinby at tds.net (squeakinby) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 18:48:00 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <411950A0.3000909@tds.net> No: HPFGUIDX 109622 M.Clifford wrote: >--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" >wrote: > > > >>Lily shares her birthday with someone alive? >>Still lost...... >> >> Hermione is a Libra. Libra-ry. Hermione lives for the library. Luna is definitely a Cancerian, so I wouldn't bother going there. Those eyes are the eyes of a moon-child. Jem From jmmears at comcast.net Tue Aug 10 22:48:28 2004 From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 22:48:28 -0000 Subject: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109623 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Josh Warren" wrote: > Not saying it would be mature, necessarily, but Harry does have a > right to be angry. You can't dispute that. Oh, he certainly has a right to be angry at the hand life has dealt him so far. What I dispute is that he has any right to be angry at Molly, and I really don't think we'll see him direct any of his anger her way. Josh continues: A good part of the living > hells of his life are quite attributible to the good guys in the > guise of protecting him. The Dursleys; 'nuf said. I think it is fair > to assume that the beginning of HPB will have PowderKeg!Harry, and we > can either leak that pressure off slowly, or in an explosion. Slowly > gets us a whole book of Angry!Harry, so... yes, I agree with you, and > thus we need an explosion. :) Well, since OOP was nothing but PowderKeg!Harry, I think it would be a bit monotonous to continue that in HBP. Besides, I think Harry has moved beyond the stage of acting out in anger. It really hasn't been a very effective coping mechanism and in the end, I think he's begun to realize that. I expect that we'll be seeing a more subdued Harry in the next book. Although, Dumbledore has shown that he isn't always omniscient, I still think that placing Harry with the Dursleys was the best option left to him at the time. He was placing Harry's survival ahead of his day to day happiness. Josh wrote: > Hmm... we do have to wonder if Molly knows even the partial prophesy, > or is she the same as DD in that she's hoping that despite all the > evidence, that Harry won't have to fulfill it until he's an adult? > Molly not knowing the partial wouldn't contradict my above statement, > as she wasn't one of the ones guarding it. How do we know that she wasn't one of the ones guarding it? The night that Sirius appears in the common room fire to tell HRH that Molly doesn't want them to participate in the DA, he tells Ron that she can't tell them herself because she's "on duty tonight". When Ron asks "on duty doing what?", Sirius replies, "Never you mind, just stuff for the Order." I think that's a pretty strong clue that she's pulling guard duty just like all the other Order members. I think that if any of the other OOP members know about the prophesy, then Molly does too. Jo S. From arielock at aol.com Tue Aug 10 22:52:01 2004 From: arielock at aol.com (arielock2001) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 22:52:01 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109625 Brenda wrote: > Are you trying to give us some sort of riddle? ;P yes. ;-) > 1. Where did you find Lily's birthday, was that in the books? No, her birthday has never been given in the books or in interviews. It's a guess based on what we know about her. > 4. "It's a birthday she shared with a friend" -- are you saying >Lily and her friend were both born on Sept 30? correct >Who do we know that were born on that day? And we have yet >to see Lily's friends specifically named in canon. Where are >you getting these from? That's part of the riddle. > 2. Why do you have the year of death in question marks? unless you suspect they died after the attack of Godric's Hallow. No, there is just so much debate about the timeline, the actual years for the story are not clear. (http://www.hp-lexicon.org/timelines/timeline-mapping-tf.html). > 3. "History likes to repeat itself in this series" -- what >'history' are we talking about here? The plot that 'matters' in >death/evil conquer will somehow must include Voldemort, IMO. >Are you drawing similaries between Tom Riddle, Lily and >Harry? Plot points are used more than once. > 5. "The definitions of all twelve can be found in your home Library" - > - are you talking about the astrology and the names of 12 horoscopes? close, months. > Please give us insights. > And no, no one will take it away from you, hehe. (giggles). Sorry. (blushes). > Brenda, who has claimed: - time-turner uses the math behind Einstein's Theory of Relativity you're on to something there. ;-) Arianna From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Tue Aug 10 22:58:19 2004 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 22:58:19 -0000 Subject: Scottish school cut-off dates- Hermione's birthday riddle solved? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109626 --- serenadust wrote: > > The problem with Hermione's year of birth is not > only reconciling it with the standard English school > cut-off date, but with the fact that Angelina Johnson > becomes 17 in October of her sixth year. > > > > The only way that Hermione could be younger than > Harry is if the cut-off date falls between her > birthday (Sept 19) and Angelina's (3rd week in October). Or if there is no strict cutoff at all. Or if there are exceptions to the cutoff and one was made for Angelina or Hermione. Or if Angelina was held back a year at Hogwarts. Or if (like most American schools; I don't know the UK practice) they permit students to be held back a year before entering, and Angelina was. Or .... > In spite of the timeline in the Lexicon and the CoS video, > I still think that Hermione is the oldest of the trio. > It's not really very important, but unless JKR can explain > that Hermione received a special exception to enter > Hogwarts a year ahead of schedule, or says that Hogwarts > cut-off is October 1, then that timeline is yet another > Flint. What the timeline indicates (at least to me) is that Rowling *intended* Hermione to be the youngest of the trio. You can call her September birthday an inconsistency if you want -- based on extrapolating to a fictional school some preconceptions about the way school admissions work at some real world schools -- but it's awfully hard to make a case that Hermione was "really" born a year earlier unless you have a conception of fictional reality that is divorced from the author's intent. -- Matt From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Tue Aug 10 23:03:13 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 23:03:13 -0000 Subject: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109627 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "serenadust" wrote: > Well, since OOP was nothing but PowderKeg!Harry, I think it would be > a bit monotonous to continue that in HBP. Besides, I think Harry > has moved beyond the stage of acting out in anger. It really hasn't > been a very effective coping mechanism and in the end, I think he's > begun to realize that. I expect that we'll be seeing a more subdued > Harry in the next book. OotP was also SilentSufferer!Harry in some senses. He certainly could have raised a lot more fuss about the Blood Quill and other things. I'd rather call 5th year Harry, Moody!Harry. Harry shouldn't take no for an answer anymore, at least where he himself is concerned, and that means _everything_ about the Order, and I see that taking some doing... that's all. > How do we know that she wasn't one of the ones guarding it? The > night that Sirius appears in the common room fire to tell HRH that > Molly doesn't want them to participate in the DA, he tells Ron that > she can't tell them herself because she's "on duty tonight". When > Ron asks "on duty doing what?", Sirius replies, "Never you mind, > just stuff for the Order." Got me there. :) ...although timing could still come into play. Ugh! I just wish HPB was published yesterday! :) Impatient!Josh From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Aug 10 23:03:16 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 23:03:16 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: <411950A0.3000909@tds.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109628 > M.Clifford wrote: > >>Lily shares her birthday with someone alive? > >>Still lost...... > >> > >> Jem: > Hermione is a Libra. > Libra-ry. Hermione lives for the library. > Valky: Fair nuff and nuff said too.... Now the History repeats starts to make more sense..... Well a bit anyway. That makes Ariana a HarryxHermione Shipper !!!! I am a HermionexRon myself with the addition of Hermione ADORES Harry but nothing like that. So ?clue? how this changes the other lines of the prophecy eg the either because neither part especially, and the mark! From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Tue Aug 10 23:06:33 2004 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 23:06:33 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: <411950A0.3000909@tds.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109629 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Jem wrote: > Hermione is a Libra. > > Libra-ry. Hermione lives for the library. > > Luna is definitely a Cancerian, so I wouldn't bother > going there. Those eyes are the eyes of a moon-child. > > Jem Actually, doesn't Libra start in late September? I think Hermione is a Virgo...though I'm sure there's someone here more expert in astrology than I. -- Matt From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Tue Aug 10 23:09:26 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 23:09:26 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109630 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arielock2001" wrote: > Brenda: > > Please give us insights. > > And no, no one will take it away from you, hehe. > > (giggles). Sorry. (blushes). Is anyone other than myself worried about this girl's sanity at the moment? *sigh* If you're making up half of the stuff your riddle is based on, then there's not that much of a basis for deducing _your_ answer. It's bad enough we're working on JKR's riddles directly. To my knowledge, we don't have birthdays for anyone of the Maurader's timeline, or for anyone other than kids, really. I don't buy into any theories that the prophesy doesn't refer to Harry at this point (could swing, but for now, it's just Harry) in particular, or to a girl, in general. Now... if you're trying to count backwards to hit 7 months... that's just getting too tricky, and I think the other contents of the prophesy itself are to be taken literally.... nothing too odd; the carefulness of its writing was to avoid weird interpretations. Josh From romulus at hermionegranger.us Tue Aug 10 23:12:44 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 23:12:44 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109631 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Nora Renka" wrote: Nora: > > Okay, I'll admit I'm up front about not being a fan of speculation-- > that's one area where Kneasy has me pegged correctly. But just how > do you get around the multiple statements, by multiple characters, > that James always hated the Dark Arts and had nothing to do with > it? That's a lot of canon to say "Oh, well, they were all 1) > confused 2) lying 3) didn't know what they were talking about 4) too > ashamed to admit it". RMM: Okay, I am at a loss here. Could you enlighten this poor soul with some citations so that I am dissuaded from my speculation that James Potter was attracted by the Dark Arts? Nora: > > I grant you that the original aims of Voldemort were popular--my own > fascism analysis needs that point. :) But keep in mind WHO they > were popular with. Regulus Black joined up, and Mommy thought he > was a right little hero for doing it. Mommy is also a firm believer > in blood criteria, and flings the word 'Mudblood' around like a wet > dishrag. > > While for all James' many, many, well-discussed faults, isn't it > meaningful that he insists he would never call Lily a Mudblood? RMM: I have never stated that because he was a Pureblood that he was into the Purebloodism. He was in it for self promotion and for the challenge. He outdid everyone at Hogwarts at everything -- except one thing -- outdoing Snape at something. And what was Snape good at? It was certainly not gaining the affection of Lily Evans! Nora: > > THAT'S the part of the DEs that was popular--getting rid of those > uppity Mudbloods. RMM: I disagree. Not all the Death Eaters were into the purebloodism philosophy, but many were. Being a member of a popular organization has its benefits -- Socially and Economically, besides the pure enjoyment of being high up in an organization feeding one's ego. And we know James had an ego. He joined, I speculate, for the sheer challenge and enjoyment of it. Nora: That was most likely a lot of their public face, > too. We have strong canon that James didn't think that way. How, > then, could we ever postulate him going up to Voldemort and > saying "Well, hey, I'd like to join up too"? RMM: To learn from Brightest Wizard of his day. Secondly, Voldemort would love to have a POPULAR student like James Potter on his team to show that this movement is POPULAR and praiseworthy. See young Regulus? We have JAMES POTTER, Head Boy, on our team! Want to join up? Voldemort probably spent a lot of time recruiting James Potter. And none of the recruitment would have had to involved any dark arts. It was great PR to have people like James Potter on your side. Nora: > > I submit that to join up the DEs, you'd either have to believe in > the pureblood crusade, or be a pure opportunist out to get power or > CYA. Peter is the example of the latter, while we have multiple > mentions of James being someone who defied Voldemort. RMM: Yes, after a time, it came to the point of PROVING one's worth to Voldemort. There was a point at which the candidate was tested. James Potter probably made a life altering decision at this point, probably helped by his new love Lily Evans, and decided to step down from his enviable position inside the Death Eaters. He sacrificed popularity for integrity. Nora: > > This is the problem with attempted subversive readings--they may > make one thing that 'seemed' problematic work better, but you > usually mess up at least five other things in the process. RMM: Okay Nora, give me FIVE OTHER THINGS I have messed up. RMM www.hermionegranger.us From hpfgu_elves at yahoo.co.uk Tue Aug 10 23:13:46 2004 From: hpfgu_elves at yahoo.co.uk (hpfgu_elves) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 23:13:46 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Release of Book 6 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109632 Hello, everyone, greetings from Hexquarters! We do all share the desire for Book 6 to be published ASAP. But, please, confine your predictions about its impending release and also observations about pregnancy to our OTC list. This list is for discussion of canon only (the books by JK Rowling), and we do allow discussion of information she gives in interviews, chats, and on her own website, as long as it relates to the content of the books. (Discussions about how to navigate JKR's website must also go to OTC.) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/ Thanks for understanding, The List Elves [Note: This message is being sent by the Admin Team as a Special Notice to the entire list. Do not respond to this message onlist. If you would like to comment on it, please do not do so by 'replying' to it by email, as your comments will go to the entire list. Instead, please respond to us at HPforGrownups-owner@ yahoogroups.com, or by posting to our Feedback list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Feedback/. (Also know that email at the hpfgu_elves@ yahoo.co.uk address is only checked sporadically, so for a faster response, please use the above 'owner' address.) Thank you!] From snow15145 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 23:15:38 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 23:15:38 -0000 Subject: JKR web update Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109633 Happy Birthday to Ginny Weasley August 11th! Snow From eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk Tue Aug 10 23:18:57 2004 From: eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk (iamvine) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 23:18:57 -0000 Subject: Time-turning as literary device (was: Just a comment about Lupin's malady) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109634 SSSusan previously stated: > > > I actually kind of *like* > > > the thought that Fred could pretend to be both himself & George > > > while George goes off to do something. :-) On the other hand, > > > wouldn't that break DD's "rule" that the person doing the time- > > > turning can't see himself? Then Eleanor said: > > Yes, but I don't see that that rule is absolutely necessary. The > > crucial thing is to not contradict what happened the first time. If > > you saw yourself, then when time-travelling you must let yourself be > > seen again, and you must do the same thing. This could be hard. If > > you simply keep out of your other self's way, you have fewer > > obligations and more freedom. SSSusan then replied: > No problem that your response is late, Eleanor; I'm behind again, > too. Anyway, I guess my question is, are you *hypothesizing* that > the rule isn't an absolute necessity? (That "they're more like > guidelines," to draw a phrase from Pirates of the Caribbean.) Or is > there something in canon which makes you pretty certain that a TT! > character can see him/herself without problem as long as their > actions are consistent? Because I guess I took the warning more > literally. There is canon - Harry sees himself, and that turns out fine - though maybe only because he didn't know it was him. In the m*v*e there's a lot more contact between past and future selves - the stone- throwing, Hermione catching a glimpse of herself, her werewolf howl to distract Lupin, and maybe some other things, I don't remember. With the stone-throwing, you can see Hermione thinking: Why aren't we leaving? Oh, because someone's got to throw stones through the window first. Oh, it must have been me. I'd better do it then. She doesn't see herself that time, but she still has contact with herself. If she'd kept to the law, and _not_ thrown the stones because she knew she wasn't supposed to interact with herself, she would have changed the past. > PLEASE forgive if this is movie contamination, but as many times as > I've read the books, I have two little kids and so have seen the > movies multiple times, too. Does Hermione in canon!PoA say they > CAN'T see themselves, and then uses the example of what would Harry > think if he barged into Hagrid's hut and saw himself (that is, he'd > think he was mad)? If that's not canon, then I don't have as much > problem with your statement that the rule isn't absolutely > necessary. If it *is* canon, then I guess my objection still stands. Yes, that's in the book. Page 291-292, UK edition. But look at it carefully. Hermione: "We're breaking one of the most important wizarding laws! Nobody's supposed to change time, nobody!" And Dumbledore says on page 288, "Miss Granger, you know the law - you know what is at stake ... you - must - not - be - seen." It's a wizarding law. Not a natural law but something the Ministry of Magic came up with. That makes me suspect it a little. We know Ministry laws can be ... overenthusiastic, sometimes. It's possible to break a law and have it turn out okay. The law is a guideline which you might get sent to Azkaban if you are caught breaking. Sometimes breaking the law is a good idea, in the same way that defending Dudley from Dementors is a good idea in book 5. But it's not really clear. What does this law say? That you mustn't change time, or that you mustn't be seen? If you are doing something illegal, it makes sense to stay hidden, for reasons quite unrelated to time travel. But if you are seen, does it matter whether it is by your past self or by someone else, as long as you don't change the past? I think the law, or rule extrapolated from the law, against being seen by yourself is because it's assumed that if you do see yourself you must be changing the past. This is not necessarily true - see examples above. Something else from that quote of Hermione's: She thinks she and Harry are already breaking the law. She talks as if they are going to deliberately change the past. And she talks about people who did change the past, even killed themselves. I'd really like to ignore this whole speech, because without it, the story is a lot simpler. Time travel stories normally work in one of two ways. Either travelling back in time always changes the past - by putting an extra version of you in it - or you can't change the past at all, because your past self was there all along. In the first scenario, you can't meet your future self. Since Harry did, it looks as if PoA uses the second scenario. But then we're told that you actually can change the past if you try??? Then we must be in some weird third scenario with rules that I don't understand. I suspect that Hermione, the Ministry of Magic and JKR are just as confused about it as anybody else. Maybe there's one set of rules if you stay in my "fluid area" and another set if you leave it. Hmm. Eleanor From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 10 23:20:31 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 23:20:31 -0000 Subject: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109635 Josh wrote: > Hmm... we do have to wonder if Molly knows even the partial > prophesy, or is she the same as DD in that she's hoping that > despite all the evidence, that Harry won't have to fulfill it > until he's an adult? Molly not knowing the partial wouldn't > contradict my above statement, as she wasn't one of the ones > guarding it. > SSSusan: Ah, but Josh, we don't know that. As Aggie pointed out a few days ago in a Molly thread, she *may very well have been one of the ones guarding the prophecy. Here is a snippet from her post 109056: >>>Aggie: Whilst I agree that Molly's role seems to be that of a 'traditionally female' one, she *has* done some spy stuff! When Sirius is talking to the Trio via floo (in OotP) and he mentions them setting up the DA, he says that he has a message for Ron from Molly. She was unable to give it herself as she was 'on duty tonight'. UK vers Ch 17 Pp330. I always assumed that this 'duty' was guarding the prophecy. This means that she *does* participate in the more 'exciting' areas of the Order, but probably not as much as the others.<<< Not conclusive, I'll grant, but being "on duty" for the other Order members *did* mean keeping watch at the MoM. Siriusly Snapey Susan From Zarleycat at aol.com Tue Aug 10 23:21:37 2004 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 23:21:37 -0000 Subject: Did Molly dislike Sirius?(was Molly-- Thoughts on a witch) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109636 Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: > > Do you really think Molly DISLIKED Sirius, or just that she > questioned his ability to be a mature, responsible guardian for > Harry? I know she made that one really nasty remark to Sirius about > his not having been able to do much for Harry for 12 years, seeing as > how he'd been locked away in Azkaban [ouch!], and I chalked that up > to 1) the stress of the situation and 2) her worry over Harry > listening *too much* to rash Sirius. But I don't think I'd go so far > as to say she DISLIKED him. > > Do others have thoughts on this? Marianne: I think she was certainly antagonistic towards Sirius in the beginning of OoP. She even "threw him a nasty look" when Mundungus did or said something that displeased her, as if it was Sirius' fault for whatever Dung was up to. On the other hand, in that first scene in the kitchen in OoP Molly was screaming, shrieking, and raging at everyone. So, yes, I do think she was stressed at the entire situation. Plus, not all that much time had passed since she got the news that not only was Sirius not the bloody mass murderer she had believed him to be for over 12 years, he was also Harry's godfather and someone that Harry was quite fond of. Not to mention that Ron had also become acquainted with said mass murderer. And, for someone like Molly who goes into full lioness-protection mode when she thinks her kids need it, this was probably a big adjustment to make in her thinking. But, later on Molly certainly seemed to appreciate Sirius' offer for the family to stay in 12 GP after Arthur was attacked. I'd have to say that, on balance, I don't think she disliked Sirius. And for someone who's greatest fear is to see the people she loves dead, I wonder if that will give her a greater understanding of just what Harry is going through. Marianne From eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk Tue Aug 10 23:22:32 2004 From: eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk (iamvine) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 23:22:32 -0000 Subject: Time-turning as literary device (was: Just a comment about Lupin's malady) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109637 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Brenda M." wrote: > Great analogy with Schroedinger's cat, Eleanor!! But it can be > extended even further to *any* elements of literature that we don't > know everything about. Plot, time-line, characterization, etc. That > is precisely *why* we have ESE! and conspiracy theories running wild - > - whatever is not told in canon are "fluid". Sure, we can draw logic > from what we know to fill in the gap, but just look at how Peter > fooled WW for 12 years. Yes! And until we read the next book, all the theories (at least, all the sensible ones :) are equally "true". See, I knew we'd get back to the "literary device" bit of the subject line eventually! Eleanor From dontask2much at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 23:24:20 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (Rebecca Bowen) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 19:24:20 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Animagi theories References: <6.1.0.6.0.20040810134523.071a59f0@mail.catbirdco.us> Message-ID: <004201c47f31$2aba8b50$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 109638 From: "Michal" > At 02:55 PM 8/9/04, RMM wrote: > >As the proof is there for the fact that Voldemort's animagus form > >being a snake; after all, Harry bit into Mr. Weasley; > > Michal: > Voldemort was possessing is pet/sidekick snake. At the time he hadn't > regained his body yet. Wouldn't it be difficult/impossible to transform if > you don't have much of a body? > charme: Actually, I agree he (LV) might be possessing a pet snake, but maybe not Nagini. Note that Mr. Weasley was bitten 3 times - if you check your Fantastic Beasts, you'll see that there's a snake that DE's or those involved in the Dark Arts preferred (a Runespoor), and this appears to be the snake that was possessed. I don't think Nagini is a Runespoor, but I do think it's possible that LV could transform into one. charme From drednort at alphalink.com.au Tue Aug 10 23:37:57 2004 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 09:37:57 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Scottish school cut-off dates- Hermione's birthday riddle solved? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4119E8F5.16210.5C15EA@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 109639 On 10 Aug 2004 at 22:01, serenadust wrote: > In spite of the timeline in the Lexicon and the CoS video, I still > think that Hermione is the oldest of the trio. It's not really very > important, but unless JKR can explain that Hermione received a > special exception to enter Hogwarts a year ahead of schedule, or > says that Hogwarts cut-off is October 1, then that timeline is yet > another Flint. The things is... early entry or acceleration of various sorts isn't that uncommon. It was less common in British schools in the early 1990s than it was in many places, but it's really not *that* unusual. I work with gifted kids, and I have a lot of contact with the way education works around the world. This just isn't that uncommon. It's not at all an unreasonable assumption to make the timeline work. Further - with British independent schools, historically, it's even more common - recently I sent a long post to the list outlining the similarities between the way Hogwarts is presented and the British Public Schools. I think that is the 'correct' model to be looking at, in as much as there is any correct model for comparing muggle schools to Hogwarts. Basically, historically, in such schools, age limits, and cut offs were very much guidelines. While most students were about the same age in the same year - by no means all were. Evidence for this - Stephen Fry's (British comedian who incidentally read the British version of the Harry Potter Audio books), autobiography 'Moab Is My Washpot'. He attended a British public school (Uppingham), which he entered a year earlier than was 'normal', and went through the school, a year ahead of the norm. He says this at one stage: "I will be taking my O levels this year. Fourteen seems a young age for them, but in those days, if they reckoned you could do them, you did them. I would take my A levels two years later and leave school at sixteen, then university at seventeen, that was my future, all chartered out before me. That was how things were done then." (page 209). I could find other examples - I still haven't returned the twenty or so books on public schools I borrowed to write my long post (-8, but this one has at least some Harry Potter relevance, so it seemed the best choice. Now, admittedly, Fry is talking about when he was at school (early 1970s) but Hogwarts does seem a little behind the Muggle world in a lot of ways, especially when it comes to social and educational trends. The idea that Hermione started at Hogwarts a year earlier than normal is simply not that surprising. If the other evidence indicates that it's the case, there is no reason to doubt that other evidence. Hogwarts needs to be seen in the context of the type of school it seems to be. Now, while not everyone will necessarily agree with my view of what type of school that is (although I think I've made the case well in the past), I think most people are very well aware that it's not exactly a 'normal' school and so while some things may certainly be similar, it shouldn't surprise us at all, when Hogwarts seems a little different. 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 mhbobbin at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 00:18:10 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 00:18:10 -0000 Subject: Figgy In-Reply-To: <002201c47eb2$cd210bf0$76c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109640 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > mhbobbin > "And on this subject, why can't Mrs. Figg see dementors? She's not > all that convincing in the Ministry hearing. And Squibs ARE supposed > to be able to see dementors." > > > DuffyPoo: > "Incidentally, can Squibs see Dementors?" [Fudge] added. > "Yes, we can!" said Mrs Fgg indignantly. - can't really blame her for being indignant, Fudge is, after all, the M for M and he doesn't know if Squibs can see Dementors? > > With regard to her being unconvincing in her description, perhaps it is down to being nervous in front of a gang of witches and wizards who don't give a 'fig' about Squibs. Whether she described the appearance of Dementors well, as Madam Bones said, "She certainly described the effects of a Dementor attack very accurately." > > And while Mrs. Figg describes the Dementors as 'running' when actually they 'glide' we can all remember that they 'flew' in the .....oops, sorry, not supposed to mention the 'm' word! ;-) > >mhbobbin wonders some more: I'm not convinced that Figgy did see the Dementors. Running, Flying or Gliding. Figg says she is a Squib. we can't know yet that she truly is although she seems truly frightened that the Dementors come back before she gets Harry and Dudley home. Harry himself doesn't seem to think she saw them (Scholastic Page 144). He seems to think that she may have seen a picture of one some time. Big guys wearing cloaks. Madame Bones' defense of Figgy's uncertain testimony is that the effects were described accurately-- something us muggles can do. Maybe Figg is what she presents herself as, maybe she was just late so didn't see the Dementors, and maybe she had never seen a Dementor before. If only she wasn't so mysterious herself. The Fig Flower signifies secrets-(per David Colbert's Harry Potter book.) BUt I don't think her only secret was hiding out as a muggle in little Whinging. Does anyone have any theories on the connection between Figgy and Perkins (the tent, the smell of cabbage). And with that, why Professor Binns calls Harry "Perkins" in the classroom scene where Harry finds Hedwig injured at the window. I've searched in the archives but haven't found any posts yet. mhbobbin From paula at jefftrout.com Tue Aug 10 12:14:02 2004 From: paula at jefftrout.com (paulaboo1013) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 12:14:02 -0000 Subject: The chess game in SS/PS, quidditch, and Snape's potion puzzle... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109641 A.J. > I'm sorry I don't have a url here, but it must be standard in the > group's essays... http://www.knight2king.net/Knight2King/Personal51.html "Chess is a metaphor for war, and the war between the forces for good, led by Albus Dumbledore, and the forces for evil, led by Lord Voldemort, is central to the overall plot of the series. The very last chapter of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix is called "The Second War." We made a connection." Paula [Elfnote: The complete URL for the Potions Riddle is http://www.hp-lexicon.org/essays/essay-potionriddle.html] From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 00:49:38 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 17:49:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Squashed magic was: blood types, Dudley In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040811004938.95728.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109642 > Yb ponders: > This got me thinking on a completely different tangent. Tom never > knew his mother, and he probably never met his father, plus his > father didn't stick around long after finding out that "the girl" > (Tom's mother) was a witch, and pregnant (wonder which scared him > more?) So how did Tom discover he was the heir of Slytherin? In fact, how did he find out about his father abandoning his mother in the first place? I can't accept the coincidence of another letter that explains everything left with a baby. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 11 00:49:48 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 00:49:48 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109643 M.Clifford wrote: > > >>Lily shares her birthday with someone alive? > > >>Still lost...... > > >> > > >> Jem: > > Hermione is a Libra. > > Libra-ry. Hermione lives for the library. Valky: > Now the History repeats starts to make more sense..... > Well a bit anyway. > That makes Ariana a HarryxHermione Shipper !!!! > I am a HermionexRon myself with the addition of Hermione ADORES > Harry but nothing like that. SSSusan: Wait. Valky, are you saying that Ariana's saying that Harry & Hermione are actually TT!James and TT!Lily? Or is it that she's saying Hermione is really TT!Lily, watching over her son? Yes, I'm lost, but fascinated against my will. :-) Siriusly Snapey Susan From jmay_71 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 10 23:13:00 2004 From: jmay_71 at yahoo.com (jmay_71) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 23:13:00 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109644 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arielock2001" > 1. I believe that we will find out that Lily's birthday is September > 30th. This would make her a Libra. Where on earth am I getting > this date, you ask? > 2. Let me add a few words to the riddle: > > "History likes to repeat itself in this series: > It's a birthday she shared with a friend WHO IS STILL ALIVE. > > Our boy won't have to kill anyone. > The definitions of all twelve MONTHS can be found in your home > LibraRy. > Save time: start at the end and work back." > > Then reread the prophesy. > After doing some research, I found that September means "seventh month" in Latin. I think what arielock2001 is trying to tell us is that "born as the seventh month" dies means born as September dies, or Sept 30. I also think the implication regarding Lily's friend who is still alive is that Lily's friend is the one who will vanquish Voldemort, not Harry. That is all I can guess right now. Still researching...:) So how'd I do? jmay From cog12345 at hotmail.com Wed Aug 11 00:40:34 2004 From: cog12345 at hotmail.com (xxsuperdanxx) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 00:40:34 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109645 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arielock2001" wrote: > > James Potter > Born ??/??/?? > Died 31/10/?? > > Lily Evans Potter > Born 30/9/?? > Died 31/10/?? > > History likes to repeat itself in this series: > It's a birthday she shared with a friend. > > Our boy won't have to kill anyone. > The definitions of all twelve can be found in your home LibraRy. > Save time: start at the end and work back. > If you mean the original definition of "September" as the seventh (Sept) month, I can see why a September 30 birthday would be important to the prophecy. But I still don't see how you're so certain that Lily's birthday is September 30, and (help me out here people) I'm experiencing a memory lapse as to who else's birthday is September 30 among all the other characters... xxsuperdanxx -- constant lurker who's temporarily out of hiding :P From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 01:04:59 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 01:04:59 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109646 > RMM: > Okay, I am at a loss here. Could you enlighten this poor soul with > some citations so that I am dissuaded from my speculation that James > Potter was attracted by the Dark Arts? Alla: I am not Nora, but here is the quote from Sirius: "And Snape was just this little oddball who was up to his eyes in the Dark Arts and James - whatever else he may have appeared to you, Harry - always hated Dark Arts" - OoP, p.670.amer.edition. Now, you may question Sirius' credibility, of course. Although I am still to hear the convincing reason why. In any event, I think Sirius so far had not been proven a liar in canon yet. So, I think that direct quote from the character about James hating the Dark Arts is stronger than speculation about him being DE. I will grant you (no matter how strongly I disagree with you) that circumstantial case could be made, albeit a weak one, IMO, that Sirius and Remus were at one point of their life were interested in dark Arts. I have no idea how the argument about James being interested in Dark Arts, AND joining Voldemort will hold up though. James is one Marauder whom I care the least about, specifically because he is the most noble one, IMO. Prior to OOP, he was portrayed as Saint. Now.. well now I think that the worst thing James did in his life was bullying Snape in pensieve Scene. At least he had some issues to work on. Makes him an interesting enough character for me. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Aug 11 01:11:53 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 01:11:53 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109647 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > Valky: > > Now the History repeats starts to make more sense..... > > Well a bit anyway. > > That makes Ariana a HarryxHermione Shipper !!!! > > I am a HermionexRon myself with the addition of Hermione ADORES > > Harry but nothing like that. > > > SSSusan: > Wait. Valky, are you saying that Ariana's saying that Harry & > Hermione are actually TT!James and TT!Lily? Or is it that she's > saying Hermione is really TT!Lily, watching over her son? > > Yes, I'm lost, but fascinated against my will. :-) > > Siriusly Snapey Susan Valky: Woaah LOL! Not really. But I get a chuckle outta that in the midst of the TT debates lately. What I suspected was hinted at by the History Repeats allegory was that there is a parrallel drawn between the Parent generation and the trio. Its a sketchy parrallel but it is there in its own way, as you are probably aware either from other posts about Neville/Peter (weaker and peripheral, yet so underestimated) .... Ron/Sirius (loyal and great yet flawed in comparison to their extraordinary best mate) or by your own observations. I figured that if she was then extending the parrallel to include Hermione/Lily (birthdates... superb ability.... loving yet stern... et al) that it follows to mention in there we *see* James and Lily reunited in Hermione and Harry. Personally, I see Harry and Lily reunited in Hermione and Harry because Hermione's love of Harry is deep like a mothers. But thats just my humble opinion. Does that clarify.....? From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 11 01:34:58 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 01:34:58 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109648 Valky: > > > Now the History repeats starts to make more sense..... > > > Well a bit anyway. > > > That makes Ariana a HarryxHermione Shipper !!!! > > > I am a HermionexRon myself with the addition of Hermione ADORES > > > Harry but nothing like that. SSSusan: > > Wait. Valky, are you saying that Ariana's saying that Harry & > > Hermione are actually TT!James and TT!Lily? Or is it that she's > > saying Hermione is really TT!Lily, watching over her son? > > > > Yes, I'm lost, but fascinated against my will. :-) > > > > Siriusly Snapey Susan Valky: > Woaah LOL! Not really. But I get a chuckle outta that in the midst > of the TT debates lately. > > What I suspected was hinted at by the History Repeats allegory was > that there is a parrallel drawn between the Parent generation and > the trio. Its a sketchy parrallel but it is there in its own way, as > you are probably aware either from other posts about Neville/Peter > (weaker and peripheral, yet so underestimated) .... Ron/Sirius > (loyal and great yet flawed in comparison to their extraordinary > best mate) or by your own observations. > > I figured that if she was then extending the parrallel to include > Hermione/Lily (birthdates... superb ability.... loving yet stern... > et al) that it follows to mention in there we *see* James and Lily > reunited in Hermione and Harry. > > Personally, I see Harry and Lily reunited in Hermione and Harry > because Hermione's love of Harry is deep like a mothers. But thats > just my humble opinion. > > Does that clarify.....? SSSusan: Hmmmm. Well, not really, because part of what Ariana said was that "Our boy won't have to kill anyone". How does THAT part fit in? Siriusly Snapey Susan, who'll very soon back out of this one! :-) From laura18 at mail2eastend.com Wed Aug 11 01:36:30 2004 From: laura18 at mail2eastend.com (jwcpgh) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 01:36:30 -0000 Subject: Villainy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109649 > Neri: > The subordinate villains are interesting because they still retain a considerable amount of humanity. Voldy made the proverbial deal with the devil: lots and lots of power for the price of his humanity. The minute he lost his humanity, JKR lost her interest in him.The only 3D aspect of Voldy is his Tom Riddle > aspect, the rejected and abused kid before he made his final deal > with the devil. BTW, I predict we will see more of Tom. Hi everyone, it's Laura, back from lurkdom and energized by her attendance at ConAlley. Nice thread, Kneasy, except that as usual you miss the point. Neri has hit it on the head. LV isn't complex because he traded his complex humanity for power and immortality. His very appearance tells us that he's not the same kind of creature we are. He was probably a lot more clever and devious when he was still Tom. As it is, he is not the least bit subtle about what he wants or what he is. The plot he devised to trick Harry into going to the DOM wouldn't have worked on anyone more worldly and experienced than Harry-think Fred and George would have fallen for it? Or even Hermione? I agree that we'll be seeing more of Tom-DD's use of his name in the DOM is a good indicator of that. One could theorize that Tom sought to shed his humanity because it was so painful for him, and that from the point of view of a young person who has been deeply hurt in childhood, absolute power, immortality and universal deference would look pretty desirable. (Obviously not every child who's suffered emotional damage goes this route, but I would guess that not too many brutal dictators or serial killers have had well-adjusted childhoods.) And no matter how complicated the reasons are that a person turns to the evil overlord lifestyle, once he's headed that way, the motivation tends to fade and the drive for power and domination come to justify and feed on themselves. So sure, it all gets very simple and straightforward, until the power hunger is all that's left. To be multilayered means to allow vulnerability and that's what these guys want to avoid at all costs, even the cost of their own humanity. That's because vulnerability risks pain, and villains like LV have decided that he'd much rather be inflicting pain than feeling it. The desire for immortality is an interesting condundrum for people, isn't it? On the surface, it looks like a pretty attractive idea. If you're happy, you want more of the same, and if you're not, you can have unlimited time to rectify the situation. But I don't know of any respected moral philosopher (correct me if I'm wrong), including theologians and founders of major religions, who see it as truly desirable. I suspect that if we were immortal, there would be more LVs among us than Nicholas Flamels. We as a species just don't seem to deal well with a lack of boundaries, do we? I haven't thought about this much though-maybe we'd all just go about our lives, always getting in the slowest line in the grocery store and complaining about gasoline prices forever and ever until the whole thing blows up. Thanks, Kneasy, for getting me back in the game! Laura From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 01:38:56 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 01:38:56 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109650 > M.Clifford wrote: > > > >>Lily shares her birthday with someone alive? > > > >>Still lost...... > > > >> > > > >> > > > Jem: > > > Hermione is a Libra. > > > Libra-ry. Hermione lives for the library. > > > Valky: > > Now the History repeats starts to make more sense..... > > Well a bit anyway. > > That makes Ariana a HarryxHermione Shipper !!!! > > I am a HermionexRon myself with the addition of Hermione ADORES > > Harry but nothing like that. > > > SSSusan: > Wait. Valky, are you saying that Ariana's saying that Harry & > Hermione are actually TT!James and TT!Lily? Or is it that she's > saying Hermione is really TT!Lily, watching over her son? Neri: Wow! TT implications of the prophecy. How comes I didn't think about this first? Now, I am an ardent R/H shipper, so it's clear that Ron's and Hermione's son, who will be born at September 30th (and will also be the HBP; I covered this one in earlier posts) will travel back in time to kill Voldy. Didn't Ron and Hermione defy Voldy three times? Lets count: once when Hermione knocked down Quirrellmort, once when they helped Harry get the stone, and once when they helped him get away with the prophecy in OotP. It all fits. And a Prince is more than equal to a Lord, isn't he? But wait, SSSusan. Did you say that it's Harry who is Ron's and Hermione's son? But JKR said that Harry is not the HBP. Oops, back to the drawing board. Neri From vmonte at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 01:51:49 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 01:51:49 -0000 Subject: The chess game in SS/PS, quidditch, and Snape's potion puzzle... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109651 A.J. wrote: I'm sorry I don't have a url here, but it must be standard in the group's essays... http://www.knight2king.net/Knight2King/Personal51.html "Chess is a metaphor for war, and the war between the forces for good, led by Albus Dumbledore, and the forces for evil, led by Lord Voldemort, is central to the overall plot of the series. The very last chapter of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix is called "The Second War." We made a connection." Paula [Elfnote: The complete URL for the Potions Riddle is http://www.hp-lexicon.org/essays/essay-potionriddle.html] vmonte responds: I'm glad you posted the knight2king website. I just went back to look for this website and the original HPFGU posts on this subject. post # 88007 and then post # 88276 -- (This is the knight2king theory. Check this post out. It will lead to many other posts discussing TT and Ron=DD if your interested in the theory.) vivian From srobles at caribe.net Wed Aug 11 01:56:18 2004 From: srobles at caribe.net (anasazi_pr) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 01:56:18 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: <411950A0.3000909@tds.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109652 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, squeakinby wrote: > M.Clifford wrote: > > >--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" > >wrote: > > > > > > > >>Lily shares her birthday with someone alive? > >>Still lost...... > >> > >> > Hermione is a Libra. > > Libra-ry. Hermione lives for the library. > > Luna is definitely a Cancerian, so I wouldn't bother going there. Those > eyes are the eyes of a moon-child. > > Jem Anasazi replies: Hi Jem. Actually, Hermione is a Virgo (her birthday is September 19, and virgos are born between Aug 22 - Sept 23). According to astrological myths, virgos are ruled by the planet Mercury, which fits with Hermione (derived from Hermes) acting like the proverbial alchemist. Hope that helps to clarify. Peace, Anasazi From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk Wed Aug 11 02:18:36 2004 From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 02:18:36 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109654 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > RMM: > > Okay, I am at a loss here. Could you enlighten this poor soul with > > some citations so that I am dissuaded from my speculation that > James > > Potter was attracted by the Dark Arts? > > > Alla: > > I am not Nora, but here is the quote from Sirius: > > > "And Snape was just this little oddball who was up to his eyes in the > Dark Arts and James - whatever else he may have appeared to you, > Harry - always hated Dark Arts" - OoP, p.670.amer.edition. > > > > Now, you may question Sirius' credibility, of course. Although I am > still to hear the convincing reason why. > > > In any event, I think Sirius so far had not been proven a liar in > canon yet. > > So, I think that direct quote from the character about James hating > the Dark Arts is stronger than speculation about him being DE. > Adding a quote from PS: "Now, yer mum an' yer dad were as good a witch an' wizard as I ever knew. Head Boy and Head Girl of Hogwarts in their day! Suppose the myst'ry is why You-Know-Who never tried to get them on his side before... probably knew they were too close ter Dumbledore ter want anything to do with the Dark Arts." (PS, p. 64 in UK paperback edition.) Now, I know that people tend to be dismissive about Hagrid's level of truthfulness -- confer the "there wasn't a single wizard who went back who wasn't in Slytherin" argument and the explanation that Hagrid is either exaggerating or quietly leaving out Harry's traitorous godfather so as not to upset the boy. But in this case I think there are good reasons to believe him. This isn't a case of exaggeration or quiet omission, if James actually had been involved with Voldemort and then come clean it'd be a bold, barefaced lie, and Hagrid isn't very good at lying. Think of all his guilty glances towards his pink umbrella. Besides, if MWPP had all been in cahoots with Voldemort while they were young, how come Sirius is clueless about the Dark Mark when he hears about it? Alshain From drliss at comcast.net Wed Aug 11 02:06:03 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (Lissa Hess) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 22:06:03 -0400 Subject: Did Molly dislike Sirius? In-Reply-To: <1092186327.12273.71886.m21@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.2.20040810215319.016e3230@mail.comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 109655 At 01:05 AM 8/11/2004 +0000, you wrote: >Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: > > > > Do you really think Molly DISLIKED Sirius, or just that she > > questioned his ability to be a mature, responsible guardian for > > Harry? I know she made that one really nasty remark to Sirius >about > > his not having been able to do much for Harry for 12 years, seeing >as > > how he'd been locked away in Azkaban [ouch!], and I chalked that up > > to 1) the stress of the situation and 2) her worry over Harry > > listening *too much* to rash Sirius. But I don't think I'd go so >far > > as to say she DISLIKED him. > > > > Do others have thoughts on this? Lissa: I've been watching this whole thread with interest. I love the character of Molly, because she TOTALLY reminds me of my own mother. Pushy and overprotective yes, but she's that way because she loves you. But overall, a great mother. One thing I did notice about Molly is that she (like most people) has trouble letting go of her prejudices. Consider when they visit Mr. Weasley in St. Mungo's; a werewolf is in the same room, and Molly's immediate reaction is fear- despite the fact she knows Lupin quite well and he's never shown her anything but comfort and kindness. For 12 years, Molly's considered Sirius a dangerous murderer that laughed as he killed off 13 people. Even though she knows it's not true, it's hard for her to overcome that gut instinct. Also, I think Molly and Sirius have a venting relationship. Sirius snaps at Molly about as much as she gets snippy with him. They're both under a lot of stress, and I think they're naturals to take their stress out on each other- especially since it means they don't vent on their kids or their other halves. (Sorry, adamant Remus/Sirius shipper here) But I think they work on that level as much as anything else. I don't think they dislike each other, but I don't think they;re crazy about each other either! Liss From shalimar07 at aol.com Wed Aug 11 01:00:39 2004 From: shalimar07 at aol.com (mumweasley7) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 01:00:39 -0000 Subject: Is Lupin James? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109656 In Book 3 Prisoner of Azkaban: Shrieking Shack Lupin was lowering his wand, gazing fixedly at Black. The professor walked to Black's side, seized his hand, pulled him to his feet so Crookshanks fell to the floor, and embraced Black like a brother. Notice 'gazing fixedly' - really looking him over. And embraced Black like a brother. In Book 5 OOtP, Sirius is explaining his family to Harry when he says he went to live with James' family after his family rejected him and they treated him like their own son. Is the reason Lupin doesn't touch Harry simply because he's so overcome with emotion that he can't afford to give away his secret and therefore chooses not embrace his son, and also why he shivers to hear Harry talk about his mother's screams? MumWeasley7 From karen at dacafe.com Wed Aug 11 00:40:02 2004 From: karen at dacafe.com (karen at dacafe.com) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 17:40:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lily's Grandparents In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <60519.68.34.189.212.1092184802.squirrel@cafemail.dcccafe.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109657 Carol writes: and "his mother's grandparents" for "his mother's parents" on her website. (That last one is still uncorrected.) >From Karen: It means more to me that Harry's mother's grandparents were muggles than just his grandparents. There has been a lot of discussion about whether there is a wizard, witch or squib in Lily's family tree. If her grandparents are muggles that means one must go back at least 5 generations to find magical blood. If any of Lily's great-grandparents were members of the WW, one of Lily's grandparents would have been a half-blood. I think JKR wants to endorse the statement that Lily (and therefore Petunia) are definitately muggles. That's not to say Petunia didn't try to attract the interest of one of Lily's classmates or that "horrid boy". ----------------------------------------- Stay ahead of the information curve. Receive DCC news and jobs on your desktop daily. Subscribe today to the DCC CafeNews newsletter. [ http://www10.dcccafe.com/nl/newsletter_subscribe.php ] It's informative and essential. From msturbo209 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 01:23:20 2004 From: msturbo209 at yahoo.com (stellablue571) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 01:23:20 -0000 Subject: Trio zodiac signs (Re: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts) In-Reply-To: <411950A0.3000909@tds.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109658 Jem: > Hermione is a Libra. > > Libra-ry. Hermione lives for the library. > > Luna is definitely a Cancerian, so I wouldn't bother going there. > Those eyes are the eyes of a moon-child. Just a correction...Hermione's birthday is September 19th, this makes her a Virgo, which is actually VERY consistent with her personal style! (If we go by "traditional" interpretations of sun signs, that is.) She would make a good Libra also, though! :) Regards to all, Stella From karen at dacafe.com Wed Aug 11 01:30:02 2004 From: karen at dacafe.com (karen at dacafe.com) Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 18:30:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Bellatrix's Fate In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <61310.68.34.189.212.1092187802.squirrel@cafemail.dcccafe.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109659 >From dcgmck: > Bellatrix belongs to Neville. >From Karen: IMO Bellatrix belongs to both Neville and Harry. Harry is the person in the final battle of the books. He has assistance getting there. Look for Neville to play more of a role in the last two books. I base this on his growing confidence, a wand that chooses him and the fact that Bellatrix has provided the "reason" to improve his magical skills. From karen at dacafe.com Wed Aug 11 02:35:25 2004 From: karen at dacafe.com (kmcbears1) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 02:35:25 -0000 Subject: Neville /Memory Charms (very long) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109660 I think that a Memory Charm was performed on Neville. My support for this theory comes from GoF. (References in Chronological order with my supporting comments to my theory. GoF - Chapter 7 Bagman and Crouch "'Poor old Bertha...memory like a leaky cauldron and no sense of directions. Lost, you take my word for it. She'll wander back into the office sometime in October, thinking it's still July.'" GoF - Chapter 27 Padfoot Returns "'Blustering on about how bad Bertha's memory is. Well, maybe she's changed since I knoew her, but the Bertha I knwew wasn't forgetfull at all -- quite the reverse. She was a bit dim, but she had an EXCELLENT MEMORY for gossip.'" (emphasis mine) Bertha Jorkin is not old in WW so why is her memory as an adult suddenly the opposite of what it was 14-15 years ago. Even in Muggle's memory does not change that drastically with age unless there is something wrong such as illness or accident. GoF - Chapter 30 The Pensive "'The Longbottoms wer very popular,' said Dumbledore. 'The attacks on them came AFTER Voldemort's fall from power, just when everyone thought they were safe.'" (emphasis mine) JKR does not say how long after but everyone was feeling safe. I think Neville was older than 13 month old Harry. If Harry can remember events from age 13 months, wouldn't Neville remember something that happened when he was 18 months? GoF -Chapter 33 - The Death Eaters "...but the means I used to break the Memory Charm upon her were powerful, and when I had extracted all useful information from her, her mind and body were both damaged beyond repair." GoF - Chapter 35 - Veritaserum "'He will stay, Minerva, because he needs to understand,' said Dumbledore curtly. 'Understanding is the first step to acceptance, and only with acceptance can there be recovery. He needs to know who has put him through the ordeal he has suffered tonight, and why." (comment on this after another Dumbledore quote.) "'He put a very powerful Memory Charm on her to make her forget what she'd found out. Too powerful. He said it damaged her memory permanently.'" Memory Charms can damage an adult's memory. What would it do to a child's or toddler's memory? Chapter 36 - The Parting of the Ways "'If I thought I could help you,' Dumbledoer said gently, 'by putting you inot an enchanted sleep and allowing you to POSTPONE the moment when you would have to think about what has happened tonight, I would do it.'" (emphasis mine) Dumbledore does have the power to help Harry forget, just preform a Memory Charm. But Dumbledore believes in learning and understanding from our experiences no matter how painful they may be. Dumbledore assumed responsibility for Harry after GH. Neville's Grandmother made the decisions for Neville after the Cruciatus Curse had left his parents in their current state. I believed Neville's Grandmother allowed or preformed the Memory Charm on Neville. Did it happen right away or was Neville suffering from nightmares that would make the Memory Charm seem like the correct course of action? IMO we will find out in Book 6 or 7. Neville does has one advantage over Bertha. His brain appears to be adjusting, growing, recovering from the Memory Charm. I think this is one of the reasons for his growing confidence and power. His brain is developing new pathways. Will the ADAD classes have lessons in using the Pensive in 6th or 7th year? I think it will be interesting to see into Harry's and Neville's memories and hope we get the chance. I do agree with the statements that Neville's grandmother is the definitive strict old-fashion proper lady. She is a mother who idolizes her son at the expense of her grandson. But I think she loves Neville and the Memory Charm was performed on young Neville because of that love. Karen From khinterberg at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 03:03:24 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 03:03:24 -0000 Subject: Potter Occupations Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109662 I was in the shower thinking through a bit in OotP that I had just read in Ch 17. Umbridge is observing Snape's class, asks him how long he has been working there, and he replies "fourteen years." We also find out that he (predictably) first applied for the DADA position but didn't get it. The fourteen years means that he was either given the position shortly before or after the infamous night at Godric's Hollow and that when he applied both the Potions and DADA positions were available. So did he apply at the beginning of the school year, perhaps because both previous professors had retired? Or were both the posts vacated that year and applied partway through? This would lead one to believe that perhaps Lily and James Potter were those two teachers, although I'm not sure which was in which position. JKR has told us that some of the teachers at Hogwarts are married or have been widowed, but that this information is kept protected and we will find out why later in the series. Could these points somehow tie in together? What does everyone think? "khinterberg" From sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 03:21:10 2004 From: sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com (sevenhundredandthirteen) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 03:21:10 -0000 Subject: JKR web update In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109663 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sevenhundredandthirteen" < sevenhundredandthirteen at y...> wrote: > Snow wrote: > > > > Happy Birthday to Ginny Weasley August 11th! > > > Which means that she is a Leo the same as Harry. > > It also means that she is only 11 days younger than him. > > If the Harry/Ginny shippers needed any more ammunition, it's this. > > Although, I'm dreadfully confused as to how Ron could have been born in > March, and then Ginny in August, unless she was FOUR MONTHS early. > > Is this JK being bad at counting again? Or is it proof that Ron and Ginny > cannot actually be siblings? > > ~<(Laurasia)>~ Oh dear, I just realised my mistake... Wrong year!!! Oh, silly me... Still, the fact that she is a Leo, the same as Harry still stands. ~<(Laurasia)>~ From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Wed Aug 11 03:31:23 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 03:31:23 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109664 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Josh Warren" wrote: > Is anyone other than myself worried about this girl's sanity at the > moment? *sigh* Hey, I'll go ahead and respond to myself before I start looking for the pitchforks and torches. My sense of humor is certainly very talented at masquerading as otherwise, and if I ever catch it, I'll have it iron its hands or something. ;) My more joking intent aside, I did want to broadcast a better explanation of what I was getting at further down in my post, as I just did in e-mail. I hold a firm belief that the children of JKR's intended audience will not have to jump through too many hoops to understand the core plot of the series. There are additional tidbits for adults to find, yes... similar to Toy Story's "I'm a lost toy" quote, which is frankly targeted a bit beyond my years. While we can find these additional chewy centers, I do think it wise to remember that JKR does and always has intended these books to be read by children, before we go too far down any given road. :) That's all... Josh From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 11 03:41:27 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 03:41:27 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109665 M.Clifford wrote: > > > > >>Lily shares her birthday with someone alive? > > > > >>Still lost...... Jem: > > > > Hermione is a Libra. > > > > Libra-ry. Hermione lives for the library. Valky: > > > Now the History repeats starts to make more sense..... > > > Well a bit anyway. > > > That makes Ariana a HarryxHermione Shipper !!!! > > > I am a HermionexRon myself with the addition of Hermione > > > ADORES Harry but nothing like that. SSSusan: > > Wait. Valky, are you saying that Ariana's saying that Harry & > > Hermione are actually TT!James and TT!Lily? Or is it that she's > > saying Hermione is really TT!Lily, watching over her son? Neri: > Wow! TT implications of the prophecy. How comes I didn't think > about this first? > > Now, I am an ardent R/H shipper, so it's clear that Ron's and > Hermione's son, who will be born at September 30th (and will also > be the HBP; I covered this one in earlier posts) will travel back > in time to kill Voldy. Didn't Ron and Hermione defy Voldy three > times? > Lets count: once when Hermione knocked down Quirrellmort, once > when they helped Harry get the stone, and once when they helped > him get away with the prophecy in OotP. It all fits. > > And a Prince is more than equal to a Lord, isn't he? > > But wait, SSSusan. Did you say that it's Harry who is Ron's and > Hermione's son? But JKR said that Harry is not the HBP. Oops, back > to the drawing board. SSSusan: Well, draw fast, Neri, because I want you to be right about the HBP being Ron's & Hermione's son! So just disregard that silly bit about its being Harry who's Hermione's son! I've no idea how all that could work out, but I think it'd be funny if you could figure a way. :-) Sheesh. I don't even LIKE TT scenarios, and look what I did. Siriusly Snapey Susan From bcbgx6 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 04:10:09 2004 From: bcbgx6 at yahoo.com (Brian) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 04:10:09 -0000 Subject: Did Molly dislike Sirius? In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.2.20040810215319.016e3230@mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109667 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Lissa Hess wrote: > At 01:05 AM 8/11/2004 +0000, you wrote: > >Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: > > > > > > Do you really think Molly DISLIKED Sirius, or just that she > > > questioned his ability to be a mature, responsible guardian for > > > Harry? I know she made that one really nasty remark to Sirius > >about > > > his not having been able to do much for Harry for 12 years, seeing > >as > > > how he'd been locked away in Azkaban [ouch!], and I chalked that up > > > to 1) the stress of the situation and 2) her worry over Harry > > > listening *too much* to rash Sirius. But I don't think I'd go so > >far > > > as to say she DISLIKED him. > > > > > > Do others have thoughts on this? Brian: I took the Molly/Sirius exchange as a personality clash. Molly is, temporarily, living in Sirius's ancestral home and she knows that he is a good guy. She treats him like a bachelor uncle (from the husband's side), though, and with good reason. My guess is that JKR has written Molly as a stereotypical mother. Stereotypy has received a lot of bad press since the days of political correctness, but Molly, I think, is an example of it. Notice that most of the time Harry notices that she behaves "like a mother." Here in the U.S., mothers are stereotypically protective (not to say that they aren't in the U.K. or elsewhere, it's just that I don't know). Also in the U.S., mothers (stereotypically) spend a lot of time prying into their childrens' lives and demanding a lot of them. Most of Molly's behaviors are "motherly" according to a "mother paradigm" I'm quite familiar with. To use an idiomatic expression I've heard, she "blows hot and cold." That is to say, her emotions rule the day. This trait is potentially interesting for R/H SHIPpers and H/H SHIPpers because Hermione, in my view, also blows hot and cold (notice how in OOTP her mood changes so quickly due to Ron's and Harry's actions). Getting back to Molly, the scene in OOTP when the Weasleys spend Christmas at Grimmauld Place comes to mind. Molly's mood changes and she helps with the meal. Molly is MOODY (no reference to Mad-eye intended)! Sirius is MOODY! If we use the books we've read so far as evidence, Molly and Sirius don't know each other that well. Remember, Molly and Arthur have unknown backstories. Anyway, I don't think Sirius and Molly dislike each other. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that Molly will, at least for awhile, be tormented with grief over Sirius's death. After all, this is the woman who in GoF worried that her last interaction with Fred and George was disciplinary! By the way, Molly does a pretty good job of henpecking Arthur, thus fulfilling another stereotype. > > Lissa: > > I've been watching this whole thread with interest. > > I love the character of Molly, because she TOTALLY reminds me of my own > mother. Brian: You see? Stereotypy at its finest! JKR's stories aren't universally appealing for nothing! snip Lissa: > > One thing I did notice about Molly is that she (like most people) has > trouble letting go of her prejudices. Brian: True! She is even small-minded enough to send Harry a small egg in GoF. She doesn't strike me as a rocket scientist. She's more heart than head. snip > > > > I don't think they dislike each other, but I don't think they;re crazy > about each other either! Brian: Righto! I imagine Sirius had "about had it" with Molly's cautious ways, but then he didn't get the last laugh...yet. From snow15145 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 04:15:16 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 04:15:16 -0000 Subject: Umbridge is Nagini...Long Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109668 Umbridge is Nagini Theory based on suggestive canon Forewarning: This is long but try to be attentive it gets more convincing and intriguing as you read hopefully! Umbridge is constantly described throughout the book as looking like a toad, except that toads don't have pointy teeth but snakes have pointy fangs for milking like Nagini. OOP The Sorting Hat's New Song pg. 212 "Well, it is lovely to be back at Hogwarts, I must say! She smiled, revealing very pointed teeth." Umbridge is most likely not capable of the animagus transfiguration but Pettigrew, having been taught by The Best, could certainly force the transfiguration to occur. Umbridge is very snake-like in her attitude, which would be best represented by a snake animagus figure. What if when Bertha went missing and the Ministry were attempting to track her whereabouts, Umbridge was sent to Albania? Not such a far stretch. I doubt that Umbridge was in the position she now has at the point in time that Bertha went missing. Malfoy may have helped her a bit with her new found position. Malfoy has the Ministry pretty much at his beckoning call. Anything Malfoy wants he lobbies (love that word) for it. Let's say Malfoy (on Voldemort's orders) wants Umbridge closer in the Ministry to Fudge and greases some palms to get what he needs. Umbridge grateful to Malfoy doesn't question his motives as to why she has gained this new position but is thankful all the same so she proceeds to remedy some currant situations she is hearing about, and places dementors in Little Whinging to attack Harry. Umbridge, overhearing Malfoy purposely tell Fudge about the over protected Harry, because he needs to ensure that Harry is unprotected at the time of the planned attack, although he doesn't disclose the attack to Fudge but prompts the attack through Umbridge's ambitious behavior. OOP Out Of The Fire pg.747: Umbridge states: "That THEY were all bleating about silencing you somehow-discrediting you-but I was the one who actually did something about it (This does bring up a curious question. Who does know about the members of the Order of the Phoenix the first time round? If Fudge and/or Malfoy know of the members from the old team, they would defiantly be aware of whom Harry's protectors could be.) If Fudge is the government-crazed bureaucrat who values his position more than the position itself and the Quibbler magazine isn't too off base with Fudge's motives about Gringotts and the goblins, Fudge may indeed have some insight into which goblins have dealings and information with such crooks as Mundungus. Umbridge, being privileged of certain information along with a little, purposely overheard setup procedures from Malfoy, proceeds to set up the perfect plan to rid Harry for the Ministry in hopes of furthering her career. Mundungus is, at the time of the attack on Harry, called away by a cauldron deal he could not refuse, this was enough to entice Mundungus a bit and the way was clear to add the dementors. Take a look at this passage between Mr. Weasley, Bill and Lupin about a goblin from OOP The Order Of The Phoenix pg. 85&86: "I think it depends what they're offered," said Lupin. "And I'm not talking about gold; if they're offered freedoms we've been denying them for centuries they're going to be tempted. Have you still not had any luck with Ragnok, Bill?" "He's feeling pretty anti-wizard at the moment," said Bill. "He hasn't stopped raging about the Bagman business, he reckons the Ministry did a cover-up, those goblins never got their gold from him, you know-" And about Mundungus dealings with shady characters only One paragraph later: " and then," choked Mundungus, tears running down his face, "and then, if you'll believe it, `e says to me, `e says, "ere, Dung, where didja get all them toads from?" `Cos some son of a Bludger's gone and nicked all mine!" And I says, "Nicked all your toads, Will, what next " Although we don't know by these statements that the person Dung is speaking of is a goblin, we do know that goblins are anti-wizard at the moment and someone led Mundungus away from protecting Harry the night of the dementors. Lupin suggests that the goblins could be open to bribes. (Something Malfoy is very likely to notice and pass on inconspicuously) We can all see how tight Malfoy is with Fudge in the Ministry. OOP The Woes Of Mrs. Weasley pg. 154: "What are you doing here anyway?" Harry asked Lucius Malfoy. "I don't think private matters between myself and the Minister are any concern of yours, Potter," said Malfoy, smoothing the front of his robes; Harry distinctly heard the gentle clinking of what sounded like a full pocket of gold. Shall we go up to your office, then, Minister?" "Certainly," said Fudge, turning his back on Harry and Mr Weasley. "This way, Lucius." Fudge appears to be pretty chummy on a first name basis with Lucius. Malfoy uses his clout with Fudge to feed him the proper information to suggest to Fudge that a Ministry official is desperately needed inside Hogwarts School since the uncooperative Dumbledore cannot be entrusted due to his recent behaviors at the Potter hearing. Summary so far: Umbridge is most willing to give to Malfoy anything he wants since he has managed to secure a prestigious seat at the Ministry for her. Umbridge acknowledges Lucius's son Draco, and most likely had some influence in him becoming a prefect*, above all the other students including those in Slytherin. Umbridge is perfectly positioned at Hogwarts by Fudge who is in turn bought by Malfoy who is again taking orders from Voldemort. Umbridge, somewhat like Percy's recent behavior, is very anxious to exhibit loyalty to what she has overheard the Ministry wants, which is to stop Dumbledore and Potter from further attempts at acknowledgement of Voldemort's return, in order to further her own career. Umbridge plans the attack by dementors on Harry with help from the goblins to get Mundungus out of the way for a short period of time with a deal about cauldrons he couldn't pass up. (Dung isn't bad he's just stupid) *OOP The Woes Of Mrs. Weasley pg. 160 "Booklists have arrived," he said, throwing one of the envelopes up to Harry, who was standing on a chair. "About time, I though they'd forgotten, they usually come much earlier than this " To get to the main point of the theory, Umbridge is Nagini; Umbridge's office fireplace is the only one the Ministry is not checking. Umbridge can come and go as she pleases within the Ministry without question because of her position there. Now, how could a snake of enormous proportion find its way into the Ministry and out again without detection the night Mr. Weasley was attacked? Simple it was Umbridge! Umbridge went to the Ministry the night of the attack, through the fireplace in her office, turned into her animagus form of Nagini (with inside help, as in Voldemort): OOP The Eye Of The Snake pg. 462 (this is Harry's perspective but look at it from Umbridge as the snake) " He was turning his head At first glance, the corridor was empty but no a man was sitting on the floor ahead, his chin drooping onto his chest, his outline gleaming in the dark Harry put out his tongue He tasted the man's scent on the air. He was alive but drowsing sitting in front of a door at the end of the corridor Harry longed to bite the man but he must master the impulse. He had more important work to do " We know this is from Harry's viewpoint but it is unlikely that Harry was feeling the impulse himself to attack nor does it appear to be an impulse from Voldemort who I doubt would stop to ponder the desire to bite someone of insignificance Harry and Voldemort are inside the snake as spectators not decision makers so can a snake instinctively recognize not to strike or to think not to, as in rationalizing? Nagini can: GOF The Riddle House pg. 13 "Nagini has interesting news, Wormtail," it said. "In-indeed, My Lord? Said Wormtail. "Indeed, yes," said the voice. "According to Nagini, there is an old Muggle standing right outside this room, listening to every word we say." Although Voldemort can speak parceltongue, would the snake be able to speak wizard? The snake, Nagini, informs Voldemort that there is an old Muggle Umbridge however could have and would have recognized the impulse to bite. Look at her impulsive behavior in the chapter "Out of the Fire" where she is talking herself out of and into impulsive type behavior: OOP Out Of The Fire Pg. 746 She seemed to be talking herself into something. She was shifting her weight nervously from foot to foot, staring at Harry, beating her wand against her empty palm and breathing heavily. Harry felt horribly powerless without his own wand as he watched her. "You are forcing me, Potter I do not want to," said Umbridge, still moving restlessly on the spot, "but sometimes circumstances justify the use I am sure the Minister will understand that I had no choice " Where was Nagini all these years? "She" just seemed to show up. How useful. Voldemort made use of other Ministry lower officials before like Bertha Jorkins, Bodes, and Rookwood to his benefit. When did Umbridge become Senior Undersecretary to the Minister, my guess is about the same time cauldron-boy Percy managed to get the position as Court Scribe. Percy's new position as well as Umbridge's was for ulterior motives; Lucius Malfoy most likely provoked the Ministry, ever so charitably, for both of these recipients to employ their currant positions. Far-fetched but it is plausible. Snow From jhnbwmn at hotmail.com Wed Aug 11 04:18:27 2004 From: jhnbwmn at hotmail.com (johnbowman19) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 04:18:27 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Harry=92s_Potential_versus_Ability_(long)?= Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109669 Okay I am not sure what you all think about Harry, but the big draw for me to Harry is the fact that he was not perfect. He was not meant to be the savior, He was not like neo (the one) in the matrix, and He was not meant to stand alone versus the force of evil. Harry was supposed to be just like anyone else. He is just okay in studies, He is just okay in looks, and He is just okay in power. What He did have is courage and most important of all is He had friends and family. The first time He faced Voldemort his Mom helped him survive. It was nothing to do with Harry, it was Lily who saved Harry (and the fact that Voldemort chose Harry). The second time Harry Faced Voldemort, He would have never even had the chance to face him, if not for his friends (Ron's chess match, and Hermione's puzzle solution). The only reason Harry makes it to the chamber prepared for what is in it, is because of Hermione's smarts. If he doesn't know a Basalik is present, he would look into the creature's eyes and die immediately. The forth time Harry reaches Voldemort is because He receives help along the way. Moody helps with the First and second tasks, while R and H help him learn for the third. If He had not scored so high on the first two tasks, Moody might have had a harder time ensuring that Harry reached the cup before the other three contenders. True, He did face Voldemort alone, but he was not saved because of His own innate power, but because He owns the brother to Voldemort's wand (which He would probably never have unless Voldemort marked him as an equal). The fifth encounter with Voldemort is only possible because Harry was helped by his friends in defending against the death eaters. Also the prophecy helped protect him from being killed out right because no damage should have come to it. All of this made me think Harry was just a courageous and lucky guy. That is until the chapter called "The Lost Prophecy" was read. Now I must believe Harry is one of the most powerful wizards in the world. He is marked as equal to Voldemort (whom DD says knows magic better than anyone else in the world). So if He is equal to Voldemort, and the only one Voldemort ever feared is DD, and DD and Mc Gonacall says that Voldemort is more powerful the DD, then Harry must be more powerful then DD. This is what I do not get. Madam Marchbanks said that DD did things with a wand that she had never seen before when She examined him for N.E.W.T.'s. So the question becomes, Will Harry be able to do things we have never seen before like DD? No. The reason is because Harry does not know magic as well as DD and Voldemort do. He may have innate power comparable to them, but He is not equal to them in a duel (as He states in the MOM). So now we are forced to consider will Harry ever be equal to DD or Voldemort in a duel? This is the question of potential. Will Harry ever fulfill His potential? Or will His potential be squandered like so many of ours? I certainly do not work to my full potential, and I think that most of you out there, do not either. So now it is a question if Harry will work to his full potential by the age of 17? Think of it this way. Most of us are in school at 17, and if at 17 you are forced to square off against an expert in your chosen carrer field, do you think you will be able to beat that expert? I know I wouldn't be able to. This is where I think Harry's friends will come in. Harry will not be Voldemort's equal at 17, but He will have friends (and possibly family) that will help Him to defeat Voldemort. But here is where I ask you all what you think. Do you think that Harry could beat Voldemort at the age of 17 in a duel? Or is He dependent on his friends for help? Is Harry meant to be the savior of the WW, or merely the leader? John From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 05:14:17 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 05:14:17 -0000 Subject: Harry's B-day Re: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109671 > RMM: > I have a question then. > Has anyone here had a book published? > Does anyone here know that the book publisher has people called > "editors" that go over the book for exactly these kinds of > discrepancies? > > So, unless the editors are a bunch of bumble brains, they would be > telling Jo: "You have some dates wrong here. Fix them or we will." > > But yet, the dates stay in the book the way they are. Why? > > For only one reason: Because the DATES are NOT WRONG. It is how we > are misreading them. (I exclude the last book because they put the > dates in wrong to make a point about our lack of being able to > discern > what is being said.) Carol responds: Speaking as an editor, let me first say that we're people, too, sometimes pressed to meet a deadline and certainly subject to error. Second, it's possible that different editors have worked on the different books and would not spot a discrepancy between two books, or maybe even a discrepancy between two chapters in the same book. We might query an apparent discrepancy, for example, "Wasn't Miss Fawcett in Ravenclaw, not Hufflepuff, earlier?" but we can't go hunting through all the chapters to find that earlier reference. As for errors regarding dates, one book clearly states that Nearly Headless Nick hasn't eaten in 400 years; another celebrates his 500th "deathday." Unless he ate during his first 100 years as a ghost but can no longer do so, one of those dates has to be wrong. JKR, like everyone else, is capable of error. So are her editors. There's no need to be so adamant about the dates, especially given her known (and admitted) weakness in math (or "maths," as she would say). Carol, who *has* had some books and articles published (most recently some articles about the friends of Percy Shelley in the New Dictionary of National Biography) and who edits for a living From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Wed Aug 11 05:21:51 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 05:21:51 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109672 >>> Arianna wrote: > The prophesy refers to someone born as "the seventh month" > dies. The word September is from Latin meaning "the seventh > month." Without a doubt, JKR knows this. [snip] > > Lily fits the positive personality aspects folklore associated with > Libras. [snip]> > I think the "friend" who shared her birthday (born as the seventh > month dies) is Peter. [snip] [snipping rest of VERY insightful post] <<< Brenda now: WOW Arianna, I think this is perhaps the most brilliant theory I've heard in a while, now I see why you were waiting for 7 months! The prophecy makes much more sense now, along with 'but your mom didn't need to die' remark in PS/SS. It will also tie in nicely with Peter's possible redemption... and of course that silver hand given by Voldemort at the rebirth ceremony. Huge spoiler indeed, I think I'm going to be very disappointed reading the next 2 books now, sigh... Thank you for your remark on my TimeTurner-Einstein's Theory of Relativity. I plan to compile a full post after my exams next week! Brenda, who wonders, can I post your theory on my Live Journal? I'll give you the full credit, of course ;) From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 04:39:10 2004 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 04:39:10 -0000 Subject: Umbridge is Nagini...Long In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109673 Snow wrote: > Umbridge is Nagini Theory based on suggestive canon > I simply do not think so...if Umbridge is Nagini...then why have Malfoy there plying Fudge with his gold? (We know Voldemort can possess people...why not Percy? I think Umbridge is nasty enough on her own. If Fudge was not such a fool, it may be neccessary, but I do not think so. I think Umbridge is in OOP for quite a few reasons. 1. That not everyone is either in the OOP or a DE. 2. To show how Sirius' parents thought Voldemort "had the right idea", but of course went the wrong way about it. (Probably especially thought this after their son died. 3. To show how prejudice against "non" or "half" human creatures affect the characters and those around them. (I can really see Umbridge trying to force through regulation guidelines on Phoenixes). 4. To show HOW some people attempt to discredit those who disagree. She wouldn't kill Harry herself, but would send dementors to do it...in all honesty, I can see her previously trying to send a werewolf to "do Harry in"...but not succeeding hence, the anti- werewolf legislation. And lastly 5. Nagini would never complain about nifflers in her office...she'd probably eat them and dash out to eat the poor soul(s) who had been levitating them through her window. Umbridge is a control freak who thinks that she can prevent Voldemort's return or fear thereof through legislation and punishment of those around her who do not share her views. It also gives us yet another excuse why Dumbledore must remain so much distant...too much control ruins a good plan. (Can you imagine what would have happened if Umbridge just spied and actually taught defense against the dark arts?) Doddiemoemoe (who'd probably have Umbridge doing lines with a quill that would permanently tatoo the back of her hand; which makes me wonder what the centars did to her....) From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 05:01:04 2004 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 05:01:04 -0000 Subject: Harrys Potential versus Ability (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109674 John wrote: <<> > DD and McGonagall says that Voldemort is more powerful the DD, > then Harry must be more powerful then DD. This is what I do not > get. Madam Marchbanks said that DD did things with a wand that she > had never seen before when she examined him for N.E.W.T.'s. So the > question becomes, will Harry be able to do things we have never seen > before like DD? No. The reason is because Harry does not know magic > as well as DD and Voldemort do. He may have innate power comparable > to them, but he is not equal to them in a duel (as he states in the > MOM). So now we are forced to consider will Harry ever be equal to > DD or Voldemort in a duel? Harry and Voldemort were in a duel and Harry won...He escaped alive. Harry is powerful...as DD would probably say...'Powerful yes, but not knowlegeable'...And If McGonagall gives Harry lessons to ensure he's an auror, then you can bet he is going to do a great many things with his wand...things Voldemort will not think of...because anything Voldemort has thought of is in Harry already..to some extent. It is blatantly apparent that Harry must learn a great deal of the power the "Dark Lord knows not". John wrote: > This is the question of potential. Will Harry ever fulfill His > potential? Or will His potential be squandered like so many of > ours? I certainly do not work to my full potential, and I think > that most of you out there do not either. So now it is a question > if Harry will work to his full potential by the age of 17? Think > of it this way. Most of us are in school at 17, and if at 17 you > are forced to square off against an expert in your chosen career > field, do you think you will be able to beat that expert? Harry must try his best of course...but Voldemort has "FOLLOWERS", and Harry has "FRIENDS AND LOVED ONES" (because you cannot say that Molly, Arthur, Lupin, Flitwick, etc. are friends you cannot deny that they have love for him in some fashion or another.) It is having these sorts of folks around Harry that will ensure his success (IMHO). If one of Harry's friends "let him down" (which has happened numerous times) he doesn't wish/want to punish them...he may think about it, but he does not. (Just like at the end of the first task in the tri-wizard contest when Ron tried to apologize). And never forget, there were a great deal many prophecies on the shelves in the MOM, who's to say that none of them didn't involve anyone that Harry already knew and was a friend or even enemy of. Doddiemoemoe (who'd rather have friends than followers any day of the week!) From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 05:12:12 2004 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 05:12:12 -0000 Subject: Godric Gryffindor based on Christian Saint Godric In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109675 Vivian wrote: > Well you learn something new every day. One of the HP Lexicon > essays mentioned that GG was based on St. Godric ... > <> > > If the Weasley's are blood related to GG I wonder if one of them > will be a Seer/Prophet? Ron perhaps? Thing is if you have to discuss one saint mentioned you have to consider all the saints mentioned, especially: SABAS REYES SALAZAR http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/saints60.htm I know, I never thought either until going to your link reading, nodding my head and thinking hhhhmmmm... Doddiemoemoe From amphibi_pro at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 05:39:05 2004 From: amphibi_pro at yahoo.com (amphibi_pro) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 05:39:05 -0000 Subject: The titlings, again Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109676 Hi! Sorry for the long silence...I took a trip for a few days ago, so I was only able to read your replies, and couldn't post any messages, until now. Anyway, here's the list of people that I think have a close relationship with Harry: - Neville : My money's on him, since he's the only other candidate that can defeat Voldemort. - Dumbledore : My second choice, although I'm not sure whether he's a pureblood or a half blood. - Pettigrew : Hmmm...interesting. We don't know much about him, so he could be a half blood. Still the word 'prince' is way out of character for him, unless that's what Jo wants us to think... - Lupin : Although he is a half blood, the word 'prince'... His poverty just doesn't fit with it. - Hagrid : Half blood alright, but not a prince, even for the giants. - The Weasleys : They are all pure blood, as far as I can remember. The thing about the HBP that keeps bothering me is the word 'prince'. I have this strong feeling that he's going to be a new character. The first one that comes to mind is another member of the Potter family, but since Dumbledore has said that Harry is the last Potter (or something like that) from the start, the chances are slim. Therefore, I went with Neville. Now, even though I put my money on him, I have some doubt about him being a prince. If he came from a royal family, then I think his parents would be taken care of in secret, or at least in a more private hospital than St. Mungo's. The only reason for me to vote for him is the fact that he is the other only candidate to defeat Voldemort. Kind of a weak excuse, huh? : ) Anyway, I've read other theories surrounding Neville (frog prince, toad keeper, and so on) which lead me to think about Trevor. As far as I can remember (and I can't check any of the books since I'm away from home), Trevor was mentioned on the surface in the first book, and disappeared into the background after that. In some ways, this is similar to young Sirius who gave his flying motorbike to Hagrid and wasn't mentioned again until the third book. The thing is, Trevor doesn't have a close relationship with Harry, which doesn't fit the pattern... Unless! What if I misunderstood the pattern? What if the pattern is 'a person that WILL have a relationship with Harry in the book itself and in the future BUT NOT in earlier books'? Unfortunately, that would expand the scope even more! My head hurts... chrisp From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Wed Aug 11 06:02:26 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 06:02:26 -0000 Subject: Umbridge is Nagini...Long In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109677 >>> Snow wrote: > Umbridge is Nagini; > Umbridge is very snake-like in her attitude, which would be best represented by a snake animagus figure. What if when Bertha went missing and the Ministry were attempting to track her whereabouts, Umbridge was sent to Albania? [snip] > Umbridge is most willing to give to Malfoy anything he wants since he has managed to secure a prestigious seat at the Ministry for her. [snip] > Umbridge's office fireplace is the only one the Ministry is not > checking ... Now, how could a snake of enormous proportion find its way into the Ministry and out again without detection the night Mr. Weasley was attacked? Simple it was Umbridge! [snip] [snipping rest of very interesting post] <<< Brenda now: Hiya Snow! You have certainly presented your case strongly IMO. Given what you have found in canon, no I don't believe it is too far-fetched. It sounds very plausible. There is just tiny part of me that makes me not want to believe it, and it is Sirius' remark in GoF, paraphrased as "the world is not divided into good people and the Death Eaters". Sure, she is foul and devious, but that is not to say she is part of the evil cult. Just a nasty politician, lol. Since Fudge will not be serving this purpose (me a firm believer of Fudge as the 'one who has left me'... that's another thread) Umbridge is the perfect candidate. A power- hungry stumpy accessorized woman, lol. Brenda From chris.yuhico at gmail.com Wed Aug 11 05:48:50 2004 From: chris.yuhico at gmail.com (chris yuhico) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 13:48:50 +0800 Subject: Peter and the prophecy In-Reply-To: <1092201276.7049.81218.m3@yahoogroups.com> References: <1092201276.7049.81218.m3@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109678 I have read some entries about Peter and the prophecy, theorizing that he will be the one to kill Voldemort. I don't think this is possible, because Trelawney made the prediction way after Peter was born, and she used future tense (e.g. "will be born") Just felt like sharing, people. Chris From arielock at aol.com Wed Aug 11 06:09:07 2004 From: arielock at aol.com (arielock2001) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 06:09:07 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109679 Thanks!!! Sure, you can post it where ever you want. ;-) Arianna --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Brenda M." wrote: > >>> Arianna wrote: > > The prophesy refers to someone born as "the seventh month" > > dies. The word September is from Latin meaning "the seventh > > month." Without a doubt, JKR knows this. [snip] > > > > Lily fits the positive personality aspects folklore associated with > > Libras. [snip]> > > I think the "friend" who shared her birthday (born as the seventh > > month dies) is Peter. [snip] > [snipping rest of VERY insightful post] <<< > > > Brenda now: > > WOW Arianna, I think this is perhaps the most brilliant theory I've > heard in a while, now I see why you were waiting for 7 months! The > prophecy makes much more sense now, along with 'but your mom didn't > need to die' remark in PS/SS. > > It will also tie in nicely with Peter's possible redemption... and > of course that silver hand given by Voldemort at the rebirth > ceremony. > > Huge spoiler indeed, I think I'm going to be very disappointed > reading the next 2 books now, sigh... > > Thank you for your remark on my TimeTurner-Einstein's Theory of > Relativity. I plan to compile a full post after my exams next week! > > > Brenda, who wonders, can I post your theory on my Live Journal? > I'll give you the full credit, of course ;) From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 06:35:21 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 06:35:21 -0000 Subject: Is Lupin James? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109680 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mumweasley7" wrote: > In Book 3 Prisoner of Azkaban: Shrieking Shack > Lupin was lowering his wand, gazing fixedly at Black. The professor > walked to Black's side, seized his hand, pulled him to his feet so > Crookshanks fell to the floor, and embraced Black like a brother. > Notice 'gazing fixedly' - really looking him over. And embraced Black > like a brother. > > In Book 5 OOtP, Sirius is explaining his family to Harry when he says > he went to live with James' family after his family rejected him and > they treated him like their own son. > > Is the reason Lupin doesn't touch Harry simply because he's so > overcome with emotion that he can't afford to give away his secret > and therefore chooses not embrace his son, and also why he shivers to > hear Harry talk about his mother's screams? > > MumWeasley7 mhbobbin: This is the theory I was alluding to when trying to work through James' state of mind when he made the decision to make Sirius the Secret Keeper in my post on "James Choice" a couple days ago or yesterday(it all melds together). There is the theory out there that since in the WW, the soul is a tangible body part that James and Lupin could have switched souls. The Galedriel Waters book puts forth this theory as well as some other posters. This theory places James' soul in Lupin's body and visa versa through some sort of switching spell. Note that we've heard about switchings spells but haven't seen any in action. This would mean that James/Lupin entity is James' soul stuck in Lupin's body, complete with werewolf transformations and that Remus/Potter entity died at Godric Hollow in James' body. I like and dislike this theory for these reasons: Like: 1. It explains Lupin's oddly emotional reactions to Harry and particularly Harry's discussion of hearing his parents' voices. (shiver) and now that we know that LV may be able to see into Harry's mind, explains why Lupin doesn't want to touch Harry while he'll touch anyone else. He only touches Harry in the Veil scene to hold him back--an emergency. To underscore the touching thing, the last line that JKR gives to Lupin in OOtp is "Keep in Touch". 2. It satisfies what I was trying to work through in the post "James' choice"---What was James' state of mind? He rejected DD's concern about the spy in his inner circle and made one of his three friends the Secret Keeper. James is presented sometimes as arrogant but it is hard to imagine him rejecting DD's concern even as he rejected DD's offer to be the Secret Keeper. How on earth could he have chosen between Sirius and Remus as his Betrayer, while of course, rejecting the true rat. We learn in the Shrieking Shack scene that at the time this decision was made, Sirius suspected Lupin of being the Spy. Lupin suspected Sirius. James' actions by making Sirius the Secret Keeper suggests that James put his trust in Sirius, and did not trust Lupin. James and Sirius did not tell Lupin about the last minute switch to Pettigrew. Well, as other posters indicate, it IS hard to imagine Lupin so distrusted. But that is what was presented to us IMO. If this theory follows, then the Remus/Potter entity made the switch to Sirius at the last minute. What this confusing theory suggests is that James, perhaps, rather than choose between Remus and Sirius tried to hedge his bets. Why make the switch? To leave Remus' soul in James Potter body would mean that Remus was risking his life and would likely be killed by LV if found, therefore, it was a way for Remus to prove his trustworhiness. Also a Remus/Potter entity could not bring LV to Godric Hollow and is therefore neutralized as a threat. (Lily was in on the switch, of course) Remus/Potter was left to guard the home at Godric's Hollow. James/Lupin went somewhere? Why? Was there something only he needed to do that only he could do? Perhaps it was James' intent to make Sirius the Secret Keeper but at the last minute, on Sirius's suggestion Remus/Potter makes Pettigrew the Secret Keeper. By making Pettigrew the Secret Keeper, a distrustful Remus/Potter also ensured that a distrusted Sirius could not betray Potter. Unfortunately, they were ratted out anyway but thanks to Lily, Harry survives. Why I dislike this theory: 1) If James' soul survives in Lupin's body, why does he disappear for an entire year in GOF? No note to Harry. NO visits. Nada. Why would a James/Lupin entity allow Sirius to step up to paternal role and form such a close bond with his own son? Of the two friends, it is Lupin that gives Harry better fatherly advice, but he has allowed the bond with Sirius to be greater. I don't get it. (But then Lupin is such a tragic emotional character.)And it would have been logical for Lupin to have continued his relationship with Harry after PoA... 2) If James did all this, Lupin's holding a very big secret--(I do believe that Lupin is holding a very big secret)-it was one thing not to reveal himself by PoA, but by OotP, why hasn't he told Sirius or DD. Why hasn't DD read his mind? There is some suggestion in the books that Lupin is a Legiwhatsy but there is no suggestion that he is a Occlumens. The theory for the switching was fed by the confusion that JKR created in some editions of GoF when the shadows come out of the wands. In this theory, James' body would come out because Remus died in James' body just as James must now undergo werewolf transformations in Lupin's body. Therefore, Lily must never be put in a position of saying to Harry "Here comes your father." This theory was also fed by the Thing-That-Must-Not-Be-Named because they only used Lily's voice and not any voice that Harry could interpret as being his father's. Recall how Lupin reacts in the Book when Harry tells Lupin that he heard his father. Oddly emotional. I'm not sold on this Switching Theory but I still think something odd is going on with Lupin and something LIKE this is possibly the cause. mhbobbin From romulus at hermionegranger.us Wed Aug 11 07:00:19 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 07:00:19 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109681 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Nora Renka" wrote: Nora: > > > "No good sittin' worryin' abou' it," Hagrid said. "What's comin' > will come, an we'll meet it when it does. Dumbledore told me wha' > you did, Harry." > > Hagrid's chest swelled as he looked at Harry. > > "Yeh did as much as yer father would've done, an' I can' give yeh no > higher praise than that." > > > > Hagrid is testifying to the general quality of James' character, > which I cannot quite see him doing even if James were the kind of > convert you would like to have him as. RMM: "kind of convert"? Apparently you're not reading what I am typing. Nora: > Ummm, I don't follow this logic. James Potter wants to learn the > Dark Arts so he can one-up Snape? Maybe I'm over-reading, but I > always read that nasty line "Because he exists" as, IN > PART, "Because he's into these things which I detest and that makes > him a bad person and worthy of torment". I can't see James Potter > doing anything that makes him more like Snape. RMM: Interesting thought, but I don't think your idea fits with the scene: <<'Well,' said James, appearing to deliberate the point, 'it's more the fact that he exists, if you know what I mean...' Many of the surrounding students laughed, Sirius and Wormtail included, but Lupin, still apparently intent on his book, didn't, and nor did Lily. 'You think you're funny,' she said coldly. 'But you're just an arrogant, bullying toerag, Potter. Leave him alone.'>> You say that it is "Because he's into these things which I detest and that makes him a bad person and worthy of torment". However, Lily doesn't laugh, nor does Lupin -- the two who are obviously of the mindset you would attribute to James. If that is what James meant, surely Lily would not have said: "You think you're funny, but you're just an arrogant, bullying toerag, Potter. Leave him alone." To Lily, James' statement was a joke...and a poor one at that. No, his comment to Lily bespeaks something else. Secondly, as far as the Dark Arts goes, that is not ALL that the Dark Lord has to offer. Does he not reward his faithful followers with wondrous gifts? Is there not a reward for pleasing him? You make Voldemort a one dimensional creature here. If there is anything Voldemort is not, is one dimensional. He is probably still the Brightest Wizard of his time, which time includes Dumbledore. Note what Dumbledore said to Professor McGonagall in this regard: "Voldemort is more powerful than I will ever be." It is not just the Dark Arts that Voldemort is good at. His brilliance alone probably attracted quite a few members to the DEs than his use of the Dark Arts. Also, does not the name "Death Eaters" connote a positive and optimistic ideal? We are Death Eaters, we sweep death away, we banish the rot and stink of death and replace it with long life and happiness. We can promise one eternal youth!! Nora: > But this organization is not exactly going to tolerate, you know, > wanting to marry a Mudblood--and it's clear that James has the > severe hots for Lily. RMM: And at this point in time, it is clear to the world that Lily is not interested. And secondly, the organization, if it gets its hands on a candidate, will make sure such a thing as a marriage to one unworthy never happens. So at this point in James' life this is not an argument against James' interest in the DEs. Nora: > Furthermore, he doesn't need the economic > benefits--he's already loaded (per JKR interview). He's got his ego > fed by his friends, but he's even willing to abnegate some of that > ego for Lily. RMM: So you say. I say, not necessarily. He is a 15 year-old kid who is about to be tempted by things way beyond his ability to comprehend. And none of them will be presented to him as DARK ARTS. Nora: > > Before OotP, we had a lot of speculation about whether the blood > thing really mattered, whether it was an important theme in the > books, etc. It was quite a nasty shock to many a person onlist to > find out, canonically, that Slytherin House had pureblood philosophy > *at its founding*. Made myself and many another person go back and > look at CoS again, that's for sure--and it's eminently possible to > read that book as a paradigm of the pureblood/DE attempts to get rid > of the Muggleborns. JKR has a nifty answer on her website about the > halfblood/pureblood thing. Don't underestimate the importance of > the blood issue as one of the factual realities of the Potterverse-- > and right now with James, we *are* arguing facts, not reality. One > of us is going to be proven right and the other is going to eat > feathers. :) RMM: Yes, the blood issue is a major element in these stories. No one is arguing that. However, I am not sure what you mean by "facts, not reality". Facts are part of reality. Maybe you can clarify what you are getting at. I have not underestimated the blood issue in my speculations. In fact, James will prove to be a rather noble character in the end. But he has some growing up to do, and some serious travails in store for him before he gets to the end. Nora: > I'm sure Voldemort would have liked to get someone like James, who > all indications point to being from an old and respected family. > My pet hypothesis is that James refused, hence some part of > the 'defying him three times' thingy, which must also be important. RMM: Well, we can pretty well guess that James will reach that point where he will have to refuse. I have posted this already in a previous post on this subject. And the nature of the refusal is such that Voldemort deems it necessary to kill him personally. And it is normally someone who is important enough that gains this honor! Nora: > We also have Lucius Malfoy describing Harry's parents as 'meddling > fools' (do I remember correctly? I'm flying with no net.) > > I just don't see how, when Voldemort IS canonically publically > associated with the anti-Muggleborn ideas, he could lure a James > Potter (who would have to be thick as a brick not to NOTICE that) > who is ardently pursuing a Muggleborn witch. RMM: Yes, well part of Hogwarts is into Purebloodism, and it doesn't stop purebloods, halfbloods, or muggleborns from attending now does it? Nora: > So he's got a Dark Mark and everything? RMM: Don't know at what point the Dark Mark is branded on one. And nor do you. Nora: > He was in the Death > Eaters? This sounds like *prime* Harry-taunting material for > Voldemort, and yet, nary a whisper. RMM: Quite a few were in the Death Eaters that are no more. My response to Voldemort would be: "Yes, well not too many came looking for you now did they?" Nora: > Instead, we have a consistent > picture of Harry's parents (both of them, natch) as strong anti- > Voldemort supporters. This is the state of canon at present. RMM: And I have not varied from that position in my speculation. > > RMM: > > Okay Nora, give me FIVE OTHER THINGS I have messed up. Nora: > > 1. Ignoring all of the canon statements about how James hated the > Dark Arts. RMM: Ouch, you're out to hurt. I was not aware of them, since my speculation regarding James had nothing to do with his like or dislike of the Dark Arts. And nor does my speculation fall on the fact that they exist. :-) And this is where you fail to understand the issue of Voldemort and the Death Eaters. You equate Purebloodism with the Dark Arts, when in fact there is much more to this issue. Purebloodism, to many pure bloods, like nationalism to many constitutionalists is a good thing. To international communists, nationalism is a pariah to be squashed and eliminated. It depends on which side you are on. On each side there are the extremists and there are the nominalists. The methods of obtaining power, whether by just means or unjust means became the dividing line for many pure bloods. (see S. Black's comments) This is where the Dark Arts probably reared its ugly head. The Unforgivable Curses were employed, people were "disappeared", etc. etc. I see James viewing all of this with abhorence and saying: NOT FOR ME! Nora: > 2. Ignoring the importance of pureblood philosophy to the INITIAL > public popularity of Voldemort's platform. RMM: Not! See my comments before. I too read what Black had to say about the Purebloodism advocated by Voldemort. Potter disliked the DARK ARTS. But we are not talking Potter's view of the Dark Arts here. We are talking about his views in regard to Purebloodism -- a completely different subject. James Potter was likely a Pureblood. But not of an extremist sort. Nora: > 3. The 'defied him three times' becomes a little trickier to > explain, as does Lucius Malfoy's comment. RMM: Your slant on "defied him three times" gets trickier. Not mine. He had escaped Voldemort three times, thus implying a threefold defiance. Nora: > 4. Screwing with the thematic point that people on the good side > can do awful stupid nasty things out of fear. RMM: You lost me here. How does what I opine go against that? There are also people on the good side that do awful things based on pride, conceit, curiousity, etc. Nora: > 5. We've already got one tempted betrayer in the MWPP group; seems > more than a little like thematic overkill to have two. RMM: Who is the other? Wormtail? Lupin? Black? I believe all of these save Wormtail were brave enough to stand up to Voldemort. (See Wormtail's comments here.) This implies that all were to some degree, more or less, idiots for the cause of the DEs. (See more Black's comments here.) Nora: > James has > already been knocked off of his pedestal--literary economy says its > likely that we get to learn some better things about him next. > (After all, Snape was made sympathetic in OotP, which means he's > going to take it next book :). > > It's not only that there's no support for James the Death Eater-- > it's that it goes directly contra things that have been well- > established. James the berk was *not* completely contradictory to > what came before--hey, who'da thunk that Snape really WAS telling at > least a good portion of the truth in PoA? But James the Voldemort > follower is such a huge reversal--and JKR doesn't really play huge > reversals. RMM: Huge reversal to you. Not to me. JKR is getting us ready for some hard doses of reality re: Harry's father. RMM www.hermionegranger.us From romulus at hermionegranger.us Wed Aug 11 07:11:11 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 07:11:11 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109682 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "alshainofthenorth" wrote: Alshain: > > Adding a quote from PS: > > "Now, yer mum an' yer dad were as good a witch an' wizard as I ever > knew. Head Boy and Head Girl of Hogwarts in their day! Suppose the > myst'ry is why You-Know-Who never tried to get them on his side > before... probably knew they were too close ter Dumbledore ter want > anything to do with the Dark Arts." (PS, p. 64 in UK paperback > edition.) > > Now, I know that people tend to be dismissive about Hagrid's level of > truthfulness RMM: If Hagrid is one thing, it is truthful! Good quote, I hadn't run across that one for awhile. Amazing what those early chapters in book one contain! My speculation about James Potter was that he was attracted by the Death Eaters, but that Lily "saved" him in the end. Lily Evans started dating James in their 7th year at Hogwarts. Hagrid's comments refer to when James and Lily were in their 7th year. Secondly, if one is being recruited by Voldemort, would it be public knowledge? For instance, one's own neighor or friends will not know that you are being asked to join the Freemasons. It will be completely quiet. Did anyone see the movie "Skulls"?? Good example of what I am talking about. RMM www.hermionegranger.us From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 07:12:46 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 07:12:46 -0000 Subject: An announcement Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109683 The first version of the Randomized Prophecy Decoder, as published in #108437, was found deficient and in urgent need of complete redesign. Obviously it is not even close to covering the whole range of possibilities (not to mention the horrible typo in the title). We regret to say that there is no time estimation for the release of the updated RPD. A complete redefinition of the basic laws of permutations might be required. Until then HPfGU members are strongly advised not to use the severely limiting old version, and will have to rely on their own imagination when decoding the prophecy. With sincere apologies, Neri From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Wed Aug 11 07:55:57 2004 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 11 Aug 2004 07:55:57 -0000 Subject: New poll for HPforGrownups Message-ID: <1092210957.315.24292.w69@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109684 Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the HPforGrownups group: How did you first learn about HPfGU (how did you find this group)? o Searched Yahoo groups for an HP group o A link from The Lexicon o A link from Fiction Alley o The Fantastic Posts / hpfgu.org.uk site o A mention on HPANA o Heard about it from a friend o A link from another Yahoo group (tell the elves which one -- HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com) o A mention in another forum (tell the elves which one -- HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com) o Used a search engine (e.g., Google) for HP info o A "Top Ten Links" list on iHarryPotter.net o Other (tell the elves where -- HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com) To vote, please visit the following web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/surveys?id=1347872 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 Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Aug 11 08:04:34 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 08:04:34 -0000 Subject: Is Lupin James? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109685 > wrote: > In Book 3 Prisoner of Azkaban: Shrieking Shack > Lupin was lowering his wand, gazing fixedly at Black. > The professor walked to Black's side, seized his hand, > pulled him to his feet so Crookshanks fell to the floor, > and embraced Black like a brother. > > mhbobbin: > There is the theory out there that since in the WW, > the soul is a tangible body part that James and Lupin > could have switched souls. The Galedriel Waters book puts > forth this theory as well as some other posters. > I like and dislike this theory for these reasons: > Like: > 1. It explains Lupin's oddly emotional reactions to Harry and > particularly Harry's discussion of hearing his parents' voices. > (shiver) and now that we know that LV may be able to see into > Harry's mind, explains why Lupin doesn't want to touch Harry while > he'll touch anyone else. > > 2. It satisfies what I was trying to work through in the > post "James' choice"--- How on earth could he have chosen > between Sirius and Remus as his Betrayer, while > of course, rejecting the true rat. > > Why I dislike this theory: > 2) If James did all this, Lupin's holding a very big secret--(I do > believe that Lupin is holding a very big secret)-it was one thing > not to reveal himself by PoA, but by OotP, why hasn't he told > Sirius or DD. Why hasn't DD read his mind? There is some > suggestion in the books that Lupin is a Legiwhatsy but there > is no suggestion that he is a Occlumens. > > The theory for the switching was fed by the confusion that JKR > created in some editions of GoF when the shadows come out of the > wands. In this theory, James' body would come out because Remus > died in James' body just as James must now undergo werewolf > transformations in Lupin's body. Therefore, Lily must never be put > in a position of saying to Harry "Here comes your father." > I'm not sold on this Switching Theory but I still think something > odd is going on with Lupin and something LIKE this is possibly the > cause. Valky: Hi MumWeasley and mbobbin! I am not sold on the switching spell yet but it's a *very Very* strong boat and I will show you why. First: mbobbins tentative objection number two : Lupin is not canon Occlumens. So how does he hide it? Well easy answered If *James* is an Occlumens. Nobody need know either since they all think he's Lupin. Now I am going out on a limb for this and I don't know why. Its not even my theory. Read these quotes from ch29 OOtP {'He kept messing up his hair,' said Harry in a pained voice. Sirius and Lupin Laughed. 'I'd forgotten he used to to that,' said Sirius affectionately. 'Was he playing with the Snitch?' said Lupin eagerly.} *Eagerly*? Wouldn't it be James place to be eager about the plaything that he cleverly acquired. As I recall Lupin in Snapes memory didn't even look up from his book while James was playing with the Snitch. Still, theres argument that can be put to this one so I will back it up with something almost invincible. {"I am 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!'he said....} There is no end to the emotional/fatherly reactions Lupin has been having...... Lupin *wrenched* *Sirius* down! It will be me! ? ? It's sooo strange that I don't buy this theory because Lupin really does act like Harrys father. From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Wed Aug 11 08:07:37 2004 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 11 Aug 2004 08:07:37 -0000 Subject: New poll for HPforGrownups Message-ID: <1092211657.228.54769.w64@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109686 Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the HPforGrownups group: Members: How old are you? (2004 version) o 14 and down o 15 to 17 o 18 to 21 o 22 to 25 o 26 to 29 o 30 to 34 o 35 to 39 o 40 to 44 o 45 to 49 o 50 to 54 o 55 to 59 o 60 to 64 o 65 to 69 o 70 to 74 o 75 and up To vote, please visit the following web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/surveys?id=1347885 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 mhbobbin at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 08:27:27 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 08:27:27 -0000 Subject: Is Lupin James? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109687 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > > > I'm not sold on this Switching Theory but I still think something > > odd is going on with Lupin and something LIKE this is possibly the > > cause. > > Valky: > > snips > > There is no end to the emotional/fatherly reactions Lupin has been > having...... Lupin *wrenched* *Sirius* down! It will be me! ? ? > > It's sooo strange that I don't buy this theory because Lupin really > does act like Harrys father. mhbobbin: For this theory to work, there must be a compelling reason for Lupin to still be hiding this secret (he IS hiding somthing) and a good reason for him to disappear for a year after reconnecting to Harry. (GOF--Lupin is AWOL as far as I'm concerned). Any idea what it could be? mhbobbin From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Aug 11 08:38:55 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 08:38:55 -0000 Subject: Is Lupin James? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109688 mhbobbin: > For this theory to work, there must be a compelling reason > for Lupin to still be hiding this secret > (he IS hiding something) and a good reason for him to > disappear for a year after reconnecting to Harry. > (GOF--Lupin is AWOL as far as I'm concerned). > Any idea what it could be? > mhbobbin Valky: I can't give you anthing more compelling than protecting Harry from himself The WereWolf! as a reason why he has kept it all shut inside so long... And where was he in GOF.... Where would you think a man would be after discovering the identity of the traitor who would have his beloved wife and son put to death....... You can't get more compelling than that. Some canon evidence that James!Lupin was out Hunting Rat in the year GOF--- 'Remus Lupin stood nearest to him. Though still quite young Lupin looked rather tired and ill; he had more grey hairs than when Harry last said goodbye to him and his robes were patched and shabbier than ever.' ch3 OOtP The Advance guard. Tired patched and shabby.... and we all wondered why.... From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 11 08:41:34 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 04:41:34 -0400 Subject: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - But Why? Message-ID: <002801c47f7f$0269f890$0ac2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109689 Brenda said: "I just wanted to clarify something: some posters (Pat, DuffyPoo, KathyK, etc) have pointed out that Snape never says 'old' and Harry never describes as 'ancient tree'. I have also noticed that the references they made came from US edition, whereas I got mine from UK version..." DuffyPoo: Yes, I did say that Snape only says old, as that is the quote from my book, a Canadian HB edition which is supposed to be exactly the same as the British edition. I just this minute checked, and my PB edition says the same thing. Also, I said I couldn't find the reference to Harry describing the tree as ancient, on a quick look through, but that I didn't doubt it was there. I did, in fact, find the reference afterwards. I couldn't find it initially as I had thought it was something Harry said and would then be in quotation marks. I found afterwards that it was something he thought. I don't know why he thought the tree was ancient except he also 'thought' this, "it's gnarled boughs were pummeling." I do not know what he is using for a reference for 'ancient' in his thoughts excpet perhaps the gnarled boughs. I, personally, have never seen a tree that I would consider 'ancient' just from looking at it (granted, I'm not much of a traveller), some I definitely think are fairly old, just from the size, but definitely not ancient. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From patientx3 at aol.com Wed Aug 11 08:52:05 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 08:52:05 -0000 Subject: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109690 HunterGreen previously: > I can certainly see a reason why Ron or Fred or > George might want to tell Molly off, but I don't see what on earth > she has done to Harry. Josh replied: >> Molly and every other adult has, in OotP, come out not smelling so much of roses, in Harry's view. Everyone knew more about his own freakin' destiny than himself. His overprotection has led to Sirius' death [snip] Molly is over-protective, and Harry is definitely on a countdown to explode at all this protection. Dumbledore and Molly are the two worst instigators. Over-protection can quite deductively be seen as the quickest way to get Harry killed... [snip] He needs to demand to be treated as an adult member of the Order. [snip] It's not that she isn't nice, concerned, etc. It is that she takes it too far and passes back into negative territory... petty, scathing, etc. on occasion. She needs an attitude adjustment on when to back off.<< Josh (in a later post): >>Harry is not going to stand for being called a child any longer, and things have simply gone to far for him to act fully like an adult in response. Self-contradictory I know, but that's the long and short of it. Molly might not be the one to receive the anger. It might be the Order as a whole. It might just be Dumbledore (lemondrop Harry?), or it might be Snape. But the one to open their mouth first will wish they hadn't. [snip] Sirius and Lupin _tried_ to give him a whiff of info, but were constrained by Dumbledore from telling all, of course. Molly objected on her own, and only brought in DD as a last resort. << HunterGreen: Wow, I decide to wait until after work to post my reply and about 5 people beat me to it! I stil feel like you haven't answered my original question, though Josh, which was, what has Molly, SPECIFICALLY, done to Harry to make him tell her off? I very much agree that the order as a whole made some very bad decisions when it came to Harry. The problem lies in the fact that they treat Harry both as a child and as an adult depending on what's appropriate at the moment. At the end of GoF he was NOT treated like a fifteen-year-old boy who had just gone through something terrible, he was treated like a 'soldier', pretty much giving a report to Dumbledore, then was told as little as possible before being sent back to the Dursley's for 2 months where he was ignored and still told nothing. An adult in that situation would be just as frustrated as Harry was, but at least an adult would have the choice to just say 'the heck with all this' and quit, or demand an explanation. But Harry can't, because he's a child, but no one remembers that until he gets to Grimmauld Place. Suddenly the person who ALERTED everyone to the return of Voldemort is given no more respect than, say, Ron or Ginny. Although he was left to fend for himself for two months as though he were grown up, he's immediately a child again as soon as that's conveinent. So for the few weeks he's at Grimmauld Place, he's considered a run-of-the- mill teenager, until he goes back to school that is. Again he's expected to fend for himself. He's cut off from letters, he can't use Floo Powder because the fires are being watched, and he doesn't know about this 'other way' the order members have of communicating, because he's "too young" to join the order. This would all be fine if he WAS Ron or Hermione or Fred or George, but he's not. So when he has need to contact the order what happens? Chaos. They expect him to make adult decisions (the adult decision in this case being contacting Snape, discounting the dream on his own, and NOT leaving school), yet they don't treat him like an adult (but NOT telling him what these other communications methods are, and keeping him in the dark about the prophecy). I think its absolutely ridiculous that Harry wasn't allowed to join the order. Again, he's the reason the order exists right now. He survived the duel with Voldemort, he came back and told Dumbledore everything that happened, and he's the one who has the mind connection with Voldemort. No one seems to care either. He's completely unimportant until he does something like save Arthur's life, or do an interview with the quibbler to convince more people of Voldemort's return (which was later posted in the daily prophet, as we know). ANYWAY, what does all that have to do with Molly? Well, it wasn't her fault. We don't know if she knew about the prophecy, she may have or she may have only been told of its existence (Dumbledore may have simply briefed the order with something as simple as "there's a prophecy involving Harry and Voldemort that I believe Voldemort is interested in hearing.") In any case, it wasn't her place to tell it to Harry. That came down to either Dumbledore (the leader of the order, and the person who originally heard the prophecy), and Sirius, who is Harry's godfather after all. Its my strong belief that Sirius knew the details about the prophecy. I doubt he knew the exact wording, but he probably heard all about it from James 15 years before. (I don't see how Dumbledore could justify not telling James and Lily the specific details, if not the exact wording, and if James was so close to picking Sirius as his secret- keeper, Sirius probably knew WHY they were going into hiding). I very much doubt Molly stopped him from telling *that* to Harry, and even if she did, they were living in the same house for about two weeks (and then another two weeks in December), he could have pulled Harry aside and told him if he really wanted to. But Sirius, for all his grumbling about Dumbledore, did listen to him (that is, if he did indeed know the prophecy). What he did tell Harry didn't really help him at all. It would have been better if Molly had won and Sirius had told him nothing. All the talk about the 'weapon' later on nearly made Harry run away! Everything else they told him was just stuff he could have guessed or figured out on his own. And Lupin was the one who actually stopped Sirius from saying anything else, but Sirius gave up so easily that I'd guess he was about done already anyway. Therefore, although Harry does indeed have the right to yell and scream at the order, the fault lies on *Dumbledore's* shoulders, not on Molly's, even if she did agree with him. Like I said above, the only other person to be blamed for not telling Harry about the prophecy, is Sirius. Since Sirius has the rights/responsibilites of being one of Harry's parents (this right was given to him directly from James and Lily, just because he may be unstable in some people's minds or that due to certain circumstances Harry can't live with him, doesn't nullify this fact). Sirius could have chosen to defy Dumbledore and tell Harry about the prophecy (or at least what little he knew about it), but he, like all the other adults, believed that Harry was just "too young" to know (which is ridiculous considering that it had to do DIRECTLY with him, he had *right* to be told). From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Aug 11 10:32:51 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 10:32:51 -0000 Subject: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - But Why? In-Reply-To: <002801c47f7f$0269f890$0ac2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109691 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > Brenda said: > "I just wanted to clarify something: some posters (Pat, DuffyPoo, > KathyK, etc) have pointed out that Snape never says 'old' and Harry > never describes as 'ancient tree'. I have also noticed that the > references they made came from US edition, whereas I got mine from UK > version..." > > > DuffyPoo: > Yes, I did say that Snape only says old, as that is the quote from my book, a Canadian HB edition which is supposed to be exactly the same as the British edition. I just this minute checked, and my PB edition says the same thing. Geoff: UK editions for reference.... '"I noticed in my search of the park, that considerable damage seems to have been done to a very valuable Whomping Willow," Snape went on..' (COS "The Whomping Willow" p.63 UK edition) 'Snape looked as though Christmas had been cancelled. He cleared his throat and said, "Professor Dumbledore, these boys have flouted the Decree for the Restriction of Underage Wizardry, caused serious damage to an old and valuable tree...."' (ibid. p.64) From snow15145 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 12:08:27 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 12:08:27 -0000 Subject: Umbridge is Nagini...Long In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109692 Doddiemoemoe's reply to my previous post: I simply do not think so...if Umbridge is Nagini...then why have Malfoy there plying Fudge with his gold? (We know Voldemort can possess people...why not Percy? I think Umbridge is nasty enough on her own. If Fudge was not such a fool, it may be neccessary, but I do not think so. >snip< AND Brenda's reply: There is just tiny part of me that makes me not want to believe it, and it is Sirius' remark in GoF, paraphrased as "the world is not divided into good people and the Death Eaters". Sure, she is foul and devious, but that is not to say she is part of the evil cult. Just a nasty politician, lol. Since Fudge will not be serving this purpose (me a firm believer of Fudge as the 'one who has left me'... that's another thread) Umbridge is the perfect candidate. A power- hungry stumpy accessorized woman, lol. Snow replying to both posts: I didn't mean to imply in any way that Umbridge was a willing participant of Voldemort any more than Bertha, Bodes or Ginny were. In fact it would be more along the lines of what Ginny had done for Riddle but didn't remember having done anything. There is defiantly a possession issue where Umbridge is concerned in this theory. Pettigrew controlled this possession factor at first by forcing her into her animagus figure to be of use to Voldemort in regaining his strength through the snake's venom. Malfoy took over after Voldemort's bodily return to ensure her a position both at Hogwarts and the Ministry where she could be of use for Voldemort to obtain information and entry. Malfoy's job was to prime the candidate (Umbridge) using the imperius curse for possession by Voldemort when it became necessary to obtain entrance to the Ministry undetected. Umbridge's fireplace in her office can be used both ways, to get into the Ministry or have someone from the Ministry come into her office. Umbridge trusts Malfoy and would allow him entry to her office wherein he could put the imperius curse on her, with ease, for Voldemort's possession. I would imagine that it would be easier for Voldemort to possess Umbridge in snake form because she would be easier to control. Umbridge acts on her own accord when she is in human form, which may be why she is such a suitable candidate, it wouldn't take much effort to condition her for control by Voldemort. Umbridge is less than talented when it comes to magic. Umbridge couldn't even vanquish the Weasley twins' portable swamp that Flitwick managed to do with ease. Umbridge was unable to control the situation with the fireworks that again, Flitwick announced he could have done easily but didn't know if he had the authority to. Umbridge is anything but a powerful witch so how did she obtain a top ranking position at the Ministry, and why? From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Wed Aug 11 12:09:46 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 12:09:46 -0000 Subject: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109693 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" wrote: > HunterGreen: > Wow, I decide to wait until after work to post my reply and about 5 > people beat me to it! I stil feel like you haven't answered my > original question, though Josh, which was, what has Molly, > SPECIFICALLY, done to Harry to make him tell her off? Heh... let's go with teenage perception. Harry isn't going to blame Sirius, and he's already taken out frustrations on DD already... though there are probably some more to go in that direction. Molly is undoubtedly one of the biggest proponents in the Order of "Harry is just a child." Is she an influence? *shrugs* Harry won't care. However, the specific action I'm looking for is theoretical. I'm waiting for the next time Molly pulls the "child" thing out of her mouth. At this point, Harry would be quite right, as you seem to agree, to pull everything H/LV out and throw it in her face. Mix in with that his being a teenager, and it won't be any prettier than the remains of DD's office. I think we can also agree that Molly won't take a verbal thrashing as... laid back as DD did. Molly and DD are the two closest things to parental figures. Harry is a teenager, and one of the most universal parts of being a teenager is rebelling against those same parental figures. DD might know better at this point, but Molly, even if she does hear from DD, will still put her neck on the chopping block. Even if Harry starts off against the Order as a whole, it is still Molly who would most quickly come out objecting and with the "child" arguement. Squeaky wheel gets the grease. *shrugs* A lot of this Molly thread reminds me of a 'defending Ron' thread on another group. Stubbornness and loyalty taken too far is a common trait between Molly, Ron, and Percy. Just because Molly and Ron do it defending Harry (et al.) doesn't excuse them. I'm not saying I hate either one of them... or that they aren't good over-all... just that they need to be... educated. :-) Josh From drliss at comcast.net Wed Aug 11 12:11:36 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (drliss at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 12:11:36 +0000 Subject: Is Lupin James? Message-ID: <081120041211.6009.411A0CF7000CE2800000177922007347489C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 109694 MumWeasley7: In Book 3 Prisoner of Azkaban: Shrieking Shack Lupin was lowering his wand, gazing fixedly at Black. The professor walked to Black's side, seized his hand, pulled him to his feet so Crookshanks fell to the floor, and embraced Black like a brother. Notice 'gazing fixedly' - really looking him over. And embraced Black like a brother. In Book 5 OOtP, Sirius is explaining his family to Harry when he says he went to live with James' family after his family rejected him and they treated him like their own son. Is the reason Lupin doesn't touch Harry simply because he's so overcome with emotion that he can't afford to give away his secret and therefore chooses not embrace his son, and also why he shivers to hear Harry talk about his mother's screams? Lissa: I've seen this theory before, most notably in the guide that's been published. I simply just don't buy it. First of all, I can totally understand why Lupin doesn't touch Harry. Lupin's not a touchy feely type of person to start with. His lycanthropy has really isolated him, and he's been shunned for the past twelve years. But more than that, Lupin is Harry's teacher. He's been fired from enough jobs that he's not going to risk this one over breaching student-teacher lines. (And if you favor the Lupin/Sirius ship, he'd have double reason to hold back from ANY physical contact with a male student.) As for shivering when he hears Harry talk about hearing his mother's screams, I can see where he'd be extremely sympathetic. Wouldn't you? After all, he knew and cared about Lily, and he knows and cares about Harry. Plus, he's probably been haunted by those few days for the past twelve years. He can only imagine too well what Harry's just starting to go through. Lupin's very into gazing fixedly. Although a lot of people have attributed this to him being a Legil... heck with it, mindreader (sorry Snape)... I think it's more a characteristic of Lupin himself. I think it translates to Lupin thinking- he doesn't often act before he thinks. Remember, when he sees Sirius again in the Shrieking Shack, he's after the truth, and very desperate to hear that the truth is Sirius was NOT the traitor. If Lupin's been James all this time, James has been doing a pretty darn good acting job. Lupin hasn't broken character once, and although they were extremely good friends, we can see from the Pensieve scene that there were some major differences in their personalities. Plus, even though Harry probably would have responded, Lupin makes NO attempt to contact Harry throughout GoF. If he were really James, I suspect he would have sent a letter. It would have been natural enough- they did develop a relatively close relationship, and by the end of PoA Harry knew that Lupin had been one of his father's best friends, so he was more than a teacher. We've already had one masquerader. And we have Tonks. (Who all's got bets on her being the traitor this time?) I think Lupin being James would be too repetitive. Sad to say, I think James is definitely dead. Liss [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Aug 11 13:17:09 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 13:17:09 -0000 Subject: Is Lupin James? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109695 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mhbobbin" wrote: > 2) If James did all this, Lupin's holding a very big secret--(I do believe that Lupin is holding a very big secret)-it was one thing not to reveal himself by PoA, but by OotP, why hasn't he told Sirius or DD. Why hasn't DD read his mind? There is some suggestion in the books that Lupin is a Legiwhatsy but there is no suggestion that he is a Occlumens.< Pippin quotes: 'An odd, closed expression appeared on Lupin's face." --PoA ch 14 (note the wordplay between "odd,closed" and "occlumens") "All this year, I have been battling with myself, wondering whether I should tell Dumbledore that Sirius was an Animagus."--PoA ch 18 If Lupin couldn't block his thoughts, wouldn't Dumbledore have discovered his secrets? Plus there's a huge hint that legi-thingy doesn't work on werewoves: "Don't ask me to fathom the way a werewolf's mind works," hissed Snape. --PoA ch 19 Pippin who agrees 100% that Lupin is holding a very big secret, and thinks JKR owes Galadriel Waters a huge debt of gratitude for throwing the 'Lupin is James' red herring into the bay. From laura18 at mail2eastend.com Wed Aug 11 13:27:30 2004 From: laura18 at mail2eastend.com (jwcpgh) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 13:27:30 -0000 Subject: Did Molly dislike Sirius? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109696 Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: Do you really think Molly DISLIKED Sirius, or just that she questioned his ability to be a mature, responsible guardian for Harry? Brian: > I took the Molly/Sirius exchange as a personality clash. My guess is that JKR has written Molly as a stereotypical mother. Stereotypy has received a lot of bad press since the days of political correctness, but Molly, I think, is an example of it. Notice that most of the time Harry notices that she behaves "like a mother." Anyway, I don't think Sirius and Molly dislike each other. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that Molly will, at least for awhile, be tormented with grief over Sirius's death. After all, this is the woman who in GoF worried that her last interaction with Fred and George was disciplinary! By the way, Molly does a pretty good job of henpecking Arthur, thus fulfilling another stereotype. Laura here: Ah, Molly. She's all heart-but that's not such a good thing, since we are made of heart and mind. I want to be clear that I have nothing but respect for full time, at home parents (being one myself). Rearing children is the most difficult, and the most important, job in the world. Still, Molly's parenting style often sets my teeth on edge. There's no doubt that her family is her whole life and she loves them with every atom of her being. But Molly's kind of love leans towards the overprotective, infantalizing kind-and that applies to her feelings about her husband too. The primary task of a parent, it seems to me, is to help her children become independent, self-sufficient, successful adults. Encouraging dependency, treating growing children (and adult husbands!) in age-inappropriate ways, interfering with the children's attempts to make their own decisions- those kinds of behaviors do not allow the children to become their own people. The thing about Molly is that she always acts out of whatever emotion is predominating in her at the moment. She never stops to think a situation through. Rarely, if ever, do we see her handle a crisis with calm deliberation. She's a bit of a caricature in that way and her behavior makes me uncomfortable. If kids learn by example, Molly's way of handling pressure is a pretty poor one. She melts down and goes all drama-queen on everyone and makes herself the focus of attention but she doesn't actually adress the problem. The fact that her kids are by and large reasonable people capable of dealing with difficulties in a constructive way (yes, even Fred and George) probably has to do more with the size of the Weasley family than anything Molly does. She just doesn't have time to micromanage every child's life the way she'd like to, and I shudder to think what kind of child would result if she did. (Wait a minute-the name Dudley comes to mind here.) My 16-year-old daughter is a lot more sympathetic to Molly than I am. She pointed out to me that Molly's behavior in book 5 probably has a lot to do with her being out of her safe space. In her home she knows what her job is and what to expect. At Grimmauld Place she is dislocated, physically and emotionally. She tries to act the same way she would at home, with mixed results. Her housekeeping organizational skills are valuable in the effort to restore the house to some semblance of livability. But she doesn't deal well with the crisis mode of the Order. Her instinct is to boss everyone around, even the adults, and try to keep the obvious a secret from her bright, curious children. Both efforts are doomed to failure, which just increases her frustration level. She can never step back and rethink her clearly ineffective reactions. I think Molly and Sirius simply had no common ground. Their life experiences were so radically different that they were barely speaking the same language. Molly is a homebody. Sirius is a fighter. Molly wants to protect and preserve the status quo. Sirius has seen evil, lived with it, and has chosen to dedicate his life to battling it. For Molly, Sirius represents danger and the destabilizing of everything she values. For Sirius, Molly represents home and conservatism (small c-as in keeping things as they are), which have stifled him and caused him pain his whole life. One can see where the problem would arise when these two try to interact. Molly's finest moment, for me, is at the end of book 4, when she hugs Harry. She doesn't try to give him long explanations or make him give any. She just gives him what he has needed all his life- simple, direct love in a simple, direct way. She knew what do to and she did it. At that moment, she is a mother to Harry in the very best sense of the word. Laura, who thinks that Sirius could have used a little of that kind of loving gesture too and wishes Molly could have seen that From pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 11 14:01:52 2004 From: pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net (pcaehill2) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 14:01:52 -0000 Subject: Weasley Is Our King--tune??? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109697 Very minor, very peripheral, but driving me crazy: Has anyone identified the tune to WIOK? I suspect an Anglican hymn or drinking song (sometimes they are both).... The reason it's driving me bonkers is that, on this re-read, I've come up with a perfectly horrible tune that won't leave my feeble brain...and if I could have the *right* one, maybe I'll be free! needing your compassion & help, Pam From drliss at comcast.net Wed Aug 11 14:13:12 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (drliss at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 14:13:12 +0000 Subject: Is Lupin James? Message-ID: <081120041413.27713.411A29780001E50600006C4122007511509C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 109698 Pippin quotes: 'An odd, closed expression appeared on Lupin's face." --PoA ch 14 (note the wordplay between "odd,closed" and "occlumens") "All this year, I have been battling with myself, wondering whether I should tell Dumbledore that Sirius was an Animagus."--PoA ch 18 If Lupin couldn't block his thoughts, wouldn't Dumbledore have discovered his secrets? Plus there's a huge hint that legi-thingy doesn't work on werewoves: "Don't ask me to fathom the way a werewolf's mind works," hissed Snape. --PoA ch 19 Pippin who agrees 100% that Lupin is holding a very big secret, and thinks JKR owes Galadriel Waters a huge debt of gratitude for throwing the 'Lupin is James' red herring into the bay. Lissa: While I don't agree with Pippin about what Lupin's secret actually -is- ;), I do agree he's hiding something. However, I'm not convinced he's an occlumens. I get the impression that even if you're a Legoperson, you have to actually TRY when you're reading someone's mind. I think Dumbledore knew that Lupin was pretty conflicted already in PoA- he's got the werewolf thing going on and DD had to know that returning to Hogwarts wasn't all peaches and cream for Lupin. But he trusted Lupin and didn't think that Lupin was helping Sirius get into the castle. (I'm wondering if Dumbledore was the one who had to tell Lupin that James, Peter, and Lily were all dead and Sirius was the traitor. Whoever had to do that must have HATED that job!) So if he trusted Lupin, why would he try to read his mind? And if he's not making a conscious effort to do it, then he wouldn't know Lupin's hiding something. The other thing that comes to mind concerning the Lupin/James switch is that Lupin had no clue that Peter was the Secret Keeper. Unless Lupin and James made the switch before Sirius suggested making Peter Secret Keeper (which WAS a last minute thing), shouldn't he know? And if Lupin-in-James' body was told that Sirius wanted to make Peter the Secret Keeper because Sirius thought Lupin was the spy, then Lupin-in-James's body would know that Sirius wasn't the spy. There was some time in between Peter being SK and the murders- wouldn't Lupin and James have switched back? Or Lupin at least let James-in-Lupin's-body know that the switch had been made? Boy, I'm confused :) I do agree it's a great red herring though- I just think there's too many flaws in it to work! (not the least of which the strongest argument (the spectres coming out of the wands) has been confirmed to be an editorial error.) Liss [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sherriola at earthlink.net Wed Aug 11 14:14:34 2004 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 08:14:34 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Weasley Is Our King--tune??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <005001c47fad$88114740$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 109699 Very minor, very peripheral, but driving me crazy: Has anyone identified the tune to WIOK? I suspect an Anglican hymn or drinking song (sometimes they are both).... The reason it's driving me bonkers is that, on this re-read, I've come up with a perfectly horrible tune that won't leave my feeble brain...and if I could have the *right* one, maybe I'll be free! needing your compassion & help, Pam Sherry now hi Pam, Well, if you can manage to get your hands on the audio version of the book, as read by Jim Dale, he comes up with a nice tune for the song, fits exactly, I think. you could get that one into your head instead! Sherry G From sherriola at earthlink.net Wed Aug 11 14:23:46 2004 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 08:23:46 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Is Lupin James? In-Reply-To: <081120041211.6009.411A0CF7000CE2800000177922007347489C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: <005201c47fae$d0a55630$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 109700 Lissa: I've seen this theory before, most notably in the guide that's been published. I simply just don't buy it. As for shivering when he hears Harry talk about hearing his mother's screams, I can see where he'd be extremely sympathetic. Wouldn't you? After all, he knew and cared about Lily, and he knows and cares about Harry. Plus, he's probably been haunted by those few days for the past twelve years. He can only imagine too well what Harry's just starting to go through. Sherry agrees: I have never bought this theory, and I know i've said this before, when the subject comes up. It would just be too incredibly cruel to Harry. If James and Lupin had switched, where the heck has he been all these years, while Harry was being abused at the Dursleys? Could Harry ever forgive that? If the big revelation were to come at the end, would Harry rush to him and say something like, oh, Dad, I'm so glad it's you! No, I don't think so. I think he'd be furious, and rightly so. It would have been the worst kind of betrayal and abandonment, and there is no reason that could ever make it right to Harry. I don't know if there's even a way that it could be made to seem right to the readers, not when we know too well what Harry has been through. The only thing would be if for some reason, Lupin/James doesn't know this has happened and doesn't remember it in any way. It makes my heart ache for Harry to think that his own father could have pulled such a nasty trick on him! Sherry G From allisonotto at gmail.com Wed Aug 11 14:32:49 2004 From: allisonotto at gmail.com (allison_m_otto) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 14:32:49 -0000 Subject: Long post - Hermione: '79 or '80? (Was Re: School cut-off date) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109701 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bex" wrote: > Yb: > This was a blip in a much earlier post. September 19, 1979 was a > Wednesday, the day of Mercury. Hermione's initials are HG (Hg), the > Periodic Table symbol for Mercury. I don't know where the "25% as > clever" thing keeps coming from, though. > > ~Yb This is an interesting theory (of RMM's, right?), but it seems extremely complex. Hermione's parents *are* dentists, but I wonder if they find chemical symbols inspiring enough to decide to name their child after Mercury (which, by the way, is increasingly controversial as a dental substance because some dentists believe it leads to poisoning). Also, unless they knew for sure that Hermione would be born on a Wednesday - and 1980 was slightly before the days of scheduled-for- convenience Caesareans - Hermione would have to have been nameless after her birth for quite some time while her parents consulted the periodic table, Greek mythology, and the Roman calendar. Seems to me if they wanted to be clever with her name, they might have started coming up with it sometime before she was actually born. And I do think that getting her name from "The Winter's Tale" is clever enough for the Grangers, and for what JKR was talking about. "The Winter's Tale" is not as often performed or read in schools (despite JKR's experience, apparently) as "Hamlet," "The Merchant of Venice," etc. 'Ophelia' is instantly recognizable as a Shakespearian name; 'Hermione' is not, unless you really know Shakespeare (how many kids or parents seeing "101 Dalmatians" knew that the name of the mother dog, Perdita, is also from "The Winter's Tale"?). Hermione's parents, being in the dentistry/medical community rather than a community of English scholars, are around other professionals who focused on science, not Shakespeare. For them to be familiar with "The Winter's Tale" does make them cultured and well-rounded, and a little bit clever. It also turned out to be very clever of JKR to call her character Hermione, since the Hermione in "The Winter's Tale": -'dies' early on (it's unclear whether she's really dead) and -spends the whole play out of commission despite the fact that -she knows the truth about the problem that sparks the play's plot. Then in the end, when all has been revealed, she "comes back to life" by changing from a *statue* of Hermione to the real, live Hermione. (this has definitely been mentioned on MuggleNet at least). If you want to get really pedantic about it, you could also say that the problem in "The Winter's Tale" is all about blood - Hermione's husband, Leontes (by the way - Leo - roar!), thinks that Hermione has had an affair and that their daughter Perdita is not of his blood. So he has Perdita 'exposed' (the Greek mythology way of not killing a child directly, but leaving it out to be eaten by wild animals) because of her illegitimate, tainted blood. Hermione supposedly 'dies' of grief, and can't 'come back to life' until Perdita is found and everything is set right. Hence the Hermione- statue. Yeah, it's a weird play. -Allison, who has a job, and I swear is getting back to it now. From arielock at aol.com Wed Aug 11 14:34:08 2004 From: arielock at aol.com (arielock2001) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 14:34:08 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109702 Brenda wrote: > Huge spoiler indeed, I think I'm going to be very disappointed > reading the next 2 books now, sigh... Arianna: Oh, please don't be disappointed!!!! That's why I waited so long, and posted a really difficult riddle when I just couldn't take it anymore. Even if I am right about that... ...we still don't know: If it is Peter, how will it go down? Will he know what's going on, or will it be an accident? Will that horrible silver hand kill our beloved werewolf? (cause I'll stage a protest.) What is the deal with Snape? Was he in love with Lily? Does he really hate Harry? Why is he so Horrible to Hermione and Neville? Why does Dumbledore trust him? What is going to happen with Hagrid's brother? What is going to happen to Umbridge? Who winds up together? Which of the staff are married? Why do people become ghosts? What is up with that veil? Will Harry somehow speak to Sirius again? How are the children really sorted? Will Harry go back into the Cos? What will he find? Who will be the new Minister of Magic? What really is in the locked room? Why is that room locked if brains, time and the veil of deaths are unlocked for anyone to stroll in? How will Molly react to the twins store? Where does Hogwarts keep its brain? Who was the "horrible boy?" Is Petunia older or younger? How many Howlers has she gotten over the years? What did Dudley see when the dementor attacked him? Why is Vernon so horrible? What is his secret? Was Lupin in love with Lily? Did Lily have a crush on him at one point? When exactly did Sirius die? and on, and on, and on... Besides, we were all itching for those last two books when we thought the prophesy was clearly about Harry. There is nothing that will stop us from devouring every page. Arianna From sophierom at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 14:34:44 2004 From: sophierom at yahoo.com (sophierom) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 07:34:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Tonks a traitor? was: Is Lupin is James In-Reply-To: <1092230873.15513.7942.m16@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20040811143444.98734.qmail@web51809.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109703 Lissa wrote: "We've already had one masquerader. And we have Tonks. (Who all's got bets on her being the traitor this time?)" Sophierom: Ooh, I haven't heard this theory before. Tonks a traitor? Are there previous posts on this? (I'll look through the evil search engine when I get a chance, but if anyone knows about any posts off the top of their head, feel free to point them out to me.) Or, does anyone want to post on this? I hope Tonks isn't a traitor, but I'd be interested in hearing some evidence pointing her in that direction. Any takers? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From romulus at hermionegranger.us Wed Aug 11 14:59:27 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 14:59:27 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109704 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "alshainofthenorth" > wrote: > Alshain: > > > > Adding a quote from PS: > > > > "Now, yer mum an' yer dad were as good a witch an' wizard as I ever > > knew. Head Boy and Head Girl of Hogwarts in their day! Suppose the > > myst'ry is why You-Know-Who never tried to get them on his side > > before... probably knew they were too close ter Dumbledore ter want > > anything to do with the Dark Arts." (PS, p. 64 in UK paperback > > edition.) RMM: And thirdly, this quote from Hagrid shows that Voldemort was recruiting some of the best and the brightest from Hogwarts. Lily and James were in Gryffindor, so this says that the DEs had members in more than one house at Hogwarts. RMM www.hermionegranger.us From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 11 15:03:11 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 11:03:11 -0400 Subject: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - But Why? Message-ID: <002201c47fb5$6ee64790$5cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109705 > DuffyPoo: > Yes, I did say that Snape only says old, as that is the quote from my book, a Canadian HB edition which is supposed to be exactly the same as the British edition. I just this minute checked, and my PB edition says the same thing. Geoff: UK editions for reference.... '"I noticed in my search of the park, that considerable damage seems to have been done to a very valuable Whomping Willow," Snape went on..' (COS "The Whomping Willow" p.63 UK edition) 'Snape looked as though Christmas had been cancelled. He cleared his throat and said, "Professor Dumbledore, these boys have flouted the Decree for the Restriction of Underage Wizardry, caused serious damage to an old and valuable tree...."' (ibid. p.64) DuffyPoo again: There you have it. I only looked at the first reference of Snape to the tree, not the second one Geoff posted above. 24-25 years is old, I supposed, but maybe not in the life of a tree. As to why HP thought it was 'ancient', I have no clue. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Koinonia2 at hotmail.com Wed Aug 11 15:33:23 2004 From: Koinonia2 at hotmail.com (koinonia02) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 15:33:23 -0000 Subject: The chess game in SS/PS, quidditch, and Snape's potion puzzle... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109706 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, ~Harry fretted about this next to the fire in the Gryffindor > common room, while Ron and Hermione used their time off to play a > game of wizard chess. > "For heaven's sake, Harry," said Hermione, exasperated, as one of > Ron's bishops wrestled her knight off his horse and dragged him > off the board. "Go and *find* Justin if it's so important to you." > cos/ch 11/pg 197-198 Message 109553: > Valky: > REALLY Good "K"! > > By this comparison are you saying that Justin Finch-Fletchley is >one of the two pieces mentioned here on the board? > I am seriously intrigued. "K": I don't know. ^-^ I've been reading CoS again and since I had just read this part it was easy for me to find. But to be honest I didn't think much about it until I read the post by Vivian (109258). >From now on I am going to pay close attention to chess matches and other statements made by the characters that could describe a chess game. vmonte (Message 109556) >I have another chess game scene. >Page 217 SS >"...Harry headed straight back to the Gryffindor common room, where >he found Ron and Hermione playing chess. Chess was the only thing >Hermione ever lost at, something Harry and Ron thought was very good >for her." (Again we are told that Hermione is not a good >strategist.) >"Don't talk to me for a moment," said Ron when Harry sat down next to >him, "I need to concern--" He caught sight of Harry's face. "What's >the matter with you? You look terrible." >"Speaking quietly so that no one else could hear, Harry told the >other two about Snape's sudden, sinister desire to be a Quidditch >referee. >"Don't play," said Hermione at once. >"Say you're ill," said Ron. >"Pretend to break your leg," Hermione suggested. >"Really break your leg," said Ron. "K" That's just the kind of example I'm talking about. Now let me give a few more. "I'm going to play," he told Ron and Hermione. "If I don't, all the Slytherins will think I'm just too scared to face Snape." ch 13- pg 221-us Below is a statement Harry makes before the chess match in SS. "I might be able to hold Snape off for a while, but I'm no match for him, really." ch 16-pg 286-us "...but I'm no *match* for him, really." And of course we do know Harry will win. So there are at least five examples of Snape being mentioned with chess or in a way that could be used to describe a match. (1) "Speaking quietly so that no one else could hear, Harry told the other two about Snape's sudden, sinister desire to be a Quidditch referee. "Don't play," said Hermione at once. "Say you're ill," said Ron. "Pretend to break your leg," Hermione suggested. "Really break your leg," said Ron. ch 13-pg 217-us (2) "I'm going to play," he told Ron and Hermione. "If I don't, all the Slytherins will think I'm just too scared to face Snape." ch 13-pg 221-us (3) "That's chess!" snapped Ron. "You've got to make some sacrifices! I take one step forward and she''ll take me -- that leaves you free to checkmate the king, Harry!" "But?" "Do you want to stop Snape or not?" "Ron?" "Look, if you don't hurry up, he'll already have the stone!" ch 16-pg 283-us (4) "I might be able to hold Snape off for a while, but I'm no match for him, really." ch 16-pg 286-us (5) "Harry dear, said Mrs. Weasley, poking her head into his and Ron's bedroom..." snip "Professor Snape would like a word with you." Harry did not immediately register what she had said. One of his castles was engaged in a violent tussle with a pawn of Ron's, and he was egging it on enthusiastically. snip "Squash him --- **squash him**, he's only a pawn, you idiot. Sorry, Mrs. Weasley, what did you say?" "Professor Snape, dear." oop-ch 24-pg 517-us vmonte (109561): >I seem to be in the minority though about how time-travel actually >works. I believe that time-travel can actually change history, while >many fans do not. "K": I will agree with you on this point. I'm not going to quote canon (lack of time) now though I have in the past. But if one goes back and reads PoA and the warnings that Hermione received, then IMO it's obvious the past can be changed. vmonte: >I think that the chess game is also a clue as to >how Dumbledore uses time-travel. When Dumbledore changes his >strategy/influences history he must factor in a whole set of >considerations. I think that he is very cautious when he uses time- >travel because changing history may not always work in your favor. "K": I do believe it's possible Dumbledore is using time-travel. And if he is then wouldn't it stand to reason that others are also doing the same? I'm still standing by my theory that Harry started some of this time- turning mess. Anyway, I love the chess discussion and will be paying closer attention to any game references in the books! "K" From Meliss9900 at aol.com Wed Aug 11 15:36:24 2004 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 11:36:24 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts Message-ID: <1de.271da6dd.2e4b96f8@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109707 In a message dated 08/11/2004 09.36 Central Daylight Time, arielock at aol.com writes: > Besides, we were all itching for those last two books when we > thought the prophesy was clearly about Harry. There is nothing > that will stop us from devouring every page. > > Arianna > > Personally I STILL think that the 7th month is July and that the prophecy is about Harry. While your theory is very intriguing there are just too many unknown variables and leaps of faith that need to be taken. Dumbledore is JKR's barometer. She's mentioned as much in her COS DVD interview. Anytime she needs to impart a bit of knowledge to the masses she uses Dumbledore (or Hermione.) She has him say in PS/SS (paraphased) that he while he might not be able to answer everyone of Harry's questions, he will not lie. As far as we can tell by canon he never has broken that promise. He might have withheld information but he hasn't lied when asked a point blank question. Dumbledore would know Latin. He would know Lily (and Peter's) birthdates yet he says that while the prophecy could have been about Harry or Neville, it ultimately became about Harry. And I just can't see JKR pulling that kind of switcheroo at the end. Melissa (who firmly believes that "Love" is the wonderful yet terrible thing behind the locked door and that somehow IT will play a part in Voldemort's defeat -- after all Dumbledore has also said that its something that LV doesn't understand and always underestimates). [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From melclaros at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 15:45:25 2004 From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 15:45:25 -0000 Subject: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - But Why? In-Reply-To: <002201c47fb5$6ee64790$5cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109708 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: . As to why HP thought it was 'ancient', I have no clue. Because he often jumps to conclusions which are just as often wrong. When he jumps to conclusions based on something Snape says (ie: "old tree") he's ALWAYS wrong. Melpomene From Meliss9900 at aol.com Wed Aug 11 15:48:34 2004 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 11:48:34 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Pettigrew Attacked Ron? Message-ID: <1e0.27aec5ee.2e4b99d2@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109709 In a message dated 08/06/2004 18.31 Central Daylight Time, wjwarren4269 at comcast.net writes: > This is where Hermione goes from telling the truth to desperation to > save Sirius. Just in case that his actions in the 3rd year boys dorm > and to the Fat Lady were damning on their own, or might prevent > acceptance of the true 'Peter story', hey... make him look even more > innocent than he is! :) > > Josh > I might be a bit late on this but Peter did attack Ron. That's how Ron wound up in the infirmary unconsious right before the TimeTurner adventure began. Melissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Meliss9900 at aol.com Wed Aug 11 15:55:00 2004 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 11:55:00 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Ron's Fate? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109710 In a message dated 08/09/2004 15.41 Central Daylight Time, srae1971 at bellsouth.net writes: > The belief that Ron is dead will be just > as effective, to Harry, as Ron actually being dead. The quote from JKR > (which I cannot find at the moment) that said "As if I'd kill Harry's > best friend" just won't let me believe she's actually going to kill > him. I don't remember a comment like made in relation to Ron but I DO remember her saying something very similar about Sirius. Look how THAT turned out. Melissa > whose heading to the store but will look for the exact qoute when I get back. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Aug 11 15:59:28 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 15:59:28 -0000 Subject: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109711 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Josh Warren" wrote: > > However, the specific action I'm looking for is theoretical. I'm waiting for the next time Molly pulls the "child" thing out of her mouth. At this point, Harry would be quite right, as you seem to agree, to pull everything H/LV out and throw it in her face. Mix in with that his being a teenager, and it won't be any prettier than the remains of DD's office. I think we can also agree that Molly won't take a verbal thrashing as... laid back as DD did. > Since, as you point out, Harry has already exploded verbally and physically and trashed Dumbledore's office, wouldn't it be anti-climactic for him to explode again? How would it move the story forward if events unfolded as you suggest? Wouldn't it be more satisfying if Petunia got the thrashing instead? I'm curious about how you see Molly reacting. What's she going to do? Duel with Harry? Burst into tears? Meekly tell Harry yes, you're ready to be a grownup now, here's your lunchbox and be careful crossing streets? You see the contradiction, I hope. If Harry needs validation from Molly to prove to himself that he shouldn't be treated as a child, that in itself is childish. If you think she's going to let him in on all the secrets of the Order from now on, I'm not convinced she knows them. "Need to know" is a standard operating procedure in secret organizations, not something Dumbledore thought up to torture Harry. I don't believe Molly knew any more than the cover story: that there was something in the Department of Mysteries that Voldemort wanted to use as a weapon against Harry. That would certainly have been enough to fire her protective instincts, the same sort of thing that made me want to tell my child to put on a sweater when *I* was cold. Molly would have been happier not knowing that the Dark Lord was plotting against Harry, therefore Harry will be happier not knowing, therefore he shouldn't be told. Dumbledore knows now that Harry has the power to overcome the mindlink. If there are things DD is still withholding (and obviously there are) it is because they are other people's secrets, or because he doesn't think Harry needs to know them to do his part. There's no reason to think that information would be given to Molly and not Harry. Pippin From aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 16:16:39 2004 From: aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com (aboutthe1910s) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 16:16:39 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109712 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arielock2001" wrote: > Born as the seventh month dies: > September is "the seventh month." That is what the word > means. It just can't be July. I hate to bring this up when you have put forth a theory that you have clearly put a lot of thought and care into, but here's the *really* huge flaw--see it *just can* be July. And while I know Jo loves to turn things around on us, and I don't believe that she would allow *convention* to dictate plot, I still just cannot believe that she would write a book in which the main antagonist is defeated by someone other than the protagonist. And, quite simply, Harry is the protagonist. Not Lily. Not Peter. And, while I'm expounding, *not Hermione*! All this said, one can never know all that Jo has in mind until one has read the seventh book. So, while I can't buy this theory, I wouldn't say that it is *impossible*, only improbable. In any case, you put forth a really nice theory. Thanks : ) aboutthe1910s From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 16:35:55 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 16:35:55 -0000 Subject: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109713 > Pippin wrote: > > I don't believe Molly knew any more than the cover story: that > there was something in the Department of Mysteries that > Voldemort wanted to use as a weapon against Harry. That would > certainly have been enough to fire her protective instincts, the > same sort of thing that made me want to tell my child to put on a > sweater when *I* was cold. Molly would have been happier not > knowing that the Dark Lord was plotting against Harry, therefore > Harry will be happier not knowing, therefore he shouldn't be told. Neri: This is a question that interests me for some time: how much did the Order members knew about the prophecy? I think Sirius knew at least that there is a prophecy, if not its content. In the DoM battle, a short time before his death, he tells Harry to "take the prophecy and go". All he can see is an orb in Harry's hand. How would he guess that this is "the prophecy", unless he already knew about its existence? Neri From drliss at comcast.net Wed Aug 11 17:38:19 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (drliss at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 17:38:19 +0000 Subject: Tonks a traitor? (was: Lupin/James) Message-ID: <081120041738.20105.411A598A00040C2E00004E8922007481849C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 109715 Lissa wrote: "We've already had one masquerader. And we have Tonks. (Who all's got bets on her being the traitor this time?)" Sophierom: Ooh, I haven't heard this theory before. Tonks a traitor? Are there previous posts on this? (I'll look through the evil search engine when I get a chance, but if anyone knows about any posts off the top of their head, feel free to point them out to me.) Or, does anyone want to post on this? I hope Tonks isn't a traitor, but I'd be interested in hearing some evidence pointing her in that direction. Any takers? Lissa: To my knowledge, there's no previous posts on it. I'm not sure that there's any canon evidence, either. Merely my speculation. It stands to reason that Voldie might have a spy in the OotP this round. He did last time, and he's got to know that Dumbledore will oppose him as he tries to regain power. A lot of people have speculated that- assuming that someone WILL betray the Order, it will be Mungdungus. I think that's too easy and obvious. So, I started hedging my bets. There's some we know won't betray the Order: Hagrid, Mad-Eye Moody, etc. I know one popular theory is Lupin, but I'll stand by my werewolf. The two that I think are the most probable candidates are Kingsley Shacklebolt and Tonks. We don't know that much about either of them. But consider a few things about Tonks. 1.) She's a Black. Now, I know we can't judge a person by their family, but maybe Tonks does get along with her aunt Narscissa. We don't see any indication of what Tonks thinks of her parents... or what she thinks about a lot of things. I'm not saying she'll turn evil because she's a Black, but perhaps Narcissa (or even Bellatrix) got to her. We don't know. Sirius doesn't know a lot of Tonks's history because he was in Azkaban the whole time. 2.) She can change her appearance at will. Dead useful ability for a spy. Spy for the Order, or spy for Voldemort? 3.) Tonks and Shacklebolt weren't in the Order the last time around. Of course, neither were a lot of people (ahem, Weasleys). On the other hand, I expect Dumbledore would be giving every person a VERY thorough screening, given what happened last time. Now granted Dumbledore doesn't catch everything, but this time he'd be looking for treason. (Why should he ever have suspected at first that Moody wasn't Moody?) Like I said, this one belongs in the pure speculation pile. Will there even BE a traitor this time around??? Not a clue. But if there is, I do kind of feel like Mungdungus is a little too obvious. Liss [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jell at es.co.nz Wed Aug 11 06:55:24 2004 From: jell at es.co.nz (Justin Elliott) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 06:55:24 -0000 Subject: The titlings, again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109716 *snip* > Unless! What if I misunderstood the pattern? What if the pattern > is 'a person that WILL have a relationship with Harry in the book > itself and in the future BUT NOT in earlier books'? Unfortunately, > that would expand the scope even more! > > My head hurts... > > chrisp Just to throw a spanner in the works, play devils advocate etc.., what if you're defining prince too literally. There is another meaning: from the Merriam-webster: Prince: one likened to a prince; especially : a man of high rank or of high standing in his class or profession - prince?ship /'prin(t)s-"ship/ noun And from the Cambridge: LITERARY prince among/of sth a man who is excellent at something: that prince of flautists, William Bennett So could the hb prince not actually be royalty? I know, this doesn't help does it? 8-D Justin From spoonmerlin at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 11:41:45 2004 From: spoonmerlin at yahoo.com (Brent) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 11:41:45 -0000 Subject: Is Lupin James? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109717 I don't buy the Lupin/James switch for these reasons. Say they did switch and after LV is gone and baby Harry has no where to go why didn't he come forward then? Where's the threat? As far as he knew it was safe. When looking at the bogart Lupin sees a moon as his biggest fear. Why not LV, someone finding out the truth or something attacking Harry? With Lupin who has no family a moon makes sence. If it was James then he would have bigger worries especally with the potion that prevents the transformations. Brent From sad1199 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 17:42:53 2004 From: sad1199 at yahoo.com (sad1199) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 17:42:53 -0000 Subject: Malfoy's words in CoS Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109718 sad1199 here: Okay here I am reading CoS again! This book is so confusing to me (possibly because I am trying too hard...). Anyway, this is my question: Why does Draco shout out "Enemies of the Heir, beware! You'll be next, Mudbloods."? I was under the impression that the chamber was put forth as a myth or was a closely guarded secret. How would Draco know that Mudbloods are next? I know later on he says "- last time the Chamber of Secrets was opened, a Mudblood died." But, before that he says that his father wouldn't tell him anything about the Chamber. I think I am going to give up on CoS for clues and go on to enjoying reading PoA (My favorite so far. I cry every time Harry gets that last owl from Sirius allowing him to go to Hogsmeade!) again. One more thing. I just voted(?) on the last poll and was pleased to see my age group 35-39 with the most. I know it is early on though and this will most likely change. Have a Happy Love Filled Day! sad1199 From kelly at protocallonline.com Wed Aug 11 17:43:46 2004 From: kelly at protocallonline.com (kellymcj2000) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 17:43:46 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109719 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "aboutthe1910s" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arielock2001" > wrote: > > > Born as the seventh month dies: > > September is "the seventh month." That is what the word > > means. It just can't be July. > > > > I hate to bring this up when you have put forth a theory that you have > clearly put a lot of thought and care into, but here's the *really* > huge flaw--see it *just can* be July. And while I know Jo loves to > turn things around on us, and I don't believe that she would allow > *convention* to dictate plot, I still just cannot believe that she > would write a book in which the main antagonist is defeated by someone > other than the protagonist. And, quite simply, Harry is the > protagonist. Not Lily. Not Peter. And, while I'm expounding, *not > Hermione*! snip by kmcj > aboutthe1910s now kmcj The discussion about this theory is really getting interesting and there seem to be two main lines of thought: 1- Sept. as the seventy month is correct, though the exact details regarding arianna's theory remain to be seen 2- the Sept. theory is incorrect because 7th month is, in fact, July I am really quite in the middle of it. On the one hand, saying the 'seventh month' and meaning July does seem too obvious. The part in the prophecy when she says seventh month really jumped out at me the first time I read it. Just seems to be a red flag. On the other hand, she hasn't given us any indication in the text of a birthday or any major event happening at the end of September. I believe it (a major event in Sept.) would have been at least hinted at by now because JKR did say once she's laid all her clues and we could figure it out from what's in the books. I don't think she expect us to make such a critical/crucial deduction about Lily and Peter being born at the end of Sept. based mostly on the idea that someone needs to be born then. (I'm not saying that's all you based your guess on arianna. I know you did have other data/points to support their birthdays being in Sept. and didn't make the claim based solely on the necessity of having to have someone's birthday occur then; however I did get the impression that the discovery of Sept as the seventh month did generate the rest of your theory. Please forgive me if I'm wrong.) I hope I'm making sense here. What I'm trying to say is that I don't think JKR would expect us to conclude the Lily/Peter connection based on our knowing Sept. means the seventh month AND I don't see enough other evidence in the text on which to make such a conclusion. As mentioned above, I do really think we'd have had a clue about it before. Now that I'm writing this, I am realizing we are of course in for at least one more huge revelation (identity of the HBP) and it could be argued that figuring out this unknown element hasn't been made easy for us. Just as this Lily/Pter connection hasn't been. Despite that possibility, I really do think the outcome of the series will be based more on Harry's decisions and the consequences of choices he's made in the past rather than on what others have done. So, to me, there should still be some as yet undiscovered significance to the seventh month. Wish I had some ideas. Thanks for letting us in on this arianna. It's very cool. And thanks for reading this far. kmcj From cquinn at mn.rr.com Wed Aug 11 13:24:50 2004 From: cquinn at mn.rr.com (twobeaglegirl) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 13:24:50 -0000 Subject: Mundungus=Crookshanks Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109720 2 beagles: I started reading OotP last night for the 3rd time through and I noticed something slightly interesting. When Mrs. Figg and Harry are dragging Dugley back home after the dementor attack and Mrs. Figg is cursing Mundungus Fletcher, he apparates into the picture. He is described as, "a squat, unshaven man in a tattered overcoat....He had SHORT BANDY LEGS, LONG SCRAGGLY GINGER HAIR, and bloodshot baggy eyes that gave him the doleful look of a basset hound." (American version, p. 22, hardback) Crookshanks is often described as a ginger cat with bandy legs and a flat face. Now I know that Crookshanks is described (by Sirius) as being the most intelligent animal of his kind, and Mundungus is a bit of an idiot, but does anyone else think that the similarities their description is a little odd? Could Mundungus be Crookshanks? From jmay_71 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 14:11:31 2004 From: jmay_71 at yahoo.com (jmay_71) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 14:11:31 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109721 Jmay: Wow, Arianna. Really interesting post. I've been thinking about it a bit and I have a slight twist to offer to your theory. To help everyone understand where I'm going with this, my theory is based on the premise that the prophesy refers to three people: Peter, Harry and Voldemort. Also, there are other definitions for the word "born" other than giving birth to a child. Such as "deliver". Arianna wrote: > Let's take the prophesy apart line by line > > The one with the power to vanquish the dark lord approaches. > -This could mean Lily or Peter or Harry. Jmay: Ok, lets say its Peter for the time being. The "power" could refer to his role as the Potter's secret keeper. Arianna: > Born to those who have thrice defied him. > we know little about Peter's parents. Jmay: Since we don't have much to go on, it could be true that Peter's parents defied Voldemort three times. However, this part could still be referring to James and Lily. If the word "born" is interpreted as delivered or supplied (both listed in Roget's Thesaurus), the sentence is now read as "delivered" to those who have thrice defied him. Again, referring to Peter's role as secret keeper. Arianna: > Born as the seventh month dies: > September is "the seventh month." That is what the word > means. It just can't be July. Jmay: Let's assume that it is referring to the end of September. We don't know when the Potter's went into hiding. If Peter was made secret keeper at the end of September, then he would have been "delivered " to them as the seventh month died. Arianna: > And the dark lord will mark him as his equal: > Harry has the scar > Peter has the dark mark > Lily had something that made Voldemort hesitate to kill her. Jmay: Voldemort also marked Peter by giving him a silver hand. True, this does not happen until much later, but if we look at the next part of the prophesy Arianna: > but he will have power the dark lord know not. > -Peter has that pesky life debt that he owes to Harry. Jmay: Exactly. The life debt occurs before Peter receives his silver hand. So Peter has the power of the life debt when Voldemort marks him with the silver hand. Arianna: > And either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live > while the other survives. > - this could mean exactly what we have been told, but what if it is > about three people? > -Voldemort was reborn human with Peter's right hand. > -Peter has that magical silver hand, about which we know > nothing. Maybe Peter will kill Voldemort with it by accident. Jmay: Ok, I want to clarify something first. A lot of posts have been written about neither living while the other survives. I think this particular line is referring to a duel arranged by Voldemort. Possible scenario: Voldemort, remembering the graveyard duel with Harry and the fact that their wands cause side effects he hadn't counted on, makes Peter battle Harry. Peter, remembering that Harry saved his life, doesn't want to be the one to kill him. Voldemort issues an ultimatum, either kill him or I'll kill you both. Now read the prophecy line again. Either (Harry or Peter) must die at the hand of the other, for neither (Harry and Peter) can live while the other (Voldemort) survives. Arianna: > The one with the power to vanquish the dark lord will be born as > the seventh month dies. > -I was hung up on the future tense for months, but even if it were > Harry, everything was set in motion by Lily's sacrifice. > Jmay: I was hung up on the future tense too, until I substituted "deliver" for born. At the time of the prediction, Peter was not the secret keeper. He had not been "delivered" or born yet. > Let's not forget, > there are two books left. If the prophesy were as straight forward > as it seems, is it really JKR's style to divulge it at the end of the > fifth book? That's why this could be the biggest spoiler. If it's > true, it changes everything. Harry won't have to go through the > veil and somehow come back. He won't have to sacrifice his life > or his magic or anything. He won't have to become a murderer. > He won't have to do any of that. In PoA, Harry tells Lupin and > Sirius not to kill Peter because he doesn't want them to be > murderers. Harry believes that murder is wrong, even for an evil > creep like Peter. > I bet Harry won't have to kill Voldemort, Peter will. > > This is from the World Book Day chat: > MauraEllen: Did the debt Wormtail has to Harry carry over to > Voldemort when he sacrificed his arm to restore his body? > JK Rowling replies -> No. Can't say any more than that! > > Voldemort does not owe Harry a life debt, but her answer implies > that something more going on there. > > Rita: What about Wormtail? Is there hope for redemption? > JK Rowling replies -> There's always hope, of course. You'll find > out more about our rat-like friend in book six. > > Peter can't bring the Potters back to life, his only hope for > redemption is to ultimately be responsible for Voldemort's death. > > So what do you think? Is it possible or utter rubbish? > Arianna Jmay: I agree with you about the idea that Peter is the key to defeating Voldemort. Your point on something more going on between Peter and Voldemort is very important. The life debt didn't transfer, maybe something else did. But, it may that Peter has to sacrifice himself for Harry (just like Lily did) and that results in Voldemort's defeat, just like Lily's sacrifice saved Harry before. Or, Peter and Harry do something together to defeat Voldemort since he is carrying around Peter's hand and Harry's blood. I realize that I have completely eliminated your Lily connection to the whole thing. But your theory really got me thinking! Jmay From inkling108 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 14:51:01 2004 From: inkling108 at yahoo.com (inkling108) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 14:51:01 -0000 Subject: Is Lupin James? In-Reply-To: <081120041413.27713.411A29780001E50600006C4122007511509C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109722 >Liss wrote: > The other thing that comes to mind concerning the Lupin/James switch is that Lupin had no clue that Peter was the Secret Keeper. Unless Lupin and James made the switch before Sirius suggested making Peter Secret Keeper (which WAS a last minute thing), shouldn't he know? Inkling now: Exactly! For me this has always been the fatal logical flaw in this theory. You can't get around it without jumping through all kinds of hoops (e.q., switching back and forth -- pretty shaky stuff from a literary point of view, very unlikely from JKR.) I think there is also pretty compelling psychological evidence against it -- the way Lupin talks about his childhood as a werewolf, and how much it meant to him to finally be accepted by the other marauders. Even the tone of self disgust he adopts when he explains why he didn't tell Dumbledore Sirius was an animagus. "It would have meant admitting that I'd betrayed his trust while I was at school...and Dumbledore's trust has meant everything to me. He let me into Hogwarts as a boy...." These are the memories and emotions of Lupin, not James. (By the way I too think he has a secret, but this isn't it.) Inkling From claphamsubwarden at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 16:21:01 2004 From: claphamsubwarden at yahoo.com (Chris) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 16:21:01 -0000 Subject: Lupin's Age (Was: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - But Why?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109723 Was Lupin 11 when he came to Hogwarts? I am not sure. Whilst it would surely be around 11 (ie slightly older). I am not so sure he was 11. He says that it didn't look like he could go to Hogwarts until Dumbledore became Headmaster, does this mean that he was rejected by Dippet? Also JKR constantly refers to him looking old and tired, now where as this is mostly to do with his lythancopy, if he was 11 when he went to Hogwarts he would only be 34/35 in PoA, which is not very old for a wizard surely. Considering that Wizards supposedly live longer than Muggles. Prove me wrong Guys! Chris http://groups.yahoo.com/group/merlin_legacy From squeakinby at tds.net Wed Aug 11 17:53:41 2004 From: squeakinby at tds.net (squeakinby) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 13:53:41 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: biggest SPOILER In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <411A5D25.8010304@tds.net> No: HPFGUIDX 109724 kellymcj2000 wrote: >--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "aboutthe1910s" > wrote: > > >>--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arielock2001" >>wrote: >> >> >> >>>Born as the seventh month dies: >>> >>> If it was an astrological calendar, then wouldn't we be looking for someone born in the middle of October? If it was a Hebrew calendar we'd be looking in April. If it was a Celtic calendar, wouldn't we be looking in May? Isn't Samhain the New Year? If it was Chinese--I have no idea. Jem From karen at dacafe.com Wed Aug 11 17:43:22 2004 From: karen at dacafe.com (kmcbears1) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 17:43:22 -0000 Subject: Lily's Grandparents Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109725 IMO JKR wants us to know that Lily and Petunia are Muggles. Harry is a half-blood as is Voldemort. IMO this is a crucial part of the story. If Lily's Grandparents are Muggles then we must go back 6 or 7 generations to find magical blood. M - Muggle , MM is Muggle Mother, MF is Muggle Father Lily (M) Lily's Parents (MM) (MF) Lily's Grandparents (MM) (MF) (MM) (MF) For this to be true: Lily's Great-grandparents must be Muggles (MM) (MF) (MM) (MF) (MM) (MF) (MM) (MF) I find it interesting that in a story which includes a look racial acceptance/conflict (fullblood, halfblood, mudblood, ) the protagonist and antagonist are both "halfbloods". - Karen From vincent.maston.ml at free.fr Wed Aug 11 15:18:40 2004 From: vincent.maston.ml at free.fr (Vincent Maston) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 17:18:40 +0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - But Why? In-Reply-To: <002201c47fb5$6ee64790$5cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> References: <002201c47fb5$6ee64790$5cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: <411A38D0.6020408@free.fr> No: HPFGUIDX 109726 Cathy Drolet a crit : > As to why HP thought it > was 'ancient', I have no clue. Well, Harry didn't know the history of the Willow, so he couldn't know exactly when it was planted here. For him, it's just a really noticeable tree, and he can't imagine Hogwarts without it (would be so much more safe, so un-hogarts-ey, really) The only one that would be able to point out that it's not that ancient would be Hermione, thanks to "Hogwarts:A history". I also think that Dumbledore would have made all he could to make people believe it was really old, so they wouldn't think of it as a tree with a purpose, at the time. Much like the rumours he spread about the shrieking shack, I believe. -- I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by. Douglas Adams From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Wed Aug 11 18:02:02 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:02:02 -0000 Subject: Lupin's Age/Whomping Willow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109727 Chris wrote: > Also JKR constantly refers to him looking old and tired, now where as > this is mostly to do with his lythancopy, if he was 11 when he went > to Hogwarts he would only be 34/35 in PoA, which is not very old for > a wizard surely. Considering that Wizards supposedly live longer than > Muggles. Yb comments: JKR has stated that Wizards have a considerably longer lifespan than muggles (DD is ~150!). I think Lupin looks old and ragged due to "that time of the month" plus the fact that he can't find a steady job and this Harry/Order business is really taking a toll on him. My thoughts on the Whomping Willow: Who said it was a sapling when it was planted? In fact, it /couldn't/ have been! How would it keep the other students away from the entrance to the tunnel? It had to be full grown, so it may have been 40-50 years old when it was planted. ~Yb From vmonte at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 18:02:13 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:02:13 -0000 Subject: chess game in SS/PS-- Ron as not Dumbledore theory... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109728 K wrote: I do believe it's possible Dumbledore is using time-travel. And if he is then wouldn't it stand to reason that others are also doing the same? I'm still standing by my theory that Harry started some of this time- turning mess. Anyway, I love the chess discussion and will be paying closer attention to any game references in the books! vmonte responds: Yes, I think you may be right about other wizards using TT. You know I'm not so sure that Dumbledore represents the king piece in the first war. It seems to me that Lily and James seemed to have made a decision/choice that was apart from what DD or any other friend wanted. Maybe they allowed PP to become the secret keeper because they felt that the only way Harry would survive was if they died. I think that Harry will not be able to change the past because his parents will make sure he cannot. I think that is why all the details of GH will not be revealed to Harry. I think that is also why DD is also not aware of what exactly happened there (a man who often knows too much). What if James and Lily made a decision to die based on their own TT adventure. Did Lily and James work in the DoM? Did Lily or James TT to the future and realized that they needed to die in order to save Harry? Lily obviously represented the Queen in the first war. But what about James? Is it possible that he represented the King, and not DD? It sure seems like J&L kept DD in the dark. Is it possible that Lupin was the Bishop? Lupin seems to be keeping quiet about something. Could he have a part in J&L's plan? And what about Sirius? Sirius would have died trying to save J,L,&H at GH. Perhaps James allowed PP as secret keeper to keep Sirius alive for Harry. After all who would be left for Harry? And Sirius is Harry's godfather after all... I'm also going to try to come up with other reasons to explain the unusual link between Ron and Dumbledore. SO THIS IS NOT ABOUT RON=DD! I think it's only fair to attempt to find other reasons to explain why Ron seems to be a strategist (with perhaps seer potential) just like DD. Is it possible that Ron will be handed the "baton" of Order protector when DD is killed? Are the Weasley family and Dumbledore related by blood to GG? Does DD notice latent ability in Ron? If DD is indeed keeping a close eye on Harry he must also notice those around him. We know that he is aware that Ron is good at strategy, he awards him for this. Do you think that Ron will also do well in his divination exams? Is DD a Seer? Not a bad talent to have as a strategist, by the way. I also noticed that in the scenes where Ron does give Harry good advice, another scene with Dumbledore will follow to explain and/or reiterate Ron's thoughts. Here is an example: page 211 SS "Want to play chess, Harry?" said Ron. "No." page 212 "Why don't we go down and visit Hagrid?" "No...you go..." "I know what you're thinking about, Harry, that mirror. Don't go back tonight." "Why not?" "I dunno, I've got a bad feeling about it..." snip "You sound like Hermione." "I'm serious, Harry, don't go." snip "So--back again, Harry?" snip page 213 "And it showed your friend Ron himself as head boy." "How did you know--? "I don't need a cloak to become invisible..." snip "Ronald Weasley, who has always been overshadowed by his brothers, sees himself standing alone, the best of all of them." I wonder if DD will give Ron exactly what he wants. Was DD once invisible like Ron? Did someone give him the chance to prove himself? Did he make Ron a prefect for a specific reason? vivian From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 18:04:05 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:04:05 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109729 > > RMM: > > Huge reversal to you. Not to me. JKR is getting us ready for > > some hard doses of reality re: Harry's father. > > Nora: > Okay. I'll repeat this one more time. > > We have strong canon . . . [snip] dcgmck: Fun reading, but have you considered the fact that virtually all you cited canon comes from hearsay? What we know of the young James Potter comes from Harry's peek into Snape's pensieve-stored memories and from accounts told by James' closest school chums. If we've learned anything from OotP, it's how easily manipulated Harry is by memories and dreams. They have thus far proven to be half-truths more effective than lies, particularly because he feels he's learned from them surreptitiously. In a court of law, everything we know about Harry could be discounted as hearsay, including what Hagrid knows. After all, while, Dumbledore trusts Hagrid with his life, he has not been seen to consult Hagrid about strategy. What's more, if Hagrid were to be asked about Harry, Ron, and Hermione, he would describe them as saints as well, which we have clearly seen is not necessarily the case. That makes him a less than trustworthy character witness. You have to admit that the young James and Sirius do bear a resemblance to Malfoy in that they are clearly wealthy sons of privilege and influence, favored by at least some of the faculty and sufficiently outstanding to be known around campus by more than their dorm mates. Such students would surely be prime targets and reasonably susceptible to others of power and influence, especially if offered an opportunity for mischief in the name of a lark. Sin, if you believe in it, comes in gilded packages, not clearly marked DARK ARTS: Do not touch. Rowling's texts have generally built on what she has not said previously, not on the hearsay she has let drop mischievously. Why should her last two volumes be different? From ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 18:05:02 2004 From: ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com (A.J.) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:05:02 -0000 Subject: Long post - Hermione: '79 or '80? (Was Re: School cut-off date) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109730 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "allison_m_otto" wrote: > kids or parents seeing "101 Dalmatians" knew that the name of the > mother dog, Perdita, is also from "The Winter's Tale"?). Actually it was from a 'lost' character who didn't make it from the book to the movie-- Pongo's wife was Missus in the book-- but I agree that Hermione's parents may well have known their Shakespeare in naming her, rather than alchemy etc.! A.J. From ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 18:10:29 2004 From: ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com (A.J.) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:10:29 -0000 Subject: Tonks a traitor? was: Is Lupin is James In-Reply-To: <20040811143444.98734.qmail@web51809.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109731 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, sophierom wrote: > Lissa wrote: > "We've already had one masquerader. And we have > Tonks. (Who all's got bets on her being the traitor > this time?)" > > Sophierom: > > Ooh, I haven't heard this theory before. Tonks a > traitor? Are there previous posts on this? Galadriel Waters has some hints about clues apparently in OOTP, but not everybody has figured out the hints to our satisfaction. From what I remember (there's a message board where people try to figure out what the clues and hints could mean), people wonder why she is so clumsy and if it is real, or an act, or someone feeling clumsy in a new form; what's the deal with the troll leg umbrella stand; what is the snout clue when she makes funny noses; 'pink' in her hair as a clue (cf Hagrid's umbrella and Umbridge's sweater). Personally I'm not sure everyone is convinced that this all is supposed to mean that something is WRONG or EVIL about Tonks per se. But to answer your question, yes, various people here and on other boards often find her suspect in some way. A.J. From kelly at protocallonline.com Wed Aug 11 18:13:48 2004 From: kelly at protocallonline.com (kellymcj2000) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:13:48 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109732 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jmay_71" wrote: > Jmay: > Wow, Arianna. Really interesting post. I've been thinking about it > a bit and I have a slight twist to offer to your theory. > > To help everyone understand where I'm going with this, my theory is > based on the premise that the prophesy refers to three people: Peter, > Harry and Voldemort. > > Also, there are other definitions for the word "born" other than > giving birth to a child. Such as "deliver". > > Jmay: > Ok, lets say its Peter for the time being. The "power" could refer > to his role as the Potter's secret keeper. > snip > > Jmay: > Since we don't have much to go on, it could be true that Peter's > parents defied Voldemort three times. However, this part could still > be referring to James and Lily. If the word "born" is interpreted as > delivered or supplied (both listed in Roget's Thesaurus), the > sentence is now read as "delivered" to those who have thrice defied > him. Again, referring to Peter's role as secret keeper. > > Arianna: > > Born as the seventh month dies: > > September is "the seventh month." That is what the word > > means. It just can't be July. > > Jmay: Let's assume that it is referring to the end of September. We > don't know when the Potter's went into hiding. If Peter was made > secret keeper at the end of September, then he would have > been "delivered " to them as the seventh month died. > > Arianna: > > And the dark lord will mark him as his equal: > > Harry has the scar > > Peter has the dark mark > > Lily had something that made Voldemort hesitate to kill her. > > Jmay: Voldemort also marked Peter by giving him a silver hand. > True, this does not happen until much later, but if we look at the > next part of the prophesy snip > Jmay: Exactly. The life debt occurs before Peter receives his silver > hand. So Peter has the power of the life debt when Voldemort marks > him with the silver hand. > > Arianna: > > And either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live > > while the other survives. > > - this could mean exactly what we have been told, but what if it is > > about three people? > > > -Voldemort was reborn human with Peter's right hand. > > -Peter has that magical silver hand, about which we know > > nothing. Maybe Peter will kill Voldemort with it by accident. > > > Jmay: Ok, I want to clarify something first. A lot of posts have > been written about neither living while the other survives. I think > this particular line is referring to a duel arranged by Voldemort. > > Possible scenario: Voldemort, remembering the graveyard duel with > Harry and the fact that their wands cause side effects he hadn't > counted on, makes Peter battle Harry. Peter, remembering that Harry > saved his life, doesn't want to be the one to kill him. Voldemort > issues an ultimatum, either kill him or I'll kill you both. Now read > the prophecy line again. Either (Harry or Peter) must die at the > hand of the other, for neither (Harry and Peter) can live while the > other (Voldemort) survives. > snip > Jmay: I agree with you about the idea that Peter is the key to > defeating Voldemort. Your point on something more going on between > Peter and Voldemort is very important. The life debt didn't > transfer, maybe something else did. But, it may that Peter has to > sacrifice himself for Harry (just like Lily did) and that results in > Voldemort's defeat, just like Lily's sacrifice saved Harry before. > Or, Peter and Harry do something together to defeat Voldemort since > he is carrying around Peter's hand and Harry's blood. snip> > Jmay Hi Jmay I think you may really be on to something. For me it's jsut based on a gut feeling/hunch really. After first reading the prophecy I came up with the same conclusion you did about it referring to three people and Pter's hand being instumental. I quickly disregarded this whole line of thought because of the seventh month (didn't think to find the latin like arianna did) and because I, along with everyone else on the planet, began thinking Harry had part of Voldemort in him. Hey, maybe the truth will somehow fit both theories together. Anyhow, jsut a bit of support for your ideas. Not that my first inclinations about things in this series ever turn out to be correct! kmcj From bamf505 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 18:16:08 2004 From: bamf505 at yahoo.com (bamf505) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:16:08 -0000 Subject: Curse Scars In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109733 > DuffyPoo wrote: "Fudge had taken half a step back from Dumbledore, but he looked no less stubborn. 'You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've heard of a curse scar acting as an alarm bell before...'" I don't ever remember reading any conversation between Fudge and Dumbledore regarding Harry's scar. bamf: Sorry for the late reply, and I hope I'm not duplicating any info. Unless I'm mistaken, Fudge read about Harry's scar in the last Rita Skeeter article, the one where she goes on and on about his scar. I doubt DD would have mentioned anything to Fudge, git that Fudge is. bamf From allisonotto at gmail.com Wed Aug 11 18:26:37 2004 From: allisonotto at gmail.com (allison_m_otto) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:26:37 -0000 Subject: Tonks a traitor? was: Is Lupin is James In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109734 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "A.J." wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, sophierom > wrote: > > Lissa wrote: > > "We've already had one masquerader. And we have > > Tonks. (Who all's got bets on her being the traitor > > this time?)" > > > > Galadriel Waters has some hints about clues apparently in OOTP, but > not everybody has figured out the hints to our satisfaction. Allison: I like Tonks and don't want her to be bad, so I'm biased, but one thing that makes me think she's okay is the fact that the DEs and specifically Bellatrix hurt her pretty badly in the battle at the DoM. Obviously Voldemort's followers hurt each other frequently, but it seems to me that if Tonks is a spy (and she'd be a valuable one, because of the morphing) the DEs might be a little more careful not to kill her. If she were a spy they couldn't be all nice to her because that would blow her cover, but Auntie Bellatrix does something really bad to her (a curse which knocks her unconscious and sends her falling down the stone stairs - and then acts very triumphant about it) which, if it killed her, would just lose them a spy. Unless she's a spy, *and* she's never shown the DEs her real face, so they didn't know what she looked like . . . From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Wed Aug 11 18:28:34 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:28:34 -0000 Subject: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109735 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > I'm curious about how you see Molly reacting. What's she going > to do? Duel with Harry? Burst into tears? Meekly tell Harry yes, > you're ready to be a grownup now, here's your lunchbox and be > careful crossing streets? You see the contradiction, I hope. > > If Harry needs validation from Molly to prove to himself that he > shouldn't be treated as a child, that in itself is childish. I was picturing more of a scene similar to OotP, where Harry insists on being told everything that's currently going on, requesting extra training, etc. Anything along the lines of "let me into the Order." I then visualize Molly, perhaps interrupting whomever is giving a more reasonable response, screaming, "Oh Heavens no! You're just a child, you should leave this to the adults! Blah blah blah!" Enter Harry, now screaming to be heard over Molly, "I wish I could!" It would be much better overall if DD has a talk with the Order (and specifically Molly) about Harry knowing that he is the only one that defeat Voldemort, and that his place in the Order needs to be affirmed, all before Harry returns from Privet Drive. Which will happen? We dunno, but the odds are 90+% that it'll be one or the other. It's almost as sure-fire as Harry wanting to distance himself from his friends to protect them (he did have those exact thoughts in OotP halfway through). Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Wed Aug 11 18:39:42 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:39:42 -0000 Subject: Mundungus=Crookshanks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109736 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "twobeaglegirl" wrote: > 2 beagles: > Could Mundungus be Crookshanks? Covered last week... nixed mainly on JKR saying conclusively that Crookshanks is not an animangus. He's a half-kneazle. Also, I suspect JKR went far enough in having Peter share Ron's bed in his rat form... not so sure she wants to broach cross-gender bed sharing that way. :) Adult man and little girl? Eww! Josh From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Wed Aug 11 18:59:12 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:59:12 -0000 Subject: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - Quotes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109737 >>> Cathy Drolet" wrote: As to why HP thought it was 'ancient', I have no clue. > >>> Melpomene > Because he often jumps to conclusions which are just as often wrong. When he jumps to conclusions based on something Snape says (ie: "old tree") he's ALWAYS wrong. <<< Brenda now: [emphasis in capital mine] Harry's 'ancient' comment: "He glanced over his shoulder at the ANCIENT tree, which was still flailing its branches threateningly." (CoS UK, 60) Snape's 'old' comment: "Professor Dumbledore, these boys have flouted the Decree for the Restriction of Under-age Wizardry, caused serious damage to an OLD and VALUABLE tree..." (CoS UK, 65) -- as Geoff has pointed out ;) So there you have it, Harry made the 'ancient' comment before he even met Snape that night. And even if it wasn't said to be ancient, I would still assume that the tree was brought from somewhere else and planted on Hogwarts' ground the year Lupin came to school. The tree would have had to be fully grown and functioning starting September of Lupin's first year, otherwise there would be no point. Sure you can Engorgio! tree or enchant it to grow, but I am more inclined to believe that it came from somewhere else. Would you be so careless in simply relying on magic to protect students from someone who turns into a full-fletched monster once a month? No, if I was the Headmaster I would have made sure the tree was already 'working properly'. And tree of 25~30 years of age is hardly ancient, IMO. Brenda From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 11 20:01:09 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:01:09 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109738 Arianna: > Born as the seventh month dies: > September is "the seventh month." That is what the word > means. It just can't be July. SSSusan: If this has been asked, I apologize. But how can it NOT be July (and, thus, Harry being talked about), if Harry was able to remove the prophecy from the shelf? Or are you saying the prophecy *is* still about Harry & Voldy but *also* about Peter, and that any of the three could have removed it from the shelf? Siriusly Snapey Susan From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Wed Aug 11 20:10:37 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:10:37 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109739 SSSusan asked: > If this has been asked, I apologize. But how can it NOT be July > (and, thus, Harry being talked about), if Harry was able to remove > the prophecy from the shelf? > > Or are you saying the prophecy *is* still about Harry & Voldy but > *also* about Peter, and that any of the three could have removed it > from the shelf? Yb's turn: I think a general agreement has been reached that Harry could take the prophecy ONLY because his name was on it, which was because someone put his name on it (an Unspeakable, for sure, maybe a Keeper of the Prophecies?), because DD and everyone else who knew about it assumed that, after the Godric's Hollow affair, Harry was "the One" mentioned in the prophecy. Peter wouldn't be able to mess with it because his name isn't on it. Whether the prophecy has anything to do with him or not is moot regarding removing the orb from the shelf. ~Yb From meriaugust at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 20:26:47 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:26:47 -0000 Subject: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109740 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Josh Warren" wrote: > I was picturing more of a scene similar to OotP, where Harry insists > on being told everything that's currently going on, requesting extra > training, etc. Anything along the lines of "let me into the Order." I > then visualize Molly, perhaps interrupting whomever is giving a more > reasonable response, screaming, "Oh Heavens no! You're just a child, > you should leave this to the adults! Blah blah blah!" Enter Harry, > now screaming to be heard over Molly, "I wish I could!" > Meri, jumping in: Yes, excellent point. (And that's a great line! So indicative of where Harry is in Order.) It would be very interesting to see Harry confront some of his elders with their blunders over the last five years. As we saw in OotP he has the frustration built up, doesn't he? Though I personally like Molly as a character, I think she (along with Arthur) does provide a bit of normalcy in a mad crazy world as well as a mother figure for Harry, but I also agree with those who find her a little domineering and mollycoddling. But isn't that a part of growing up? Learning to assert yourself against your parental units? Harry is very lucky, being an orphan, that he has someone to react against in that manner. It is a big part of being a noraml teenager. > It would be much better overall if DD has a talk with the Order (and > specifically Molly) about Harry knowing that he is the only one that > defeat Voldemort, and that his place in the Order needs to be > affirmed, all before Harry returns from Privet Drive. Meri: But how many people in the Order, or even in the WW, know about the prophecy and its contents? Not that many, I think. But more importantly, how public should that information become? Harry's allready terribly well known, and we have seen the consequences of that over the last five novels, but if he were to be revealed as a savior to the WW in general, then I think things just might cross over into insane territory. But I agree that Harry having an official role in the Order will go a long way to keeping his spirits up and feeling useful (the lack of any direction or action being, I suspect, one of the main reasons that the summer between GoF and OotP devolved into such a shitty one). But that possition must be, as Josh says, affirmed and more importantly respected. Harry should be allowed to be involved, and at a high level. He is, after all, the one the whole thing is about. > Which will happen? We dunno, but the odds are 90+% that it'll be one > or the other. It's almost as sure-fire as Harry wanting to distance > himself from his friends to protect them (he did have those exact > thoughts in OotP halfway through). > > Josh Meri: Yes, I concur, but let's hope Harry's gotten over the 'go it alone' syndrome, because, as we've seen, he can't go very far without them. Meri - who hopes that next year, between NEWT classes, Quidditch, the DA, the Order, and the whole being the target of a seriously evil wizard and his twisted henchmen, Harry will at least be able to get some sleep... From dk59us at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 20:40:14 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:40:14 -0000 Subject: Calendars was Re: biggest SPOILER In-Reply-To: <411A5D25.8010304@tds.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109741 arielock2001 wrote: > >> > >>>Born as the seventh month dies: > >>> Jem wrote: > If it was an astrological calendar, then wouldn't we be looking for > someone born in the middle of October? > If it was a Hebrew calendar we'd be looking in April. > If it was a Celtic calendar, wouldn't we be looking in May? Isn't > Samhain the New Year? > If it was Chinese--I have no idea. Now Eustace_Scrubb: Indeed, a few months ago (May? the inscrutable archives would tell) when the Cuaron interview mentioning the graveyard that had to be removed from the adaptation-in-a-medium-that-must-not-be-named first came up, JKR stated that Hogwarts was on an ancient Celtic site. This led to a number of posts theorizing that the Celtic seventh month, May, was the one referred to in the prophecy. My feeling about that also applies to the possibility of September being the month referred to in the prophecy. We have no evidence that the wizarding world, at least in the UK as JKR has described it, follows a calendar that differs in any significant way from that of the surrounding muggles (except of course that September 1 is always a Sunday). While it is absolutely true that other calendars have been used in the UK in other time periods and in other languages, the prophecy was made in the late 20th century and it was delivered in English. I believe the meaning in those carefully chosen words must be found in English as well (and yes, of course, that meaning will be translated _into_ numerous languages later). Now, I agree that JKR knows her Latin and also her Celtic mythology and she has and will make use of elements of both in weaving her story. However, I don't think she will hang a major plot twist on an archaic Latin meaning of a modern English proper noun. That's not to say that there aren't a number of interesting suggestions that were included in the original post that may play a role in the conclusion of the series--surely Peter Pettigrew will turn out to be crucial. Maybe Harry will be unable to succeed in his appointed task without Pettigrew fufilling his life debt to Harry first. If we do indeed find out more about "our rat-like friend" in the 6th book as promised by JKR, it may be that Peter will have done his part and suffered his fate before we get to book 7. So while I am skeptical about the central premise of the theory, keep the theories coming! Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From drednort at alphalink.com.au Wed Aug 11 20:42:57 2004 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 06:42:57 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - But Why? In-Reply-To: <411A38D0.6020408@free.fr> References: <002201c47fb5$6ee64790$5cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: <411B1171.5812.24015B7@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 109742 On 11 Aug 2004 at 17:18, Vincent Maston wrote: > I also think that Dumbledore would have made all he could to make people > believe it was really old, so they wouldn't think of it as a tree with a > purpose, at the time. Much like the rumours he spread about the > shrieking shack, I believe. I just wonder why the Whomping Willow can't be old - while we know it was planted at Hogwarts in Lupin's time, it could have been a transplant surely - perhaps it grew somewhere else for 500 years. Honestly, I'm not sure I'd rely on a brand new sapling to guard a werewolf (-8 Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html (ISTJ) | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 "You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia From flamingstarchows at att.net Wed Aug 11 20:57:27 2004 From: flamingstarchows at att.net (texaschow) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:57:27 -0000 Subject: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - Quotes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109743 > Brenda now: [emphasis in capital mine] > > Harry's 'ancient' comment: > "He glanced over his shoulder at the ANCIENT tree, which was still > flailing its branches threateningly." (CoS UK, 60) > > And tree of 25~30 years of age is hardly ancient, IMO. > Me-- Sometimes you have to look at things from a child's perspective (and Harry was a child of 12 in COS). To someone that age, 30 years *is* ancient. Not to mention you have to consider the appearance of the tree. It could look far older than its actual age. Or, as some have said, it could have been transplanted as a fully mature tree. ~Cathy~ From meriaugust at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 20:57:51 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:57:51 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109744 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arielock2001" wrote: snip > > The prophesy refers to someone born as "the seventh month" > dies. The word September is from Latin meaning "the seventh > month." Without a doubt, JKR knows this. Almost all of the > spells are based on Latin words. The woman knows her Latin. > At least one person has to have been born on the Sept 30, as > someone with that birthday has to fill the prophesy. There is no > way that prophesy is about Harry. He was born in July. It is the > seventh calander month, but that is the big red herring. Meri: Well, yeah, a thousand years ago or whatever, September was the seventh month, but now July is. I think that the use of the phrase "seventh month" was just to make it seem more mystical and dramatic. It sounds better, after all, than "born as July dies". And also the use of the word "approaches". It is strongly implied that at the time of the prophecy the person to whom it refers is not yet born. > Dumbledore may think the prophesy is about Harry, but let's not > forget there are two books to go. JKR loves to convince us of > one thing and then have it be completely wrong (please see the > end of every book, except the fifth one). Meri: Yes, but lets also remember that every time she convinced us of something she also resolved it in the same novel: SS: We thought Snape was the bad guy, only to discover that Quirell was ESE in the last chapter. CoS: We were all convinced that Diary!Tom Riddle was a begnin entity, until we discover in the second to last chapter that he is infact, ESE. PoA: We are led to believe that Sirius is ESE, that Pettigrew is dead, etc. But we discover the opposite in the Shreiking Shack scene. GoF: We are sure that Moody is on the side of good, only to discover that he is the most ESE that he can be. (And that Snape was a DE, but I had an inkling about that beforehand.) But what were we convinced of in Order? And what was resolved? Order doesn't follow this pattern, mostly, I think, because this is what I'd call the turning point in the series (which I actually think started just after the third task in Goblet, but that's another thing). It's the big revelation. The "No, I am your father" of the series. And, if you remember, Empire Strikes Back didn't have any resolution, either. (Nor do most middle, turning point chapters in epic series: Two Towers, Taran Wanderer, Empire, Subtle Knife, etc.) > Lily fits the positive personality aspects folklore associated with > Libras. http://search.cari.com.my/horoscopes/libra.php (this > website has lots of info and no pop-up, but many others have the > same info) > She seems to abhor anything she thinks is unfair, and will > intervene when she sees fit (fighting against Voldemort, > standing up to James when he was bullying Snape). Meri: Actually, we have very little cannon to support anything about Lily Evans' personality. We were led to beileve pre-Order that she was a wonderful, saintly human being, but remember we were also led to beileve the same about James. He had flaws, just like Lily did, and remember that the movies (specifically Lupin's bizarre speech about Lily in PoA) are not cannon. And I would also point out what Lily did after Snape called her a mudblood and James continued to harass and humiliate him: she walked away and had to try not to laugh. Also, those horoscopes are terribly innacurate and objective. Most are also contradictory, and are so vauge that many people (myself included) can fit themselves to many different signs. (I being a Virgo). The > symbol for Libra is balanced scales. JKR loves playing with > names, for example Hagrid is a play on haggard, Umbridge is a > play on umbrage, it seems fitting that Lily Evans is supposed to > look like Lily Evens. Meri: Again, speculation. After the whole Mark Evans episode I don't know how much attention we should pay to such Muggle sounding names. Meri - not quite convinced that we fans (as a collective, I'm not singling anyone out) have yet come close to figuring out JKR's ultimate plot... From hallisallimalli at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 21:15:45 2004 From: hallisallimalli at yahoo.com (halli) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 21:15:45 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109745 RMM: You have to admit that the young James and Sirius do bear a resemblance to Malfoy in that they are clearly wealthy sons of privilege and influence, favored by at least some of the faculty and sufficiently outstanding to be known around campus by more than their dorm mates. Such students would surely be prime targets and reasonably susceptible to others of power and influence, especially if offered an opportunity for mischief in the name of a lark. Sin, if you believe in it, comes in gilded packages, not clearly marked DARK ARTS: Do not touch. Rowling's texts have generally built on what she has not said previously, not on the hearsay she has let drop mischievously. Why should her last two volumes be different? Halli: I'm sorry, but I refuse to believe that Harry's father, or his fathers' friends (besides Peter) were death eaters. James hated the dark arts, we've heard that before. All the maurauders hated Snape, the little freak that was up to his eyeballs in the dark arts. If they were fellow death eaters, why would they have such a loathing for each other? Also, if James had been a death eater, then there would've been no reason to worry about a secret keeper, and if there was, he would've known not to trust Peter with that job. That, and why would Voldemort want to kill James when he came in? As his master, he could say 'stand aside' and all that. I just think that if anyone asked JKR if James was a death eater, they would get the same reaction they got when they asked about Lily. "How dare you?" From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Wed Aug 11 21:16:54 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 21:16:54 -0000 Subject: Calendars was Re: biggest SPOILER In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109746 Eustace_Scrubb wrote: > We have no evidence that the wizarding world, at least in the UK as > JKR has described it, follows a calendar that differs in any > significant way from that of the surrounding muggles (except of > course that September 1 is always a Sunday). Yb: GAAAAHHHH! Where does everyone get that? Someone PLEASE tell me where Sept. 1 is always a Sunday! ES: > Now, I agree that JKR knows her Latin and also her Celtic mythology > and she has and will make use of elements of both in weaving her > story. However, I don't think she will hang a major plot twist on > an archaic Latin meaning of a modern English proper noun. Yb: Agreed. Another point: getting plot points out of JK in conversation/on-website is like pulling teeth from a moving victim. Examples: What did that gleam in DD's eye at the end of GoF mean? JK: Can't tell you! Are cats important, and if so, how? JK: Can't tell you! Why is it important that Harry has his mother's eyes? JK: Can't tell you! *However*, she lets go of minor points or points that don't/won't come up in canon rather easily: -Ginny's given name is Ginerva. -Harry went up to "Mad-Eye's" office (BC, Jr.) and retrieved his -Marauder's Map before he left for King's Cross at the end of GoF. It was sort of implied. -Fred and George Weasley were born on April Fools' Day. Granted, she lets some other things slip, like Lily was in Gryffindor, and Crookshanks is half Kneazle, but MAJOR plot points stay under wraps until she puts them in text. She refuses to tell us point blank who Hermione likes, for crying out loud ("The hints are all there!"). Sooo... why would she give us Hermione's birthday on the website and in-chat if it was a major plot point? She would at least have hinted that Hermione's birthday is in September if it was at all relevant to the plot, not just handed it to us. Giving us something like that, especially with no hints in canon, implies that it will probably never even make it into the books. She wouldn't just ES wraps up: > That's not to say that there aren't a number of interesting > suggestions that were included in the original post that may play a > role in the conclusion of the series--surely Peter Pettigrew will > turn out to be crucial. Maybe Harry will be unable to succeed in his > appointed task without Pettigrew fufilling his life debt to Harry > first. If we do indeed find out more about "our rat-like friend" in > the 6th book as promised by JKR, it may be that Peter will have done > his part and suffered his fate before we get to book 7. Yb wrapping up her thoughts (and frustrated screams): DEFINITELY. Peter's little life-debt to Harry will probably save Harry's life, and probably cost the little rat /his/. That's the only way to make him even somewhat redeemable. I see him being a pivotal character/creature in Book 7. Killing him in HBP would just be too soon. I smell a rat in the final showdown... ~Yb From shirley2allie at hotmail.com Wed Aug 11 21:17:47 2004 From: shirley2allie at hotmail.com (Shirley) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 21:17:47 -0000 Subject: Calendars was Re: biggest SPOILER In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109747 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Eustace_Scrubb" wrote: > arielock2001 wrote: > > >> > > >>>Born as the seventh month dies: > > >>> > > Jem wrote: > > If it was an astrological calendar, then wouldn't we be looking for > > someone born in the middle of October? > > If it was a Hebrew calendar we'd be looking in April. > > If it was a Celtic calendar, wouldn't we be looking in May? Isn't > > Samhain the New Year? > > If it was Chinese--I have no idea. Shirley: LOL!! I cracked up when I read this. So, apparently (tongue firmly in cheek, here), we could potentially be looking at just about any month of the year..... ;-) > Now Eustace_Scrubb: > Indeed, a few months ago (May? the inscrutable archives would tell) > when the Cuaron interview mentioning the graveyard that had to be > removed from the adaptation-in-a-medium-that-must-not-be-named Shirley, again: ROFLMAO (again)!! I don't know how you kept track of your dashes in typing that, but that was very amusing (not to mention, a great way to get around the forbidden topic). Eustace_Scrubb finishes his thought: first > came up, JKR stated that Hogwarts was on an ancient Celtic site. This > led to a number of posts theorizing that the Celtic seventh month, > May, was the one referred to in the prophecy. > > My feeling about that also applies to the possibility of September > being the month referred to in the prophecy. We have no evidence that > the wizarding world, at least in the UK as JKR has described it, > follows a calendar that differs in any significant way from that of > the surrounding muggles (except of course that September 1 is always > a Sunday). While it is absolutely true that other calendars have been > used in the UK in other time periods and in other languages, the > prophecy was made in the late 20th century and it was delivered in > English. I believe the meaning in those carefully chosen words must > be found in English as well (and yes, of course, that meaning will be > translated _into_ numerous languages later). > > Now, I agree that JKR knows her Latin and also her Celtic mythology > and she has and will make use of elements of both in weaving her > story. However, I don't think she will hang a major plot twist on an > archaic Latin meaning of a modern English proper noun. > > That's not to say that there aren't a number of interesting > suggestions that were included in the original post that may play a > role in the conclusion of the series--surely Peter Pettigrew will turn > out to be crucial. Maybe Harry will be unable to succeed in his > appointed task without Pettigrew fufilling his life debt to Harry > first. If we do indeed find out more about "our rat-like friend" in > the 6th book as promised by JKR, it may be that Peter will have done > his part and suffered his fate before we get to book 7. > Shirley: which would be fine with me; I am just *not* a Peter fan. I dislike Peter so much that I really *don't* want him to be so crucial to the conclusion of the story. I know that we have often seen traitors redeem themselves in many literary plots, but I'm not sure I've ever read about a turnaround this drastic (not that I'm so well-read that I've read *everything*, by any means!). > So while I am skeptical about the central premise of the theory, keep > the theories coming! > > Cheers, > > Eustace_Scrubb Shirley: However, I'd also like to point out that the term "life debt" is not one that has ever been used in canon. So, while we all understand that Peter owes his life to Harry (for stopping Lupin and Sirius from killing him (as he deserved, IMO)), we still don't really *know* what that "debt" means in the wizarding world. Hopefully that will be one of the things we learn in the next book (may it come out soon). But, of course, that's what makes all of our speculation so much fun! Shirley, wishing she could be as creative as some of you guys are.... From entropymail at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 21:17:52 2004 From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 21:17:52 -0000 Subject: Why Was Hagrid Left Out of the Order? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109748 Okay, guys. Here's one that's been niggling at me all day and, I'm sorry to say, I don't yet have any answer for it. The question is: "Why isn't Hagrid in the Order of the Phoenix?" Well, of course, my first reaction was to believe that it was because of his lack of magical talent and training. But then I remembered Arabella Figg. She's a Squib, for goodness sakes, and they let her in! Then I thought perhaps Dumbledore felt that Hagrid's ...erm...lack of discretion at times, might be a good reason to hold off on his invite. But if we're going to exclude those of questionable discretion/character/loyalties, then certainly good ol' Mundungus Fletcher would be a bit more questionable than Hagrid ever would. So, what's your opinion? Why hasn't Hagrid been invited into the Order? :: Entropy :: From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Wed Aug 11 21:18:02 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 21:18:02 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109749 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > SSSusan: > If this has been asked, I apologize. But how can it NOT be July > (and, thus, Harry being talked about), if Harry was able to remove > the prophecy from the shelf? > > Or are you saying the prophecy *is* still about Harry & Voldy but > *also* about Peter, and that any of the three could have removed it > from the shelf? Not to encourage these people... *grumble* ...but that would depend on what spell did the protecting. I would assume that it was applied by Unspeakables specifcally for the people named... although that would seem a little counterproductive (simply don't allow Dark Lords to grab theirs). So... maybe that is indeed validation of Harry? Josh From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 11 21:22:13 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 21:22:13 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109750 SSSusan asked: > > If this has been asked, I apologize. But how can it NOT be July > > (and, thus, Harry being talked about), if Harry was able to > > remove the prophecy from the shelf? > > > > Or are you saying the prophecy *is* still about Harry & Voldy but > > *also* about Peter, and that any of the three could have removed > > it from the shelf? Yb's turn: > I think a general agreement has been reached that Harry could take > the prophecy ONLY because his name was on it, which was because > someone put his name on it (an Unspeakable, for sure, maybe a > Keeper of the Prophecies?), because DD and everyone else who knew > about it assumed that, after the Godric's Hollow affair, Harry > was "the One" mentioned in the prophecy. Peter wouldn't be able to > mess with it because his name isn't on it. Whether the prophecy has > anything to do with him or not is moot regarding removing the orb > from the shelf. SSSusan: I'd argue that that's opinion and not canon, but if you're right, then this would mean that when the prophecy was first placed there, only Voldy could've removed it, correct? Or could Voldy, Neville or Harry have removed it? And then once the ministry re-labeled it, then only Voldy or Harry could pick it up. Is that the gist of it? Siriusly Snapey Susan From shrtbusryder2002 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 21:29:10 2004 From: shrtbusryder2002 at yahoo.com (Jason) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 21:29:10 -0000 Subject: Why Was Hagrid Left Out of the Order? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109751 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" wrote: > Okay, guys. Here's one that's been niggling at me all day and, I'm > sorry to say, I don't yet have any answer for it. The question is: > > "Why isn't Hagrid in the Order of the Phoenix?" > > Well, of course, my first reaction was to believe that it was because > of his lack of magical talent and training. But then I remembered > Arabella Figg. She's a Squib, for goodness sakes, and they let her in! > > Then I thought perhaps Dumbledore felt that Hagrid's ...erm...lack of > discretion at times, might be a good reason to hold off on his invite. > But if we're going to exclude those of questionable > discretion/character/loyalties, then certainly good ol' Mundungus > Fletcher would be a bit more questionable than Hagrid ever would. > > So, what's your opinion? Why hasn't Hagrid been invited into the Order? > > :: Entropy :: Jason: How do we know he's not in the order? He was on a trip to the Giants and couldnt have attended the meetings at #12. He was run off from Hogwarts by the time Harry needed help. I actually think he *is* in the OotP. From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Wed Aug 11 21:46:18 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 21:46:18 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109752 I (Yblitzka) wrote: > > I think a general agreement has been reached that Harry could take > > the prophecy ONLY because his name was on it, which was because > > someone put his name on it (an Unspeakable, for sure, maybe a > > Keeper of the Prophecies?), because DD and everyone else who knew > > about it assumed that, after the Godric's Hollow affair, Harry > > was "the One" mentioned in the prophecy. Peter wouldn't be able to > > mess with it because his name isn't on it. Whether the prophecy has > > anything to do with him or not is moot regarding removing the orb > > from the shelf. Then SSSusan asked: > I'd argue that that's opinion and not canon, but if you're right, > then this would mean that when the prophecy was first placed there, > only Voldy could've removed it, correct? Or could Voldy, Neville or > Harry have removed it? And then once the ministry re-labeled it, > then only Voldy or Harry could pick it up. Is that the gist of it? My reply: OK, I'll give you that there isn't any canon that specifically supports my theory, but circumstantial evidence is there. No one can remove the orb except Harry (and LV, but he couldn't just waltz into the MoM and grab it, now could he?). Lucius didn't want it UNTIL Harry grabbed it, and I think he even says something like "You were the only one who could touch it" or something like that. And on being relabeled, etc... The labels would /probably/ (speculation on my part) have been (if it was labeled once and then changed as necessary): First: and LV/Dark Lord (I don't know what they put on the orb for Voldemort. Then, after the boys were born: NL or HP and LV (thus either boy or LV could have removed it) After the attack on Godric's Hollow: HP and LV (whatever the last label was, that was shown in OotP) Of course, Neville and Harry were at most 15 months old while both names were on it (before Godric's Hollow), so they wouldn't be very interested in picking it up (oooo, shiny), and LV believed he'd heard all of it, so he wasn't interested in grabbing it either. But anyone about whom the prophecy speaks (to the best of the recorder's interpreting skills) will have their name on the prophecy, and thus be able to pick it up off the shelf. ~Yb From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 11 21:51:16 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 17:51:16 -0400 Subject: Curse Scars Message-ID: <001c01c47fed$54630a10$23fbe2d1@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109753 > DuffyPoo wrote: "Fudge had taken half a step back from Dumbledore, but he looked no less stubborn. 'You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've heard of a curse scar acting as an alarm bell before...'" I don't ever remember reading any conversation between Fudge and Dumbledore regarding Harry's scar. bamf: "Sorry for the late reply, and I hope I'm not duplicating any info. Unless I'm mistaken, Fudge read about Harry's scar in the last Rita Skeeter article, the one where she goes on and on about his scar. I doubt DD would have mentioned anything to Fudge, git that Fudge is." DuffyPoo: I read through that article quite carefully, before I posted my question, and I can't see anything in there that would refer to a curse scar acting as an alarm bell. DD does trust Fudge, at least to some degree, until the end of GoF. It was Fudge, after all, who met Harry at the Leaky Cauldron, not DD. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 22:15:59 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 22:15:59 -0000 Subject: HP translations- the name 'Hogwarts' In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109754 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eloise_herisson" wrote: > Sandra: > > > I have checked the HP Lexicon and it says: > > "The name "Hogwarts" is actually the name of a flower. JKR > > said: "I ... recalled the day we went to Kew Gardens and saw those > > lilies that were called Hogwarts. I'd seen them seven years before > > .... When Hogwarts occurred to me as a name for the school, I had > > no idea where it came from." (SMH) " > ~Eloise > > I hesitate at present to suggest that perhaps JKR made a mistake > here...;-) Well, not exactly a mistake as such. > > Although I have no doubt that the sound of the name stuck in her > mind from this encounter at Kew, in fact the flower is spelled > "Hogwort", .... "Wort" is a common flower name suffix ... > Clearly this punned itself with "hog" and "wart" in her mind. > > ...edited... > > ~Eloise Asian_lovr2: Let's not forget about 'Wart Hogs'. Wart Hog - A wild African hog (Phacochoerus aethiopicus) that has two tusks and wartlike growths on the face. I think to some extent, JKR just like the sound of the word. I remember when she was looking for a name for the most popular wizarding sport, she knew it started with a "Q" and searched until she came up with 'Quidditch'. She extended her liking for the sound of Hogwarts by also seeing it as a 'twist' on Wart Hogs. In addition, there is historic, both real-life and fictional, association between witches and warts. Note: the visual references to Hogs that appear; winged boars flanking the main gates to the grounds. Could those be winged wart hogs? The severed hog's head on the sign outside the Hog's Head Inn. As long as you mentioned 'wort', there is an alternate meaning to that word too. Wort - An infusion of malt that is fermented to make beer. Beer is the modern version of it's ancient predecessor Mead. So, by extending the association, Hog+wort becomes Hog+mead=Hogsmeade. Conclusion, she managed to work both 'wart' and 'wort' into associations with Hogs. Just a thought. Steve/asian_lovr2 From snow15145 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 22:18:08 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 22:18:08 -0000 Subject: Why Was Hagrid Left Out of the Order? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109755 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" wrote: > Okay, guys. Here's one that's been niggling at me all day and, I'm > sorry to say, I don't yet have any answer for it. The question is: > > "Why isn't Hagrid in the Order of the Phoenix?" > > Well, of course, my first reaction was to believe that it was because > of his lack of magical talent and training. But then I remembered > Arabella Figg. She's a Squib, for goodness sakes, and they let her in! > > Then I thought perhaps Dumbledore felt that Hagrid's ...erm...lack of > discretion at times, might be a good reason to hold off on his invite. > But if we're going to exclude those of questionable > discretion/character/loyalties, then certainly good ol' Mundungus > Fletcher would be a bit more questionable than Hagrid ever would. > > So, what's your opinion? Why hasn't Hagrid been invited into the Order? > > :: Entropy :: Snow: Hagrid was in the Order the first time around: Woes Of Mrs. Weasley pg. 174 U.S. "That's Edgar Bones...brother of Amelia Bones, they got him and his family took he was a great wizard...Sturgis Podmore, blimey, he looks young...Caradoc Dearborn, vanished six mnths after this, we never found his body...Hagrid, of course, looks exactly the same as ever..." I think Hagrid is mentioned as being in the Order this time around also but I just can't remember where it says at the moment. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 11 22:36:50 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 22:36:50 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109756 SSSusan asked: > > I'd argue that that's opinion and not canon, but if you're right, then this would mean that when the prophecy was first placed there, only Voldy could've removed it, correct? Or could Voldy, Neville or Harry have removed it? And then once the ministry re- labeled it, then only Voldy or Harry could pick it up. Is that the gist of it?< < Yb: > OK, I'll give you that there isn't any canon that specifically > supports my theory, but circumstantial evidence is there. No one > can remove the orb except Harry (and LV, but he couldn't just > waltz into the MoM and grab it, now could he?). Lucius didn't want > it UNTIL Harry grabbed it, and I think he even says something > like "You were the only one who could touch it" or something like > that. And on being relabeled, etc... > > The labels would /probably/ (speculation on my part) have been (if > it was labeled once and then changed as necessary): > > First: and LV/Dark Lord (I don't know what they put on the > orb for Voldemort. > > Then, after the boys were born: NL or HP and LV (thus either boy > or LV could have removed it) > > After the attack on Godric's Hollow: HP and LV (whatever the last > label was, that was shown in OotP) > > Of course, Neville and Harry were at most 15 months old while both > names were on it (before Godric's Hollow), so they wouldn't be > very interested in picking it up (oooo, shiny), and LV believed > he'd heard all of it, so he wasn't interested in grabbing it > either. But anyone about whom the prophecy speaks (to the best of > the recorder's interpreting skills) will have their name on the > prophecy, and thus be able to pick it up off the shelf. > > ~Yb SSSusan: Oh, I wasn't arguing that Harry or Neville would actually have been interested in picking up the orb as babies; I was just asking what was possible. As for how the label changed, we know this much: "It's--it's got your name on," said Ron. ... "My name?" said Harry blankly. He stepped forward. ...In spidery writing was written a date of some sixteen years previously, and below that: S.P.T. to A.P.W.B.D Dark Lord and (?) Harry Potter [OoP, pp. 779-780, US hardback] 'The odd thing is, Harry," [DD] said softly, "that it may not have meant you at all. Sibyll's prophecy could have applied to two wizard boys.... One, of course, was you. The other was Neville Longbottom." "But then...but then, why was it my name on the prophecy and not Neville's?" "The official record was relabeled after Voldemort's attack on you as a child," said DD. "It seemed plain to the keeper of the Hall of Prophecy that Voldemort could only have tried to kill you because he knew you to be the one to whom Sibyll was referring." [p. 842] So, as I read this again, I think you were right in your earlier post, that Harry could take it because *someone* put his name on it-- rather than there being some inherent magic in the orb or something. Really, all I was trying to get at with my previous question was this: When the DoM person labelled it "Dark Lord and (?)", I wondered if all *three* could have taken it from the shelf [not that they would have at age 15 months, but just hypothetically], and then once it was relabeled w/ Harry's name, would Neville still have been able to remove it, or just Harry & Voldy? Siriusly Snapey Susan From snow15145 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 22:38:55 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 22:38:55 -0000 Subject: Curse Scars In-Reply-To: <001c01c47fed$54630a10$23fbe2d1@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109757 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > > DuffyPoo wrote: > "Fudge had taken half a step back from Dumbledore, but he > looked no less stubborn. 'You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've > heard of a curse scar acting as an alarm bell before...'" > > I don't ever remember reading any conversation between Fudge and > Dumbledore regarding Harry's scar. > > > bamf: > "Sorry for the late reply, and I hope I'm not duplicating any info. > > Unless I'm mistaken, Fudge read about Harry's scar in the last Rita > Skeeter article, the one where she goes on and on about his scar. I > doubt DD would have mentioned anything to Fudge, git that Fudge is." > > > DuffyPoo: > I read through that article quite carefully, before I posted my question, and I can't see anything in there that would refer to a curse scar acting as an alarm bell. DD does trust Fudge, at least to some degree, until the end of GoF. It was Fudge, after all, who met Harry at the Leaky Cauldron, not DD. Snow: The quote you are referring to, DuffyPoo, can be found in GOF The Parting of the Ways pg.705 & 706 U.S. "Listen to me, Cornelius," said Dumbledore, taking a step toward Fudge, and once again, he seemed to radiate that indefinable sense of power that Harry had felt after Dumbledore had Stunned young Crouch. "Harry is as sane as you or I. That scar upon his forehead has not addled his brains. I believe it hurts him when Lord Voldemort is close by, or feeling particularly murderous." Fudge had taken half a step back from Dumbledore, but he looked no less stubborn. "You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've never heard of a curse scar acting as an alarm bell before..." Hope this helps! From vincent.maston.ml at free.fr Wed Aug 11 14:16:24 2004 From: vincent.maston.ml at free.fr (Vincent Maston) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 16:16:24 +0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Is Lupin James? In-Reply-To: <081120041413.27713.411A29780001E50600006C4122007511509C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> References: <081120041413.27713.411A29780001E50600006C4122007511509C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: <411A2A38.2000604@free.fr> No: HPFGUIDX 109758 drliss at comcast.net a crit : > If Lupin couldn't block his thoughts, wouldn't Dumbledore have > discovered his secrets? Well, it doesn't seem to me very dumbledore-esque to read people's thoughts, at least for peoples he trusts. And he sure seems to trust Lupin, to get him in such close contact with Harry "Vincent" -- I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by. Douglas Adams From candlekicks at yahoo.ca Wed Aug 11 18:16:22 2004 From: candlekicks at yahoo.ca (Linda Anderson) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 14:16:22 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Malfoy's words in CoS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040811181622.11005.qmail@web52501.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109759 sad1199 here: Okay here I am reading CoS again! This book is so confusing to me (possibly because I am trying too hard...). Anyway, this is my question: Why does Draco shout out "Enemies of the Heir, beware! You'll be next, Mudbloods"? I was under the impression that the chamber was put forth as a myth or was a closely guarded secret. How would Draco know that Mudbloods are next? I know later on he says "- last time the Chamber of Secrets was opened, a Mudblood died." But, before that he says that his father wouldn't tell him anything about the Chamber. Linda: It seems to me that this can be explained in book one. Draco assumed that he was going to be in Slytherin before he was sorted. Coming from a wizarding family, he knew the characteristics of each house and would have known and been proud of the fact that Slytherin was pro pure-blood. He had a vague idea about the Chamber from his father (he knew that there was a chamber and Lucius must have told him that it was created by Slytherin. he also knew about the "mud-blood death") Not a far stretch for him from there. Malfoy was also told to "keep my head down and let the heir of Slytherin get on with it.He says the school needs ridding of all the Mudblood filth, but not to get mixed up in it." He was given enough information to keep him safely out of the way by his father. Also, the information seems to have been passed through the halls of the Malfoy Manor freely as Dobby knew about the plot to have the Chamber reopened and came to warn Harry. PoA is my favourite too! Linda From eeyore6771 at comcast.net Wed Aug 11 18:36:37 2004 From: eeyore6771 at comcast.net (Pat) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:36:37 -0000 Subject: Mundungus=Crookshanks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109760 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "twobeaglegirl" wrote: > 2 beagles: >snip are dragging Dugley back home after the dementor attack and Mrs. > Figg is cursing Mundungus Fletcher, he apparates into the picture. > He is described as, "a squat, unshaven man in a tattered > overcoat....He had SHORT BANDY LEGS, LONG SCRAGGLY GINGER HAIR, and > bloodshot baggy eyes that gave him the doleful look of a basset > hound." (American version, p. 22, hardback) Crookshanks is often > described as a ginger cat with bandy legs and a flat face. > Now I know that Crookshanks is described (by Sirius) as being the > most intelligent animal of his kind, and Mundungus is a bit of an > idiot, but does anyone else think that the similarities their > description is a little odd? Could Mundungus be Crookshanks? Pat here: I've noticed the same thing, but can't figure out the connection between Crookshanks and Mundungus. Maybe there just isn't one. The other person who is always described as being cat-like is Ginny, who also has ginger hair. And in COS, when Mrs. Norris is attacked, she reacts to the news, leading Ron to say that she loves cats. (Of course, her reaction is really something else.) But in GOF, at the end, she is curled up at the end of Hermione's bed; in OotP, she is down on the floor playing with Crookshanks; and in at least one other instance, Ginny is curled up, cat-like. All that leads me to think that they are just ways to describe the different characters, or they are possibly red herrings. After all, aren't Mundungus and Crookshanks in the room at the same time at least once? That would rule out the chance that they are one in the same. Pat From cquinn at mn.rr.com Wed Aug 11 18:38:19 2004 From: cquinn at mn.rr.com (twobeaglegirl) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:38:19 -0000 Subject: Curse Scars In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109761 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bamf505" wrote: > > DuffyPoo wrote: > "Fudge had taken half a step back from Dumbledore, but he > looked no less stubborn. 'You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've > heard of a curse scar acting as an alarm bell before...'" > > I don't ever remember reading any conversation between Fudge and > Dumbledore regarding Harry's scar. > > > bamf: > Unless I'm mistaken, Fudge read about Harry's scar in the last Rita > Skeeter article, the one where she goes on and on about his scar. I > doubt DD would have mentioned anything to Fudge, git that Fudge is. 2beagles: And actually, the discussion took place between Dumbledore and Fudge in the hospital ward at the end of GOF, ("Parting of the Ways" chapter, sorry don't have the book with me) when Git!Fudge was informed of LV's return and refused to believe it. From yahoogroups at catbirdco.us Wed Aug 11 18:59:57 2004 From: yahoogroups at catbirdco.us (Michal) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 11:59:57 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Animagi theories Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040811115942.067a65d0@mail.catbirdco.us> No: HPFGUIDX 109762 At 03:33 PM 8/10/04, you wrote: >--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Michal wrote: > > At 02:55 PM 8/9/04, RMM wrote: > > >As the proof is there for the fact that Voldemort's animagus form > > >being a snake; after all, Harry bit into Mr. Weasley; > > > > Michal: > > Voldemort was possessing is pet/sidekick snake. At the time he hadn't > > regained his body yet. Wouldn't it be difficult/impossible to transform if > > you don't have much of a body? > >RMM: >Are you saying that Voldemort did not have a body in OotP? Michal: Oops! You're right, V got his body back at the end of GoF. If he were an animagus, a snake would be the expected form for him to take, and since he has a body in OP, he could transform if he knows how. BTW (hoping to be at least half right ), Harry didn't bite Mr. Weasley; he was a "passenger," not the "pilot" of the snake that might or might not be, as Charme suggests, Nagini or a runespoor under V's control. From ballerinalaura at mac.com Wed Aug 11 19:43:40 2004 From: ballerinalaura at mac.com (theredshoes86) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 19:43:40 -0000 Subject: you CAN'T hurt a BABY!!! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109763 hello all... In the 5th book, when Harry and the gang are running from Voldemort's Death Eaters in the Ministry of Magic, there comes a point when Harry wants to curse the man whose head turned into a baby's head and Hermione stops Harry. She says, "you can't hurt a baby" and then something like 'there was no time to argue the suggestion' follows. Has this particular part stuck out to anyone else??? Could, perhaps, Harry being a baby at the time when Voldemort tried to kill him have anything to do with Voldemort's powers being destroyed??? I mean, why else would Hermione say that? the guy was a Death Eater, she wouldn't have minded hurting him. And there are no other accounts of babies being hurt in any of the books .... ANY THOUGHTS?????? From margotcragg at hotmail.com Wed Aug 11 19:50:11 2004 From: margotcragg at hotmail.com (pookasmorning) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 19:50:11 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109764 > > Arianna: > > > Born as the seventh month dies: > > > September is "the seventh month." That is what the word > > > means. It just can't be July. Though this theory is interesting, I think it would be out of character for JKR to write something so convoluted. While we love to develop complicated theories, the reality is usually relatively simple once she lets us see it. A seventh month/seventh month switcheroo with three prophecy subjects and a Bad Guy-killing hero other than Harry? Less simple. And don't forget that this is a children's book - kids have much less patience than we do for plot points that require miles of explanation before they become plausible. By making tertiary characters the actual focus of the climax, a great deal of Harry's life at Hogwarts becomes filler. If Lily's sacrifice and Peter's debt were actually all that was needed, what was the point of the first three books in the series? I contend that the Harry/Voldemort confrontation has been built up too much in canon for it to turn out that the prophecy has nothing to do with him *and* the final victory will not be his. - pooka From candlekicks at yahoo.ca Wed Aug 11 20:28:27 2004 From: candlekicks at yahoo.ca (candlekicks) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:28:27 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109765 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bex" wrote: > SSSusan asked: > > If this has been asked, I apologize. But how can it NOT be July > > (and, thus, Harry being talked about), if Harry was able to remove > > the prophecy from the shelf? > > > > Or are you saying the prophecy *is* still about Harry & Voldy but > > *also* about Peter, and that any of the three could have removed it > > from the shelf? > > Yb's turn: > I think a general agreement has been reached that Harry could take > the prophecy ONLY because his name was on it, which was because > someone put his name on it (an Unspeakable, for sure, maybe a Keeper > of the Prophecies?), because DD and everyone else who knew about it > assumed that, after the Godric's Hollow affair, Harry was "the One" > mentioned in the prophecy. Peter wouldn't be able to mess with it > because his name isn't on it. Whether the prophecy has anything to do > with him or not is moot regarding removing the orb from the shelf. Just a thought... Do you think that a prophesy can be that easily manipulated? If that was all that needed to happen, why not use the imperious curse on someone who could alter the names on the prophesy and have them take it off of the shelves once it was realized that only someone named on it could remove it?? Linda From william_mclamb at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 21:01:50 2004 From: william_mclamb at yahoo.com (william_mclamb) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 21:01:50 -0000 Subject: FF: Wizarding World & Families of the Muggle-born Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109766 Are the Grangers and the Dursleys going to have their minds 'Obliverated'(sp?) when Hermiome and Harry graduate? Will Hermione and Harry be 'Obliverated' as well? In a fanfic, Cause and Effect http://www.fanfiction.net/s/1580109/1/ Hermione's parents must be smuggled into Hogwarts to visit her. This scene got me wondering, How does the WW handle the relatives of the Muggleborn, or for that matter the muggle loved ones of ANY wizard? The answer to my opening question is probably 'no,' Petunia and Vernon seem to remember Lily being a witch though this knowledge might have been given them when Harry was dumped on them. Yet if it is no then it seems to me that there would be an ever-growing number of muggles who know about the WW. While Harry and the Durselys will probably part with no looking back, can the same be said for Hermione and her family? Who can the Grangers tell that Hermione is a witch? ---Got to go, more later, hopefully!-- "William McLamb" From khinterberg at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 22:09:14 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 22:09:14 -0000 Subject: Why Was Hagrid Left Out of the Order? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109767 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" wrote: > Okay, guys. Here's one that's been niggling at me all day and, I'm > sorry to say, I don't yet have any answer for it. The question is: > > "Why isn't Hagrid in the Order of the Phoenix?" We know for a fact that Hagrid was in the Order first time around, he is in the picture which Moody shows Harry. And of course he couldn't be at meetings while he was off giant-hunting. I think there's no way he DOESN'T belong to the order. khinterberg, a lupin lover From bamf505 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 22:57:57 2004 From: bamf505 at yahoo.com (Metylda) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 15:57:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - Info In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040811225757.89825.qmail@web12301.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109768 --- Josh Warren wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Brenda M." > wrote: > > Apologies for lack of exact quotation, but when > Snape is lecturing > > them about damaging the Whomping Willow, he > describes it as "old > and > > valuable". Also Harry's description has it > "ancient tree". > > > > But why? > > > > We know it was planted the year Lupin came to > Hogwarts. So that > will > > be about 24-25 years ago. It must have come from > somewhere else -- > I > > suppose that's a common sense, tree of that > magnitude will take > quite > > a long time to grow. So how old of trees are > thought to > > be 'ancient'? Any botanist? > > bamf: *waves hand* Will you settle for a horticulture student? Willows: (Salix, genus) very few willows have the common 'weeping' shape (most notably demonstrated by Salix alba 'Tristis'). Some are very stiff in form, some are only a few feet high . They love water, and their have often been known to get into pipes. Willows are fast growing trees, growing 1-1.5 feet per growing season. If it's going to be transplanted and used right away (non-magically growth enhanced), my guess would be it's about a 10 year old tree at planting. That would make it about 18 feet at the time of planting, and strong enough to endure students. (And expensive, to boot!) Granted, being a fast growing tree mean not being long-lived, generally. A 50 year old willow is a long-lived tree. Not to say that they don't live longer than that, but they are usually blown over or usually are taken out by disease or bugs. What is considered 'old' depends on each type of tree you are talking about. A hard wood tree (oak) is much longer lived than a 'soft wood' tree (willow, poplars). My guess would be that the whomping willow is probably 40 years old. It's hard to say, though. As for valuable, we don't know how rare they are in the WW. If it's rare, than it's going to be valuable, more than just to guard the enterance to the SShack. Sorry about lecture mode. ;) If you have any more questions, let me know! bamf, a 'budding' horticulturalist ===== "Why, you speak treason!" -Maid Marian "Fluently!" -Robin Hood -The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) Cub fans are not normal. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Wed Aug 11 23:01:11 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 23:01:11 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109769 Linda's brilliant musing: > Do you think that a prophesy can be that easily manipulated? If that > was all that needed to happen, why not use the imperious curse on > someone who could alter the names on the prophesy and have them take > it off of the shelves once it was realized that only someone named > on it could remove it?? Yb's turn, though somewhat dimmer: I see two scenarios. Here they are, least likely first: 1) The DEs and LV didn't think about that. (Not likely.) 2) They did, at least try. Lucius came down to Level 9 near the beginning of OotP, making nice with all the hotshots and being mean to Arthur. I think he was rattling his his change purse, too. Maybe he tried to bribe the Keeper of the Prophecies that day. Then we have that little incident with poor old Bode. He worked on Level 9 (we learned that in GoF, Arthur called him an Unspeakable at the Quidditch World Cup), so maybe he /was/ the KotP. Anyway, he wound up in St. Mungo's, unable to speak coherently, move, whatever... My thoughts are that someone put him under the Imperius curse to try to change the name (or just take the orb), he started resisting, touched it when he shouldn't have, and suffered the fate of the Prophecy- stealers. Then, when he started to recover, someone sends him Devil's Snare, and it kills him. That's what I think happened, unless there is canon to make me look like a liar. ~Yb From vmonte at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 23:01:59 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 23:01:59 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109770 Linda wrote: Just a thought... Do you think that a prophesy can be that easily manipulated? If that was all that needed to happen, why not use the imperious curse on someone who could alter the names on the prophesy and have them take it off of the shelves once it was realized that only someone named on it could remove it?? vmonte responds: I agree. Besides, according to canon only Harry and Neville touched the orb. vivian From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Wed Aug 11 23:05:00 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 23:05:00 -0000 Subject: Why Was Hagrid Left Out of the Order? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109771 khinterberg: > We know for a fact that Hagrid was in the Order first time around, > he is in the picture which Moody shows Harry. And of course he > couldn't be at meetings while he was off giant-hunting. I think > there's no way he DOESN'T belong to the order. Yb: Ay, who wouldn't want the lovable half-giant on their side? Someone who can stand up to half a dozen full-grown wizards shooting stun spells at him all at once? (OotP, during OWL season). Can haul grown men up by the collar single-handedly? Give him a wand and a Louisville Slugger and clear the way! ~Yb From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Wed Aug 11 23:08:46 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 23:08:46 -0000 Subject: Phrophecy Orbs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109772 vmonte commented: > > I agree. Besides, according to canon only Harry and Neville touched > the orb. Yb: Yes, but once Harry took it off the shelf, no one really minded trying ton take it off his hands (Both Lucy and Trixie tried). Who touched it after Harry grabbed it (*I think*) is not important. ~Yb From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 23:14:59 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 23:14:59 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ Children's Books? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109773 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Josh Warren" wrote: > ...edited... While we can find these additional chewy centers, I do > think it wise to remember that JKR does and always has intended these > books to be read by children, before we go too far down any given > road. :) > > That's all... > > Josh Asian_lovr2: While your statement that these books were written for children has been made several times, and is a belief held by many people, it is none the less false and has been refuted an equal number of times. JKRowling did not write these as children's books. She wrote the story for herself, and wrote it the way it came to her. She never took her original vision and in any way adapted it for children. In fact, she has bluntly said that she will not deviate from her original vision to suit any audience. From her perspective, if anyone of any age would like to join her for the adventure, fine; but first and foremost, she wrote the books for herself, and fellow readers must take the adventure as it comes; like it or not. It was the Publishing company's marketing department who decided the books could best be marketed to children. They made this decision with only one book, the first book, to use as their reference. So these are not /children's books/. They are just books; old, young, whatever, you can take it or leave it. Just passing it along. Steve/asian_lovr2 From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Wed Aug 11 23:48:36 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 23:48:36 -0000 Subject: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - Info In-Reply-To: <20040811225757.89825.qmail@web12301.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109774 >>> bamf, a 'budding' horticulturalist wrote: > Will you settle for a horticulture student? <<< Brenda: Lol, yes! > Willows: (Salix, genus) very few willows have the > common 'weeping' shape (most notably demonstrated by > Salix alba 'Tristis'). Some are very stiff in form, > some are only a few feet high . They love water, and > their have often been known to get into pipes. > > Willows are fast growing trees, growing 1-1.5 feet per > growing season. If it's going to be transplanted and > used right away (non-magically growth enhanced), my > guess would be it's about a 10 year old tree at > planting. That would make it about 18 feet at the > time of planting, and strong enough to endure > students. (And expensive, to boot!) > > Granted, being a fast growing tree mean not being > long-lived, generally. A 50 year old willow is a > long-lived tree. Not to say that they don't live > longer than that, but they are usually blown over or > usually are taken out by disease or bugs. What is > considered 'old' depends on each type of tree you are > talking about. A hard wood tree (oak) is much longer > lived than a 'soft wood' tree (willow, poplars). Brenda now: Awesome, so the Whomping Willow can't be *that* old, at least in terms of trees. Muggle tree that is. Gotcha. ;) I would think that there are spells and enchantments guarding the Willow, from bugs per se. To have the Willow grow is another story, IMO. Some possibilities are: the Willow was 10 years old and still growing when it was first planted (as you suggested), or it was already a fully-grown tree, replanted onto Hogwarts ground, then magically guarded. After all, we don't hear the Mauraders or Snape commenting on how much the Willow has grown, no? (not that lack of evidence is evidence...) I wonder why it was willow though, out of all different kinds of trees there are... Brenda From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Wed Aug 11 23:55:48 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 23:55:48 -0000 Subject: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - Info In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109775 Brenda pondered: > I wonder why it was willow though, out of all different kinds of > trees there are... Yb's answer: Well not only do Willows grow at a rather alarming rate for the tree world, but they also have long thin branches that can be whipped around, inflicting great pain within a pretty fair radius. The idea was to protect the hole in the ground (at the base of the tree), so another type of tree, say an elm or oak, wouldn't have been able to guard it as well, since the branches of those trees are rarely close to the ground. Plus, the name has a nice ring to it: Whomping Willow. Maybe a Mauling Maple, or an Enraged Elm, or an Aggressive Ash (boy wouldn't that hurt!), or perhaps an Overly-Aggressive Oak, anyone? ~Yb From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 00:16:59 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 00:16:59 -0000 Subject: Why Was Hagrid Left Out of the Order? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109776 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bex" wrote: > khinterberg: > > We know for a fact that Hagrid was in the Order first time around, > > he is in the picture which Moody shows Harry. And of course he > > couldn't be at meetings while he was off giant-hunting. I think > > there's no way he DOESN'T belong to the order. > > Yb: > Ay, who wouldn't want the lovable half-giant on their side? Someone > who can stand up to half a dozen full-grown wizards shooting stun > spells at him all at once? (OotP, during OWL season). Can haul grown > men up by the collar single-handedly? Give him a wand and a > Louisville Slugger and clear the way! > > ~Yb mhbobbin: I think he is in the Order. His mission was to go to see the Giants and that takes him out of the story for half the book. And he would attack notice --more than the usual oddly dressed folks--walking into the neighborhood at Grimauld Place. He might not even fit in the rooms there. And I doubt, for the same reason, that he'd be standing watch at the MoM. They'd need 12 invisibility cloaks for him. mhbobbin From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 00:21:16 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 00:21:16 -0000 Subject: Tonks a traitor? was: Is Lupin is James In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109777 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "allison_m_otto" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "A.J." wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, sophierom > > wrote: > > > Lissa wrote: > > > "We've already had one masquerader. And we have > > > Tonks. (Who all's got bets on her being the traitor > > > this time?)" > > > > > mhbobbin writes: I just want to know why her nose turns into Dudley's at the dinner shortly after Harry arrives at Grimauld Place. mhbobbin From romulus at hermionegranger.us Thu Aug 12 00:24:12 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 00:24:12 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109778 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Nora Renka" wrote: Nora: > Actually, I do think Voldemort is pretty one-dimensional. He gave > up his humanity for power, and he wants power. He's pretty slick > about it, too, but he's not a terribly deep character--there was a > good post arguing to this effect not long ago. RMM: Well you underestimate him then. You shall see. Nora: > > He *wants* to pursue Lily, though--even though she told him off. > Since it's canonical that he's after that, why would he join an > organization that wants to destroy her? RMM: Because he is joining a society that hasn't advertised the destruction of non-Purebloods. He is joining a society that advocates Purebloods running things. Big difference. Nora: > It's canon that he ditches a decent amount of ego for Lily, RMM: I don't think he has to ditch anything to date her. Nora: > and she > starts dating him in 7th year. Are we going to put a full-fledged > Dark Arts 'Rise and Fall' in the time in-between then--because one's > he's involved with her, there's no way he's going to be hanging out > with the DEs. RMM: It is clear here that you simply do not understand the essence and makeup of a political movement. And that is why you probably look at Voldemort as a one-dimensional person. Nora: > Yes, yes you have. You've ignored the fact that the blood issue was > the first and foremost public face of what Voldemort stood for, and > that that is what people approved of in his positions. > RMM: Again, I disagree. There are many ways of saying Pure is Good that gain a large acceptance. See my comment above regarding what the Pure Bloods were preaching. Running things.... NOT Wiping out the opposition. If there is one thing you need to understand is how political rhetoric works. Take Bush and his WMDs for example. See how far he got with that! Nora: > Because Dumbledore is there--remember how in CoS everyone is > like "With DD gone, it's not safe for the Muggleborn students". > This line of argument doesn't impact my contentions. If Lucius > Malfoy had gotten away with the diary plot, it might have kept all > the Muggleborns out of Hogwarts. If LV takes over, it would > certainly keep all the Muggleborns out of Hogwarts. RMM: Yes, in the end that is true, and in CoS, everyone was looking back on the 1970s with perfect hindsight. Big difference between 1990s and 1970s when it comes to understanding the 1970s. Nora: > I but consider myself an honest woman. :) RMM: And I'm not? Nora: > And how can you say "Oh, James was involved with the Dark Arts" when > it's so canonical that he disliked them? RMM: I have never stated that he was "involved with the Dark Arts." You continue to misunderstand what I am saying and it is because you totally underestimate what the heck was going on in the 1970s in the WW. Nora: > Are you trying to argue > that he got fooled into it? The Dark Arts seem to be a pretty clear > sub-branch of magic in JKR's world, and it doesn't seem to be a > relativistic "Oh, it's just how you use the magic" thing. RMM: He fooled himself into it. He went in with both eyes open. And here is another point. Pureblood philosophy has nothing to do with the Dark Arts. The Dark Arts have everything to do with how Voldemort was going to take power. And that is what turned everyone off, or at least many including James Potter. Nora: > If James were also into the Dark Arts, it messes with the point that > he was a good man who HATED the Dark Arts but yet was still an > obnoxious bully. It's important to have that good consistency on > the one side to make his faults thematically meaningful. RMM: And I have never stated that James liked or was into the Dark Arts. How many times do I have to repeat it? > > > Nora: > >> 5. We've already got one tempted betrayer in the MWPP group; > >> seems more than a little like thematic overkill to have two. > > > > RMM: > > Who is the other? Wormtail? Lupin? Black? > > I believe all of these save Wormtail were brave enough to stand up > > to Voldemort. (See Wormtail's comments here.) > > This implies that all were to some degree, more or less, idiots > > for the cause of the DEs. (See more Black's comments here.) > > Guh? Standing up to Voldemort means that you had to have been an > idiot for the DE cause? That's not logical. RMM: Continuing to want to misunderstand me. Yes, it is logical if you know what it being stated. S. Black himself said they were "idiots" at that age. At that age, the speculation is that they were attracted, by their heritage, into joining up for the cause. They rose in rank and stature in the organizatiion to the point that they were "the few good men" that Voldemort was looking for. And up to this time there were NO DARK ARTS!!!!!! Then, the test came. The true purpose was exposed. The loyal stayed and the others left. The Marauders, minus one, left. James was of such stature in the organization, that Voldemort made it a priority that James must be killed. And that is what the snake did to the deer, or in this case, the Anaconda did to the stag. Looking back, Sirius Black can say that we were all idiots. (And that is canon.) > Nora: > We have strong canon that James Potter hated the Dark Arts, coming > from Sirius. We have strong canon from Hagrid that You-Know-Who > never tried to recruit the Potters, being as they were personally > close to Dumbledore. RMM: As far as Hagrid knows. Nora: > We have strong canon that James Potter did not > subscribe to the pureblood philosophy that Voldemort overtly stood > for the in WW, the philosophy that is the thing that attracted a > number of his followers. RMM: Not so. Give me an instance where James swore off Purebloodism. And contrast what you find, if you can, with what I said earlier about the extremists and the nominalists. Nora: > This, natch, all adds up to a coherent > picture of a man--someone who was an arrogant bully in school, but > had a coherent strong moral sense about some things, and acted on > that sense by joining the Order of the Phoenix. RMM: He joined after he rejected Voldemort. He was not hunted personally by Voldemort because he was a good wizard. Lily was a good witch, but Voldemort did not want to kill her. You view is too one dimensional here. Jo Rowling's characters drip with real personalities. That is why her books are so good. Nora: > Your readings have to bend, twist, or ignore a lot of canon. My > reading fits in smooth and clean, and takes account of all details-- > and one good way to judge competing readings of a text is to > consider how much they are able to explain, and how much they have > to leave out. RMM: If you strip down the characters to one dimension, then I can see what you are saying. Fortunately Jo Rowling does not have 1-D characters in her books! That is why I love them so much. RMM www.hermionegranger.us From dontask2much at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 00:27:47 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:27:47 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Is Lupin James? References: <081120041211.6009.411A0CF7000CE2800000177922007347489C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: <024c01c48003$323e56e0$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 109779 From: > Lissa: > > If Lupin's been James all this time, James has been doing a pretty darn good acting job. Lupin hasn't broken character once, and although they were extremely good friends, we can see from the Pensieve scene that there were some major differences in their personalities. Plus, even though Harry probably would have responded, Lupin makes NO attempt to contact Harry throughout GoF. If he were really James, I suspect he would have sent a letter. It would have been natural enough- they did develop a relatively close relationship, and by the end of PoA Harry knew that Lupin had been one of his father's best friends, so he was more than a teacher. > > We've already had one masquerader. And we have Tonks. (Who all's got bets on her being the traitor this time?) I think Lupin being James would be too repetitive. > > Sad to say, I think James is definitely dead. > > Liss charme: I also agree that James is definitely dead. That being said, this whole thing about Lupin is kinda freaky, simply because I noticed in OoP JKR doesn't write *anything* about him fighting anyone in DoM. He simply jumps in front of Malfoy while Malfoy is aiming at Harry at the last minute - everyone there has detail surrounding who they're fighting, when they fall, etc. If Lupin was James, don't you believe James would have been in the thick of it? Something is fishy there...or maybe I'm being paranoid.... charme From romulus at hermionegranger.us Thu Aug 12 00:27:38 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 00:27:38 -0000 Subject: Why Was Hagrid Left Out of the Order? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109780 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" wrote: > Okay, guys. Here's one that's been niggling at me all day and, I'm > sorry to say, I don't yet have any answer for it. The question is: > > "Why isn't Hagrid in the Order of the Phoenix?" > RMM: Well I think the episode with the dinosaur egg probably sealed it for him. He becomes a weak link in the organization. As much as I love him, and he can do great things for the cause, I could not trust him with critical information -- like how to get past Fluffy. :-) RMM www.hermionegranger.us From dontask2much at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 00:36:46 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:36:46 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Neville's Wand References: Message-ID: <026f01c48004$7332f380$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 109781 ---- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Ferer" > > Some part, sure. I would guess that you could use your parent's wand > better than a total stranger's. The more like your parent you are, > the less the wand mismatch. But it's still not Neville's very own > wand, the wand that picked him. > > Boolean:"Will we see an improvement once [Neville] has a new wand in HBP?" > > We're going to see an improvement no matter what, I think. Neville > has so much come into his own he will be reborn. He's a 100% proven > Gryffindor hero now. The seeds were there when he defied his own > friends in PS/SS and they have born fruit now. > charme: How interesting you use the word "seeds." I don't know if anyone else realizes it, but in homeopathy "mimulus" (I know it's not the same word as Mimbulus as in Mimbulus Mimbletonia, but work with me here) is a flower and that flower is used as an extract in homeopathy: "Mimulus is used as a type remedy for people who tend to be nervous, timid and shy generally. Sometimes people of this type may blush easily or stammer, and they will usually avoid social occasions and any event where they will be in the limelight. Mimulus is the remedy to encourage the quiet courage and strength that lies hidden in such people, so that they can face the everyday trials of life with steadfastness." Quite an interesting concept, isn't it? Just do a search on Yahoo or Google for mimulus and you'll find it. That plant of Neville's is growing with him and his abilities, or influencing him in some way, IMO...... From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 00:39:10 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 00:39:10 -0000 Subject: Is Lupin James? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109782 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "inkling108" wrote: > >Liss wrote: > > The other thing that comes to mind concerning the Lupin/James > switch is that Lupin had no clue that Peter was the Secret Keeper. > Unless Lupin and James made the switch before Sirius suggested > making Peter Secret Keeper (which WAS a last minute thing), > shouldn't he know? > > Inkling now: > > Exactly! For me this has always been the fatal logical flaw in this > theory. You can't get around it without jumping through all kinds> of hoops (e.q., switching back and forth -- pretty shaky stuff from > a literary point of view, very unlikely from JKR.) > > I think there is also pretty compelling psychological evidence > against it -- the way Lupin talks about his childhood as a werewolf, > and how much it meant to him to finally be accepted by the other > marauders. Even the tone of self disgust he adopts when he explains > why he didn't tell Dumbledore Sirius was an animagus. > snip > > (By the way I too think he has a secret, but this isn't it.) > mhbobbin: There have been many good posts on this. I too believe this theory is a wonderful red herring despite helping to reignite this theory discussion. The Switching theory answers some questions about Lupin while raising too many other questions. But I did want to add: That in the unlikely event that the Switch had happened, then the subsequent Sirius/Pettigrew switch had to have happened AFTER James had assumed Lupin's body and gone off some where to do some thing so that he would not have known about it. It only makes sense if a Remus in James body, at Sirius' last minute suggestion, made the decision to switch Secret Keeprs. And Lupin does touch other people, just not Harry. For example, when they all leave the Knight Bus after the Christmas Break, Lupin shakes hands all round but speaks to Harry. And of course, the punch line, another JKR joke--tweaking us--is the final Lupin line to Harry to "Keep in Touch." [shiver] Why why why can't we figure out what a werewolf who can't hold a job and is in a secret society and who lost all the best friends he ever had is still concealing some major secret? JKR is not going to reveal this, IMO, till the end of Book 7, probably just before she kills him and lets him fall into Harry's arms, saying "Harry, there's just one more thing I must tell you. All along, I was ----". But then, he dies and Harry never finds out. Crazed readers run through the streets, mass riots. JKR writes final 8th book: "Harry Potter and the Crazed Internet Posters" mhbobbin From ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 00:51:37 2004 From: ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com (A.J.) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 00:51:37 -0000 Subject: Neville's Wand In-Reply-To: <026f01c48004$7332f380$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109783 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "charme" wrote: > "Mimulus is used as a type remedy for people who tend to be nervous, timid > That plant of Neville's is growing with him > and his abilities, or influencing him in some way, IMO...... Yes, that was a description much like the Bach Flowers that someone posted on another board when wondering what powers the plant had. Certainly it seems linked to Neville's growing boldness. His plant must be significant, possibly later-- a) note the repetition (emphasis?) of its name in the new Gryffindor password; b) somebody on this or another board once noted that the four who made it the farthest/sanest in the MOM fight were the ones who had been sprayed with Stinksap; c) Galadriel Waters says, "are you SURE you like Neville's plant?" d) Someone pointed out that Mimulus is from Assyria-- how did Algie get that? TT? Is Algie good? It seems JKR planted the mimulus here among the other many things that made OOTP long so that there would be significance in the future. What will come next? A.J. http://www.angelfire.com/cantina/ajl/hp.html From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 12 00:54:01 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 00:54:01 -0000 Subject: you CAN'T hurt a BABY!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109784 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "theredshoes86" wrote: > In the 5th book, when Harry and the gang are running from Voldemort's Death Eaters in the Ministry of Magic, there comes a point when Harry wants to curse the man whose head turned into a baby's head and Hermione stops Harry. > > She says, "you can't hurt a baby" and then something like 'there was no time to argue the suggestion' follows. > > Has this particular part stuck out to anyone else??? > > Could, perhaps, Harry being a baby at the time when Voldemort tried to kill him have anything to do with Voldemort's powers being destroyed??? > > I mean, why else would Hermione say that? the guy was a Death Eater, she wouldn't have minded hurting him. And there are no other accounts of babies being hurt in any of the books .... > > ANY THOUGHTS?????? SSSusan: YES, this stuck out to me, too. I actually stopped when I got to it, looked up and said, "WHAT??" To me, it ranks right up there with the line in that-medium-which-is-not-to-be-named, "Is that REALLY how my hair looks from the back?" Neither seems very Hermione-like. No, this line didn't strike me as *meaning* anything significant; just that it was so out of character--so much less intellectual than what she usually says. Siriusly Snapey Susan From cincimaelder at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 01:25:20 2004 From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (Maggie) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 01:25:20 -0000 Subject: Why Was Hagrid Left Out of the Order? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109785 > > ~Yb > mhbobbin: > I think he is in the Order. His mission was to go to see the Giants > and that takes him out of the story for half the book. And he would > attack notice --more than the usual oddly dressed folks--walking > into the neighborhood at Grimauld Place. He might not even fit in > the rooms there. And I doubt, for the same reason, that he'd be > standing watch at the MoM. They'd need 12 invisibility cloaks for > him. > > mhbobbin I agree. Plus, once he returned from the Giant trip he needed to be at Hogwarts to teach and care for the animals. Once he was attacked, well, everything happened that night. In fact, the job he was doing for the order, was to go to the Giants. I guess in the book it says he's doing it for DD, but I think that might imply the order. MAE From snow15145 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 01:57:31 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 01:57:31 -0000 Subject: Neville's Wand In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109786 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "A.J." wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "charme" > wrote: > > > "Mimulus is used as a type remedy for people who tend to be > nervous, timid > > That plant of Neville's is growing with him > > and his abilities, or influencing him in some way, IMO...... > > Yes, that was a description much like the Bach Flowers that someone > posted on another board when wondering what powers the plant had. > Certainly it seems linked to Neville's growing boldness. His plant > must be significant, possibly later-- a) note the repetition > (emphasis?) of its name in the new Gryffindor password; b) somebody > on this or another board once noted that the four who made it the > farthest/sanest in the MOM fight were the ones who had been sprayed > with Stinksap; c) Galadriel Waters says, "are you SURE you like > Neville's plant?" d) Someone pointed out that Mimulus is from > Assyria-- how did Algie get that? TT? Is Algie good? > > It seems JKR planted the mimulus here among the other many things > that made OOTP long so that there would be significance in the > future. What will come next? > > > A.J. > > http://www.angelfire.com/cantina/ajl/hp.html Snow: Could it be the name of the plant that has the significance? Remember Uncle Vernon with his mimble wimble blurbish in SS, also his demenors for dementors in OOP? Vernon may know a bit more than he lets on but doesn't exactly remember the correct wording. The plant's name is used, as you pointed out, as a Gryffindor password. From snow15145 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 02:03:39 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:03:39 -0000 Subject: Is Lupin James? In-Reply-To: <024c01c48003$323e56e0$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109787 charme: I also agree that James is definitely dead. That being said, this whole thing about Lupin is kinda freaky, simply because I noticed in OoP JKR doesn't write *anything* about him fighting anyone in DoM. He simply jumps in front of Malfoy while Malfoy is aiming at Harry at the last minute - everyone there has detail surrounding who they're fighting, when they fall, etc. If Lupin was James, don't you believe James would have been in the thick of it? Something is fishy there...or maybe I'm being paranoid.... charme Snow: Ohhhhh! Another one for Pippin's ESE Lupin theory! I never noticed this Charme, you are good! Have to go have a look at this for myself, thanks Charme! From ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 02:31:38 2004 From: ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com (A.J.) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:31:38 -0000 Subject: you CAN'T hurt a BABY!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109788 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "theredshoes86" > wrote: > > She says, "you can't hurt a baby" and then something like 'there > was no time to argue the suggestion' follows. > > Could, perhaps, Harry being a baby at the time when Voldemort > tried to kill him have anything to do with Voldemort's powers being > destroyed??? > > > SSSusan: > YES, this stuck out to me, too. There is that possibility, since life debts and so forth carry a certain magic-- didn't somebody here theorize that such a no-no could have caused Voldemort's curse backfire? (Sorry I keep mentioning, 'I saw someone post this...) But the scene struck me in a different way, along the lines that perhaps Harry might show compassion to, say, a baby Voldemort or so... (various ways... TT, soak in the MoM tank, echoes Japanese folk tale, etc.) Of course this seems rather out there now, but Hermione's line does seem to stick out. A.J. http://www.angelfire.com/cantina/ajl/hp.html From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 04:15:05 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 04:15:05 -0000 Subject: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109790 > Geoff: > The flip side of that argument is that 09/01/42 looks like 9th > January 1942 from /our/ side of the pond which could confuse > people..... Carol: Exactly. which is why I think we should say "September 1" (or "1 September") rather than using numbers for dates so neither group will be confused. :-) > > Carol (earlier): > > He [Tom] does say that he was in his fifth year when the basilisk appeared and that he preserved his sixteen-year-old self in the diary, > > beginning in June of the same year he framed Hagrid, which I take to be 1943 since Harry finds the diary in 1993. So my assumption is > that he had turned 16 by June 1943, but there's no need for a date as early as September 1 [1942]. In fact, most students would have turned 16 by the end of their fifth year. > > > Geoff: > All students will have turned 16 by the end of their Fifth Year - see my comment in message 109294. Carol: Okay. I see what's confusing me about your post and maybe confusing you about mine. I was considering the end of the fifth year to be the end of classes before the summer holidays, not the beginning of the sixth year. So we agree that *all* students are 16 by the time that they begin their sixth year but some (like Harry) turn 16 over the summer. Most would begin their *fifth* year at 15 and end it at 16. That's the usual pattern, with only about 1/4 of the students turning 16 over the summer. In Tom's case, we know that the basilisk was released in Tom's fifth year and we know that he was 16 when he began the diary in June of what must be that same school year (1942-43). So he would have had to be 15, not 16, by September 1, 1942 and probably turned 16 some time between that date and June 1943. I still say there's no need for him to have been one of the older students. He seems, in fact, to fit the usual pattern defined in my first paragraph. Does that make sense? Or do we actually agree but are just having trouble understanding each other? And where's the aspirin bottle? All this math is giving me a headache. Carol From bamf505 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 04:31:46 2004 From: bamf505 at yahoo.com (Metylda) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 21:31:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - Info In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040812043146.54458.qmail@web12301.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109791 --- Bex wrote: > Brenda pondered: > > I wonder why it was willow though, out of all > different kinds of > > trees there are... > > Yb's answer: > Well not only do Willows grow at a rather alarming > rate for the tree > world, but they also have long thin branches that > can be whipped > around, inflicting great pain within a pretty fair > radius. bamf again: Speaking of pain, a point of interest with willows - we derive aspirin from them (salicylic acid , or however it is spelled). So, after the willow whomps you, you can chew on one of its branches for headache relief. Also, willow bark tea was used for many years as a pain reliever. (Before the advent of aspirin). Maybe the bark of a whomping willow also offers a more potent pain reliever? bamf ===== "Why, you speak treason!" -Maid Marian "Fluently!" -Robin Hood -The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) Cub fans are not normal. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From kelly at protocallonline.com Thu Aug 12 04:53:04 2004 From: kelly at protocallonline.com (kellymcj2000) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 04:53:04 -0000 Subject: candy Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109792 Hi all So, what are the candy theories out there. I tried using the search thing and of course came up with nothing. I have been very lazy regarding the whole candy theme and never really delved into it. I'm hoping to just go with some theory already out there. Well, if you can please let me know. thanks kmcj From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 04:53:24 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 04:53:24 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109793 > Halli: > I'm sorry, but I refuse to believe that Harry's father, or his > fathers' friends (besides Peter) were death eaters. James hated the > dark arts, we've heard that before. All the maurauders hated Snape, > the little freak that was up to his eyeballs in the dark arts. If > they were fellow death eaters, why would they have such a loathing > for each other? Also, if James had been a death eater, then there > would've been no reason to worry about a secret keeper, and if there was, he would've known not to trust Peter with that job. That, and why would Voldemort want to kill James when he came in? As his > master, he could say 'stand aside' and all that. [snip] dcgmck: The key term here is, I think, the tense of the verb "were". I wish only to suggest that it is highly improbable that Voldemort did not at least attempt to recruit the brightest students from Hogwarts. Intellectuals are both highly useful and easily seduced, at least initially, by novel approaches that involve a hint of mystery, puzzle, or challenge. (Just look at the buzz Rowling generates and the time we collectively spend/waste in speculation.) Whether or not James and Co. ever actually enlisted, they would have at least listened to Voldemort's opening pitch. Canon asserts that he was cautious in his initial approach to the Wizarding World, knowing that guile rather than outright force would more easily and effectively open doors for him until he actually developed a following. In the graveyard scene in GoF when the surviving DE's are summoned and LV comments on empty spaces, he clearly indicates that at least one who has not returned must eventually die. Logic suggests that if, and that's a big IF, James was ever so briefly seduced before realizing what was wrong with LV, (or alternatively that he had to choose between Lily and LV, which was a no-brainer for him,) he had to be marked for death by LV. For Voldemort, such a move would have been reflexive rather than debatable. (Please note the huge IF to the foregoing.) If, in fact, James had been foolish enough to succumb ever so briefly to Voldemort's allures, that in itself would explain the need for a secret keeper. James' ignorance of Pettigrew's double agent status could then be explained any number of ways. James might have expected Peter to come to his senses when he did. Another explanation is that the true allegiance of a double agent is never really known and always suspected by all sides involved. All that said, I'll need some serious writing on JKR's part to be convinced that James actually succumbed, even briefly. I'd be more inclined to see him and Sirius volunteering to play the mole role themselves, thus bringing LV's wrath down upon their heads, which would yield the same blasting result when LV entered that humble hut in Godric's Hollow. When all is said and done, more is said than done, and it's all just jolly speculation. :-> From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 05:05:15 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 05:05:15 -0000 Subject: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - Info In-Reply-To: <20040812043146.54458.qmail@web12301.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109794 > > Yb's answer: > > Well not only do Willows grow at a rather alarming > > rate for the tree > > world, but they also have long thin branches that > > can be whipped > > around, inflicting great pain within a pretty fair > > radius. > > > bamf again: > > Speaking of pain, a point of interest with willows - > we derive aspirin from them (salicylic acid , or > however it is spelled). So, after the willow whomps > you, you can chew on one of its branches for headache > relief. Also, willow bark tea was used for many years > as a pain reliever. (Before the advent of aspirin). > > Maybe the bark of a whomping willow also offers a more > potent pain reliever? Carol adds: That's ironic, considering that willow switches were used for punishing American and Canadian pupils in the one-room schoolhouses of the nineteenth century. Maybe they were used in England as well; I don't know. If so, "whomping" could suggest whipping in the sense of old-fashioned corporal punishment. (I can see Filch coveting one of the branches and the right to use it on the students.) Carol, who thought it was birch trees that had salicylic acid From bamf505 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 05:15:31 2004 From: bamf505 at yahoo.com (Metylda) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 22:15:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Curse Scars In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040812051531.30927.qmail@web12308.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109795 > > > DuffyPoo wrote: > > I don't ever remember reading any conversation > between Fudge and > > Dumbledore regarding Harry's scar. > > > > > > bamf: > > "Sorry for the late reply, and I hope I'm not > duplicating any info. > > > > Unless I'm mistaken, Fudge read about Harry's scar > in the last Rita > > Skeeter article, the one where she goes on and on > about his scar. I > > doubt DD would have mentioned anything to Fudge, > git that Fudge is." > > > > > > DuffyPoo: > > I read through that article quite carefully, > before I posted my > question, and I can't see anything in there that > would refer to a > curse scar acting as an alarm bell. DD does trust > Fudge, at least to > some degree, until the end of GoF. It was Fudge, > after all, who met > Harry at the Leaky Cauldron, not DD. > bamf again: Now that I'm not at work, I can point you to the page. It's on the US Edition, pg 611, second paragraph of the Rita Skeeter article, which points out to the rest of the WW that Harry's scar hurts. "Potter, the Daily Prophet can exclusively reveal, regularly collapses at school, and is often heard to complain of pain in the scar on his forehead (relic of the curse with which You-Know-Who appempted to kill him). On Monday last, midway through a Divination lesson, your Daily Prophet reporter witnessed Potter storming from the class, claiming that his scar was hurting to badly to continue." Rita's article continues about how Potter's unstable and crying for attention. I don't think it was ever discussed before with Fudge, or else he wouldn't have been so ... stupid ... bamf, who normally like chocolate fudge with peanut butter, or mint, mixed in... ===== "Why, you speak treason!" -Maid Marian "Fluently!" -Robin Hood -The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) Cub fans are not normal. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 05:23:39 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 05:23:39 -0000 Subject: candy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109796 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kellymcj2000" wrote: > Hi all > > So, what are the candy theories out there. I tried using the search > thing and of course came up with nothing. I have been very lazy > regarding the whole candy theme and never really delved into it. I'm > hoping to just go with some theory already out there. Well, if you > can please let me know. > > thanks > kmcj dcgmck: Starting weakly, I'd just like to toss out the thought that Dumbledore's preference for muggle candies over WW candies seems as signifcant as his desire for socks. I think he's bound to Hogwarts the way that house elves are bound to families but that he's a different kind of elf with a muggle connection. Maybe he was an orphan raised by muggles or maybe he has muggle blood. I like the idea that he is a different kind of elf abandoned or intentionally left at a muggle orphanage. :-> Just messing around... From nearlyheadlessryan at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 23:35:41 2004 From: nearlyheadlessryan at yahoo.com (nearlyheadlessryan) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 23:35:41 -0000 Subject: Can Fawkes apperate on school grounds? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109797 I was just reading OOP for the fifth time and it all of a sudden hit me... Several times in the 5 books we are reminded that no one can either apparate or disapparate on/in school grounds. (Not only from Hermione several times but from other students and teachers as well) In OOP, Fawkes disappears to go and do jobs for Dumbledore, and then when Fudge tries to take Dumbledore out of the school, (after Dumbledore takes responsibility for the D.A. club) the book tells us the Dumbledore took ahold of Fawkes' tail and they were gone/disappeared. Do the rules not apply to animals? Because, what Fawkes did sure sounds alot like Disapparating to me. At least now, we have solved how Dumbledore gets around to places so quickly. Please let me know your theories. Thanks, -nearlyheadlessRyan From kelly at protocallonline.com Thu Aug 12 05:41:42 2004 From: kelly at protocallonline.com (kellymcj2000) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 05:41:42 -0000 Subject: you CAN'T hurt a BABY!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109798 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "theredshoes86" wrote: > hello all... > > In the 5th book, when Harry and the gang are running from Voldemort's Death Eaters in the Ministry of Magic, there comes a point when Harry wants to curse the man whose head turned into a baby's head and Hermione stops Harry. > > She says, "you can't hurt a baby" and then something like 'there was no time to argue the suggestion' follows. > > Has this particular part stuck out to anyone else??? > > Could, perhaps, Harry being a baby at the time when Voldemort tried to kill him have anything to do with Voldemort's powers being destroyed??? > > I mean, why else would Hermione say that? the guy was a Death Eater, she wouldn't have minded hurting him. And there are no other accounts of babies being hurt in any of the books .... > > ANY THOUGHTS?????? You know, it was completely out of character and really weird for her to say that, but I never thought to ask why JKR had Hermione say it. Duh on my part. I've never considered an uncharacteristic comment as a clue. Now you mention it though, it seems obvious that it must mean something. I don't think it's that babies can't be hurt though. I'll have to go reread it. Maybe attacking a baby with magic changes a wizard in a good/evil sort of way. You know, like doing it takes something out of the witch or wizard that's integral to their being basically good or not so good. Maybe once you've done it you open yourself up to a whole slew of negative influences or something. Part of the making choices says who we are theme maybe?? Well, I'll have to think about it. kmcj From msturbo209 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 11 23:52:17 2004 From: msturbo209 at yahoo.com (stellablue571) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 23:52:17 -0000 Subject: Prophecy Interpretations (Re: BIGGEST SPOILER) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109799 kmcj: I really do think the outcome of the series will be > based more on Harry's decisions and the consequences of choices he's > made in the past rather than on what others have done. > > So, to me, there should still be some as yet undiscovered > significance to the seventh month. Wish I had some ideas. Thanks > for letting us in on this arianna. It's very cool. And thanks for > reading this far. > > kmcj Stella says: I absolutely love the idea of Voldemort being done in by the "gift" he has given Wormtail! When a distraught Harry questions Dumbledore at the end of POA about the repercussions of his allowing the rat to live, thus forging a magical connection between them, DD reassures Harry that he did the right thing. "This is magic at its' deepest, most impenetrable,Harry. But trust me...the time may come when you will be very glad you saved Pettigrew's life." So...This tells us that unless this is the mother of all red herrings, (which is also quite possible!) Peter will definitely be playing a key role in the ultimate downfall of his lord. JKR herself has said we will be learning more about him in the HBP, and why wouldn't we? After all, his conspicuous absence in OoP has had us all guessing for just a little too long... That said, the prophesy can still be very much about Harry, the "vanquisher" of the Dark Lord. You brilliant theorists inspired me to do some definition checking of my own. And not to my surprise, nowhere in the definition of "vanquish" does it mention the word death. Defeat, yes. Kill? Not necessarily! Therefore, our hero can remain the vanquisher without having to commit murder, leaving him untainted, and at least in this one respect, allowing him to keep his childish innocence. Someone has to die, this is definite, but never does it say that Harry has to actually do the dirty deed himself! I have a suspicion that Harry's innocence(mixed with Voldemort now having both Harry and LILY"s blood in his veins(remember her POWERFUL sacrifice) affords him some magical protection that is underestimated by voldemort! Also in the scene quoted above DD assures Harry that James would have also spared his treacherous friends life>>providing us with still more canon evidence that James just doesn"t have it in him to be a DE! Thanks for reading and please let me know what you think Stella From msturbo209 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 01:21:53 2004 From: msturbo209 at yahoo.com (stellablue571) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 01:21:53 -0000 Subject: Tonks a traitor? was: Is Lupin is James In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109800 > > > > Lissa wrote: > > > > "We've already had one masquerader. And we have > > > > Tonks. (Who all's got bets on her being the traitor > > > > this time?)" > > > > > > > > > mhbobbin writes: > I just want to know why her nose turns into Dudley's at the dinner > shortly after Harry arrives at Grimauld Place. > mhbobbin Stella: I may be wrong but I think it turned into a pig snout and this just reminded him of Dud :D From WriterKim at comcast.net Thu Aug 12 03:11:13 2004 From: WriterKim at comcast.net (Kim) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 03:11:13 -0000 Subject: you CAN'T hurt a BABY!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109801 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "theredshoes86" wrote: > She says, "you can't hurt a baby" and then something like 'there was no time to argue the suggestion' follows. > > Has this particular part stuck out to anyone else??? Hello! This stuck out to me as well, but mostly as a mark of Hermione's character. I read that line as significant because, caught in the throes of time, if you will, the death eater did not just take on the appearance of a baby, he reverted to the same state of innocence as a child. He clearly had a baby's brain and was unable to comprehend who he was or what he was doing, and did not possess the capability for evil. Despite the fact that this was indeed a death eater, Hermione recognized that one does not kill the innocent, a code of honor that Voldemort obviously does not share. I think the passage does set up a nice parallel between Voldemort vs. baby Harry and Harry vs. baby Death Eater, and it will be interesting to see if her choice impacts them later! Kim :) From kelly at protocallonline.com Thu Aug 12 06:02:14 2004 From: kelly at protocallonline.com (kellymcj2000) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 06:02:14 -0000 Subject: candy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109802 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dcgmck" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kellymcj2000" > wrote: > > Hi all > > > > So, what are the candy theories out there. I tried using the > search > > thing and of course came up with nothing. I have been very lazy > > regarding the whole candy theme and never really delved into it. > I'm > > hoping to just go with some theory already out there. Well, if you > > can please let me know. > > > > thanks > > kmcj > > dcgmck: > Starting weakly, I'd just like to toss out the thought that > Dumbledore's preference for muggle candies over WW candies seems as > signifcant as his desire for socks. I think he's bound to Hogwarts > the way that house elves are bound to families but that he's a > different kind of elf with a muggle connection. Maybe he was an > orphan raised by muggles or maybe he has muggle blood. I like the > idea that he is a different kind of elf abandoned or intentionally > left at a muggle orphanage. :-> Just messing around... Thanks. You know I'm here so infrequently I didn't even know about a Dumbledore bound to Howarts/muggles theory or of speculation regarding socks. Actually, now you've said that, it reminds me of one fleeting thought I had about candy being a link to reality or the rest of the world, muggle world that is. Maybe it was Alice Longbottom's droobles bubble gum that got me thinking along those lines. Candy as a message to/from the muggle world? ANyhow, I'm always just amazed about how JKR goes on at length about sweets sometimes. And Honeydukes!!! Does she think kids obsess about candy all the time? Wait, they do. At least mine seem to. But teens ought to have grown out of that, right? Well, regardless, I think it's a weird little sidetrack for her and I do wonder what we're supposed to make of it. Maybe I'm just too suspicious and looking for things that aren't even there. kmcj From candlekicks at yahoo.ca Thu Aug 12 03:55:54 2004 From: candlekicks at yahoo.ca (Linda Anderson) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 23:55:54 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040812035554.975.qmail@web52507.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109803 Siriusly Snapey Susan: "The official record was relabeled after Voldemort's attack on you as a child," said DD. "It seemed plain to the keeper of the Hall of Prophecy that Voldemort could only have tried to kill you because he knew you to be the one to whom Sibyll was referring." [p. 842] Dare I say it but, I believe that this conversation it being taken on a purly literal translation. The idea that the writing on a tag is magical and would prevent the removal seems to be flawed. If this was the case the overturning of the racks would be made more difficult. I believe that the Orb that holds the prophecy must be the magical item as it holds the exact prophecy. Similar to the pensieve that DD uses to store his memory strings. They seem to have the same principles. When the globe hits the floor the memory comes out for all to hear. Therefore the exact recollection of the prophecy is kept in tact for future reference by the orb. Husband of Linda.- From kelly at protocallonline.com Thu Aug 12 06:15:07 2004 From: kelly at protocallonline.com (kellymcj2000) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 06:15:07 -0000 Subject: Prophecy Interpretations (Re: BIGGEST SPOILER) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109804 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "stellablue571" wrote: > kmcj: > I really do think the outcome of the series will be > > based more on Harry's decisions and the consequences of choices > he's > > made in the past rather than on what others have done. > > > > So, to me, there should still be some as yet undiscovered > > significance to the seventh month. Wish I had some ideas. Thanks > > for letting us in on this arianna. It's very cool. And thanks for > > reading this far. > > > > kmcj > > > Stella says: > > I absolutely love the idea of Voldemort being done in by the "gift" > he has given Wormtail! When a distraught Harry questions Dumbledore > at the end of POA about the repercussions of his allowing the rat to > live, thus forging a magical connection between them, DD reassures > Harry that he did the right thing. > > "This is magic at its' deepest, most impenetrable,Harry. But trust > me...the time may come when you will be very glad you saved > Pettigrew's life." > > So...This tells us that unless this is the mother of all red herrings, > (which is also quite possible!) Peter will definitely be playing a > key role in the ultimate downfall of his lord. JKR herself has said > we will be learning more about him in the HBP, and why wouldn't we? > After all, his conspicuous absence in OoP has had us all guessing for > just a little too long... > > That said, the prophesy can still be very much about Harry, > the "vanquisher" of the Dark Lord. You brilliant theorists inspired > me to do some definition checking of my own. And not to my surprise, > nowhere in the definition of "vanquish" does it mention the word > death. Defeat, yes. Kill? Not necessarily! > > Therefore, our hero can remain the vanquisher without having to > commit murder, leaving him untainted, and at least in this one > respect, allowing him to keep his childish innocence. Someone has to > die, this is definite, but never does it say that Harry has to > actually do the dirty deed himself! I have a suspicion that Harry's > innocence(mixed with Voldemort now having both Harry and LILY"s blood > in his veins(remember her POWERFUL sacrifice) affords him some > magical protection that is underestimated by voldemort! > > Also in the scene quoted above DD assures Harry that James would have > also spared his treacherous friends life>>providing us with still > more canon evidence that James just doesn"t have it in him to be a DE! > > Thanks for reading and please let me know what you think > > Stella And here's another possible reason to anticipate Wormtail's potential significance-the only other prophecy JKR has let us in on is one concerning Peter. Trelawney forsees him going back to Voldemort in PoA. I'm liking this more and more. And the really cool part, to me anyhow, is how it can still all fit in with Harry being Voldemort's downfall. kmcj From kelly at protocallonline.com Thu Aug 12 06:26:26 2004 From: kelly at protocallonline.com (kellymcj2000) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 06:26:26 -0000 Subject: Can Fawkes apperate on school grounds? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109805 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nearlyheadlessryan" wrote: > I was just reading OOP for the fifth time and it all of a sudden hit > me... Several times in the 5 books we are reminded that no one can > either apparate or disapparate on/in school grounds. (Not only from > Hermione several times but from other students and teachers as well) > In OOP, Fawkes disappears to go and do jobs for Dumbledore, and then > when Fudge tries to take Dumbledore out of the school, (after > Dumbledore takes responsibility for the D.A. club) the book tells us > the Dumbledore took ahold of Fawkes' tail and they were > gone/disappeared. Do the rules not apply to animals? Because, what > Fawkes did sure sounds alot like Disapparating to me. At least now, > we have solved how Dumbledore gets around to places so quickly. > Please let me know your theories. Thanks, > -nearlyheadlessRyan Yes, the whole you can't apparate or disapparate on Hogwarts grounds line has come up far too often to be taken lightly. I think it'll definitely come into play in the final fight. As to Fawkes however, I'm guessing JKR's answer about Dobby being able to apparate in Hogwarts would apply. Some beings just have powers wizards don't, and vice versa. kmcj From eeyore6771 at comcast.net Thu Aug 12 03:57:23 2004 From: eeyore6771 at comcast.net (Pat) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 03:57:23 -0000 Subject: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - But Why? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109806 Brenda wrote: > > Hi all! > > > ... when Snape is lecturing > > them about damaging the Whomping Willow, he describes it as "old > and > > valuable". Also Harry's description has it "ancient tree". > > > > But why? > > > > > > Pat here: > > In the book, Harry never says ancient, and Snape never says old, > just valuable. Here's the quote, after Snape reads from the paper > that they were seen by six or seven muggles: > > "I noticed, in my search of the park, that considerable damage seems > to have been done to a very valuable Whomping Willow." (US > paperback, Chap. 5, p. 79) Pat again: Well, on further reading, after someone pointed out the difference in the UK and US versions, I looked again at that part. And the old and ancient references are in the US version--I apologize for having missed them when I first posted about this. So to correct my mistake: "He [Harry] glanced over his shoulder at the ancient tree, which was still flailing its branches threateningly." (US, Chap. 5, p. 76) and... Snape said: "Professor Dumbledore, these boys have flouted the Decree for the Restriction of Underage Wizardry, caused serious damage to an old and valuable tree--surely acts of this nature--" (US, Chap. 5, p. 81) I guess my mistake was in looking too quickly, rather than re- reading more carefully. Sorry about that. Pat From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 06:27:28 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 06:27:28 -0000 Subject: Figgy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109807 > > DuffyPoo wrote: > > "Incidentally, can Squibs see Dementors?" [Fudge] added. > > "Yes, we can!" said Mrs Fgg indignantly. - can't really blame her > for being indignant, Fudge is, after all, the M for M and he doesn't > know if Squibs can see Dementors? > > > > With regard to her being unconvincing in her description, perhaps > it is down to being nervous in front of a gang of witches and > wizards who don't give a 'fig' about Squibs. Whether she described > the appearance of Dementors well, as Madam Bones said, "She > certainly described the effects of a Dementor attack very > accurately." > > > > And while Mrs. Figg describes the Dementors as 'running' when > actually they 'glide' we can all remember that they 'flew' in > the .....oops, sorry, not supposed to mention the 'm' word! ;-) > > mhbobbin wondered: > > I'm not convinced that Figgy did see the Dementors. Running, Flying > or Gliding. Figg says she is a Squib. we can't know yet that she > truly is although she seems truly frightened that the Dementors come > back before she gets Harry and Dudley home. > > Harry himself doesn't seem to think she saw them (Scholastic Page > 144). He seems to think that she may have seen a picture of one some > time. Big guys wearing cloaks. Madame Bones' defense of Figgy's > uncertain testimony is that the effects were described accurately-- > something us muggles can do. > > Maybe Figg is what she presents herself as, maybe she was just late > so didn't see the Dementors, and maybe she had never seen a Dementor > before. If only she wasn't so mysterious herself. > > Does anyone have any theories on the connection between Figgy and > Perkins (the tent, the smell of cabbage). And with that, why > Professor Binns calls Harry "Perkins" in the classroom scene where > Harry finds Hedwig injured at the window. I've searched in the > archives but haven't found any posts yet. Carol: Whether or not Mrs. Figg saw the Dementors (and I think she did), she certainly wouldn't lie about being a Squib. If she were a Muggle, she wouldn't even know what a Squib was. Like Filch, she has an affinity with cats, which spy for her and do what she tells them. Also notice how she talks: "The cat's among the pixies again," etc. She's throughly familiar with the WW and at home in it, even if she can't "transfigure a teabag." And she's part of the Order, one of the "old crowd" that Sirius is sent to summon at the end of GoF. She's been watching and protecting Harry for a long time as the link between Little Whinging and the WW. No, I think there's no reason to doubt either her truthfulness or her status as a Squib, and I think it's quite likely that she'll surprise even herself by being the one who performs magic late in life under dire circumstances. (Go, Mrs. Figg!) I did notice the smell of cabbage and associate Perkins' tent with Mrs. Figg's house (so did Harry, IIRC). Al these bits and pieces--Binns calling Harry "Perkins," Perkins being a warlock, have been discussed before (more than once) but no convincing conclusions reached. IMO, Mrs. Figg will prove significant. The rest won't. Carol From Meliss9900 at aol.com Thu Aug 12 06:29:26 2004 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:29:26 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts Message-ID: <103.4ccb31c3.2e4c6846@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109808 In a message dated 08/11/2004 16.48 Central Daylight Time, hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu writes: > OK, I'll give you that there isn't any canon that specifically > supports my theory, but circumstantial evidence is there. No one can > remove the orb except Harry (and LV, but he couldn't just waltz into > the MoM and grab it, now could he?). Lucius didn't want it UNTIL > Harry grabbed it, and I think he even says something like "You were > the only one who could touch it" or something like that. And on being > relabeled, etc... > > As I recall (don't have OOTP handy at the moment) Harry learned after the fact that if anyone but the person(s) who was/were named on it touched it they would go insane. That could easily include any record keeper. I tend to think that the original prophecy was labeled only with the date it was made, the name of the person who made it and the person who heard it (easier to find that way) and then "officially" named once the participants were clear. Melissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Aug 12 06:41:08 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 06:41:08 -0000 Subject: Calendars was Re: biggest SPOILER In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109809 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Shirley" wrote: Shirley: > However, I'd also like to point out that the term "life debt" is not > one that has ever been used in canon. So, while we all understand > that Peter owes his life to Harry (for stopping Lupin and Sirius from > killing him (as he deserved, IMO)), we still don't really *know* what > that "debt" means in the wizarding world. Hopefully that will be one > of the things we learn in the next book (may it come out soon). > Geoff: Depends also on what we mean by "life debt". Canon comes close to using the term... "Pettigrew owes his life to you. You have sent Voldemort a deputy who is in your debt..." (POA "Owl Post Again" p.311 UK edition) How does he repay a debt? Send a cheque for ?350.67? Take Harry out for a meal? It's got to be deeper than that.... From eeyore5497 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 06:17:47 2004 From: eeyore5497 at yahoo.com (Michelle Horcher) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 23:17:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040812061747.52513.qmail@web12204.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109810 dcgmck: > Whether or not James and Co. ever actually enlisted, > they would have > at least listened to Voldemort's opening pitch. > Canon asserts that > he was cautious in his initial approach to the > Wizarding World, > knowing that guile rather than outright force would > more easily and > effectively open doors for him until he actually > developed a > following. > > In the graveyard scene in GoF when the surviving > DE's are summoned > and LV comments on empty spaces, he clearly > indicates that at least > one who has not returned must eventually die. I believe the one LV is referring to is Karkaroff on whom we actually have canon is a DE. (Refer to the conversation he has with Snape at the end of one of his classes (Sorry, not sure of what pages or chapter in GOF)). All this speculation is facinating but do we have ANY canon whatsoever that James was a DE or even intrigues by the dark arts. I have read several arguments quoting canon that James "hated the dark arts". Which was an actual quote made by Lupin to Harry in OoP during the fireplace scene with Sirius (Sorry, again no page numbers). Michelle, who should have been in bed hours ago but has been reading way to many posts... From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Aug 12 06:55:06 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 06:55:06 -0000 Subject: Riddle and Grindelwald in 1945 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109811 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: Geoff: > > All students will have turned 16 by the end of their Fifth Year - > see my comment in message 109294. > > Carol: > Okay. I see what's confusing me about your post and maybe confusing > you about mine. I was considering the end of the fifth year to be the > end of classes before the summer holidays, not the beginning of the > sixth year. So we agree that *all* students are 16 by the time that > they begin their sixth year but some (like Harry) turn 16 over the > summer. Most would begin their *fifth* year at 15 and end it at 16. > That's the usual pattern, with only about 1/4 of the students turning > 16 over the summer. > > In Tom's case, we know that the basilisk was released in Tom's fifth > year and we know that he was 16 when he began the diary in June of > what must be that same school year (1942-43). So he would have had to > be 15, not 16, by September 1, 1942 and probably turned 16 some time > between that date and June 1943. I still say there's no need for him > to have been one of the older students. He seems, in fact, to fit the > usual pattern defined in my first paragraph. Geoff: My comment re students having turned 16 by the end of their 5th Year is tied into the 31st August cut-off date, which is also technically the end of the UK school year from the administrative and teacher employment point of view. When I started teaching, my contract ran from 1st September. Re Tom's birthday, I agree that he doesn't have to be among the oldest in the year. I hadn't taken on board that the comment about being a 16 year old when he began to write the diary might have been well into the year. I was thinking in terms of the Chamber being opened early in the school year and mentally making the two events simultaneous. From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Thu Aug 12 08:41:22 2004 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 12 Aug 2004 08:41:22 -0000 Subject: New poll for HPforGrownups Message-ID: <1092300082.365.84002.w47@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109812 Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the HPforGrownups group: List volume survey. With which of the following statements do you agree? Please check *all* that apply. (N.B. this survey is designed to gather specific information primarily regarding the effect of list volume. Please don't tick a choice unless it represents your view. E.g. don't check, 'I do not post because the list volume is too high to keep up with; I'd post if it were slower' if in fact you do not post for different reasons.) o I think that the volume of posts on the main list is fine. o I think that the volume of posts on the main list is too high. o I read all messages most days. o I would like to read all messages most days but find it impossible. o I am a poster. o I do not post because the list volume is too high to keep up with; o I read an entire thread before I post on it. o I would like to read an entire thread before posting but find it o I always try to see if anyone else has posted the same thing before o I feel I have to post quickly before anyone else jumps in with my o I get frustrated by seeing the same ideas or answers posted o I think posters should be allowed to post as frequently as they like. o I would like to see a statutory limit to the number of posts anyone o I would like to see a voluntary limit to the number of posts anyone o I would like to have occasional no posting days so that everyone can o I would like to have frequent no posting days so that everyone can o I think that one-liner posts should be banned. o I am bothered by other posters' bad snipping. o I am bothered by movie related discussion on the main list. o I am bothered by other OT posts on the main list. To vote, please visit the following web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/surveys?id=1349463 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 patientx3 at aol.com Thu Aug 12 09:25:23 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 09:25:23 -0000 Subject: Calendars was Re: biggest SPOILER In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109813 Eustace_Scrubb wrote: > We have no evidence that the wizarding world, at least in the UK as > JKR has described it, follows a calendar that differs in any > significant way from that of the surrounding muggles (except of > course that September 1 is always a Sunday). Yb: >>GAAAAHHHH! Where does everyone get that? Someone PLEASE tell me where Sept. 1 is always a Sunday!<< HunterGreen: The train always leaves for Hogwarts on September first, the next day is always Monday, the first day of school. Therefore, September first is always a Sunday (I've always taken it as artistic license, combined with the fact that (IMO) she's not writing each story under a certain year, so making September 2nd always a Monday is easier than keeping the date vague). Yb wrote: >> Sooo... why would she give us Hermione's birthday on the website and in-chat if it was a major plot point? She would at least have hinted that Hermione's birthday is in September if it was at all relevant to the plot, not just handed it to us. Giving us something like that, especially with no hints in canon, implies that it will probably never even make it into the books. << HunterGreen: Not that I agree that Hermione could be "the one" (not only is it supposed to be male, the 19th is not as the 'month dies', and I don't see how her dentist parents could have defied Voldemort three times, and I believe JKR has said at one point in an interview that we wouldn't be hearing any more about them), but there HAVE been hints in the books about what her birthday is. [PoA chpt 4] ' "I've still got ten Galleons," [Hermione] said, checking her purse. "It's my birthday in September, and Mum and Dad gave me some money to get myself an early birthday present." ' I like the idea, though, that the prophecy doesn't refer to a baby born in July at all (since September meaning the 'seventh month' is so clever and misleading, especially since even Dumbledore assumes its July). However, I don't see how the rest of the prophecy could point to any one else but Harry. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 12 09:31:28 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 05:31:28 -0400 Subject: Curse Scars Message-ID: <002201c4804f$25852130$96c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109814 Snow said: >>>"Listen to me, Cornelius," said Dumbledore, taking a step toward Fudge, and once again, he seemed to radiate that indefinable sense of power that Harry had felt after Dumbledore had Stunned young Crouch. "Harry is as sane as you or I. That scar upon his forehead has not addled his brains. I believe it hurts him when Lord Voldemort is close by, or feeling particularly murderous." Fudge had taken half a step back from Dumbledore, but he looked no less stubborn. "You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've never heard of a curse scar acting as an alarm bell before..."<<< DuffyPoo: Snow, does your book really say "but I've *never* heard of a curse scar?" Both of mine, Canadian HB and PB published in 2000 say "You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've [I have] heard of a curse scar acting as an alarm bell before." I was trying to figure out when Fudge had heard it before - I knew DD had told him just then. If there is a correction is a subsequent publication to what I have then it all makes sense. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ameliagoldfeesh at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 09:41:57 2004 From: ameliagoldfeesh at yahoo.com (ameliagoldfeesh) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 09:41:57 -0000 Subject: Longevity and Youth (was Re: Why Voldemort is a fascist..) In-Reply-To: <000e01c47cc8$08271920$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109815 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "manawydan" wrote: > > I've noticed this also. Whatever else it is, the WW is certainly not the > gerontocracy that you might imagine that it would be, given the greater > longevity of wizards (and the likely absence of things like retirement ages > and old age pensions!) People get into positions of responsibility early. A Goldfeesh here: JKR (from her 4/2001 Comic Relief Chat-thanks to TLC Quick Quill Quotes) says that: "Dumbledore's about 150 years old... wizards have a longer life expectancy than us Muggles, Snape's 35 or 6.' Now I have gone to the Lexicon and looked over the list of wizards and witches (up to the letter K- I don't quite have what it takes to be a L.O.O.N.) and noted the ones that have birth and death dates. Of the twenty that go up to "K" with the exception of only three- being Dumbledore 150+, Musidora Barkwith (146), and Nicholas Flamel (665+?), have lived past the age of 100. (The fourth, Beatrix Bloxam, a children's author, is listed as living from 1794-1810- but I suspect the date should be to 1910?) I suppose the point I'm trying to make is that for all the "longer life expectancy" of the wizarding folk,* they are living to a normal muggle age of around 70 to 100. I first started noticing this on her website "Wizard of the Month." A Goldfeesh *the information on ages comes from Lexicon, and some of the wizards listed there are from the trading card game, Chocolate Frog Cards, trading cards from the film, with all the information written by JKR. Info also includes COS and POA video game playing cards, which I'm not sure if JKR wrote or not- I didn't find the Lexicon too clear on that. From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Thu Aug 12 10:00:23 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (Jo Raggett) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 10:00:23 -0000 Subject: Curse Scars In-Reply-To: <002201c4804f$25852130$96c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109816 > DuffyPoo: > Snow, does your book really say "but I've *never* heard of a curse > scar?" Both of mine, Canadian HB and PB published in 2000 > say "You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've [I have] heard of a > curse scar acting as an alarm bell before." Aggie: My UK version (p613 published 2000) says the same as DuffyPoo's. As it stands though it doesn't make sense (although I'm sure the English bods on here will elaborate on that!). I have to admit I *read* it as having the 'never' in there, it's the only way my little brain can make sense of what Fudge is saying!! From pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 12 11:59:05 2004 From: pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net (pcaehill2) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 11:59:05 -0000 Subject: Prophecy Interpretations (Re: BIGGEST SPOILER) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109817 > > Stella says: [snip] > > I absolutely love the idea of Voldemort being done > > in by the "gift" he has given Wormtail! [snip] > > That said, the prophesy can still be very much about > > Harry, the "vanquisher" of the Dark Lord....nowhere > > in the definition of "vanquish" does it mention the > > word death. Defeat, yes. Kill? Not necessarily! kmcj continued: {snip} > And here's another possible reason to anticipate Wormtail's > potential significance-the only other prophecy JKR has let > us in on is one concerning Peter. Pam agrees: I do think that Peter will have some gollum-like role to play (although not in the same manner, since the only things Peter is "addicted" to seem to be his own fears and lust for power, not an artifact, and I think his part in destroying power will be more willful, a chosen betryal). And I think the silver hand is definitely significant, and possibly dangerous to LV -- great irony, that, to have created an 'indestructible' hand that even *he* cannot destroy to save himself! And I love the reasoning re: vanquish vs. death--Harry as vanquisher seems more in line with this heroic tale than Harry as murderer (although, I have to admit, I never could understand why Harry calls it murder, when it really would be self-defense?)... A basic flaw in the "peter-is-the-one-in-the-prophecy" argument seems to me to be the "he will mark him as his equal" part: the "dark mark" does *not* mark any DE as LV's equal. Whereas, it is extremely evident (to me at least) that Harry's scar *is* a mark that is related to a transfer of power from LV to Harry. Pam, who really doesn't believe Peter is very like gollum, except that he's a miserable creature who has cut himself off from all intimate relationships and lusts for power... From hpfgu_elves at yahoo.co.uk Thu Aug 12 12:17:03 2004 From: hpfgu_elves at yahoo.co.uk (hpfgu_elves) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 12:17:03 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: We Need Your Opinions Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109818 Hello, everyone! As you are all aware, the rate of posting on the main list has been very high of late. The List Elves would like to know how this is affecting your experience of the list and would like to canvas your opinions. Please would as many of you as possible, whether you post or simply read the list, take a few minutes to help us. The survey can be found at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/surveys?id=1349463 Discussion of related matters is taking place on our Feedback list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Feedback Please let us know your opinions. They are important to us and will help us in planning for the future. (As some of the options in this poll have gotten cut off, a list of the full wording of these options is included below.) As many have already noticed (and voted - thank you!), we've also created another poll which asks "How you first learned of HPfGU?" If your answer isn't listed, please let the elves know where at HPforGrownups-owner@ yahoogroups.com. Third, we have a new version of the "Members' Ages" poll, to get an accurate reflection of current list members' ages. If you vote in this one, please also vote in the old version of this poll, if you haven't done so already. The 'old' poll is the sixth one down on the list. We just ask that people vote in both, as one is current and the other is 'historical', for lack of a better term. :-) Finally, we'd like to draw everyone's attention to two new tables in the Database section: "Recommended Posts" and "Recommended Posts (pre-OOP)". These are for highlighting posts that you think are great, posts you'd like everyone to see. Please everyone, feel free to make entries in these tables. Many thanks The List Elves ************* Full wording of List Volume Survey poll options: ~I think that the volume of posts on the main list is fine. ~I think that the volume of posts on the main list is too high. ~I read all messages most days. ~I would like to read all messages most days but find it impossible. ~I am a poster. ~I do not post because the list volume is too high to keep up with; I'd post if it were slower. ~I read an entire thread before I post on it. ~I would like to read an entire thread before posting but find it impossible. ~I always try to see if anyone else has posted the same thing before I hit 'send' ~I feel I have to post quickly before anyone else jumps in with my idea. ~I get frustrated by seeing the same ideas or answers posted frequently. ~I think posters should be allowed to post as frequently as they like. ~I would like to see a statutory limit to the number of posts anyone can make in a day. ~I would like to see a voluntary limit to the number of posts anyone can make in a day. ~I would like to have occasional no posting days so that everyone can catch up on reading. ~I would like to have frequent no posting days so that everyone can catch up on reading. ~I think that one-liner posts should be banned. ~I am bothered by other posters' bad snipping. ~I am bothered by movie related discussion on the main list. ~I am bothered by other OT posts on the main list. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 12 12:25:58 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 08:25:58 -0400 Subject: Case for Marauders Message-ID: <001201c48067$8631e460$87c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109819 RMM (I believe) said > They rose in rank and stature in the organizatiion to the point > that they were "the few good men" that Voldemort was looking for. > And up to this time there were NO DARK ARTS!!!!!! > Then, the test came. The true purpose was exposed. The loyal > stayed and the others left. The Marauders, minus one, left. > DuffyPoo now: Pardon me for jumping into the fray after trying so hard to stay out of this discussion. If James, Sirius and Lupin left the 'LV study group' or whatever it was, and Pettigrew stayed behind, why would they ever trust him with anything, ever again, especially something as important as being James and Lily's Secret-Keeper? They wouldn't, IMO. James and DD were close according to DD, "I knew your father very well, both at Hogwarts, and later, Harry." Even if James, Sirius and Lupin had gotten involved in this study group, and then realizing what was being expected of them, left, by the time of the prophecy and DD's urging that he and Lily go into hiding, James would have informed DD of the dealings with LV and that PP had never left the group. PP wouldn't even be in the Order after that, IMO. PP looked up to James "hero-worshipped Black and Potter" to quote McGonagall. He wouldn't be about to do anything that would make James and Sirius look down on him even more than they already did. McGonagall says Peter was not in their (James and Sirius') league, talent-wise. If there ever was an LV 'study group' at Hogwarts, if the Marauders had joined, PP would have left the second the rest of the Marauders dropped out, or he would have been out of the Marauders, IMO. Yes, we can argue that if the Marauders dumped PP that he would have gone ratting to DD, but that would have gotten them ALL into difficulties, not just James, Sirius and Lupin. PP was as much a part of the Marauders' escapades as any of the rest. DD would have already known - or soon would know - about the 'prank' and would, most likely, be keeping a very close eye - "both eyes, as often as I can spare them" (FOTR) - on the whole gang. It was Black's idea to switch Secret-Keepers, because he believed LV would be after him. After him because he is James' best friend and the most likely prospect for who would be the Secret-Keeper and know their hiding place, not because he had once been "in the organization". He suggested using Pettigrew because he was weak and talentless and LV would never suspect. Sirius thought it was the perfect bluff. Unfortunately, Sirius was wrong. Sirius wouldn't have even suggested using PP as the Secret-Keeper if PP had remained in a secret blood purity, dark arts organization. Not IMO. RMM: >James was of such stature in the organization, that Voldemort made > it a priority that James must be killed. Nora: "That's funny, I thought that little half-heard prophecy had more to do with it, but what do I know--I just listen to Dumbledore.And keep in mind that we now know a good portion of why Voldemort was at Godric's Hallow--he's gunning for baby Harry." DuffyPoo again: I thought it was the prophecy as well and LV going for baby Harry. Naive little me. If LV was after James because of his "stature in the organization" he would have been after Sirius and Lupin as well. While it can be, I suppose, argued that "stature in the organization" is why LV was believed to be 'after Sirius', I stated above my reasons why I believe that is not the case. There is no evidence, anywhere, that LV went after Lupin, and it is my belief that Lupin wouldn't have been wanted in the 'organization' from the get-go, since he is a half-blood. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eeyore5497 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 06:35:09 2004 From: eeyore5497 at yahoo.com (Michelle Horcher) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 23:35:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: you CAN'T hurt a BABY!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040812063509.81672.qmail@web12201.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109820 kmcj: > I don't think it's that babies can't be hurt though. > Maybe attacking a baby with magic changes a wizard > in a good/evil sort of way. You know, like doing it > takes something out of the witch or wizard that's > integral to their being basically good or not so > good. Maybe once you've done it you open yourself > up to a whole slew of negative influences or something. > Part of the making choices says who we are theme maybe? Now Michelle: I remember in PS/SS Firenze tells Harry in the Forbidden Forest that "when you slay something as pure as a Unicorn, you are cursed. That you will live but only a half-life" (Sorry, paraphrazing a bit). I think perhaps the same principle would apply to killing something as innocent as a defenseless baby. From kellikat36318 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 06:41:56 2004 From: kellikat36318 at yahoo.com (Kelli Nichols) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 06:41:56 -0000 Subject: Why Was Hagrid Left Out of the Order? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109821 Entropy wrote: > > Why isn't Hagrid in the Order of the Phoenix? > RMM: > Well I think the episode with the dinosaur egg probably sealed it > for him. He becomes a weak link in the organization. > As much as I love him, and he can do great things for the cause, I > could not trust him with critical information -- like how to get > past Fluffy. :-) There is also the tiny technicality that he isn't really supposed to be doing magic seeing that he got expelled. Most of the Order work would require being able to defend yourself without landing yourself in Azkaban. "Kelli Nichols" From eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk Thu Aug 12 12:34:16 2004 From: eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk (iamvine) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 12:34:16 -0000 Subject: you CAN'T hurt a BABY!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109822 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kim" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "theredshoes86" > wrote: > > > She says, "you can't hurt a baby" and then something like 'there > was no time to argue the suggestion' follows. > > > > Has this particular part stuck out to anyone else??? > > Hello! > > This stuck out to me as well, but mostly as a mark of Hermione's > character. I read that line as significant because, caught in the > throes of time, if you will, the death eater did not just take on > the appearance of a baby, he reverted to the same state of innocence > as a child. He clearly had a baby's brain and was unable to > comprehend who he was or what he was doing, and did not possess the > capability for evil. Despite the fact that this was indeed a death > eater, Hermione recognized that one does not kill the innocent, a > code of honor that Voldemort obviously does not share. Yes, I don't see any contradiction with Hermione's character at all. It seems of a piece with her attitude towards house-elves. I also think she's expressing one of JKR's principles. It's as if JKR sat down and drew a line between "good nastiness" and "bad nastiness", in terms of what was suitable for the kind of books she wanted to write. For all the murder, torture, racism, cruelty and insanity in WW, we have seen no rape, no divorce, no illegitimate births (even Tom Riddle bears his father's surname). Even the Cruciatus Curse is a very clean method of torture. Someone shouts a word and it causes pain. The perpetrator is detached from it - no blood gets on his robes, his hands stay literally (though not figuratively) clean. Very different from some other authors (I'm thinking of a few in the fantasy genre) with their fondness for graphic detail. It's okay to hurt your characters, but dwelling on it is beyond the pale. If Death Eaters must sublimate their adult urges by turning Muggle women upside down in mid-air, then there are even more restrictions on what good characters can do. You can't hurt an innocent. You can't hurt a baby, even if he was an adult and trying to kill you five minutes ago. This probably applies to Voldemort too, but not so strongly. After all, he did try to AK baby Harry. Eleanor From jmay_71 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 12:32:07 2004 From: jmay_71 at yahoo.com (jmay_71) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 12:32:07 -0000 Subject: you CAN'T hurt a BABY!!! In-Reply-To: <20040812063509.81672.qmail@web12201.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109823 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Michelle Horcher wrote: > > Now Michelle: > > I remember in PS/SS Firenze tells Harry in the > Forbidden Forest that "when you slay something as pure > as a Unicorn, you are cursed. That you will live but > only a half-life" (Sorry, paraphrazing a bit). I think > perhaps the same principle would apply to killing > something as innocent as a defenseless baby. Jmay: Interesting choice to bring up Firenze. The centaurs also made a statement about not hurting children as well. I don't remember the exact wording, but wasn't it something like we don't hurt foals? From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Thu Aug 12 12:40:09 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 12:40:09 -0000 Subject: candy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109824 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kellymcj2000" wrote: > I think it's a weird little sidetrack for her and I do wonder what > we're supposed to make of it. Maybe I'm just too suspicious and > looking for things that aren't even there. I'm going to throw a big 10-4 there. :) Dumbledore is always going off on little tracks of seeming senility. Hooch's earmuffs, lemondrops, candy passwords, socks, Oddment! Tweak!, the joy of a room full of chamberpots, etc. :) Except for the last foreshowing the RoR, I don't think any of this says anything about Dumbledore other than his love for the common everyday. While we all have responsibilities in life, and in the books, DD has more than most, it is important to enjoy the little things in life. However, it would be nice for DD to explain that once before the series wraps up. Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Thu Aug 12 12:50:28 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 12:50:28 -0000 Subject: Calendars - Sept 1 always Sunday? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109825 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" wrote: > HunterGreen: > The train always leaves for Hogwarts on September first, the next day > is always Monday, the first day of school. Therefore, September first > is always a Sunday (I've always taken it as artistic license, > combined with the fact that (IMO) she's not writing each story under > a certain year, so making September 2nd always a Monday is easier > than keeping the date vague). The first day of class doesn't necessarily have to be a Monday. Admittedly, the 2 consecutive Halloweens on Saturday (lexicon) was bad enough, but I'm fairly certain the day of the week is usually left vague for Sept 1. Unless it says Monday, or full week of classes or something... That's what Yb and I are looking for (no books else I'd know!). Josh From kelly at protocallonline.com Thu Aug 12 13:51:24 2004 From: kelly at protocallonline.com (kellymcj2000) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 13:51:24 -0000 Subject: Prophecy Interpretations (Re: BIGGEST SPOILER) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109826 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pcaehill2" wrote: > > > Stella says: > [snip] > > > I absolutely love the idea of Voldemort being done > > > in by the "gift" he has given Wormtail! > [snip] > > > That said, the prophesy can still be very much about > > > Harry, the "vanquisher" of the Dark Lord....nowhere > > > in the definition of "vanquish" does it mention the > > > word death. Defeat, yes. Kill? Not necessarily! > > kmcj continued: > {snip} > > And here's another possible reason to anticipate Wormtail's > > potential significance-the only other prophecy JKR has let > > us in on is one concerning Peter. > Pam agrees: > I do think that Peter will have some gollum-like role to play > (although not in the same manner, since the only things Peter > is "addicted" to seem to be his own fears and lust for power, not an > artifact, and I think his part in destroying power will be more > willful, a chosen betryal). snip by kmcj > Pam continues > A basic flaw in the "peter-is-the-one-in-the-prophecy" argument > seems to me to be the "he will mark him as his equal" part: > the "dark mark" does *not* mark any DE as LV's equal. Whereas, it > is extremely evident (to me at least) that Harry's scar *is* a mark > that is related to a transfer of power from LV to Harry. > snip again now kmcj Well Pam, I completely agree about Peter not being the one referred to in the prophecy. At this point, I still think it's Harry. What I was trying to convey is that I think Peter will have a significant part to play in the battle between H and V. I think the phrase 'by the hand of the other' in the prophecy is quite striking and is one of JKR's famous double meaning tricks. I think we'll see Peter being told to attack Harry in some manner but he'll be compromised in doing so because of his life debt. The hand his master gave him will be forced to compete with his other hand, which could be said to be Harry's owing to the life debt. I don't mean his hands will be slapping at each other (hilarious image though) but that the 'choice' Harry made in letting Peter live will somehow cause a difficulty in Peter completing his master's orders. In the type of scenario I'm anticipating, the basic gist of the prophecy will be accomplished and will be between Harry and V but 'by the hand of the other' will actually be very literal and mean Pter's silver hand and human hand will come into play. Whew. Hope I explained well. Actually, there's a bit more to what I think about that whole life debt, but that's for another post. Can't expect you to read a thesis here now can I? kmcj, well aware of what an utter HP geek she's become From drliss at comcast.net Thu Aug 12 12:56:59 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (drliss at comcast.net) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 12:56:59 +0000 Subject: Is Lupin James? Message-ID: <081220041256.8391.411B691A0008E31C000020C722007481849C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 109827 charme: I also agree that James is definitely dead. That being said, this whole thing about Lupin is kinda freaky, simply because I noticed in OoP JKR doesn't write *anything* about him fighting anyone in DoM. He simply jumps in front of Malfoy while Malfoy is aiming at Harry at the last minute - everyone there has detail surrounding who they're fighting, when they fall, etc. If Lupin was James, don't you believe James would have been in the thick of it? Something is fishy there...or maybe I'm being paranoid.... charme Snow: Ohhhhh! Another one for Pippin's ESE Lupin theory! I never noticed this Charme, you are good! Have to go have a look at this for myself, thanks Charme! Lissa: I've been thinking about this one myself, too. There's a LOT going on in that scene. I wonder if Lupin IS fighting someone Harry just doesn't identify, or if he's out of Harry's range? Or it got edited out because the scene was too busy? My real belief is that Lupin is there in a literary sense for two reasons: to actually SEE Sirius die, and to pull Harry back from the veil. I really need to re-read the scene, but do we get a good picture of what -everyone- is doing? Writing combat is not easy, and perhaps Lupin wasn't focused on because he becomes a focal point later in the battle, when Sirius dies and he holds back Harry. He had to be doing SOMETHING- if he'd been standing against the wall twirling his wand, Harry certainly would have noticed. I'm also wondering if Lupin doesn't touch Harry because he's afraid. I don't think Lupin lets people in easily at all anymore (can you blame him?) and he's very, very afraid of getting close to Harry, especially if he knows about the prophecy. I think he's simply lost too many people, and he's not going to let himself get too close to Harry so that if Harry dies, he won't feel the pain as intensely. I also wonder if he can't look at Harry and (despite his you-know-what self gushing about Lily's eyes) not see James. That's got to be painful. There's also very possibly some sort of law about werewolves and physical contact with underaged wizards? mhbobbin: Why why why can't we figure out what a werewolf who can't hold a job and is in a secret society and who lost all the best friends he ever had is still concealing some major secret? JKR is not going to reveal this, IMO, till the end of Book 7, probably just before she kills him and lets him fall into Harry's arms, saying "Harry, there's just one more thing I must tell you. All along, I was ----". But then, he dies and Harry never finds out. Crazed readers run through the streets, mass riots. JKR writes final 8th book: "Harry Potter and the Crazed Internet Posters" Lissa: This cracked me up, and I think you have a good point. (Personally, my take on Lupin's "secret" is simply that he and Sirius had a relationship that went beyond friendship, but that's just me.) It could be Lupin isn't hiding anything at all- except himself. He's incredibly controlled and closed off, and maybe that's just the result of 12 years of exile? Liss [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kelly at protocallonline.com Thu Aug 12 14:23:56 2004 From: kelly at protocallonline.com (kellymcj2000) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 14:23:56 -0000 Subject: candy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109828 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Josh Warren" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kellymcj2000" > wrote: > > I think it's a weird little sidetrack for her and I do wonder what > > we're supposed to make of it. Maybe I'm just too suspicious and > > looking for things that aren't even there. > > I'm going to throw a big 10-4 there. :) Dumbledore is always going > off on little tracks of seeming senility. Hooch's earmuffs, > lemondrops, candy passwords, socks, Oddment! Tweak!, the joy of a > room full of chamberpots, etc. :) Except for the last foreshowing the > RoR, I don't think any of this says anything about Dumbledore other > than his love for the common everyday. > > While we all have responsibilities in life, and in the books, DD has > more than most, it is important to enjoy the little things in life. > However, it would be nice for DD to explain that once before the > series wraps up. > > Josh Well, while acknowledging that it may well mean nothing, to which you have just agreed, let me throw in this one last thought. I'd actually not been referring to Dumbledore specifically but rather to the candy throughout the series. It starts right away in the first book even before Harry knows he's a wizard and just keeps going and going. Sweets on the train, everyone sends piles of candy when he's in the infirmary, Honeydukes, descriptions of candy and sweets throughout all the books. And then, the gum wrappers Alice L. gives Neville. That's another, maybe the biggest thing, that made me start thinking about candy as some sort of, well something. And of course Fred and George are continually disguising magic within candy or some sort of sweet. My first guess is candy as some sort of link to non-magical things or as some sort of communication tool. I hadn't really considered Dumbledore and sweets specifically. Well, that's all. And maybe it's nothing. :) kmcj From snow15145 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 14:25:28 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 14:25:28 -0000 Subject: Curse Scars In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109829 Snow: The quote in question is in GOF The Parting of the Ways U.S edition: "You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've never heard of a curse scar acting as an alarm bell before..."<<< DuffyPoo replyed: Snow, does your book really say "but I've *never* heard of a curse scar?" Both of mine, Canadian HB and PB published in 2000 say "You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've [I have] heard of a curse scar acting as an alarm bell before." I was trying to figure out when Fudge had heard it before - I knew DD had told him just then. If there is a correction is a subsequent publication to what I have then it all makes sense. Aggie replying to DuffyPoo: My UK version (p613 published 2000) says the same as DuffyPoo's. As it stands though it doesn't make sense (although I'm sure the English bods on here will elaborate on that!). I have to admit I *read* it as having the 'never' in there, it's the only way my little brain can make sense of what Fudge is saying!! Snow: The word *never* in the quote above does appear in the U.S. edition. I just received the UK's latest version of the books for my birthday and they also exclude the word never. I can't see how the sentence makes sense without the word never given the text between Dumbledore and Fudge at that point. Is the publisher the same for both the UK and Canadian editions? From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 14:42:03 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 14:42:03 -0000 Subject: Is Lupin James? (related to James' Choice as well) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109830 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "inkling108" wrote: > >Liss wrote: > > The other thing that comes to mind concerning the Lupin/James > switch is that Lupin had no clue that Peter was the Secret Keeper. Unless Lupin and James made the switch before Sirius suggested making Peter Secret Keeper (which WAS a last minute thing), shouldn't he know? > Inkling now: > >snip> > I think there is also pretty compelling psychological evidence > against it -- the way Lupin talks about his childhood as a werewolf, and how much it meant to him to finally be accepted by the other marauders. Even the tone of self disgust he adopts when he explains why he didn't tell Dumbledore Sirius was an animagus. "It would have meant admitting that I'd betrayed his trust while I was at school...and Dumbledore's trust has meant everything to me. > He let me into Hogwarts as a boy...." > > These are the memories and emotions of Lupin, not James. > > (By the way I too think he has a secret, but this isn't it.) > mhbobbin: I think there's general consensus by posters that the Switching Theory has holes big enough to drive a truck through, and it is highly unlikely that James is Lupin. But thinking about this brings me back to when James decided to make Sirius his Secret Keeper. When James switched to Pettigrew, they did not tell Remus. There's the discussion in the Shrieking Shack, Ch 19, PoA, when Sirius admits he thought Lupin was the Spy. Lupin, in turn, thought Sirius was the Spy. We cannot know for sure who James thought was a spy, however, he subsequently chose Sirius to be his Secret Keeper, and when he then decided on Pettigrew, did not tell Lupin. That is a suggestion of James' thoughts. Why was Lupin not told? That's why I don't accept that James originally chose Sirius simply because he was the bestest friend, like a brother. James had been warned by DD that there was a spy close to him. James declined to make DD the Secret Keeper. It's hard to imagine that James dismissed DD's warning of a Spy so close to him, isn't it? With the lives of Lily and Baby Harry at stake. James is often accused of arrogance by Snape. Yet possibly, here is the ultimate example of arrogance by James--turning down DD's offer, believing he knew how to get around a rat so close to him. (since no one other than his three school friends has yet been presented as close to James, I believe that the choice was between the three friends and not some one not yet met.) How foolish was it of James to decline DD's offer to be SK? Very foolish as it turned out. So was James just blinded by his confidence in own ability to discern the motives of others or did something else happen here? So this is the dilemma. In my view, either: A. James, being arrogant or over-confident, thought he knew who the Spy was. (I don't believe that James dismissed the warning of a Spy by DD but that's a possibility as well) Since he subsequently made arrangements with Sirius and Pettigrew but NOT Lupin, the question is did he have reason to suspect Lupin? Lupin is always presented as giving good advice, being sensitive to the feelings of others, remaining calm when the discussion isn't --there's nothing about Lupin that would make him stand out as untrustworthy. The reckless characteristics of Sirius would more likely give one pause. IF James had a reason to suspect Lupin, THAT might be related to the secret that many of us believe Lupin is hiding. (other than ESE Lupin theories or that Lupin is a wild werewolf wanting to rip people apart every month. To say that James chose Sirius just because he was closer to him, and nothing personal to Lupin, is-- IMO--to say that James didn't take DD's warning seriously. OR B. James hedged his bets somehow. He made the SK arrangement with Sirius but neutralized Lupin with a separate arrangement with him, thus James thought he had neutralized both Lupin and Sirius, but then at Sirius last minute advice, became vulnerable to the true rat. The Switching Theory accomplishes this but for all the reasons discussed in this thread, raises other questions. And maybe that other arrangement is the Secret that Lupin is hiding. In addition, we don't know where Lupin was in the year of GOF--which makes no sense to me--or what his mission is for the Order. Lupin stays at Grimauld Place but disappears for long periods--and it doesn't seem to be related to his werewolf problem. Whatever the secret, I believe that Lupin is so intent on keeping it secret still, that he won't even shake Harry's hand (twice in OotP he shakes everyone else's hand but not Harry's) perhaps fearful that LV would find out about it. WE're told over and over that Harry is distressed by DD not making eye contact. But we learn why that makes sense and may be a diversion from the whole Lupin / Harry thing. Keep in Touch. mhbobbin From grapfnt at netscape.net Thu Aug 12 14:18:29 2004 From: grapfnt at netscape.net (mindy bindy) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 15:18:29 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Timing of Lupin (long) References: <1091728661.29177.78353.m24@yahoogroups.com> <003c01c47b3e$349b5380$a3d086d9@oemcomputer> Message-ID: <411B7C35.8090002@netscape.net> No: HPFGUIDX 109831 I've read both the great theories on this thread and the "Whomping Willow" thread and the thing that struck me most was that people (especially Dumbledore) have gone to a lot of trouble for Lupin, and it's somehow hard to see why. In a truly pragmatic sense, he hasn't so far been worth that much risk. Firstly, DD as a newish headmaster plants ot transplants a magical tree, sets up a tunnel and builds or enchants a shack in order to contain one pupil. We hear nothign of other werewolf children this set-up was used for. (It also struck me that Lupin was originally bitten by a person, and it could be interesting to find out who that was). Lupin in turn is a good student and becomes a prefect, although he does make some unsuitable friends and chooses not to tell DD that they're unlicensed Animagi. Then, at a time when it would be most useful, DD hires him as a teacher, despite having the same dangerous affliction. He does not need the shack now, as Snape (his old school-friends' enemy) makes a potion to keep him safe. Another point - exactly how long has this revolutionary potion been on the market? Lupin, it needs noting, teaches Harry an advanced protective charm. He fails DD again by forgetting to take it (on an understandably stressful night) and roams the forest, risking the lives of children (who could not only be eaten but be infected). He then resigns, and disappears for a year. However, DD seems to know that he's still "active" or likely to rejoin the Order - since he told Sirius to find him and hide at his *cough*ship*cough* house. That makes me wonder if DD and Lupin had been in contact over the GOF year. Since then, he hasn't done anything of importance except stop Harry from running through the archway. The thing is (again) there's been a *lot* of effort made to train and help this person/creature, and not much repayment. I don't believe the ESE! theory (because I'm physically incapable) but all I see now is a link to DD. I'd rather build something along the lines of "DD was a werewolf but grew out of it" or "there's a big Lupin prophecy lying around somewhere". From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 12 14:57:39 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 14:57:39 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: <103.4ccb31c3.2e4c6846@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109832 hubbarrk at r... writes: > > OK, I'll give you that there isn't any canon that specifically > > supports my theory, but circumstantial evidence is there. No one > > can remove the orb except Harry (and LV, but he couldn't just > > waltz into the MoM and grab it, now could he?). Lucius didn't > > want it UNTIL Harry grabbed it, and I think he even says > > something like "You were the only one who could touch it" or > > something like that. And on being relabeled, etc... Melissa: > As I recall (don't have OOTP handy at the moment) Harry learned > after the fact that if anyone but the person(s) who was/were named > on it touched it they would go insane. That could easily include > any record keeper. > > I tend to think that the original prophecy was labeled only with > the date it was made, the name of the person who made it and the > person who heard it (easier to find that way) and then "officially" > named once the participants were clear. SSSusan: Hi, Melissa. So, in your view, is the magic that makes the wrong lifter-upper go insane *inherent* in the prophecy orb itself somehow, or is it placed there by the Ministry employee in such a way that he determines who may or may not touch it safely? THIS seems to be the crux of the issue--whether there's something magical about the orb itself that automatically "knows" who can pick it up, or whether that information is simply assigned by the witch or wizard in charge. Clearly, it's just the picking up which is problematic, and not the touching it afterwards. I wonder why that is? Oh--well, duh. I guess the idea is that if the orb is protected enough so that only a subject of the prophecy can get it in his/her hand, then whatever THAT person decides to do with it subsequently is considered his/her right? Siriusly Snapey Susan From ExSlytherin at aol.com Thu Aug 12 15:07:32 2004 From: ExSlytherin at aol.com (Mandy) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 15:07:32 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109833 > Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: > Really, all I was trying to get at with my previous question was > this: When the DoM person labelled it "Dark Lord and (?)", I > wondered if all *three* could have taken it from the shelf [not that they would have at age 15 months, but just hypothetically], and then once it was relabeled w/ Harry's name, would Neville still have > been able to remove it, or just Harry & Voldy? > Mandy here: If the idea is only the persons whos names are written on the Orb can physically touch the orb without harm, (as opposed to who the is about prophecy about), then for the time that the orb was labeled The Dark Lord and ?, the question mark could refer to anyone at all. Any one at all could, in fact, be able to handle the orb successfully. Once the name Harry Potter was added, instead of the ?, then it came down to HP and LV as the only one able to touch the orb. From cmjohnstone at hotmail.com Thu Aug 12 15:27:48 2004 From: cmjohnstone at hotmail.com (littleleahstill) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 15:27:48 -0000 Subject: You CAN'T hurt a BABY Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109834 SSSusan wrote: >YES, this stuck out to me, too. I actually stopped when I got to >it, looked up and said, "WHAT??" To me, it ranks right up there >with the line in that-medium-which-is-not-to-be-named, "Is that >REALLY how my hair looks from the back?" Neither seems very >Hermione-like. No, this line didn't strike me as *meaning* anything >significant; just that it was so out of character--so much less >intellectual than what she usually says. I didn't actually find it particularly out of character for Hermione. It seemed part and parcel of her defence of what she perceives to be the defenceless- Neville, the House elves. She doesn't stop to work out whether there are any rational arguments against freeing the elves; probably rightly,(there were a lot of rational arguments for not abolishing slavery) she goes with her gut instinct, and she is doing the same here. It must be partly this quality which makes her a Gryffindor and not a Ravenclaw. But the sentence struck me too and I am sure will resonate later. Leah From Meliss9900 at aol.com Thu Aug 12 16:10:45 2004 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 12:10:45 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ron's Patronus (Warning Ron=DD) Message-ID: <8c.12131841.2e4cf085@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109835 In a message dated 08/07/2004 14.19 Central Daylight Time, vmonte at yahoo.com writes: > You are not making something out of nothing. There is a reason why > JKR left this bit out. JKR once said that she could not tell a fan > what Snape's patronus was because it would give too much away. I bet > Ron's patronus would also... > Remember she also didn't tell us how Hermione fared when Fake!Moody was Imperio-ing the kids but she described Ron's aftereffects (still skipping every third step). I just have a hard time picturing DD (even as a child) as ever being susceptible to the Imperius curse even as a child. Melissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 12 16:16:57 2004 From: pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net (pcaehill2) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 16:16:57 -0000 Subject: Prophecy Interpretations (Re: BIGGEST SPOILER) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109836 Pam wrote: [snip] > > A basic flaw in the "peter-is-the-one-in-the-prophecy" > > argument seems to me to be the "he will mark him as > > his equal" part: the "dark mark" does *not* mark any > > DE as LV's equal. Whereas, it is extremely evident > > (to me at least) that Harry's scar *is* a mark > > that is related to a transfer of power from LV to Harry. kmcj replied: [snip] > What I was trying to convey is that I think Peter will > have a significant part to play in the battle between > H and V. I think the phrase 'by the hand of the other' > in the prophecy is quite striking and is one of JKR's > famous double meaning tricks. I think we'll see Peter > being told to attack Harry in some manner but he'll be > compromised in doing so because of his life debt. [snip again] > Whew. Hope I explained well. Pam agrees! You explained quite well; I truly believe that Peter's hand will play some role in the final battle. I also think that Wormtail's betrayal of the Potters will come back to haunt him--it would have been interesting to see his reaction to the 'ghostly' Potters when they emerged from the priori incantatem effect (probably scared him...wandless). I'm afraid I made the real error in miscommunication here: I was referring to (without referencing) arianna's previous post in this thread, in which she stated: [snip from arianna] > And the dark lord will mark him as his equal: > Harry has the scar > Peter has the dark mark [snip] Pam again: --I really don't think the dark mark = scar in profundity. kmcj continued: > Can't expect you to read a thesis here now can I? Pam: Expecto thesaurem? Go for it. From snow15145 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 16:27:18 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 16:27:18 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109837 What is the connection between Dumbledore, Fawkes and Harry, there is defiantly a connection but what is it? (1)Harry's very first glimpse of the Phoenix, Fawkes, is in COS The Polyjuice Potion: "It's a shame you had to see him on a Burning Day," said Dumbledore, seating himself behind his desk. "He's really very handsome most of the time, wonderful red and gold plumage. Facinating creatures, phoenixes. They can carry immensely heavy loads, their tears have healing powers, and they make highly faithful pets." (Interesting to note that the word faithful in the last sentence is in italics.) (2)Harry had help from the phoenix in COS directly related to Dumbledore: "First of all, Harry, I want to thank you," said Dumbledore, eyes twinkling again. "You must have shown me real loyalty down in the Chamber. Nothing but that could have called Fawkes to you."...COS Dobby's Reward (3)Harry heard the phoenix song but had no physical help in GOF: And then an unearthly and beautiful sound filled the air it was coming from every thread of the light-spun web vibrating around Harry and Voldemort. It was a sound Harry recognized, though he had heard it only once before in his life: phoenix song. It was the sound of hope to Harry 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 GOF Priori Incantatem (4)Harry heard Dumbledore at his hearing in OOP and felt the same way he did when he heard the phoenix song: A powerful emotion had risen in Harry's chest at the sight of Dumbledore, a fortified, hopeful feeling rather like that which Phoenix song gave him...OOP The Hearing The statements above as to Harry hearing and feeling the presence of the Phoenix appear to evolve in each book they appear in: COS- Dumbledore tells Harry that Phoenixes are very faithful COS- Harry must have shown great loyalty (or faithfulness) to Dumbledore to bring Fawkes to him The first time Harry actually sees and hears the Phoenix Dumbledore is the one who makes the connection, for him, that only great loyalty to him could have summoned the Phoenix GOF- Harry heard the sound of the Phoenix that he had heard in the Chamber the sound he connected with Dumbledore The second time Harry hears and feels the Phoenix which he himself connects with Dumbledore OOP- This time the sight of Dumbledore induces the feeling that the Phoenix song gives him It is this last time that Harry feels the Phoenix emotion, which is a 180-degree turn about, that is so revealing. It is no longer the Phoenix which gives Harry comfort but Dumbledore's presence. The connection starts with Harry's loyalty to Dumbledore, which calls the Phoenix and ends with the connection of Harry feeling the Phoenix at the sight of Dumbledore. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Some Questions The Order of the Phoenix is a Secret Order, why does the name of the group appear to be in tribute to the Phoenix, like a collective unity belonging to the (faithful)Phoenix? Very, very important question: Are and were all the members of the Order of the Phoenix once in Gryffindor house (loyalty to Dumbledore)? This one could be interesting given Snape is part of the Order. So what is the connection between Dumbledore, Fawkes and Harry? Snow From grapfnt at netscape.net Thu Aug 12 15:15:58 2004 From: grapfnt at netscape.net (mindy bindy) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 16:15:58 +0100 Subject: Is Lupin James? (related to James' Choice as well) References: Message-ID: <411B89AE.8000200@netscape.net> No: HPFGUIDX 109838 mhbobbin at yahoo.com wrote: >>(By the way I too think he has a secret, but this isn't it.) > ... And maybe that other arrangement is the Secret that Lupin is > hiding. In addition, we don't know where Lupin was in the year of > GOF--which makes no sense to me--or what his mission is for the > Order. Lupin stays at Grimmauld Place but disappears for long > periods--and it doesn't seem to be related to his werewolf problem. > > Whatever the secret, I believe that Lupin is so intent on keeping it > secret still, that he won't even shake Harry's hand (twice in OotP > he shakes everyone else's hand but not Harry's) perhaps fearful that > LV would find out about it. We're told over and over that Harry is > distressed by DD not making eye contact. But we learn why that makes > sense and may be a diversion from the whole Lupin / Harry thing. > Keep in Touch. heather: Your post crossed with mine, but I agree - there's something fishy about the wolf. I said elsewhere that he has a link to DD, but here - it's not just he disappeared from the story, but that it is deliberately left blank where he went. It only takes one sentence "He's negotiating with goblins" to clear up missing characters, but instead we get deliberate vagueness. I think he's the new Neville - before OOP, people were remarking that Neville had way too many dangling mysteries to be just left a supporting character, and they were proved right. From pentzouli at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 15:38:32 2004 From: pentzouli at yahoo.com (pentzouli) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 15:38:32 -0000 Subject: you CAN'T hurt a BABY!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109839 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "theredshoes86" wrote: > In the 5th book, when Harry and the gang are running from Voldemort's Death Eaters in the Ministry of Magic, there comes a point when Harry wants to curse the man whose head turned into a baby's head and Hermione stops Harry. She says, "you can't hurt a baby" and then something like 'there was no time to argue the suggestion' follows. > > Has this particular part stuck out to anyone else??? > Could, perhaps, Harry being a baby at the time when Voldemort tried to kill him have anything to do with Voldemort's powers being destroyed??? I mean, why else would Hermione say that? the guy was a Death Eater, she wouldn't have minded hurting him. And there are no other accounts of babies being hurt in any of the books .... ANY THOUGHTS?????? Hello! I would like to share my thoughts on that one: First of all, let's keep in mind two or three things : -For one, Hermione is the "brains" in that Trio. -Second, they are in a middle of a very quick fight, and they don't have time to lose, either, as their ultimate goal is to find Sirius. So, my immediate thought was that this particular phrase had one and only purpose : to prevent Harry from both losing time and stamina by casting spells here and there. Why is that? you would ask me... Well, the Deatheater's head that was struck by this curse or something, was taking the shape AND the mentality of a baby. It is as if Hermione was trying to say to Harry : "You can't hurt a baby, and surely the baby can't hurt you, so let's go and not waste any more time here. If his head is a baby's, he can't possibly do us any harm either, as he can hardly speak enough to cast a spell. So leave him and let's go, while he still has a baby's head!" But since they had so limited time in their heads, this phrase would be squeezed in so little words... What do you think? pentzouli From terpnurse at qwest.net Thu Aug 12 16:12:54 2004 From: terpnurse at qwest.net (Steven Spencer) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 09:12:54 -0700 Subject: candy In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <77BDDEE8-EC7A-11D8-B420-0003930C168E@qwest.net> No: HPFGUIDX 109840 kellymcj2000 wrote: > And then, the gum wrappers Alice L. gives Neville. That's another, > maybe the biggest thing, that made me start thinking about candy as > some sort of, well something. And of course Fred and George are > continually disguising magic within candy or some sort of sweet. > > My first guess is candy as some sort of link to non-magical things or > as some sort of communication tool. I hadn't really considered > Dumbledore and sweets specifically. I was actually thinking along the same lines myself. That candy could be communication tool. One way being the Chocolate Frog cards, with the pictures moving from one to another of the same person. But further, I think there might be communications within the gum wrappers. Many muggle brands of buble gum (as opposed to chewing gum) contain little riddles or jokes printed on them. Do we have any reason to believe that the same may not be true for Droobles Best Blowing Gum wrappers? We know the French resistance cells during WWII relied heavily on coded messages and ingenious ways of communicating those messages. Could the gum wrappers be analogous to some of their methods? Along with that too, I think other ways and means of communique will crop up as the war progresses. The WWN will surely come into play, and we know more now about how wizarding print media operates and how a well placed article can so dramatically turn the tide. Terpnurse From neisha_saxena at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 16:33:13 2004 From: neisha_saxena at yahoo.com (Neisha Saxena) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 09:33:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: You CAN'T hurt a baby! In-Reply-To: <1092276243.15845.76626.m6@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20040812163313.72107.qmail@web50905.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109841 I agree with all those who stated that Hermione's comments are significant, both as a reflection of her own character and as a reflection of one of the underlying themes of the book. We see a number of characters close to Dumbledore save or attempt to save small children -- Lily Potter tries to save Harry, Harry saves Fleur Delacour's small sister, Arthur Weasley helps save the small muggle children from the Death Eater torture in GOF, Firenz saves Harry in Sorcerors/Philosophers Stone against the wishes of his fellow centaurs. And, of course, the centaurs specifically state that they do not hurt foals. We also see characters close to Voldemort go after children, for example: Voldemort himself goes after both Harry and Ginny Weasley, Bellatrix LeStrange wants to torture Ginny and does torture Neville, the death eaters torture muggle children for fun at the Quidditch World Cup. How children, unicorns, house elves and others not able to defend themselves are treated is a reflection of one's character, Sirius says so himself in the cave in GOF when Hermione talks about how Barty Crouch treated his house elf. It's also important to keep in mind that JKR has been the mother of small children the entire time she has been working on these books, so the treatment of children is in the forefront of her mind. Has anyone else wondered about the centaur's reading of the stars in Sorceror's/Philosopher's Stone in light of the prophecy revealed in OOTP? IIRC, the centaurs try to dissuade Firenze from saving Harry by saying something like, you know what is coming, we don't interfere with what is written in the stars. They also keep repeating to Hagrid that "Mars is bright tonight," which is exactly what Firenze says in Divination class in OOTP. It seems that when Mars is bright, Voldemort is about to make a move toward the upcoming war. Later in S/P S, once he is safely out of the forest, he tells Ron and Hermione what Firenz told him, that Voldemort was killing the unicorns and that the other centaurs said something about the stars. He then jokes the stars have to do with Voldemort killing him. There are some theories that whenever Ron or Harry make a joke about divination, what they joke about comes true. Thoughts? Neisha Saxena From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 12 16:37:51 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 12:37:51 -0400 Subject: Curse Scars Message-ID: <000f01c4808a$b6342790$73fae2d1@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109842 Snow: The quote in question is in GOF The Parting of the Ways U.S edition: "You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've never heard of a curse scar acting as an alarm bell before..."<<< DuffyPoo replyed: "Snow, does your book really say "but I've *never* heard of a curse scar?" Both of mine, Canadian HB and PB published in 2000 say "You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've [I have] heard of a curse scar acting as an alarm bell before." I was trying to figure out when Fudge had heard it before - I knew DD had told him just then. If there is a correction is a subsequent publication to what I have then it all makes sense." Aggie replying to DuffyPoo: >>My UK version (p613 published 2000) says the same as DuffyPoo's. As it stands though it doesn't make sense (although I'm sure the English bods on here will elaborate on that!). I have to admit I *read* it as having the 'never' in there, it's the only way my little brain can make sense of what Fudge is saying!!<< Snow: "The word *never* in the quote above does appear in the U.S. edition. I just received the UK's latest version of the books for my birthday and they also exclude the word never. I can't see how the sentence makes sense without the word never given the text between Dumbledore and Fudge at that point. Is the publisher the same for both the UK and Canadian editions?" DuffyPoo again: It does't make sense without the *never* that was the reason for my question. Without the *never* it appears Fudge has heard of a curse scar before and I wondered where either DD had mentioned it to Fudge, or if Fudge was referring to something else (DD's scar of the London Underground, perhaps) that we don't know about yet. However, if *never* is the the U.S. edition, I guess that is what the sentence is supposed to mean...which does make sense. I'll check the next time I'm in a bookstore for a newer edition than I have and see if it is changed. (I can't even begin to explain how annoying all these inconsistencies between editions is to me.) FYI, the Canadian books are published by Raincoast Books in Vancouver and the British by Bloomsbury Publishing in London. I don't know if Raincoast is the Canadian subsidiary of Bloomsbury or what, I've just always been led to believe that the UK and Canadian editions are exactly the same. The OotP paperback I bought Tuesday has the 'Prefects can't dock house points from other Prefects' change that was noted by someone in the UK a few weeks ago. Thanks, Snow and Aggie, for your help. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ejblack at rogers.com Thu Aug 12 03:19:49 2004 From: ejblack at rogers.com (jcb54me) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 03:19:49 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ Children's Books? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109843 Steve/asian_lovr2: > JKRowling did not write these as children's books. She wrote the >story for herself, and wrote it the way it came to her. She never >took her original vision and in any way adapted it for children. (snip) >It was the Publishing company's marketing department who decided >the books could best be marketed to children. Absolutely! Consider Lord of the Rings. It begins with what might be considered a children's tale (The Hobbit) and then develops into a major mythic saga. But, because Hobbit came first, LOTR was at first considered a children's or at most a teenage set of books by the publishers. Jeanette From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 12 16:46:07 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 12:46:07 -0400 Subject: Calendars was Re: biggest SPOILER Message-ID: <001c01c4808b$dd9c8b50$73fae2d1@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109844 Yb: >>GAAAAHHHH! Where does everyone get that? Someone PLEASE tell me where Sept. 1 is always a Sunday!<< HunterGreen: "The train always leaves for Hogwarts on September first, the next day is always Monday, the first day of school. Therefore, September first is always a Sunday (I've always taken it as artistic license, combined with the fact that (IMO) she's not writing each story under a certain year, so making September 2nd always a Monday is easier than keeping the date vague)." DuffyPoo: Except for GoF where both Sept 1 and Sept 2 are Mondays. "'It's been absolute uproar,' Percy told them importantly, the Sunday evening before they were due to return to Hogwarts." -the next day, Sept 1 then, they get the train to Hogwarts and learn about the Triwizard Tournament at the feast, then: "The storm had blown itself out by the following morning....Harry, Ron and Hermione examined their new timetables at breakfast....'Today's not bad .. outside all morning, ' said Ron, who was running his finger down the Monday column of his timetable." I read GoF at least a dozen times before I had this pointed out to me, I just don't pay that much attention to what day of the week it is. I don't like Mondays myself; I wouldn't want two in the same week, never mind following each other. ;-) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Thu Aug 12 16:54:22 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 16:54:22 -0000 Subject: Can Fawkes apperate on school grounds? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109845 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nearlyheadlessryan" wrote: > I was just reading OOP for the fifth time and it all of a sudden hit > me... Several times in the 5 books we are reminded that no one can > either apparate or disapparate on/in school grounds. (Not only from > Hermione several times but from other students and teachers as well) > In OOP, Fawkes disappears to go and do jobs for Dumbledore, and then > when Fudge tries to take Dumbledore out of the school, (after > Dumbledore takes responsibility for the D.A. club) the book tells us > the Dumbledore took ahold of Fawkes' tail and they were > gone/disappeared. Do the rules not apply to animals? Because, what > Fawkes did sure sounds alot like Disapparating to me. At least now, > we have solved how Dumbledore gets around to places so quickly. > Please let me know your theories. Thanks, > -nearlyheadlessRyan Yb thinks, or tries to anyway, in her current state of mind: That "apparating/disapparating" rule is reinforced by "Hogwart's, a History," which Hermione has probably read several times over. I think a key we may be missing is that HaH was written by humans (wizards) for humans. The WW in general seems to neglect the magical capabilities of other magical creatures, even house-elves, who are more powerful than some wizards. Naturally, the authors would neglect house-elf magic, since they aren't "human." Regarding Fawkes, the authors of HaH probably didn't know a phoenix could disappear or appear on the grounds. The only way to find out is to have a phoenix try to apparate/disapparate, ande I doubt the authors had one which would offer its services. ~Yb From pentzouli at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 16:46:39 2004 From: pentzouli at yahoo.com (pentzouli) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 16:46:39 -0000 Subject: House Elves, Hermione And Freedom Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109846 Hello all... I could say I am new to the list, since I have posted before, but since then it has been a very, very long time, not to mention under a different username... Any way, I have a few questions about the whole freedom-house elves- Hermione's war thing. First of all, I wonder if there is some separation between good house-elves and bad house-elves. I mean, Winky's behaviour is not at all similar to that of Dobby's, as described in GoF, and even though she had recognized that her master was a "bad boy", she wanted to remain loyal. I cannot start about Kreacher, he seems evil to the bone, and not because Sirius is not nice to him, he rather grabs every opportunity he can to mumble behind everyone's back, I assume because he served Sirius's family for so long. On the other hand, Dobby tries to protect Harry, even though his master is one of Harry's biggest enemies. So, we have three house-elves that come from a very dark background: Dobby : his master is the Malfoy family, and he appreciates his freedom by helping Harry in numerous occasions. Winky : her master is not just Barty Crouch Sr, as we first learn, but the devoted servant of Voldemort, Barty Crouch Jr. This makes an evil enough background to me. Kreacher : his master is the Black family, and he surely shows his devotion to the "dark" part of this family. Conclusion : all the three house-elves we are introduced to come from "dark" wizards' families, even though their intentions are not always evil. The main thing is that they certainly cannot be trusted. Where are the good house-elves? So, why Hermione is so willing to set them free, when it is clear that they will not only depreciate the gift of freedom,(at least most of them will), but are capable of magic not easily tamed by wizards? For my part, I don't think that these trivia that we know of produce sufficient evidence to back up Hermione's willingness to free them. Even Hagrid, who loves all creatures, even the most fearful ones, does not agree with Hermione. Could it be that in the next two books, our heroine makes a terrible mistake by fulfilling her goal? You see, I think that although her intentions are those of a pacifist, and this opens a very big aspect of her personality for all of us to see, the fight begins after the house-elves are free : the fight to make them appreciate and help the right side in this war, and prevent them from using their powerful magic against the wizards who took them for granted while they were in their service. Feel free to share your thoughts, I would really like to discuss this! pentzouli From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Thu Aug 12 17:33:50 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 17:33:50 -0000 Subject: Longbottom's Torture to Insanity (Re: candy) In-Reply-To: <77BDDEE8-EC7A-11D8-B420-0003930C168E@qwest.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109847 >>> Terpnurse wrote: We know the French resistance cells during WWII relied heavily on coded messages and ingenious ways of communicating those messages. Could the gum wrappers be analogous to some of their methods? Along with that too, I think other ways and means of communique will crop up as the war progresses. The WWN will surely come into play, and we know more now about how wizarding print media operates and how a well placed article can so dramatically turn the tide. <<< Brenda now: Uhoh, are you saying what I *think* you are saying? Possibly ESE! Dumbledore? O_o Let me follow your logic: So if the droobles bubble gum wrapper *did* contain coded messages or provide some sort of communication method, Alice Longbottom could not have been *absolutley* insane and without mind? Assuming it was out of her own motivation to pass it along to Neville, I doubt any clinically-insane permanently-lost-their-mind patients will be able to do that, not consciously anyway. This possibilty suggests a few implication, such as: 1) Alice is in fact slowly recovering; 2) Alice recognizes Neville as her son; 3) Alice was tortured to insanity, but now recovered, but playing along to keep whatever her secrets are; 4) Alice was never insane, but in order to protect herself and her intel she faked insanity. Of course, one must ask, WHY on earth the Longbottoms were tortured to insanity in the first place. Voldemort has disappeared a year prior to that, what made Bellatrix & co believe that they knew his whereabouts, out of everyone in the Order? I know I am not the only one thinking that it was just a cover-up excuse. If it is the case of 3) or 4) from above, I think it has Ever-So-Evil! Dumbledore written all over the place. Great, Kneasy will be pleased... If D-Dore indeed felt the need to orchestrate this cover-up, it makes me wonder just whatever intel was that they had. Must be of utmost importance. I wonder, if DD did play a role in Longbottoms' supposed insanity and the truth comes out, how Neville will take this... Will he feel much rage to actually hurt Dumbledore? Hmm, something to think about... Brenda From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Thu Aug 12 17:43:03 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 17:43:03 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109848 >>> Snow wrote: The Order of the Phoenix is a Secret Order, why does the name of the group appear to be in tribute to the Phoenix, like a collective unity belonging to the (faithful)Phoenix? Very, very important question: Are and were all the members of the Order of the Phoenix once in Gryffindor house (loyalty to Dumbledore)? This one could be interesting given Snape is part of the Order. So what is the connection between Dumbledore, Fawkes and Harry? --------------------------------------------------------------------- Brenda: Apologies for bringing up the obvious point... but there is the Fawkes' tail in Harry's wand core... The thing is, same thing goes for Voldemort too, he shares the same core as well. So if you extend it far enough, you could say there is a connection between: Dumbledore, Harry, Voldemort, Salazar, and of course the Fawkes itself. Phoenix is supposed to be the symbol of immotality, correct? So who knows Fawkes had belonged to originally. ::cough::GodricGryffindor::cough:: I think this ties in nicely with the "Dumbledore is the Heir of Gryffindor" theory. Brenda From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 17:49:36 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 17:49:36 -0000 Subject: Phrophecy Orbs - Summary In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109849 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bex" wrote: > vmonte commented: > > > > I agree. Besides, according to canon only Harry and Neville > > touched the orb. > Yb: > Yes, but once Harry took it off the shelf, no one really minded > trying ton take it off his hands (Both Lucy and Trixie tried). Who > touched it after Harry grabbed it (*I think*) is not important. > > ~Yb Asian_lovr2: I'm going to try and make a condensed statement of the possibilities; however, I admit, condensed statements are not my strong suit. The Nature of the Orb's Protections- We must decide if- 1.) The nature of the Prophecy Orb's protection is inherent in the Orb itself. In a sense, we must ponder whether the Orb has a form of magical intelligence that allows it to self-protect, and more over, adapt to changing conditions. For example, when it was determined that Harry was 'the one', the Orb self-adjusted to allow him to touch it. 2.) The Orb itself is neutral, and it protective nature is subject to the application of outside magic. Example; when it was determined that Harry was 'the one'; the Keeper of Prophecies went down to the vault and altered the enchantments on the Orb to allow Harry to touch it. Points to Ponder- 1.) Once the Orb is off the shelf, it seems that anyone can touch it. Lucius and 'Trixie' didn't have any reservation about touching it once Harry removed it from the shelf. If the Orb is magically intelligent and self-protecting, why does the protection stop as soon as it is removed from the shelf? 2.) What is the purpose of the Orbs and the Hall of Prophecies? Is it simply a storage facility, or are the Prophecies kept there so the Dept of Mysteries can study them? Do they keep track of the accuracy rate of various Prophets like Trelawny? Since many Prophecies are mulit-part prophecies, are the researchers tracking and cataloging the various stages for accuracy? If they are being studied, does that imply that the researchers must handle them in their course of study? Note: they may study them by observing them on the shelf. I personally assume they handle them, but that may not really be necessary. 3.) Is Harry being closely monitored at Privet Drive as an extension of the research being done in the Hall of Prophecies? Are all people whose fate has been prophesied being monitored to determine the accuracy of their particular prophecy? Or, is Harry being monitored simply because he is tied to Voldemort and the DE's, and they, The Ministry, are concerned about his safety? Or, is Harry being monitored related to his Prophecy, but not as a direct result of action on the part of the Hall of Prophecies, instead by, for example, Magical Law Enforcement out of concern for his safety, a concerned based in the Prophecy and Harry's connection to 'The Dark Lord', but not directly tied to the Dept of Mysteries? My Opinion- Since the protection seems to end once it the Prophecy is removed from the shelf, I am inclined to think the protection is external to the Orb itself. The Orb is neutral, and it's protections are applied to it by the Keeper of the Hall of Prophecies, and modified by him as circumstances dictate. Since modification and control of prophecy orbs would be a very specific, specialized, isolated, and obscure branch of magic, I think very few wizards would know how to counteract the charms and enchantments placed by the Keeper of Orbs. Also, in a sense, the Orbs could be 'password protected'. You may be able to discover the charms and spells necessary to alter the Orb, but without the 'password' or 'by-pass' key, you would not be able to alter them without suffering the same consequences as trying to remove them. That's a lot of speculation on my part, but I personally can't see why, if the Orb was self-protecting, it's self-protection would stop once it was removed from the shelf. And, I have to assume that the Hall of Prophecies is more than a warehouse; it must exist as a reseach facility, and that implies that the wizard who work there are researching, tracking, and therefore handling the prophecies to some degree. For what it's worth... Steve/Asian_lovr2 From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 18:13:10 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 18:13:10 -0000 Subject: Why Was Hagrid Left Out of the Order? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109850 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Maggie" wrote: > > mhbobbin: > > I think he is in the Order. His mission was to go to see the Giants > > and that takes him out of the story for half the book. And he would > > attack notice --more than the usual oddly dressed folks--walking > > into the neighborhood at Grimauld Place. He might not even fit in > > the rooms there. And I doubt, for the same reason, that he'd be > > standing watch at the MoM. They'd need 12 invisibility cloaks for > > him. > > > > mhbobbin > MAE: > > I agree. Plus, once he returned from the Giant trip he needed to be > at Hogwarts to teach and care for the animals. Once he was attacked, > well, everything happened that night. In fact, the job he was doing > for the order, was to go to the Giants. I guess in the book it says > he's doing it for DD, but I think that might imply the order. > > MAE Asian_lovr2: We have already established that Hagrid was in the photograph of the Order during the first war against Voldemort, and we have also established that he is and has carried out specific missions for Dumbledore during the present conflit. I see the only logical conclusion is that Hagrid is indeed a member in good and long standing of the Order of the Phoenix. However, I would like to add a more general comment about who is on which side. There seems to be a misconception that you are either a Death Eater or you are against Voldemort, and the same applies to the Order of the Phoenix, you are either in it, or you are against Dumbledore. By extension, this belief implies that if you are for Voldemort, then you are automatically a Death Eater, and if you are for Dumbledore, you are automatically a member of the Order of the Phoenix. Life is not that simple; I think there are more shades of grey involved. To use an illustration from history, there were far more soldiers in the German army than there were in the SS Troops. That parallels the current wizard world situation nicely; the DE's and the Order members represent an elite force of opposition, and not the rank and file soldiers. There are many more people fighting against Voldemort than just the Order of the Phoenix; Dark Forces Defense League, Magical Law Enforcement, the Auror's office, forces from the International Confederation of Wizards, citizen wizards-foreign and domestic, etc.... The same applies to Voldemort, although more so during his first quest for power, the DE's are his personal guard and elite force of wizards that make up his inner circle. Outside this circle are probably many forms of 'rank and file' supporters that may be part of sympathetic organizations or simply individuals who support the 'pureblood' view. Restated; in the orginal conflict the Dark Lord may have amassed an army of thousands, but that was thousands of soldier, not thousands of Death Eaters. Just a thought. Steve/asian_lovr2 From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Thu Aug 12 18:26:13 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 18:26:13 -0000 Subject: you CAN'T hurt a BABY!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109851 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pentzouli" wrote: > First of all, let's keep in mind two or three things : > ... > -Second, they are in a middle of a very quick fight, and they don't > have time to lose, either, as their ultimate goal is to find Sirius. > So, my immediate thought was that this particular phrase had one and > only purpose : to prevent Harry from both losing time and stamina by > casting spells here and there. Why is that? you would ask me... At this point, it was already well known to the sextet that the Sirius thing was fake. Their goal at this time is to get out alive, and without letting the DEs get the prophesy from them (since they want it so badly). However, a quick stupefy wouldn't hurt anything... most likely. Hermione is typically wordy, so she would have expounded on the why, if there were anything additional. However, yes, her basic problem is that this particular DE was no longer a threat at that time, and thus was helpless. You can't shoot an unarmed man-- same diff. Josh From cruthw at earthlink.net Thu Aug 12 18:28:22 2004 From: cruthw at earthlink.net (caspenzoe) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 18:28:22 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ Children's Books? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109852 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jcb54me" wrote: > Steve/asian_lovr2: > > JKRowling did not write these as children's books. She wrote the > >story for herself, and wrote it the way it came to her. She never > >took her original vision and in any way adapted it for children. > (snip) > >It was the Publishing company's marketing department who decided > >the books could best be marketed to children. > > Absolutely! Consider Lord of the Rings. It begins with what > might be considered a children's tale (The Hobbit) and then develops > into a major mythic saga. But, because Hobbit came first, LOTR was > at first considered a children's or at most a teenage set of books > by the publishers. > > Jeanette I really have to take issue with the whole debate about whether the HP books are written for children/are children's literature or not. I think it's a false issue for the following reasons: 1. Of course JKR wrote them as they came to her - that's what artists do; 2. However, they couldn't, particularly the first one, have been sold to any publisher without a target audience - in this case, children - whether the first book was published word for word as JKR originally wrote it (I seriosuly doubt it) or not; 3. In addidtion, the far greater length of the more recent books, indicates (to me at least) that JKR was given a lot more leeway by her publisher(s) as the books became more and more popular, and, by implication a lot less in the first volumes; in other words, I believe there was likely a lot of editing and cutting at the beginning of the series; 4. Nevertheless, the fact that editing is part of the process all books go through on the way to the publisher doesn't make any literature any less the author's creation; 5. All great art/literature works on more than one level, and sometimes on many levels (adult and child, literal and symbolic, etc.) - one might even say that the more levels a work of art succeeds in, the greater the art; 6. Therefore, while the books may mature somewhat as Harry does, they are and will remain "children's" as well as "adults'" books; in fact, were they to lose their ability to communicate directly to children, their artistic quality would decline substantially - diminishing JKR's accomplishment - something none of us would like to see happen. Therefore, with all due respect to Steve, I think his interpretation of JKR's comments is far too literal. I worry that Steve and some others here - Hans comes to mind (again - with all due respect - I read and enjoy both their posts - lot's of inspiration there!) - perhaps all of us at some point - are in real danger of becoming addled HP fundamentalists. In other words, yes there is genuine artistry behind the books and yes there is liberal symbolism of various kinds - but the notion that these somehow confine JKR to any sort of rigid formula (such as Hermione and Ron must be beheaded) or level is simply absurd, and flies in the face of everything that makes great literature great. My two knuts - just don't think it works that way! Caspen From romulus at hermionegranger.us Thu Aug 12 18:34:36 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 18:34:36 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109853 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "snow15145" wrote: Snow: > So what is the connection between Dumbledore, Fawkes and Harry? RMM: Well, I speculate, since Dumbledore used to teach Transfiguration, that he is an animagus. I also believe that his animagus form is a phoenix. Fawkes the phoenix is with Dumbledore. And Harry's wand has the tail feather of a phoenix. RMM From JLaming263 at hotmail.com Thu Aug 12 18:37:40 2004 From: JLaming263 at hotmail.com (jimlaming) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 18:37:40 -0000 Subject: you CAN'T hurt a BABY!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109854 > SSSusan: > YES, this stuck out to me, too. I actually stopped when I got to > it, looked up and said, "WHAT??" To me, it ranks right up there > with the line in that-medium-which-is-not-to-be-named, "Is that > REALLY how my hair looks from the back?" Neither seems very > Hermione-like. No, this line didn't strike me as *meaning* anything > significant; just that it was so out of character--so much less > intellectual than what she usually says. > Jim laughs: How many girls (women) would really ask about thier hair when they were actually looking at their backside. Sorry for the digression... I just heard (in my head) a different question when I was watching the .... oops, I should't have said that, I shouldn't have saud that. Jim, as he pulls a dragon skin blanket over his head... From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 18:41:20 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 18:41:20 -0000 Subject: Malfoy's words in CoS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109855 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sad1199" wrote: > sad1199 here: > ...Why does Draco shout out "Enemies of the Heir, beware! > You'll be next, Mudbloods."? I was under the impression that the > chamber was put forth as a myth or was a closely guarded secret. Asian_lovr2: The LOCATION of the Chamber wasn't a closely guarded secret, it was flat out unknown. However, the MYTH of the existance of the Chamber was well known in the wizard world and is even written about in 'Hogwarts-A History'. That it existed, and the nature and purpose of it's existance were well known from the Myth and the general history of Mr. Slytherin; it's the exact location that no one had ever been able to discover. > SAd1199: > > How would Draco know that Mudbloods are next? I know later on he > says "- last time the Chamber of Secrets was opened, a Mudblood > died." But, before that he says that his father wouldn't tell him > anything about the Chamber. > ...edited... > > Have a Happy Love Filled Day! sad1199 Asian_lovr2: Again we must make a distinction between the legend, the history, and the location of the Chamber. A careful reading will show that Draco's father did talk to him about the Chamber and it's general philosophy, and commented about when it was previously open, but he left it at very general information, and didn't give Draco any information that would allow him to get involved in the situation. As we can see from Draco's attitude, that was probably a wise move on his father's part. If Draco got involved, that could involved Lucius by association, and I'm sure /that/ was not part of Lucius's master plan. So, Draco's knowledge is a combination of knowing about the legend of the Chamber, the general history and philosophy of Slythering, and a brief and somewhat limited conversation with this father. Just at thought. Steve/asian_lovr2 From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk Thu Aug 12 18:45:27 2004 From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 18:45:27 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin (long) In-Reply-To: <411B7C35.8090002@netscape.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109856 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, mindy bindy wrote: > I've read both the great theories on this thread and the "Whomping > Willow" thread and the thing that struck me most was that people > (especially Dumbledore) have gone to a lot of trouble for Lupin, and > it's somehow hard to see why. In a truly pragmatic sense, he hasn't so > far been worth that much risk. > > Since then, he hasn't done anything of importance except stop Harry from > running through the archway. > > The thing is (again) there's been a *lot* of effort made to train and > help this person/creature, and not much repayment. I don't believe the > ESE! theory (because I'm physically incapable) but all I see now is a > link to DD. I'd rather build something along the lines of "DD was a > werewolf but grew out of it" or "there's a big Lupin prophecy lying > around somewhere". Alshain (apologies if this has come up before, it's been some days since I perused the Lupin thread): We don't know yet what Lupin has been doing off-camera. Canon states that he was absent from Grimmauld Place for extended periods in the summer, away on Order business. He could be up to something that the others can't do; among the fanon ideas the most well-known is that he may be acting as Dumbledore's ambassador to Dark creatures in the UK and in Europe (or digging up magical objects of power, *affectionate smile at the thought of Professor Lupin rigged out as Indiana Jones*.) But the main problem I see in your argument is that it would be extremely foreign and out of character for Dumbledore to think in terms of cost-efficiency calculus. He supports the Muggle-borns, the animals and centaurs in the Forbidden Forest, Hagrid and Lupin because he thinks it's the right and decent thing to do, not because he expects to be rewarded for it or as terms of a bargain. Alshain From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 18:52:22 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 18:52:22 -0000 Subject: Why Was Hagrid Left Out of the Order? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109857 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Maggie" wrote: > > Asian_lovr2: > > > > However, I would like to add a more general comment about who is on > which side. There seems to be a misconception that you are either a > Death Eater or you are against Voldemort, and the same applies to the > Order of the Phoenix, you are either in it, or you are against > Dumbledore. By extension, this belief implies that if you are for > Voldemort, then you are automatically a Death Eater, and if you are > for Dumbledore, you are automatically a member of the Order of the > Phoenix. > > snip snip> > There are many more people fighting against Voldemort than just the > Order of the Phoenix; Dark Forces Defense League, Magical Law > Enforcement, the Auror's office, forces from the International > Confederation of Wizards, citizen wizards-foreign and domestic, etc.... > > > > Restated; in the orginal conflict the Dark Lord may have amassed an > army of thousands, but that was thousands of soldier, not thousands of > Death Eaters. > > mhbobbin: I also suspect there are minimal magical powers restrictions to be a DE. (For example, I think Umbridge is a DE wanna-be. I'd be very surprised if LV would find her powerful enough to be one of his elite squad. Her power in the OotP is due to Fudge's placing her at Hogwarts. She couldn't even get rid of the swamp and DD's office barred her. But she was mean enough to be a DE. Have we had any other mentions of Dark Forces Defense League other than that Lockhart was a member. (Cough.) mhbobbin From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 18:58:46 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 18:58:46 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109858 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "snow15145" > wrote: > Snow: > > So what is the connection between Dumbledore, Fawkes and Harry? > > RMM: > Well, I speculate, since Dumbledore used to teach Transfiguration, > that he is an animagus. > I also believe that his animagus form is a phoenix. > Fawkes the phoenix is with Dumbledore. > > And Harry's wand has the tail feather of a phoenix. > > mhbobbin writes: And lets not forget the "second death" at the MoM in OotP. During the duel between LV and DD, Fawkes takes one of curses for DD and dies. While it's not much of a sacrifice, he was there the instant DD needed him. Later, he rises from the ashes... mhbobbin From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 19:02:34 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 19:02:34 -0000 Subject: you CAN'T hurt a BABY!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109859 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "theredshoes86" wrote: > hello all... > > ...edited... > > She says, "you can't hurt a baby" and then something like 'there was no time to argue the suggestion' follows. > > Has this particular part stuck out to anyone else??? > > Could, perhaps, Harry being a baby at the time when Voldemort tried to kill him have anything to do with Voldemort's powers being destroyed??? > > I mean, why else would Hermione say that? the guy was a Death Eater, she wouldn't have minded hurting him. And there are no other accounts of babies being hurt in any of the books .... > > ANY THOUGHTS?????? > > ballerinalaura Asian_lovr2: I don't think Hermione is saying 'it's impossible to hurt a baby' or that 'it is dangerous to hurt a baby', I think she is simply saying that you 'shouldn't hurt a baby'. A baby is innocent and defenseless, therefore, there is no point in harming them. Personally, I would have stunned that 'baby head' in the blink of an eye. He may have had the brain of a baby but he still had the body and strength of a full grown man, he could have still done harm, although it would have certainly been harm without willful intent. None the less, I would have quickly put him out of commission. As long as we are on the subject, advise to Harry and the gang, next time take or break the wands of DE's once you've cursed them. Just a thought. Steve/asian_lovr2 From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 12 19:05:13 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 19:05:13 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin (long) In-Reply-To: <411B7C35.8090002@netscape.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109860 mindy bindy wrote: > I've read both the great theories on this thread and the "Whomping > Willow" thread and the thing that struck me most was that people > (especially Dumbledore) have gone to a lot of trouble for Lupin, > and it's somehow hard to see why. In a truly pragmatic sense, he > hasn't so far been worth that much risk. > > Firstly, DD as a newish headmaster plants ot transplants a magical > tree, sets up a tunnel and builds or enchants a shack in order to > contain one pupil. We hear nothign of other werewolf children this > set-up was used for. Lupin in turn is a good student and becomes a > prefect, although he does make some unsuitable friends and chooses > not to tell DD that they're unlicensed Animagi. > > Then, at a time when it would be most useful, DD hires him as a > teacher, despite having the same dangerous affliction. He does not > need the shack now, as Snape (his old school-friends' enemy) makes > a potion to keep him safe. Lupin, it needs noting, teaches Harry an > advanced protective charm. > > He fails DD again by forgetting to take it (on an understandably > stressful night) and roams the forest, risking the lives of > children (who could not only be eaten but be infected). He then > resigns, and disappears for a year. However, DD seems to know that > he's still "active" or likely to rejoin the Order - since he told > Sirius to find him and hide at his *cough*ship*cough* house. That > makes me wonder if DD and Lupin had been in contact over the GOF > year. > > Since then, he hasn't done anything of importance except stop Harry > from running through the archway. > > The thing is (again) there's been a *lot* of effort made to train > and help this person/creature, and not much repayment. SSSusan: I disagree with the strength of the statements made here re: the degree of risk taken for Lupin's sake vs. the worth of Lupin's contributions. I'll start off right away acknowledging that as a student, Lupin & buddies took tremendous, sometimes stupid risks *and* that on the night of the SS incident Lupin failed to take his potion. He HAS made mistakes; risks have been present. But I wouldn't go so far as to say they weren't really worth the payoff. I think Lupin's contributions *have* been significant or at least "worth it." In the beginning, as a student, DD took him and set the stage for being able to say to the world at large, "See? Discrimination against a werewolf is unnecessary." Lupin made it through 7 years, became a prefect, and almost the entire student body was none the wiser. [Yes, there are still those pesky "what ifs" regarding the Marauder risks, but nothing awful DID happen in the end.] DD is a man who believes that wizards need to treat their fellows and those creatures "lesser" than themselves better than they have done. He took the risk, he made a (quiet) stand, but at any time he could have pointed out that it had worked. In that way Lupin was sort of a "test case" and I'd argue that turned out to be worth the risk. No, we don't know of any more werewolf children who've come to Hogwarts, but if another appeared on the scene, would DD take him/her in? Based on his experience w/ Lupin, I think he would. [And he might watch him/her more closely!] As an adult, I think it was extremely important that Lupin was with Harry and Hogwarts that year of PoA. He taught Harry the patronus, he helped the students as a whole face their fears through the boggart, he showed them some *important* stuff in DADA for a change. He also served Harry as a trusted teacher/mentor. With OotP I think it's an understatement to say all he did of importance was stop Harry from going through the veil. He led the advance guard at the start of the year; he took the lead in addressing the Dursleys again at the end of the year. His role with the Order?similar to that of Molly, Kingsley, and many others?wasn't spelled out clearly. We did find out what Hagrid was doing, and we know Snape is doing SOMETHING important and dangerous, and we know Order members are taking turns pulling guard duty in the MoM. We know Lupin was present at meetings and helping with planning. That's about all we know. Just because we don't know the specifics of what these folks are doing doesn't mean they're not contributing. I guess I'm asking, is there a reason to suspect that Lupin, especially, has added nothing worthwhile to the cause? I'd think that *Sirius* is the one whose contributions would be questioned, since he was unable to get out and do much. But why Lupin? Also, now that he's NOT teaching at Hogwarts and so isn't tied to a job position that makes it difficult to disappear for a couple of days each month, what is the risk to the Order of having him in it? Siriusly Snapey Susan From romulus at hermionegranger.us Thu Aug 12 19:06:40 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 19:06:40 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109861 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "halli" > > Halli: > I'm sorry, but I refuse to believe that Harry's father, or his > fathers' friends (besides Peter) were death eaters. James hated the > dark arts, we've heard that before. All the maurauders hated Snape, > the little freak that was up to his eyeballs in the dark arts. If > they were fellow death eaters, why would they have such a loathing > for each other? Also, if James had been a death eater, then there > would've been no reason to worry about a secret keeper, and if there > was, he would've known not to trust Peter with that job. That, and > why would Voldemort want to kill James when he came in? As his > master, he could say 'stand aside' and all that. I just think that > if anyone asked JKR if James was a death eater, they would get the > same reaction they got when they asked about Lily. "How dare you?" RMM: You bring up several things here, and I would like to discuss some of them. First regarding "James hated the Dark Arts". I absolutely 100% agree! The books scream that out loud and clear. However, the books and JKR have never stated that he NEVER PERFORMED THE DARK ARTS. He may have hated them, but I aver that he performed them as Voldemort's right hand man, or close to it. Why do I say that James is part of the inner circle of the DEs? Well, canon says loud and clear that Voldemort only pays personal attention to those that are close to him. In other words, Voldemort went to the Potters for two reasons that night -- 1) to kill James Potter, and 2) to kill Harry Potter. And those reasons had no relation to each other. James was part of Voldemort's high command and he turned on Voldemort at some point. He would not compromise himself any more. And I believe Lily helped him see the error of his ways. Her LOVE saved him, just as it saved Harry. Second, your question "If they were fellow death eaters, why would they have such a loathing for each other?" The DEs are personally loyal only to one individual. Canon shows that many DEs did not know the existence of other DEs. In the DEs Voldemort did not want trust between the DEs, he wanted only their trust in him. I will add here that, yes, I speculate that the Marauders, maybe not all of them at first, but most of them went into the DEs under the guidance and leadership of Remus Lupin. Lupin the prefect led them into an association with Voldemort. That is heavily implied in canon. See the following from PoA: <> Note what he states in the first paragraph: "He never knew I had led three fellow students into becoming Animagi illegally" and then in the second paragraph he states: "admitting that I'd led others along with me... " There is a big difference here. In the first, he is leading others only, and in the second he is leading others AND HIMSELF! In other words, he can't be referring to the illegal animagi thing, for he is not an animagus, nor did he lead himself into it. So, Lupin led himself and others into SOMETHING ELSE. Remus Lupin the Prefect and the Leader of the Marauders led James Potter, Peter Pettigrew, and himself Remus Lupin into the DEs. Sirius Black did not go along with it, until later. How much later? About a year later Sirius entered the DEs. Of course the objection will be....but Remus Lupin is only a halfblood....what would Voldemort want with a halfblood? I answer, to get to those under Remus Lupin's influence. I further speculate that Remus only advanced a short way into the secret society. James Potter was the true prize that Voldemort was seeking. And James rose much further. Yes, by all means, BITE MY HEAD OFF. RMM www.hermionegranger.us From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Thu Aug 12 19:19:05 2004 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 19:19:05 -0000 Subject: Calendars - Sept 1 always Sunday? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109862 > > HunterGreen: > > The train always leaves for Hogwarts on September > > first, the next day is always Monday, the first day > > of school. Therefore, September first is always a > > Sunday (I've always taken it as artistic license, > > combined with the fact that (IMO) she's not writing > > each story under a certain year, so making September > > 2nd always a Monday is easier than keeping the date > > vague). > Josh: > The first day of class doesn't necessarily have to be > a Monday. Admittedly, the 2 consecutive Halloweens on > Saturday (lexicon) was bad enough, but I'm fairly > certain the day of the week is usually left vague for > Sept 1. Unless it says Monday, or full week of classes > or something... Well, there are precious few days of the week mentioned at all in the first three books (the most common is Saturdays for Quidditch practices/matches), and I don't see anything in particular bearing on what day was the first of the term. But in both GF and OP, there is an indication that the Sept. 2 start of term is a Monday, because in both books the trio is shown looking over their schedules for "Monday" to see what classes they have the first day. (GF ch. 13; OP ch. 12). -- Matt From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 12 19:19:07 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 19:19:07 -0000 Subject: Phrophecy Orbs - Summary In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109863 Asian_lovr2: > We must decide if- > 1.) The nature of the Prophecy Orb's protection is inherent in the > Orb itself. > 2.) The Orb itself is neutral, and it protective nature is subject > to the application of outside magic. > > 1.) Once the Orb is off the shelf, it seems that anyone can touch > it. Lucius and 'Trixie' didn't have any reservation about touching > it once Harry removed it from the shelf. > > If the Orb is magically intelligent and self-protecting, why does > the protection stop as soon as it is removed from the shelf? > > Since the protection seems to end once it the Prophecy is removed > from the shelf, I am inclined to think the protection is external > to the Orb itself. > That's a lot of speculation on my part, but I personally can't see > why, if the Orb was self-protecting, it's self-protection would stop > once it was removed from the shelf. SSSusan: I asked the same kind of question in 109832. Here is one possibility, anyway. Clearly, it's just the picking up which is problematic, and not the touching it afterwards. I wonder why that is? Oh--well, duh. I guess the idea is that if the orb is protected enough so that only a subject of the prophecy can get it in his/her hand, then whatever THAT person decides to do with it subsequently is considered his/her right? Siriusly Snapey Susan From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 19:29:37 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 19:29:37 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore and Socks, Magical Contracts, and Bertie Botts Beans Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109864 Last night I fired off what was intended as a light-hearted response to the question of candy in J. K. Rowling's Harry Potter series. I awoke with my brain twirling, for good or ill the day will tell... Enough preamble. When Harry asks Dumbledore in PS/SS what the latter sees when he looks into the Mirror of Erised, Dumbledore replies, "Socks." We learn in CoS that one sock is the minimum requirement for terminating the lifelong magical contract that binds a house elf to his wizarding family. Note that one sock is but half the requisite pair required for "proper" attire for the feet on which a body stands, yet its giving is sufficient to terminate a magical contract. Magical contracts, we learn in GoF, are unbreakably binding. When Harry's name comes out of the Goblet, it is Dumbledore who asserts that there is no way out for Harry, that he must now go through the contest to fulfill the contract someone of greater power and authority has enacted for him. Harry's lack of say in the matter is reminiscent of the position of a child apprenticed by impoverished parents to a stern master, of a child of indentured servants who have entered into a generations-long contract, of a slave sold into captivity. One can view the situation as a necessity of life, as an unfortunate consequence of circumstances, or as a vile practice in need of abolition. Dumbledore's failure or unwillingness to act on Harry's behalf, in turn, raises all sorts of questions. A best case interpretation sees Dumbledore as a man of honor either giving Harry a chance to prove himself or teaching Harry that contracts must be honored, a lesson that many wish would be better taught in these avarice-driven times, possibly both. A more cynical interpretation might see Dumbledore as seizing an opportunity to forward his own ends or worse, being unnecessarily constrained at an inopportune time. After all, civil disobedience is the conscience-driven denial of the authority of an inherently bad contract. Mahatma Ghandi and Martin Luther King, Jr., among others, used this idea to change their societies for the better. Soldiers have been court-martialed for failure to use such judgment in defiance of illegal orders. Despite these real-world examples of justifiable social contract breaking, the author allows Dumbledore to assert the conservative position that such a thing as an unbreakable contract exists, even though the contract is based on the equivalent of a forged signature and fulfilling the contract is potentially lethal. What, then, is Dumbledore's motivation? What is his position? He seems to take contracts, magical and otherwise, very seriously. He takes his contract to serve as Hogwarts' headmaster very seriously. One might posit that he feels as bound to his duty as headmaster as any house elf is to serve his/her family; hence the wish for socks. I do not mean this in a negative light. In Christian literature Jesus asked on the eve of his greatest trial that his 'cup', his burden be lifted from him, though he ultimately submitted to crucifixion as the only way through the task at hand. In Frank Herbert's 'Dune Messiah' Leo Atreides contemplates the many alternate paths he might take on the eve of his plunge into the metamorphosis that makes him a deified sandworm. One can wish to serve, understand the need for sacrifice, and still wish there might be another way without actually turning from the requirements of necessity in fulfilling the most binding contract of all, that of one's life calling, one's truest vocation, regardless of what one may profess. Dumbledore's recognition of the price of fulfilling one's duty, of adhering to the demands of the unwritten yet binding contract that might be perceived as accepting the consequences of one's choices and acceptance of privileges, is shown in many ways, but the one that produces both humor and pathos is his relationship with magical sweets. He says in PS/SS, "Ah! Bertie Bott's Every Flavor Beans! I was unfortunate enough in my youth to come across a vomit-flavored one, and since then I'm afraid I've rather lost my liking for them -- but I think I'll be safe with a nice toffee, don't you? . . . Alas, ear wax!" (U.S. pb 300-1). Dumbledore recognizes and accepts the consequences of magical temptations, though he continues to try them between long breaks. More often he is seen indulging in safer if more mundane muggle treats, especially lemon sherbets/drops. Even this choice reflects Dumbledore's reality that life is a mixture of sweet and sour, of service and sacrifice, of privilege and consequence. From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Thu Aug 12 19:42:30 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 19:42:30 -0000 Subject: you CAN'T hurt a BABY!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109865 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > Asian_lovr2: > > Personally, I would have stunned that 'baby head' in the blink of an > eye. He may have had the brain of a baby but he still had the body and > strength of a full grown man, he could have still done harm, Actually... I might want to backtrack... This _was_ after Minerva had been hospitalized due to 4 stunners... too much for her age. One could assume that a baby would be similarly unprepared to handle a nominal shock such as a single stunner. Brain damange? Without the guise of self-defense at that very moment (the former-DE's intentions do count), such damage (or death) could spell trouble for Harry had he fired that stunner. Josh From meltowne at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 19:55:31 2004 From: meltowne at yahoo.com (meltowne) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 19:55:31 -0000 Subject: The Timing of Lupin (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109866 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > I think Lupin's contributions *have* been significant or at > least "worth it." In the beginning, as a student, DD took him and > set the stage for being able to say to the world at large, "See? > Discrimination against a werewolf is unnecessary." Lupin made it > through 7 years, became a prefect, and almost the entire student body > was none the wiser. [Yes, there are still those pesky "what ifs" > regarding the Marauder risks, but nothing awful DID happen in the > end.] DD is a man who believes that wizards need to treat their > fellows and those creatures "lesser" than themselves better than they > have done. He took the risk, he made a (quiet) stand, but at any > time he could have pointed out that it had worked. In that way Lupin > was sort of a "test case" and I'd argue that turned out to be worth > the risk. No, we don't know of any more werewolf children who've > come to Hogwarts, but if another appeared on the scene, would DD take > him/her in? Based on his experience w/ Lupin, I think he would. > [And he might watch him/her more closely!] > > As an adult, I think it was extremely important that Lupin was with > Harry and Hogwarts that year of PoA. He taught Harry the patronus, > he helped the students as a whole face their fears through the > boggart, he showed them some *important* stuff in DADA for a change. > He also served Harry as a trusted teacher/mentor. > > With OotP I think it's an understatement to say all he did of > importance was stop Harry from going through the veil. He led the > advance guard at the start of the year; he took the lead in > addressing the Dursleys again at the end of the year. His role with > the Order?similar to that of Molly, Kingsley, and many others? wasn't > spelled out clearly. We did find out what Hagrid was doing, and we > know Snape is doing SOMETHING important and dangerous, and we know > Order members are taking turns pulling guard duty in the MoM. We > know Lupin was present at meetings and helping with planning. That's > about all we know. Just because we don't know the specifics of what > these folks are doing doesn't mean they're not contributing. I guess > I'm asking, is there a reason to suspect that Lupin, especially, has > added nothing worthwhile to the cause? I'd think that *Sirius* is > the one whose contributions would be questioned, since he was unable > to get out and do much. But why Lupin? I get the feeling DD set Lupin up to be a new Father-figure for Harry. Of the 4 Marauders, James was dead, Peter was thought dead, and Sirius was thought to have been the spy. In POA, who better than Lupin to keep watch over Harry while Sirius is on the loose - Lupin was one of his best friends, and might be the only one who can effectively protect Harry - or at least be the one who can gain Harry's trust enough to do so. Snape is certainly powerful enough to do it, but doesn't have the same kind of motivation. I get the impression that aside from Sirius, Lupin was James's best friend, with Peter a distant third. By the end of POA, Lupin is compromised as a teacher, and cannot return to Hogwarts. Since DD know Sirius was not the spy, and is not out to kill Harry, Lupin is not needed to protect Harry directly. He is sent on other business - who knows, maybe he was out looking for signs of LV, meeting up with other werewolves, or other "creatures" who might become allies. By OoP, DD knows that Sirius isn't going to be cleared, and is a bit of a liability. By the end of OoP, Harry has lost his father and his godfather. Dumbledore cannot afford to be a father-figure to him, because of the connection with LV, so Lupin is the logical choice to step up to that role. It's also possible that Petunia knows Lupin - we don't know how much Lily stayed in touch with any of the other students, but we Know Petunia knew James. I think there is something about Lupin that is being hidden from Harry, and thus us. Why, for instance, was Lupin a Prefect, yet James became Head Boy? What was Lily's relationship with Lupin up until 7th year? They were both Prefects, and must have spent time together. In 5th year, we see her tell James to leave SS alone, while Lupin just sits there, unable to control his friends - much like Hemione tries to get F&G to behave. Were Lupin and Lily as close as Ron and Hermione? From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com Thu Aug 12 20:06:51 2004 From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 20:06:51 -0000 Subject: Droobles from the Tower of London (was: candy) In-Reply-To: <77BDDEE8-EC7A-11D8-B420-0003930C168E@qwest.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109867 > Terpnurse wrote: > We know the French resistance cells during WWII relied heavily on coded messages and ingenious ways of communicating those messages. Could the gum wrappers be analogous to some of their methods? Along with that too, I think other ways and means of communique will crop up as the war progresses. The WWN will surely come into play, and we know more now about how wizarding print media operates and how a well placed article can so dramatically turn the tide. < >< boyd: My apologies in advance for the following addition to the increasingly over-debated topic of the significance of the Droobles wrappers. If, as others have postulated, the Longbottoms are being given poisoned Droobles gum to keep them out of the picture or to keep their mouths shut, then I may have an alternative source of inspiration that may be a bit closer to home for the very British Ms. Rowling: the Tower of London. Sir Thomas Overbury died in the Tower in 1613 after being poisoned for six months by arsenic, ground glass and mercury. And many other captives of the Tower sent messages to their loved ones, some of which have been postulated to contain secret messages. Put the two together and you get: the Longbottoms? Not a believer, just an enabler. --boyd tangentially, anagrammed Neville = Le Elvin (clearly Neville is the half-elf HBP, and that wand is just getting in his way) From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Aug 12 20:15:38 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 20:15:38 -0000 Subject: Longbottom's Torture to Insanity (Re: candy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109868 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Brenda M." wrote: > > Let me follow your logic: > > So if the droobles bubble gum wrapper *did* contain coded messages or > provide some sort of communication method, Alice Longbottom could not > have been *absolutley* insane and without mind? Assuming it was out > of her own motivation to pass it along to Neville, I doubt any > clinically-insane permanently-lost-their-mind patients will be able > to do that, not consciously anyway. > > If it is the case of 3) or 4) from above, I think it has Ever-So-Evil! > Dumbledore written all over the place. Great, Kneasy will be > pleased... > Speak my name and I appear. No, I don't really go for ESE!DD - he's much more devious and manipulative than that. After all, many posters seem to think that villains are by their very nature one-dimensional. Not if the author is any good they're not. Try Dracula (the original, please), Hannibal Lecter or O'Brien in 1984. But let's have a look at this Droobles stuff - mostly because I've been in an off-board exchange with Lyn Mangiameli about it. He has an idea, not so much a theory, more a possible connection which despite my urging he's reluctant to post and he suggested I do so instead. So I will, with maybe some thoughts of my own. OK. There's general agreement that Alice is trying to tell Neville something. At one time the site was knee-deep in anagrams as posters tried to re-arrange 'Droobles Best Blowing Gum' into a message that would mean something. When that didn't work most of 'em tried for a message that'd mean *anything*, sensible or not. It wasn't a great success. Fortunately I had other things to post about at the time and so I wasn't sucked into the mire, not that an anagram was a conclusion I'd have favoured anyway. If Alice and Frank had been tortured to insanity it's unlikely that Alice would be able to construct a communication that would need one's full wits and mental faculties to visualise and comprehend. No, it's much simpler than that. She's trying to give Neville a clue, not a message. And it's urgent and important. So if it's not the wrapper, what's left? The contents - the gum. Some believe that the Longbottoms are being secretly drugged. I don't go for that either. The potions (ever seen a pill or tablet or an injectable in the WW?) come in the large economy size. If someone wanted to keep the Longbottoms quiet I doubt they'd fit the draft inside a piece of gum - and how would the Longbottoms know it was being done to them anyway? They wouldn't - not unless the person responsible surreptitiously doctored the gum at the bedside. Once, maybe. But for 12 years? Oh, look, a pinion-equipped porcine just flapped past. What does Droobles do? It produces bubbles, spheres that remain stable for days. Spheres? What sort of clue is that? Where can we find spheres? In the Ministry, in the Dept. of Mysteries, of course. There's a fair chance that there is something in a prophecy globe that concerns Neville. Alice blows bubbles and they remind her and she's desperate to get the concept across to Neville. And I doubt that the globe is the same one as that Voldy was after. Mind you, it could be one of the two that were broken, the ones where we didn't quite hear the prophecies they contained. Wouldn't put it past JKR, being sneaky like that. Kneasy From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Aug 12 20:46:19 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 20:46:19 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore and Socks, Magical Contracts, and Bertie Botts Beans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109869 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dcgmck" wrote: > > Magical contracts, we learn in GoF, are unbreakably binding. When > Harry's name comes out of the Goblet, it is Dumbledore who asserts > that there is no way out for Harry, that he must now go through the > contest to fulfill the contract someone of greater power and > authority has enacted for him. Kneasy: Not quite true. It's Bagman that burbles on about the need to comply with the rules. DD listens to all the arguments and goes along. The only time DD mentions magical contracts is earlier when he's explaining the seriousness of placing ones name in the Goblet. I've never considered that there was a contract. No contract can be binding unless you enter into it willingly. Harry did not put his name into the Goblet and by the adjusted rules then pertaining he was not allowed to enter. Where has Harry shown willingness to enter the contract? He hasn't - and nobody asks him if he wants to enter after his name is drawn. DD knew there was something funny going on and he knew Harry was the probable target. What to do? If he withdraws Harry then it's likely Harry will still be a target, but at least he now knows where and when the enemy will strike - during one of the three phases of the competition. No point in getting Harry involved otherwise. And I reckon he knew who to watch, too. Moody was an old friend. Just because Crouch!Moody looks like Moody doesn't mean he'd fool someone who knew him well. Why do you think DD *instructed* Crouch!Moody to teach resistance to the Imperius curse? To reduce Harry's vulnerability. What did surprise DD was the Portkey!Cup. That was unexpected. Kneasy From dk59us at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 21:04:05 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 21:04:05 -0000 Subject: Longbottom's Torture to Insanity (Re: candy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109870 Brenda wrote: > Of course, one must ask, WHY on earth the Longbottoms were tortured > to insanity in the first place. Voldemort has disappeared a year > prior to that, what made Bellatrix & co believe that they knew his > whereabouts, out of everyone in the Order? I know I am not the only > one thinking that it was just a cover-up excuse. Now Eustace_Scrubb: At the risk of sounding like a broken record (that's a muggle entertainment medium that went obsolete some time ago)... We only really know from canon that the attack on the Longbottoms occurred at some point after Godric's Hollow when most in the WW had begun to feel safe. As the celebrations on November 1, 1981 (if that was really the year), one day after Godric's Hollow, were open enough and boisterous enough to draw the attention of Vernon Dursley and the muggle newscasters, I would argue that the feeling of safety was almost immediate--not wise, perhaps, but there you have it. Dumbledore, having deposited Harry on the Dursleys' steps on the night of November 1, tells McGonagall that they themselves might as well join the celebrations. Now I would not argue that Bellatrix and company attacked the Longbottoms that night (though I wouldn't rule it out yet, either). But I would say that canon suggests it could have been anytime after Halloween 1981. The trial of the LeStranges and Crouch Jr. certainly was much later. Again, we have no canon (do we?) that would tell us how soon after the attacks the perpetrators were identified and captured. Who would have identified them? Were Frank and Alice lucid enough to do so? They were apparently not of much help for the trial itself. I would expect that the attackers might have remained at large for some time. I think that Bellatrix knew that Voldemort intended to attack both the Longbottoms and the Potters but not necessarily why (i.e., they didn't know about the prophecy and the importance of a baby). When it became evident that Voldemort had vanished and the Potters were dead, Bellatrix and the others drew the conclusion that the Longbottoms had somehow defeated or captured their master; in other words, his plans had gone awry not at Godric's Hollow but at his next stop. That's why the Longbottoms were tortured. Now, I know this theory at least as many potential holes in it as most, but for now I'll stick to it! Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb "If you're referring to the incident with the dragon, I was barely involved." From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Aug 12 21:06:01 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 21:06:01 -0000 Subject: Phrophecy Orbs - Summary In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109871 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > Clearly, it's just the picking up which is problematic, and not the > touching it afterwards. I wonder why that is? Oh--well, duh. I > guess the idea is that if the orb is protected enough so that only a > subject of the prophecy can get it in his/her hand, then whatever > THAT person decides to do with it subsequently is considered his/her > right? > I once hypothesised that the Ministry was a combination of secutity vault and a way of evaluating Seers for accuracy (79273). After all, how do you know just how good a Seer is? By their track record. And it wouldn't do if just anyone could come along and listen to a prophecy and maybe deliberately act in such a way so as to 'prove' or 'disprove' it, now would it? As to how a prophesy gets a globe and a jaundiced view of prophets - see 79180. Kneasy From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Aug 12 21:19:59 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 21:19:59 -0000 Subject: Is Lupin James? (related to James' Choice as well) In-Reply-To: <411B89AE.8000200@netscape.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109872 > mhbobbin at y... wrote: > (By the way I too think he has a secret, but this isn't it.) > And maybe that other arrangement is the Secret that Lupin is > hiding. In addition, we don't know where Lupin was in the year of > GOF--which makes no sense to me--or what his mission is for the > Order. Lupin stays at Grimmauld Place but disappears for long > periods--and it doesn't seem to be related to his werewolf > problem. > > > > > heather: Your post crossed with mine, but I agree - there's something fishy about the wolf. > I said elsewhere that he has a link to DD, but here - it's not > just he disappeared from the story, but that it is > deliberately left blank where he went. It only takes one > sentence "He's negotiating with goblins" to clear up missing > characters, but instead we get deliberate vagueness. Valky: I agree with you both that it is the 'vagueness', that seems so deliberately applied to Lupin that is making it so suspicious. for mbobbin We have three clues to where Remus Lupin went to in the year GOF: 1 A the end of POA Lupin is observed by Harry as seeming to be in a hurry to leave, as they say their Goodbyes. Remus is concealing his urgency in most of what he says to Harry, the farewell is a slightly lingering and the time he gives Harry, although he seems to be in a rush for some reason, is not merely polite. If he takes this extra time in spite of his rush because he is loathe to leave Harry's side it throw ESE!Lupin a curveball, which I personally prefer here, and notches one up for the Red Herring or something like it. However, it could be just 'good cover' for ESE, and I hate that! Either way Lupin is leaving because *He Has Business*, somewhere and the Werewolf/Parents thing is a tangible pardon out at best, its just an excuse. 2 At the end of GOF Sirius is given instructions by DD to go and alert Remus Lupin then lie low at Lupins for a while. Nothing more is said, its all so very vague but we can draw a few sketches around it. Wherever Lupin is during GOF it appears either he has returned by the time LV is reborn or DD *doesn't know* that he isn't home. The latter makes all the current speculations very viable. 3 Finally as I have mentioned, at the beginning of OOtP Harry observes that Lupin has greyed and tired quite some more than he ever was in POA. Giving weight to a speculation that in the year GOF Remus was not at home with his feet on the couch. Lead this all where you will because I have no idea what the secret Remus hides is. Secondly for mbobbin also: While you are at great pains considering in depth the secret keeper switch, I would like to add for you; If James and Remus had done a switching spell, then due to the fact that the Remus *we know* has no clue about the SK switch at the last minute then *James* wasn't in on it not *Remus*. Put another way for clarity; If we are given that Remus is James; Hence it is James!Remus that doesn't know Peter was SK; It follows that the *real* Remus Lupin and not James made the final decision to switch to Peter, with Lily, and not the *real* James Potter. Now for both of you: At this point I must say that the reason I don't buy the James!Remus switch is that it was originally based on a theory that the *Potter Bloodline* was the essential paradigm to LV's reason for wanting to kill Harry. This has been fully sunk, as you know. Besides even before it was sunk, I never really bought that James Potter would be such a coward. However, just supposing that the switch was for *another* reason; like for example James *trusted* Remus with his family, and *Sirius* with his secret while he went out into the big blue to seek a magic or artifact to save his young family and _accidentally_ got stuck in the werewolfs body because *Remus and Lily* made the mistake of trusting Peter, I start to see that it *could* happen. Best to You All Valky From jen60565 at aol.com Thu Aug 12 21:26:30 2004 From: jen60565 at aol.com (txjen70) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 21:26:30 -0000 Subject: Ron's Patronus (Warning Ron=DD) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109873 I've read the Dumbledore is Ron theory and while I do see how it could be possible, I personally don't think that will happen. However, you make a good point if that particular theory is true because hiding it from us probably means she is hiding it from Harry also. He probably didn't see it. Now if Harry saw Dumbledore's patronus (I can't remember if he did) then of course noting that Ron's was the same might be more of a clue than she wants to give. So she could be hiding it until she is ready for Harry to notice Ron's patronus and that it is the same as Dumbledore's. --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > Shannon wrote: > > I was rereading OoP recently, and noticed something that struck me as > a little bit odd. During the last DA meeting, (US Edition, pages 606- > 607), they are working on producing Patronuses. They mention Cho's > swan, Hermione's otter, and she even mentions Lavender, Neville and > Seamus. But no Ron, whether he was having trouble or had done it > successfully, nothing. It seemed odd to me because usually when JKR > gets into describing how students are handling difficult bits of > magic, she at leasts describes Harry, Ron and Hermione's efforts. > Anyone have any thoughts as to why he might have been left entirely > out of this scene? Am I making something out of nothing? > > > vmonte responds: > > You are not making something out of nothing. There is a reason why > JKR left this bit out. JKR once said that she could not tell a fan > what Snape's patronus was because it would give too much away. I bet > Ron's patronus would also... > My theory (and it's not popular) is that Ron is Dumbledore and that > they both have the same patronus. > > vivian From zanelupin at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 21:37:00 2004 From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 21:37:00 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109874 *sigh* I was going to keep out of this one. To begin, I agree with everything Nora has said in her posts regarding this matter. Okay, on with it. RMM: > First regarding "James hated the Dark Arts". I absolutely 100% agree! The books scream that out loud and clear. However, the books and JKR have never stated that he NEVER PERFORMED THE DARK ARTS. He may have hated them, but I aver that he performed them as Voldemort's right hand man, or close to it.< KathyK: You're walking a fine line here and I don't think you're succeeding. He hated them but decided to join up with LV who is all about the dark arts and decided to dabble in them anyway. Why? Please tell me why James would choose to do this if he hates the Dark Arts so much. There is *nothing* to back up a claim that he performed Dark Arts while the canon that he hated said Dark Arts is a good indication that he would not perform them or be a part of a group that does do them. For what? The sake of cozying up to Voldemort who stands for soemthing else he disdains, Pure Bloodism? It just doesn't make any sense no matter how much I think about it. RMM: > Why do I say that James is part of the inner circle of the DEs? Well, canon says loud and clear that Voldemort only pays personal attention to those that are close to him. In other words, Voldemort went to the Potters for two reasons that night -- 1) to kill James Potter, and 2) to kill Harry Potter.< KathyK: And here I thought young Harry with the "power to vanquish the Dark Lord" was sufficient reason to go after the Potters. How very silly of me. So this is why he went after Harry rather than Neville. It had nothing to do with Pettigrew giving up their location. It had nothing to do with Harry being a half-blood like himself. It was a vendetta against Harry's father. Bad Luck, Harry. James has messed up your life real good, then. ;-) RMM: >He would not compromise himself any more. And I believe Lily helped him see the error of his ways. Her LOVE saved him, just as it saved Harry.< KathyK: The points Nora and others have brought up already that James is not a DE are much stronger and more firmly based in what we already know than what you are positing. It is much more in line with canon that James wasn't a Death Eater and that he's had a thing for Lily since he was at least 15 and that Lily only went out with him in 7th year because he deflated his ego. Much more in line than saying he was following around the Dark Arts loving, purge-the-mudbloods-from-the- world Lord Voldemort until Lily's love saved him. Why would Lily go for James if he was affiliated in any way with a group that questioned her right to *exist*? "James thinks muggleborns are second-class citizens at best but he's just so darn cute, I have to go out with him?" It doesn't fly. And before we get to Remus Lupin's statements in PoA let me add this. Sirius Black states that he ran away from his home when he was sixteen. He spent his holidays at his good friend, James' house. Why did Sirius run away? He says, "Because I hated the whole lot of them: my parents, with their pure-blood mania, convinced that to be a Black made you practically royal...my idiot brother, soft enough to believe them" (OoP Ch 6, US ed. p. 111). As I recall it's your contention that MWPP were all at one point death eaters. At least by the age of sixteen we know Sirius Black had enough of that. He left his family. And he went to JAMES. Why would he do this if James Potter was so keen to be Lord Voldemort's right-hand man? Unless all this took place before they reached sixteen? RMM: >Lupin the prefect led them into an association with Voldemort. >That is heavily implied in canon. See the following from PoA: > Note what he states in the first paragraph: "He never knew I had led three fellow students into becoming Animagi illegally" and then in the second paragraph he states: "admitting that I'd led others along with me... " There is a big difference here. In the first, he is leading others only, and in the second he is leading others AND HIMSELF! In other words, he can't be referring to the illegal animagi thing, for he is not an animagus, nor did he lead himself into it.< >So, Lupin led himself and others into SOMETHING ELSE.< KathyK: False. Lupin is referring to the fact that he "led" three other students along with him to betray Dumbledore's trust and to break school (and Ministry) rules by becoming unregistered animagi. Lupin knows that betraying Dumbledore was wrong. He knew it when he was a student, too, and did it anyway. To me it's clear Lupin blames himself for his friends' decision to become animagi and betray Dumbledore's trust *along with him.* However, I don't believe Lupin actually is the one who convinced the other three to act in this way. We have canonical evidence that James and Sirius were the ones in charge during school. "Black and Potter. Ringleaders of their little gang." (PoA Ch 10, US ed. p. 204) "I think Dumbledore might have hoped that I would be able to excercise some control over my best friends," said Lupin. "I need scarcely say that I failed dismally." (OoP Ch 9, US ed. p. 170) "Did I ever tell you to lay off Snape?" he said. "Did I ever have the guts to tell you I thought you were out of order?" "Yeah, well," said Sirius, "you made us feel ashamed of ourselves sometimes...That was something..." (OoP Ch 29, US ed. p. 671) If any of them were leading the others it was Sirius and James. No doubt. Lupin did not lead them to break rules and he certainly didn't influence his friends into becoming Death Eaters. RMM: > Sirius Black did not go along with it, until later. How much later? > About a year later Sirius entered the DEs. KathyK: Why so long? Especially when he at 16, as canonically stated, had no use for his dark arts performing, pure blood loving family who thought LV had the right idea? Because *Lupin* said so? Not a chance. There's no way Sirius or James were death eaters. There are just too many things that don't add up. Enough from me, KathyK, rediscovering the yumminess of sun-dried tomatoes From caesian at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 21:38:30 2004 From: caesian at yahoo.com (caesian) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 14:38:30 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] House Elves, Hermione And Freedom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109875 On Aug 12, 2004, at 9:46 AM, pentzouli wrote: caesian snipped intro: > First of all, I wonder if there is some separation between good > house-elves and bad house-elves. > I mean, Winky's behaviour is not at all similar to that of Dobby's, > as described in GoF, and even though she had recognized that her > master was a "bad boy", she wanted to remain loyal. I cannot start > about Kreacher, he seems evil to the bone, > all the three house-elves we are introduced to come > from "dark" wizards' families, even though their intentions are not > always evil. The main thing is that they certainly cannot be > trusted. Where are the good house-elves? > > So, why Hermione is so willing to set them free, when it is clear > that they will not only depreciate the gift of freedom,(at least > most of them will), but are capable of magic not easily tamed by > wizards? > > For my part, I don't think that these trivia that we know of produce > sufficient evidence to back up Hermione's willingness to free them. > Even Hagrid, who loves all creatures, even the most fearful ones, > does not agree with Hermione. Could it be that in the next two > books, our heroine makes a terrible mistake by fulfilling her goal? > You see, I think that although her intentions are those of a > pacifist, and this opens a very big aspect of her personality for > all of us to see, the fight begins after the house-elves are free : > the fight to make them appreciate and help the right side in this > war, and prevent them from using their powerful magic against the > wizards who took them for granted while they were in their service. > > Caesian responds: Welcome (back) pentzouli ;-). Not to put too fine a point on it, but that is the nature of being free. Wizards are free to choose whether they will serve a particular master. Some of them choose to serve evil. Would you suggest we enslave the wizards? I'm not trying to take sides on the house-elf freedom issue. We do not know the history and nature of their enslavement, or the reason. Perhaps there is more that could be understood about the potential consequences of freeing the house elves (or the consequences of keeping them bound into servitude.) caesian [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eeyore6771 at comcast.net Thu Aug 12 17:09:40 2004 From: eeyore6771 at comcast.net (Pat) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 17:09:40 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109876 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > M.Clifford wrote: > > > > > >>Lily shares her birthday with someone alive? > > > > > >>Still lost...... Pat here: I found this to be very confusing and rather than posting sent an email--one of many, apparently. Mainly because I had no clue what the clues meant. Upon reading all the responses however, I've noticed that there is a huge error regarding Hermione. If you go to the Lexicon and check Hermione's birthdate, it is not September 30. It's actually September 19, which means that she is not Libra--she's a Virgo (August 23 through September 22). (And if you know anything about Virgos, her personality fits that much better anyway, but that's hardly the point.) Now, September 19th is more than half-way through the month, but definitely not at the end of it. I also don't understand the reference to Lily's friend who is still alive. We've never been given any information about any of Lily's friends, unless it is Remus--I doubt that it would be Peter. But the only reference to Lily having female friends is when Harry pokes his nose in the Pensieve and sees her in Snape's Worst Memory (OotP)- -however none of those girls are named. I find all of this interesting, but too criptic to be giving us any clues that we can actually work out, according to canon. Can you explain some more where you are going with this? Pat From pentzouli at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 17:20:32 2004 From: pentzouli at yahoo.com (pentzouli) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 17:20:32 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109877 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "snow15145" wrote: > What is the connection between Dumbledore, Fawkes and Harry, there is > defiantly a connection but what is it? --------------------------- SNIP - SNIP - SNIP -------------------------- Some Questions > > The Order of the Phoenix is a Secret Order, why does the name of the > group appear to be in tribute to the Phoenix, like a collective unity > belonging to the (faithful)Phoenix? > ------------------------ SNIP - SNIP - SNIP ------------------------ > Snow pentzouli : I think that there are a lot to be revealed about these mysterious connections in the upcoming books. But apart from that, I have a few thoughts to contribute : To your question about the Order's name, I don't think that it has so much to do with the loyalty its members show to Dumbledore, as to how the Order was regrouped. It would seem that it has risen from its ashes, like phoenixes do, with some old members, of course, but also with some new ones. From the picture that Moody shows to Harry, we can conclude that the Order suffered a huge amount of loss during the last time it was active. And now, at the time least expected, it has risen again, more organized, more aware than the last time. As for Fawkes's connection to Harry, I have some remarks to make : the song that Harry hears during the duel with Voldemort in GoF sounded strange to me at first. How could possibly Harry hear Fawkes's song? Well, with a better reading of the chapter I realised that since Harry's and Voldemort's wands have Fawkes's feathers in them, and since the phoenix's song gives courage to the pure and fear to the evil, Harry would hear this song like it came from inside him (through the wand, which was attached to his hand). And it would certainly seem the most beautiful nusic to his ears... I think that through all the references Dumbledore has made about Fawkes, and through the relationship that has been established between Harry and Fawkes, and since JKR has stated that Harry may have a different pet in the books to come(Kids BBC interview, answer to reporter Victor Greenstreet) maybe we are looking at Harry's future pet... Thanks for reading this! pentzouli From lszydlowski at hotmail.com Thu Aug 12 17:36:57 2004 From: lszydlowski at hotmail.com (mizstorge) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 17:36:57 -0000 Subject: Tonks a traitor? was: Is Lupin is James In-Reply-To: <20040811143444.98734.qmail@web51809.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109878 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, sophierom wrote: > Lissa wrote: > "We've already had one masquerader. And we have > Tonks. (Who all's got bets on her being the traitor > this time?)" > > Sophierom: > > Ooh, I haven't heard this theory before. I hope Tonks isn't > a traitor, but I'd be interested in hearing some > evidence pointing her in that direction. Any takers? Miz Storge' replies: Don't know about anyone else's ideas either, but I don't trust Tonks.The idea was first presented to me by my Dear Husband. His reasoning goes like this: - We know half-breeds can be as vicious as full-bloods since we have Tom Riddle's example and dear Tonks is half-muggle on her dad's side and a Black on her Mum's side (darkest of the dark wizarding clans). -We know she's a metamorphmagi and that would certainly come in handy for being a traitor. -The best evidence, however, is the battle at the Ministry of Magic. Tonks shoots one spell, and it goes over the head of the target. Then she has a brief scuffle with Bellatrix and conveniently falls down several tiers and conveniently hurts herself enough to get out of the fight. -We know she's clumsy - but how did someone that clumsy get to be an Auror in the first place? Or is her clumsiness a way to hide activities which members of the Order might find suspicious? During the battle at the Ministry, was she just trying to preserve her cover? As for her tripping at Grimmauld Place, awakening Mrs. Black's portrait, was she actually looking for something - some magical heirloom perhaps? Maybe she's just a ditsy girl, but I'm very sceptical! From eeyore6771 at comcast.net Thu Aug 12 17:48:19 2004 From: eeyore6771 at comcast.net (Pat) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 17:48:19 -0000 Subject: Prophecy Interpretations (Re: BIGGEST SPOILER) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109879 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kellymcj2000" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "stellablue571" > wrote: > > kmcj: > > I really do think the outcome of the series will be > > > based more on Harry's decisions and the consequences of choices he's > > > made in the past rather than on what others have done. > > > [snips away] > > > > "This is magic at its' deepest, most impenetrable, Harry. But trust > > me...the time may come when you will be very glad you saved > > Pettigrew's life." > > [more snipping] And not to my > surprise, > > nowhere in the definition of "vanquish" does it mention the word > > death. Defeat, yes. Kill? Not necessarily! > > > > Therefore, our hero can remain the vanquisher without having to > > commit murder, leaving him untainted, and at least in this one > > respect, allowing him to keep his childish innocence. Someone has to > > die, this is definite, but never does it say that Harry has to > > actually do the dirty deed himself! Pat, way out in left field: I personally still think that Harry, in some way, has to be the one, and only one, to bring about the demise of Voldemort--not by killing him, but by causing that thing that Dumbledore says is worse than death--no idea what that might be though. That being said though, I had a really whacky thought. JKR's extensive use of the Time Turner has always baffeled me. Then the whole time thing comes up again at the MOM with the room with all the clocks, the DE falling into the bell jar, and the Time Turners falling and restoring themselves on the shelves. There is also a reference to time when Snape is teaching Harry occlumency. He tells hims that time and space matter in magic. In POA, when Hermione is explaining the Time Turner to Harry, she tells him how important it is that they not see themselves, because when that has happened to other wizards, the results have been terrible. Now, all that leads me back to COS, when Harry meets Riddle in the Chamber of Secrets and Tom tells him who he really is. Harry asks Tom why he cares how he escaped from Voldemort as a baby. And Tom Riddle says: "Voldemort is my past, present, and future, Harry Potter...." (COS, Ch ap.17, p. 313, US) He then rearranges the letters in his name to say "I Am Lord Voldemort". So, (you know, it's awful trying to explain a long train of thought)...is it possible that Voldemort, preserved somehow in an other part of his life (like he did with the Tom Riddle diary), or by using a Time Turner, will end up doing himself in, perhaps aided in some way by Harry? That would fit with the prophecy that "neither can live while the other survives..." I know that whole thing is really far-fetched, and don't particularly buy it myself, but sometimes in reading the wording of the Prophecy, I find that I really start grasping at straws. I'm hoping that someone else will be able to use some of my randomness and make something coherent out of it. LOL Pat, who has just confused herself From flyballcairn at bellsouth.net Thu Aug 12 18:31:58 2004 From: flyballcairn at bellsouth.net (Danielle Arnt) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 13:31:58 -0500 Subject: Harry's Use of Cruciatus curse Message-ID: <020101c4809a$a6d851d0$5302a8c0@Shadowfax> No: HPFGUIDX 109880 I didn't see anything about this in the FAQ, so I'm not sure if it's been discussed before. I found it very disturbing that Harry attempted to use the cruciatus curse on Bellatrix. If it's an unforgiveable curse, shouldn't he be sent to Azkaban for using it? Or, is it ok to use against Death Eaters or defending oneself against those who do use unforgiveable curses? I don't think "righteous anger" would be an excuse or anyone could claim it. Perhaps, because Harry tried to use the curse but essentially failed because it only hit Bellatrix but didn't cause her pain, he might not actually have been seen to have used it. Hhmm. Interesting, though,that Dumbledore doesn't say anything about it at the end of the book and Harry doesn't unload his conscience about it--or will it be something Voldemort will use against him in the future? Any one have any thoughts about this? Danie in Alabama [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From grapfnt at netscape.net Thu Aug 12 19:56:06 2004 From: grapfnt at netscape.net (mindy bindy) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 20:56:06 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Timing of Lupin (long) References: Message-ID: <411BCB56.10100@netscape.net> No: HPFGUIDX 109881 > SSSusan: > I disagree with the strength of the statements made here re: the > degree of risk taken for Lupin's sake vs. the worth of Lupin's > contributions. I'll start off right away acknowledging that as a > student, Lupin & buddies took tremendous, sometimes stupid risks > *and* that on the night of the SS incident Lupin failed to take his > potion. He HAS made mistakes; risks have been present. But I > wouldn't go so far as to say they weren't really worth the payoff. > h: I was just extending an argument to be cheeky - in reality I'm all in favour of him. I just think it's worth pointing out the physical risk he could present. (something that many other modern werewolf renditions don't deal with) > I think Lupin's contributions *have* been significant or at > least "worth it." In the beginning, as a student, DD took him and > set the stage for being able to say to the world at large, "See? > Discrimination against a werewolf is unnecessary." Lupin made it > through 7 years, became a prefect, and almost the entire student body > was none the wiser. [Yes, there are still those pesky "what ifs" > regarding the Marauder risks, but nothing awful DID happen in the > end.] DD is a man who believes that wizards need to treat their > fellows and those creatures "lesser" than themselves better than they > have done. He took the risk, he made a (quiet) stand, but at any > time he could have pointed out that it had worked. In that way Lupin > was sort of a "test case" and I'd argue that turned out to be worth > the risk. No, we don't know of any more werewolf children who've > come to Hogwarts, but if another appeared on the scene, would DD take > him/her in? Based on his experience w/ Lupin, I think he would. > [And he might watch him/her more closely!] h: Yes, I can see that he'd be a good test case if the subject ever came up, but as an exercise in mixed-tutoring it was a partial security failure, as the amount of risk to other pupils in letting him and his mates wander the grounds is unacceptable. Although the WW does have a different concept of risk than the outside world, an incurable disease like lycanthropy needs to be taken seriously. (I am in favour of DD making any amount of effort to make people such as Lupin part of society, I just think he didn't consider security properly). In such an extreme case, DD should have had him watched every single month. ... > With OotP I think it's an understatement to say all he did of > importance was stop Harry from going through the veil. He led the > advance guard at the start of the year; he took the lead in > addressing the Dursleys again at the end of the year. His role with > the Ordersimilar to that of Molly, Kingsley, and many otherswasn't > spelled out clearly. h: I think I may be forgetting how much comes from Harry's POV. He doesn't know or care what many of the adults get up to, despite wanting to join the Order. Perhaps it would help if he asked some questions about other people for a change! We did find out what Hagrid was doing, and we > know Snape is doing SOMETHING important and dangerous, and we know > Order members are taking turns pulling guard duty in the MoM. We > know Lupin was present at meetings and helping with planning. That's > about all we know. Just because we don't know the specifics of what > these folks are doing doesn't mean they're not contributing. I guess > I'm asking, is there a reason to suspect that Lupin, especially, has > added nothing worthwhile to the cause? I'd think that *Sirius* is > the one whose contributions would be questioned, since he was unable > to get out and do much. But why Lupin? > h: He didn't seem to do a lot in the MoM battle, but agin it's hard to tell when everything is told from Harry's POV. I didn't realise what an interesting and mystery-making writing technique it is until now. Sometimes it's so frustrating that Harry doesn't ask the right questions. > Also, now that he's NOT teaching at Hogwarts and so isn't tied to a > job position that makes it difficult to disappear for a couple of > days each month, what is the risk to the Order of having him in it? h: I don't think he's any risk *now* - he'll just make the usual discreet arrangements, made easier by being in contact with Snape. It's just... a fishy feeling. From ejblack at rogers.com Thu Aug 12 18:57:55 2004 From: ejblack at rogers.com (jcb54me) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 18:57:55 -0000 Subject: Longbottom's Torture to Insanity (Re: candy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109882 Going off on a totally different thought. I think the candy, is symbol of nourishment, not only of the body but of the mind and spirit. Note the repeated emphaise in all the books on the happy community feasts of Hogwarts as opposed to the stingy, begrudged meals provided by Harry's muggle family. My thought is, Alice's gift of candy wrappers means even in her tormented mental condition she is still trying to provide loving nourishment to her child. Even insane, she is thinking of him - remember the comment along the lines of "you must have enough wrappers to paper your bedroom", so this is no one-time gift but a steady reaching out to Neville over the years. Jeanette From r.v.oldridge at herts.ac.uk Thu Aug 12 20:36:53 2004 From: r.v.oldridge at herts.ac.uk (lrcxrvo) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 20:36:53 -0000 Subject: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - Info In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109883 Brenda: > I wonder why it was willow though, out of all different kinds of > trees there are... I've always thought that was a bit of a nod to Tolkien? Old man willow? "lrcxrvo" From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Thu Aug 12 21:53:03 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (Jo Raggett) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 22:53:03 +0100 Subject: Alice' resistance WAS Re: candy Message-ID: <001801c480b6$c0aa3580$cffd87d9@oemcomputer> No: HPFGUIDX 109884 Terpnurse: >>>We know the French resistance cells during WWII relied heavily on coded messages and ingenious ways of communicating those messages. Could the gum wrappers be analogous to some of their methods?>>>>>>>> Aggie: When I first read this I wondered WHY they would need to pass information in this manner. But then I got thinking (*always* a bad sign!!) and thought specifically about Alice and Frank. They are trapped in their own minds and in the locked ward in St Mungo's, what if they (or at least Alice) feels that there is a dangerous element in said ward. Perhaps she thinks that one of the members of staff is trying to keep them from recovering! That they are kept in a state of 'insaneness' to stop them spilling the beans about something they know. Perhaps it's someone using the imperius curse and Alice is, at last, fighting it. We *know* that Bode died there, what if this wasn't an accident? She may be using the wrappers as a means of 'resistance' communication, we don't know as Neville just puts it in his pocket and doesn't read them!!! Cuckoos? I think one's just flown over my nest!! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 21:58:11 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 21:58:11 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109885 > KathyK wrote: big snip. > Sirius Black states that he ran away from his home when he was > sixteen. He spent his holidays at his good friend, James' house. > Why did Sirius run away? He says, "Because I hated the whole lot of > them: my parents, with their pure-blood mania, convinced that to be > a Black made you practically royal...my idiot brother, soft enough > to believe them" (OoP Ch 6, US ed. p. 111). > > As I recall it's your contention that MWPP were all at one point > death eaters. At least by the age of sixteen we know Sirius Black > had enough of that. He left his family. And he went to JAMES. > Why would he do this if James Potter was so keen to be Lord > Voldemort's right-hand man? Unless all this took place before they > reached sixteen? > Alla: LOL, Kathy! You know, for now I pretty much gave up participating in this argument seeing as Nora and now you do it very well, but I just wanted to make a quick comment on this one. NOT ONLY Sirius would not have gone to James, if James participated in Voldemort related crasiness, James and his family would not have agreed to shelter sixteen year old runaway, who decided to reject all this pureblood brohaha. I LIKE to speculate, BUT I still prefer that my speculation had at least some canon-support, some roots. If my speculation is flat out rejected by canon, it becomes really weak, IMO From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Thu Aug 12 22:16:45 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 22:16:45 -0000 Subject: Harry's Use of Cruciatus curse In-Reply-To: <020101c4809a$a6d851d0$5302a8c0@Shadowfax> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109886 Danie wondered: > I didn't see anything about this in the FAQ, so I'm not sure if it's been discussed before. I found it very disturbing that Harry attempted to use the cruciatus curse on Bellatrix. If it's an unforgiveable curse, shouldn't he be sent to Azkaban for using it? Or, is it ok to use against Death Eaters or defending oneself against those who do use unforgiveable curses? I don't think "righteous anger" would be an excuse or anyone could claim it. Perhaps, because Harry tried to use the curse but essentially failed because it only hit Bellatrix but didn't cause her pain, he might not actually have been seen to have used it. > > Hhmm. Interesting, though,that Dumbledore doesn't say anything about it at the end of the book and Harry doesn't unload his conscience about it--or will it be something Voldemort will use against him in the future? Yb responds: Well, remember, back dureing and immediately following the first war, Aurors were allowed to use the UCs on Dark wizards/DEs if necessary. I would imagine excessive use would warrant an investigation, but the occasional "Crucio" or AK was allowed. I think this is a hint of things to come. We'll probably see the MoM take a new stance on the UCs, since LV is back and badder than ever. In the heat of battle, a wizard (good guy) would probably be forgiven for an AK if it was a life-or-death situation. "Crucio" and "Imperio" are less likely to be forgiven, since they aren't really self-defense mechanisms so much as torture weapons and means of control. Harry may be in trouble, though. I am sure everyone will back him up if it comes down to needing witnesses, but did anyone that would really care (like a MoM official) see him use the curse? Of course if it comes to trial he's in hot water. He used the Cruciatus curse out of anger, not self-defense, even though he was in considerable danger. The only reason it didn't "work" was he didn't have the magical power behind it, nor the will to *really* want it to happen. Harry wouldn't want to hurt someone just for the sake of inflicting pain. I think he will have a bit more credibility with the MoM now than at the beginning of OotP, but he is still an underage wizard who cast a UC. I doubt he will land in Azkaban, but he may be in for some trouble. Re: his conscience and LV I don't think Harry will lose much sleep about making Trixie feel a few pin pricks. She deserved it IMHO. If there was ever a need for a llightning bolt, I think it needs to be aimed in her direction. And as for LV "lording" it over Harry? Highly doubtful. LV doesn't care about using the UCs. He uses them more than "Accio" for crying out loud, he won't care. The only thing he'll do to Harry regarding Hartry casting a UC is taunt him into doing another. ("C'mon, do it again! Whatsamatta? Ya scared? C'mon, do it again!") My thoughts, keep the change. ~Yb From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Thu Aug 12 22:23:00 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 22:23:00 -0000 Subject: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - Info In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109887 Brenda asked: > > I wonder why it was willow though, out of all different kinds of > > trees there are... > lrcxrvo (wow, what a random mess of consonants) theorized: > I've always thought that was a bit of a nod to Tolkien? Old man > willow? Ybby responds: Maybe so. JK is the only one who knows for sure. I suppose she could have made up a type of tree instead of using a species that already exists, but used the willow as a nod to Tolkien. But, I stand by the thought that she selected the willow for the branches and attack capabilities. ~Yb From bethg2 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 22:39:25 2004 From: bethg2 at yahoo.com (bethg2 at yahoo.com) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 22:39:25 -0000 Subject: Longbottom's Torture to Insanity (Re: candy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109888 > Brenda wrote: > > > > Of course, one must ask, WHY on earth the Longbottoms were tortured > > to insanity in the first place. A questioned occured to me last week that may have something to do with this. What is Alice's maiden name? We haven't been told, but she had to be a pure blood. Possibly she is part of one of the large pureblood families we know. She most likely isn't a Black, Harry would have noticed that on the tapestry. It could be that she was considered a blood traitor to her family and one of her DE relatives decided to follow through on the attack out of spite after Voldemort's fall. Beth G From ballerinalaura at mac.com Thu Aug 12 22:09:31 2004 From: ballerinalaura at mac.com (theredshoes86) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 22:09:31 -0000 Subject: MORE thoughts on 'you can't hurt a baby' Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109889 Everyone's comments were really interesting, it had never crossed my mind that Herminone just wanted to save time... but I still believe that she meant that there was a REASON why people, not just Harry can't hurt babies. "pentzouli" wrote: > So, my immediate thought was that this particular phrase had one > and only purpose : to prevent Harry from both losing time and stamina > by casting spells here and there. Somehow, my perception was just the opposite... a spell would have just taken a second. AND, even though the Death Eater's head was a baby and incapable of rational thoughts, Rowling writes, "his thick arms flailed dangerously in all directions, narrowly missing Harry" (ootp, 791, US hard cover edition) therefore, we cannot say that the death eater was not dangerous and not worth stunning. > Asian_lovr2: > > Personally, I would have stunned that 'baby head' in the blink of an > eye. He may have had the brain of a baby but he still had the body > and strength of a full grown man, he could have still done harm THEREFORE, Herminone's reason for preventing Harry from stunning the Death Eater must have been something other than saving time. I didn't find Hermione's comment so much as out of character as an extremely unusual proposal at that point in time... I think Harry felt it was unusual too, because he could have stunned the Death Eater in a second and they would have gone on their way. I agree with Neisha Saxena in thinking that this has to do with innocence. Neisha Saxena: >We see a number of characters close to Dumbledore save >or attempt to save small children -- Lily Potter tries >to save Harry, Harry saves Fleur Delacour's small >sister, Arthur Weasley helps save the small muggle >children from the Death Eater torture in GOF, Firenz >saves Harry in Sorcerors/Philosophers Stone against >the wishes of his fellow centaurs. >And, of course, the centaurs specifically state that >they do not hurt foals. >How children, unicorns, house elves and others not >able to defend themselves are treated is a reflection >of one's character, Sirius says so himself in the cave >in GOF when Hermione talks about how Barty Crouch >treated his house elf. I think it definately ties in with the 'choices' theme... "It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." (CoS, 333, US paperback) Neisha Saxena: >We also see characters close to Voldemort go after >children, for example: Voldemort himself goes after >both Harry and Ginny Weasley, Bellatrix LeStrange >wants to torture Ginny and does torture Neville, the >death eaters torture muggle children for fun at the >Quidditch World Cup. I think Hermione figured something out. Once she sees the head changing from adult to baby and baby to adult and back again, Rowling writes "'It's time,' said Hermione in an awestruck voice. 'Time...'" (ootp, 791, US hardcover) and the last 'time' is in italics... meaning that there is a significance on the word time. SO, maybe Hermione wasn't just surprized at the appalling sight, MAYBE she made a connection between time, innocence, and Harry's own past when Voldemort's powers were reduced to nothing because he hurt something as innocent and pure as a baby??? Maybe? ~LAURA From pentzouli at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 22:26:11 2004 From: pentzouli at yahoo.com (pentzouli) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 22:26:11 -0000 Subject: House Elves, Hermione And Freedom In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109890 caesian wrote: > Welcome (back) pentzouli ;-). Not to put too fine a point on it, > but that is the nature of being free. Wizards are free to choose > whether they will serve a particular master. Some of them choose > to serve evil. Would you suggest we enslave the wizards? > > I'm not trying to take sides on the house-elf freedom issue. We > do not know the history and nature of their enslavement, or the > reason. Perhaps there is more that could be understood about the > potential consequences of freeing the house elves (or the > consequences of keeping them bound into servitude.) pentzouli : Of course I don't wish to take sides, either, I wouldn't know the most appropriate action... But the fact that the author does not present elves in families that we know are with the "good" side in this upcoming war strikes me as suspicious. The issue of their freedom wouldn't be disturbing to my eyes if the circumstances were more appropriate (and by this I mean that now the good guys have far more dangerous things to consider). But the thing is that it is not at all clear if all wizarding families have elves, or only the wealthy ones (and that strikes me as odd too, if they are not paid to offer their services, why the distinction?), and I agree with you in your saying that we do not know the reason for their enslavement... I, for one, would really like to know... Thanks for spending time reading my post! pentzouli From dontask2much at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 23:16:11 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 19:16:11 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Dumbledore Connection References: Message-ID: <008601c480c2$5c34ee40$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 109891 ----- Original Message ----- From: "mhbobbin" > > And lets not forget the "second death" at the MoM in OotP. During > the duel between LV and DD, Fawkes takes one of curses for DD and > dies. While it's not much of a sacrifice, he was there the instant > DD needed him. Later, he rises from the ashes... > charme: And then there's a DE who is apparently dead too - did anyone else catch that? I think it's Nott.... charme From terpnurse at qwest.net Thu Aug 12 22:22:53 2004 From: terpnurse at qwest.net (Steven Spencer) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 15:22:53 -0700 Subject: Alice's resistance In-Reply-To: <001801c480b6$c0aa3580$cffd87d9@oemcomputer> References: <001801c480b6$c0aa3580$cffd87d9@oemcomputer> Message-ID: <27473A60-ECAE-11D8-B420-0003930C168E@qwest.net> No: HPFGUIDX 109892 Aggie wrote: > Terpnurse: >>>> We know the French resistance cells during WWII relied heavily on >>>> coded messages and ingenious ways of communicating those messages. >>>> Could the gum wrappers be analogous to some of their >>>> methods?>>>>>>>> > > Aggie: > When I first read this I wondered WHY they would need to pass > information in this manner. But then I got thinking (*always* a bad > sign!!) and thought specifically about Alice and Frank. They are > trapped in their own minds and in the locked ward in St Mungo's, what > if they (or at least Alice) feels that there is a dangerous element in > said ward. Perhaps she thinks that one of the members of staff is > trying to keep them from recovering! That they are kept in a state of > 'insaneness' to stop them spilling the beans about something they > know. Perhaps it's someone using the imperius curse and Alice is, at > last, fighting it. We *know* that Bode died there, what if this > wasn't an accident? She may be using the wrappers as a means of > 'resistance' communication, we don't know as Neville just puts it in > his pocket and doesn't read them!!! > > Cuckoos? I think one's just flown over my nest!! Terpnurse: Oh my lord I just thought of something! Earlier, Kneasy said: "What does Droobles do? It produces bubbles, spheres that remain stable for days. Spheres? What sort of clue is that? Where can we find spheres? In the Ministry, in the Dept. of Mysteries, of course." Combined with what you just wrote, it occurs to me that there's another type of sphere that Alice would likely be more aware of in her present state. The light globes at St. Mungo's! JKR went into a bit of detail describing those lights, twice! During both of Harry's visits to the hospital. And you're absolutely right about Bode. He was on the same ward as the Longbottoms, and presumably shared a nurse or healer with them. Didn't Hermione even remark that someone at the hospital should've recognized the plant for what it was? Perhaps the spheres that Alice is possibly warning Neville about are those lights. Maybe some sort of spy device, like a crystal ball? Or perhaps there's something else inimical about them? From dontask2much at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 23:23:34 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 19:23:34 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Longbottom's Torture to Insanity (Re: candy) References: Message-ID: <00ab01c480c3$64470310$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 109893 From: "Brenda M." > > Of course, one must ask, WHY on earth the Longbottoms were tortured > to insanity in the first place. Voldemort has disappeared a year > prior to that, what made Bellatrix & co believe that they knew his > whereabouts, out of everyone in the Order? I know I am not the only > one thinking that it was just a cover-up excuse. > charme: I vacillate between the Longbottoms were tortured because they were good, and the Longbottoms were tortured because "it's a lifetime of service" for LV. (Don't anyone flame me out here - I get totally confused about this and for good reason.) In OoP, Malfoy makes the strangest comment in the DoM: he says something to the effect that Neville's grandmother won't be surprised, since she is used to losing family members to "our cause." It's the most confusing statement about Neville overall in my mind. charme From mz_annethrope at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 22:38:55 2004 From: mz_annethrope at yahoo.com (mz_annethrope) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 22:38:55 -0000 Subject: Phrophecy Orbs - Summary In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109894 > Steve/Asian_lovr2: > > 1.) Once the Orb is off the shelf, it seems that anyone can > > touch it. Lucius and 'Trixie' didn't have any reservation about > > touching it once Harry removed it from the shelf. > > > > Since the protection seems to end once the Prophecy is removed > > from the shelf, I am inclined to think the protection is external > > to the Orb itself. > > That's a lot of speculation on my part, but I personally can't > > see why, if the Orb was self-protecting, its self-protection would > > stop once it was removed from the shelf. > SSSusan: > Clearly, it's just the picking up which is problematic, and not the > touching it afterwards. I guess the idea is that if the orb is protected > enough so that only a subject of the prophecy can get it in his/her hand, > then whatever THAT person decides to do with it subsequently is considered > his/her right? mz_annethrope: (Coming from a holiday and not having read postings in a while.) Perhaps the protection of the orb lies in the shelf it's placed on rather than in the orb itself. I'm considering this because of the protection that DD placed on the Philosopher's Stone in Book 1. The protection--that you could only get it if you didn't want to use it-- lay in the mirror rather than the stone, and Quirrell could have got the stone from Harry (at least according to Voldemort) if only Harry hadn't killed him first. mz_annethrope From spinelli372003 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 22:59:07 2004 From: spinelli372003 at yahoo.com (spinelli372003) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 22:59:07 -0000 Subject: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - Info In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109895 Brenda asked: > I wonder why it was willow though, out of all different kinds > of trees there are... J.K. could have used the Willow tree because of the ability to hide things underneath. During my childhood we played all sorts of games under a Willow tree's branches. We played "House" "Hide and seek" and as we grew older we would hide with our boyfriends. Never did anything really outrageous under there but wishing now I had. sherry From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 12 23:42:04 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 23:42:04 -0000 Subject: Longbottom's Torture to Insanity (Re: candy) In-Reply-To: <00ab01c480c3$64470310$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109896 charme: > I vacillate between the Longbottoms were tortured because they were good, > and the Longbottoms were tortured because "it's a lifetime of service" for > LV. (Don't anyone flame me out here - I get totally confused about this and > for good reason.) In OoP, Malfoy makes the strangest comment in the DoM: he > says something to the effect that Neville's grandmother won't be surprised, > since she is used to losing family members to "our cause." It's the most > confusing statement about Neville overall in my mind. SSSusan: If it helps, I always took that Draco remark to be kind of like the "royal we." That is, he's only saying "our" as in the purebloods, or the DEs, or Voldy's followers, or some such thing. I don't think he meant "our" = Draco and Neville. Siriusly Snapey Susan From caesian at yahoo.com Thu Aug 12 23:45:11 2004 From: caesian at yahoo.com (caesian) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 16:45:11 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: House Elves, Hermione And Freedom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109897 > caesian wrote: > > Welcome (back) pentzouli ;-).? Not to put too fine a point on it, > > but that is the nature of being free.? Wizards are free to choose > > whether they will serve a particular master.? Some of them choose > > to serve evil.? Would you suggest we enslave the wizards? > > > > I'm not trying to take sides on the house-elf freedom issue.? We > > do not know the history and nature of their enslavement, or the > > reason.? Perhaps there is more that could be understood about the > > potential consequences of freeing the house elves (or the > > consequences of keeping them bound into servitude.) > > > pentzouli : > > Of course I don't wish to take sides, either, I wouldn't know the > most appropriate action... But the fact that the author does not > present elves in families that we know are with the "good" side in > this upcoming war strikes me as suspicious. Caesian objects: Well, that is true (and perhaps that is a message about House-elf owners, rather than House elfs). But what about Hogwarts, where the largest number of elves of any dwelling in Britain work, according to Nick? Are the elves at Hogwarts bad? (and if so - Harry and Ron will have to be on their guard against super-hot bed-warming pans!) > The issue of their freedom wouldn't be disturbing to my eyes if the > circumstances were more appropriate (and by this I mean that now the > good guys have far more dangerous things to consider). Caesian> > Thanks for spending time reading my post! > pentzouli > > Caesian responds: My pleasure pentzouli :-). Let's say my point is in the school of Dumbledore's approach vs. that of - say - Barty Crouch Sr. When things are most dangerous - that is the worst possible time to start making arguments about restricting basic civil liberties. For example, the right to a trial, or to defend oneself in court (cough * Sirius * cough). Do you agree that in the WW, these same arguments have probably been made against Muggleborns? - "how do we know we can trust them?" or, "maybe we'll let them be full members of our community when things seem safer, but not now". I'm not saying that these issues are the same as the reason the elves are enslaved - we agree we don't know why. (Wouldn't it be nice if our brainiac Hermione could bother to update us on that topic before rushing off to the library sans explanation again - I'm feeling like Ron here.) Cheers, Caesian - who apologizes for being a bit touchy about this topic at the moment (cough * American politics suck * cough) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Aug 12 23:53:48 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 23:53:48 -0000 Subject: Longbottom's Torture to Insanity (Re: candy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109898 Bren wrote: > > So if the droobles bubble gum wrapper *did* contain coded messages or provide some sort of communication method, Alice Longbottom could not have been *absolutley* insane and without mind? Assuming it was out of her own motivation to pass it along to Neville, I doubt any clinically-insane permanently-lost-their-mind patients will be able to do that, not consciously anyway. > > Kneasy: > If Alice and Frank had been tortured to insanity it's unlikely that Alice would be able to construct a communication that would need one's full wits and mental faculties to visualise and comprehend. No, it's much simpler than that. She's trying to give Neville a clue, not a message. And it's urgent and important. > > So if it's not the wrapper, what's left? The contents - the gum. Some believe that the Longbottoms are being secretly drugged. I don't go for that either. The potions (ever seen a pill or tablet or an injectable in the WW?) come in the large economy size. If someone wanted to keep the Longbottoms quiet I doubt they'd fit the draft inside a piece of gum - and how would the Longbottoms know it was being done to them anyway? They wouldn't - not unless the person responsible surreptitiously doctored the gum at the bedside. Once, maybe. But for 12 years? Oh, look, a pinion-equipped porcine just flapped past. > > What does Droobles do? It produces bubbles, spheres that remain stable for days. Spheres? What sort of clue is that? Where can we find spheres? In the Ministry, in the Dept. of Mysteries, of course. There's a fair chance that there is something in a prophecy globe that concerns Neville. Alice blows bubbles and they remind her and she's desperate to get the concept across to Neville. And I doubt that the globe is the same one as that Voldy was after. Mind you, it could be one of the two that were broken, the ones where we didn't quite hear the prophecies they contained. Wouldn't put it past JKR, being sneaky like that. > > Kneasy Valky: Hoorah! Finally, a swift and deadly blow to the poison theory. Well done Kneasy, but lay off the pigs a bit eh, they fly... they do.... I like the spheres theory a LOT! Although, I was among those kneedeep in so many letters of the alphabet trying to decode an anagram, I also posted in there somewhere that failing an anagram the clue must be the long lasting blue bubbles. I focussed deeply on the *blue* part in preference to the *bubble* part and came up with nothing. I wonder now if the 'lasting for days' and 'blue' adjectives are of any help in uncovering a possible nature of this supposed prophecy that Alice is reminded of. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Fri Aug 13 00:08:45 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 00:08:45 -0000 Subject: Alice's resistance In-Reply-To: <27473A60-ECAE-11D8-B420-0003930C168E@qwest.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109899 > Terpnurse: > Oh my lord I just thought of something! The light globes at St. Mungo's! JKR went into a bit of detail describing those lights, twice! During both of Harry's visits to the hospital. And you're absolutely right about Bode. He was on the same ward as the Longbottoms, and presumably shared a nurse or healer with them. Didn't Hermione even remark that someone at the hospital should've recognized the plant for what it was? Perhaps the spheres that Alice is possibly warning Neville about are those lights. Maybe > some sort of spy device, like a crystal ball? Or perhaps there's > something else inimical about them? Valky: Yes! You have me rather excited here. I investigated the St Mungos Light Bulbs and I have come up with something. During Christmas the lights were coloured Red and Gold making them look like giant christams baubles. Can you think of an occasion when they might have been coloured BLUE making them look like Droobles Best Blowing Gum? You may be onto the final answer in this case...... Best to you From aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 00:11:19 2004 From: aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com (aboutthe1910s) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 00:11:19 -0000 Subject: Alice's resistance In-Reply-To: <27473A60-ECAE-11D8-B420-0003930C168E@qwest.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109900 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steven Spencer" wrote: > Aggie wrote: > > > Terpnurse: > >>>> We know the French resistance cells during WWII relied heavily on > >>>> coded messages and ingenious ways of communicating those messages. > >>>> Could the gum wrappers be analogous to some of their > >>>> methods?>>>>>>>> > > > > Aggie: > > When I first read this I wondered WHY they would need to pass > > information in this manner. But then I got thinking (*always* a bad > > sign!!) and thought specifically about Alice and Frank. They are > > trapped in their own minds and in the locked ward in St Mungo's, what > > if they (or at least Alice) feels that there is a dangerous element in > > said ward. Perhaps she thinks that one of the members of staff is > > trying to keep them from recovering! That they are kept in a state of > > 'insaneness' to stop them spilling the beans about something they > > know. Perhaps it's someone using the imperius curse and Alice is, at > > last, fighting it. We *know* that Bode died there, what if this > > wasn't an accident? She may be using the wrappers as a means of > > 'resistance' communication, we don't know as Neville just puts it in > > his pocket and doesn't read them!!! > > > > Cuckoos? I think one's just flown over my nest!! > > > Terpnurse: > Oh my lord I just thought of something! Earlier, Kneasy said: > > "What does Droobles do? It produces bubbles, spheres that remain stable > for days. Spheres? What sort of clue is that? Where can we find spheres? > In the Ministry, in the Dept. of Mysteries, of course." > > Combined with what you just wrote, it occurs to me that there's another > type of sphere that Alice would likely be more aware of in her present > state. The light globes at St. Mungo's! JKR went into a bit of detail > describing those lights, twice! During both of Harry's visits to the > hospital. And you're absolutely right about Bode. He was on the same > ward as the Longbottoms, and presumably shared a nurse or healer with > them. Didn't Hermione even remark that someone at the hospital > should've recognized the plant for what it was? Perhaps the spheres > that Alice is possibly warning Neville about are those lights. Maybe > some sort of spy device, like a crystal ball? Or perhaps there's > something else inimical about them? On mugglenet.com, there's a section on anagrams (http://www.mugglenet.com/anagrams.shtml), and I'm sure many of people on here have been there, but just to bring this up again as it pertains to this particular post, the last anagrams listed is this (I'm cutting and pasting): "Drooble's Best Blowing Gum is an anagram of Gold bribe below St. Mungos Very interesting...in book 5, Neville's Mum gives him a gum wrapper. Is she passing on an important message?" aboutthe1910s From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com Fri Aug 13 00:13:32 2004 From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 00:13:32 -0000 Subject: FILK: Aragog Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109901 Aragog To the theme from Underdog Here's a MIDI, along with some really cool pictures! http://www.melaman2.com/cartoons/singles/underdog.html CHORUS OF SPIDERS When Riddle tightens up his noose And basilisks are on the loose We need find no further excuse To get in line and then vamoose Toward Aragog! Aragog! Aragog! Aragog! He's our Shelob, he's our Strider Hail king of all the spiders! Aragog. Aragog! HARRY AND RON When Polyjuice has done its work And we've ruled out that Draco jerk For other clues we're forced to lurk And find them hid in forest murk With Aragog! Aragog! Aragog! Aragog! HARRY, RON AND CHORUS OF SPIDERS He's as huge as the Grand Canyon! Hagrid's animal companion! Aragog. Aragog! - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Fri Aug 13 00:19:35 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 00:19:35 -0000 Subject: Longbottom's Torture to Insanity (Re: candy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109902 >>> Kneasy wrote: > Speak my name and I appear. <<< Brenda: *laughing her arse off* You a Genie in the bottle? ;P >>> Kneasy: No, I don't really go for ESE!DD - he's much more devious and manipulative than that. <<< Brenda: I agree that DD can be quite devious and manipulative, but with every bit of honourable intention. I mean if we don't have DD on good side then who can we *really* trust to fight Voldemort? Harry? Pffft! I happen to think villains are usually portrayed as the most devious characters in the plot -- unless you are talking complexity, much like Snape's. >>> Kneasy: So if it's not the wrapper, what's left? The contents - the gum [snip] It produces bubbles [snip] Where can we find spheres? In the Ministry, in the Dept. of Mysteries, of course. There's a fair chance that there is something in a prophecy globe that concerns Neville. Alice blows bubbles and they remind her and she's desperate to get the concept across to Neville. And I doubt that the globe is the same one as that Voldy was after. Mind you, it could be one of the two that were broken, the ones where we didn't quite hear the prophecies they contained. <<< Bren: Neat logic, I like it. Alice's cognition being triggered, hopefully this will facilitate her recovery. I think someone mentioned that this probably was not the first time Alice had given Neville the wrapper. What other spheres do we know of that can be proven important? I am thinking bubble gums are deflatable so perhaps not the moon... >>> Aggie with her great point: > Perhaps she thinks that one of the members of staff is > trying to keep them from recovering! That they are kept in a state of > 'insaneness' to stop them spilling the beans about something they > know [snip We *know* that Bode died there, what if this > wasn't an accident? >>> Terpnurse responded: And you're absolutely right about Bode. He was on the same ward as the Longbottoms, and presumably shared a nurse or healer with them. Didn't Hermione even remark that someone at the hospital should've recognized the plant for what it was? Perhaps the spheres that Alice is possibly warning Neville about are those lights. Maybe some sort of spy device, like a crystal ball? Or perhaps there's something else inimical about them? <<< Brenda: Brilliant, I was just about to rant about why the heck it is taking so long for them to recover. I mean, how *can* you torture a powerful wizard to insanity with Crucio! permanently? I am assuming it is the worst spell for torturing, otherwise that would have made into Unforgivable Curses list as well. Even the Dementors do not exert permanent affect on their victims, Azkaban prisoners seem to be recovering afterwards. It was always nagging to me, IF the Longbottoms have been taken care of pretty well in St. Mungo's, they should have made at least some recovery by now, IMO. If they were as respected and liked by the Wizarding community, it makes sense to me that WW at least paid their admiration by allocating some of the top healers in Britain. As for the light globes at St. Mungo's being spy device, it rings a bell, no? Those lights DD captured on 4 Privet Drive which might explain for the awful quick response from MoM whenever Harry performs magic (while Hermione's all the charm practice before Hogwarts has yet to cause her troubles ) >>> Eustace_Scrubb: We only really know from canon that the attack on the Longbottoms occurred at some point after Godric's Hollow when most in the WW had begun to feel safe. As the celebrations on November 1, 1981 (if that was really the year), one day after Godric's Hollow, were open enough and boisterous enough to draw the attention of Vernon Dursley and the muggle newscasters, I would argue that the feeling of safety was almost immediate--not wise, perhaps, but there you have it. <<< Brenda: Thank you for pointing it out to me, I always thought the attack on Longbottoms was one year later. I think I had it mixed with Crouch Jr. `died' a year after he was brought in to Azkaban. >>> Eustace_Scrubb: I think that Bellatrix knew that Voldemort intended to attack both the Longbottoms and the Potters but not necessarily why (i.e., they didn't know about the prophecy and the importance of a baby). When it became evident that Voldemort had vanished and the Potters were dead, Bellatrix and the others drew the conclusion that the Longbottoms had somehow defeated or captured their master; in other words, his plans had gone awry not at Godric's Hollow but at his next stop. That's why the Longbottoms were tortured. <<< Bren: While I will still argue that Bella & co knew the partial content of the prophecy, I agree that they had plans to attack the Potters as well. But Voldemort went after them BEFORE he sent his generals? Why? Or perhaps the Potters were attacked as well, but they never got caught. Could this be why all the Potters are dead? Following your train of thought, I will postulate that Neville was placed in protection and THAT is why Frank and Alice were tortured. Poor parents for having magically powerful children And as for Beth's speculation of Alice's maiden name, I simply have no idea Brenda, who yelled out "Dang it, # 109901 is taken! So much for palindrome!" How nerdy, I know From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Fri Aug 13 00:31:37 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 00:31:37 -0000 Subject: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - Info In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109903 >>> "lrcxrvo" wrote: > I've always thought that was a bit of a nod to Tolkien? Old man > willow? Brenda: Hahha, that's quite hilarious! I first thought you were referring to a tree in LOTR or something, as I have yet to read the novels... After re-reading OoP I will, this time for real! (my friends going 'yeah right') With HPness, Brenda From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 00:40:18 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 00:40:18 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ Children's Books? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109904 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "caspenzoe" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jcb54me" wrote: > > Steve/asian_lovr2: > > > JKRowling did not write these as children's books. She wrote the > > >story for herself, and wrote it the way it came to her. She never > > >took her original vision and in any way adapted it for children. > > Jeanette: > > > > Absolutely! Consider Lord of the Rings. It begins with what > > might be considered a children's tale (The Hobbit) and then > > develops into a major mythic saga. But, because Hobbit came > > first, LOTR was at first considered a children's or at most a > > teenage set of books y the publishers. > > > > Jeanette > Caspen: > > I really have to take issue with the whole debate about whether the > HP books are written for children/are children's literature or not. > I think it's a false issue for the following reasons: > > ...edited list... > > Therefore, with all due respect to Steve, I think his interpretation > of JKR's comments is far too literal. I worry that Steve and some > others here - Hans comes to mind (...) - perhaps all of us at some > point - are in real danger of becoming addled HP fundamentalists. > > In other words, yes there is genuine artistry behind the books and > yes there is liberal symbolism of various kinds - but the notion > that these somehow confine JKR to any sort of rigid formula (such > as Hermione and Ron must be beheaded) or level is simply absurd, > and flies in the face of everything that makes great literature > great. > > My two knuts - just don't think it works that way! > > Caspen Asian_lovr2: JKR has spoken many times in interviews and chats, and on her own website about edits and changes that she and the publishers made to the books, but she never allowed any edit that compromised the story. She flat out said she would never alter her vision to appeal to any else's sensibilities, expectations, or desires. Example, if the original vision calls for Harry to die, then Harry dies, she said she wouldn't change it to spare anyone's feelings. So, there is no doubt that a great deal of editing, proofreading, and in some cases re-writing went into each and every book. But it was done for the same reason all books are proofread and edited, for continuity, consistency, error correction, grammar, punctuation, and cultural idioms. However, none of that was to appeal to or appease a specific audience, other than cultural phrases unfamiliar to American audiences. It's obvious from the lack of swearing and adult romantic situations that JKR did not intend to exclude children, but I take acception to the idea that the books were written /for/ children. They were written for a general audience which /includes/ children. It is obvious from the development of the more emotional and non-romantic adult themes like death of beloved characters and emotional trama that this series never was a /childrens/ series. It was geared toward general audineces which includes children. I went back and looked and the original poster's statements on this issue said/implied JKR was 'softening' the book because they were /read/ by children. I may have taken that statement a little farther than was intended. That implied to me that the books were written /for/ children. So, she does soften what she writes, but does so with the intent of not excluding children as readers. In that sense, there is a limit to what she will write, but I don't see her avoiding any hard issues or simplifying or dumbing down the plot or it's complexities for anyone including for children. JKR has said that kids are much smarter than adults give them credit for; they don't need plots simplified or dumbed down. Give them a chance and they will quick rise to the level of the books. So, upon rereading the original post, it didn't quite literally say what I thought it said. Having admitted that point, I stand firm in my position. I will however further ammend my position by saying that much of the speculation seen here is above and beyond what is LIKELY, and /likely/ is my primary test of a theory. Not is it possible or imaginable, but is it likely. I find it very unlikely that Snape is a vampire, or that Dumbledore is either Ron or Hedwig, or that someone will time travel agiain in some extremely pivotal way. However, many people have had a great deal of fun with those theories; so more power to them. Just one man's opinion. Steve/asian_lovr2 From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 00:54:59 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 00:54:59 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109905 [snip] > Alla: > > LOL, Kathy! You know, for now I pretty much gave up participating in this argument seeing as Nora and now you do it very well, but I just wanted to make a quick comment on this one. > [snip] > I LIKE to speculate, BUT I still prefer that my speculation had at > least some canon-support, some roots. > > If my speculation is flat out rejected by canon, it becomes really > weak, IMO dcgmck: Hm... This does seem, for the most part, like a devil's advocate's argument, but while I also appreciate canonical support, I do worry when the canon cited is clearly shaded by the cloud of perspective. Hagrid doesn't always know what Harry, Ron, and Hermione are thinking or doing; neither would he have been in a position to know everything that the Marauders were willing to try. He doesn't seem to have known that they were unregistered animagi, nor is it likely that he would have disapproved, since he himself clearly dabbles in unauthorized magic and experimental breeding. Nothing Black and Lupin say about their past is definitive. They clearly gloss over what they perceive to have been youthful foibles, as evidenced by their delighted reminiscences upon hearing of Harry's viewing of Snape's memory in OotP. Declaring hatred for the dark arts is right up there with Barty Crouch, Jr.'s declaration of his despite for death eaters that went unpunished after having been caught. He is sincere, yet we, like Harry, are fools to take his words at their face value. Timewise it does seem illogical that the Marauders would have had time to be courted by Voldemort before James matured sufficiently for Lily to be willing to date him. What about after graduation and before marriage? How many people stay with their high school sweethearts through their twenties? Is it not just as likely that they went their separate ways, only to regroup at a later time? There is at present no canonical support one way or the other on this point. I guess my point is that both agreeing and disagreeing seem like folly at this point in time. There just isn't enough hard evidence outside the realm of personal testimonials at this point to declare absolutely that James and Sirius in particular were not susceptible to appeals to intellectual superiority for, as Gandalf said, "the good of lesser folk." Such an appeal won many to Hitler's cause until he showed his true colors. Those "lesser folk" tend to remain in the abstract for broad-minded intellectuals who nevertheless cross the street from homeless panhandlers and sneer at oily, greasy, dirty, foul-mouthed associates. From romulus at hermionegranger.us Fri Aug 13 00:59:43 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 00:59:43 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109906 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "KathyK" wrote: > KathyK: > > You're walking a fine line here and I don't think you're > succeeding. He hated them but decided to join up with LV who is all > about the dark arts and decided to dabble in them anyway. Why? > Please tell me why James would choose to do this if he hates the > Dark Arts so much. RMM: Okay, you bring up some interesting things here. And I will try to address them. James would join the Death Eaters if his friends like Lupin and Pettigrew said "Hey that would be a cool thing to do!" You denigrate Lupin's influence here too much. Granted he couldn't maintain control over Sirius and James, but he himself said that HE LED THEM into becoming anamagi. So, if it came to something dangerous and exciting, and Lupin said YES, then they did it. See more below on Lupin. Powerful magic, in my mind, is probably very intoxicating. If Professor Voldemort is teaching at Hogwarts, and I believe that he was, then he would certainly impress the students with his knowledge of DADA. The brightest wizard of his time is teaching 16 year olds some of most amazing things that they had ever seen. I know I would be impressed. And never mind the fact that there may or may not have been something questionable about the Dark Arts in there. That is impressive stuff! KathyK: > There is *nothing* to back up a claim that he > performed Dark Arts while the canon that he hated said Dark Arts is > a good indication that he would not perform them or be a part of a > group that does do them. RMM: Let me give you an illustration. Lord Voldemort is the DADA teacher and he is instructing the students in some very powerful stuff. Well, in order to show the students the very powerful countercurse to this piece of Dark magic, we will need a student in the class to perform that piece of dark magic so that we can illustrate how the counter to it works. And Gee, you will have to perform that piece of magic for each and every student so that they may get the counter curse right. What has Voldemort just achieved? He has blurred the line between good and bad. He is having his students learn bad stuff for the sake of learning the good stuff. They have become desensitized to the Dark Arts. [I believe this DADA class is so dangerous for this reason.] Secondly, many people do things that they detest or hate. But they do them for a higher reason. Many hate their jobs, but they perform those jobs so that they may bring home money for the family. I think you need to establish the fact that just because James Potter hated the Dark Arts that he did not perform them, before you can discount what I am saying about James Potter and his performing the dark arts. James had no problem doing all that illegal and dangerous stuff regarding animagism. He would be a perfect candidate for entry into a higher realm of powerful magic. After all, is there a class at Hogwarts that differientates for the students what is Dark Arts and what is not? I believe that is left with the DADA teacher no? And if the DADA teacher is teaching you powerful and impressive stuff, and he is after all the DADA teacher, it must be good right? I get the impression that James Potter jumped in with both feet and he realized only later what he was actually doing and in hindsight hated the thought of what he had done. KathyK: > For what? The sake of cozying up to > Voldemort who stands for soemthing else he disdains, Pure Bloodism? RMM: James Potter disdains Pure Bloodism? Where does canon say that? Are you, like Nora, equating Pure Bloodism with the Dark Arts? Big mistake if you are. > KathyK: > > And here I thought young Harry with the "power to vanquish the Dark > Lord" was sufficient reason to go after the Potters. How very silly > of me. So this is why he went after Harry rather than Neville. It > had nothing to do with Pettigrew giving up their location. It had > nothing to do with Harry being a half-blood like himself. It was a > vendetta against Harry's father. Bad Luck, Harry. James has messed > up your life real good, then. ;-) RMM: What is so difficult about what I said? I am sure others catch my meaning. James Potter was high up in the DEs. He betrayed, or defied if you will, Voldemort at some point. The level of his involvement necessitated that Voldemort himself destroy James Potter. Secondly, James Potter now has a son that some prophecy says will destroy Voldemort. Voldemort now has a two-fold reason for finding the Potters. Can this idea be so farfetched? KathyK: >It is much more in line with canon that > James wasn't a Death Eater and that he's had a thing for Lily since > he was at least 15 and that Lily only went out with him in 7th year > because he deflated his ego. Much more in line than saying he was > following around the Dark Arts loving, purge-the-mudbloods-from-the- > world Lord Voldemort until Lily's love saved him. Why would Lily go > for James if he was affiliated in any way with a group that > questioned her right to *exist*? "James thinks muggleborns are > second-class citizens at best but he's just so darn cute, I have to > go out with him?" It doesn't fly. RMM: Yes, I would agree when you put it in those terms. :-) I believe you oversimplify the situation here. I could write reams about this one, but I will confine myself to a few comments. First, James has always had a thing for Lily. Two, Lily doesn't like James big ego. Three, the DEs and Voldemort were preaching Pure Bloodism, but in terms, sugar coated enough, to convince the most sceptical that it was a good movement only interested in the rights of those Pure blood magical families. Pure bloods have rights too! We are an anti-death to the Pure bloods organization. We don't want to become extinct. Save the Purebloods. We are pro-pureblood. People always fall for the rhetoric. Four, the DEs are a secret society. You will not know the true aims until you reach a certain level. Do a little study on Freemasonry to see how it works. Five, James, when he became less egotistical, and this is an interesting topic in itself, became more attractive to Lily. Lily would not even know that James had become involved with the DEs for quite some time. Remember, the DEs are a secret organization. James has ZERO problems with doing stuff on the sly or illegally. KathyK: > And before we get to Remus Lupin's statements in PoA let me add this. > > Sirius Black states that he ran away from his home when he was > sixteen. He spent his holidays at his good friend, James' house. > Why did Sirius run away? He says, "Because I hated the whole lot of > them: my parents, with their pure-blood mania, convinced that to be > a Black made you practically royal...my idiot brother, soft enough > to believe them" (OoP Ch 6, US ed. p. 111). > > As I recall it's your contention that MWPP were all at one point > death eaters. At least by the age of sixteen we know Sirius Black > had enough of that. He left his family. And he went to JAMES. > Why would he do this if James Potter was so keen to be Lord > Voldemort's right-hand man? Unless all this took place before they > reached sixteen? RMM: Yes, good stuff here. Let me explain. Correct me if I am wrong here but here is a timeline of Sirius Black and James Potter in their last two years at Hogwarts. 5th year ends and the boys go home from school. That summer, Sirius moves out and into the Potters, before his 6th year at Hogwarts. (This means that Voldemort is very popular at this time, because Sirius' parents are really being too much for Sirius.) Sirius and James enter their 6th year at Hogwarts. Something happens in the 6th year, because Sirius finds his OWN PLACE TO LIVE between his 6th and 7th years at Hogwarts. He only visits the Potters for Sunday dinner. This tells me that his visits are with the parents (who have "adopted" him) and not to James. Where is James? And what happend to their relationship? Had James started seeing Lily at this time? NO, for we are told that they only started going out during their 7th year at Hogwarts. Something happened to cause a rift between James and Sirius -- being two of the closest friends imaginable. That something is the entrance of James, Remus, and Peter into the clutches and organization of Voldemort. And there were others as well. Remus, being a prefect, has influence over others. In spite of what you say Kathy, Remus is a leader type. And I believe what Remus says when he said that HE LED OTHERS and himself.... Now, James and Sirius enter their 7th year at Hogwarts. James begins to see Lily, because Lily likes what she sees in this young man now. James has changed. He seems less egotistical and more thoughtful and kind and less childish.... What has accomplished this change in James? I would speculate and say that James has been introduced to some very powerful magic that has completely impressed him. He sees how little he knows in terms of this and it makes him less inward looking. He now has no reason to think that he is great; he has just been humbled by the most powerful wizard of his age. He grows to admire and like Voldemort as a true mentor. Voldemort likes James and makes him feel special. They probably become very close friends. Meantime, Sirius is one who begins to miss his friend James terribly, now has to make a decision: join James or not. I believe he breaks down and joins up. > KathyK: > > False. Lupin is referring to the fact that he "led" three other > students along with him to betray Dumbledore's trust and to break > school (and Ministry) rules by becoming unregistered animagi. RMM: Yes you can read it that way, but you can also read it the way I stated it. You have nothing to prove the falsity of my position. Your way has Lupin repeating himself, my way has Lupin confessing for multiple transgressions of Dumbledore's trust. KathyK: > However, I don't believe Lupin > actually is the one who convinced the other three to act in this > way. We have canonical evidence that James and Sirius were the ones > in charge during school. RMM: Well, I belive Remus when he says that he led them. Black and Potter were the troublemakers there is no doubt. They were up to no good, and they were hard to control, if at all. But the fact is that Lupin had influence over them and he led them, as he says, into becoming animagi. Why, because it was dangerous and exciting for Black and Potter. Lupin says he led himself and others.....and I say....into the DEs because why? It was dangerous and exciting....save for Sirius. RMM www.hermionegranger.us From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 01:28:05 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 01:28:05 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore and Socks, Magical Contracts, and Bertie Botts Beans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109907 [snip] dcgmck: > > Harry's name comes out of the Goblet, it is Dumbledore who asserts that there is no way out for Harry, that he must now go through the contest to fulfill the contract someone of greater power and authority has enacted for him. > > Kneasy: > Not quite true. It's Bagman that burbles on about the need to comply > with the rules. DD listens to all the arguments and goes along. > The only time DD mentions magical contracts is earlier when he's > explaining the seriousness of placing ones name in the Goblet. > I've never considered that there was a contract. dcgmck: Dumbledore, explaining the rules for the selection of champions: "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. There can be no change of heart once you have become a champion." (GoF U.S. pbk 256) The wording is such that the name, not the placer of the name, is the one bound by the magical contract. From snow15145 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 01:34:02 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 01:34:02 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109908 Brenda snipped: Apologies for bringing up the obvious point... but there is the Fawkes' tail in Harry's wand core... The thing is, same thing goes for Voldemort too, he shares the same core as well. So if you extend it far enough, you could say there is a connection between: Dumbledore, Harry, Voldemort, Salazar, and of course the Fawkes itself. Snow: Brenda, your suggestion that Harry's connection to Fawkes is by way of the feather that is in Harry's wand core. You have also graciously included the fact that Voldemort has the same connection. Thank you for including Voldemort in that connection, very important character (I forgot) whose Fawkes connection has not been exactly spelled out as extensively as Harry's. But there are definite passages that link Voldemort to this connection as well. A comment made by Pentzouli fits this scenario very appropriately. Pentzouli snipped: >Harry's and Voldemort's wands have Fawkes's feathers in them, and since the phoenix's song gives courage to the pure and fear to the evil< So we know that, in the golden web dome, Harry was given courage and heard pleasant reassuring sounds, while Voldemort was hearing things that created fear and yet the inducing factor that created these emotions came from the same source; Fawkes. We can concede that there is a connection between Fawkes, Harry and Voldemort through their wand cores. The connection doesn't stop there though. Harry sees Dumbledore at his hearing and feels the presence of the phoenix, which is exhilarating to Harry. The connection is also there for Voldemort when he sees Dumbledore, the only one he ever feared (the essence of the Phoenix). Voldemort, therefore also connects with Dumbledore's Fawkes-side but unlike Harry has the opposite reaction because of his evil intentions, again, the passage that the phoenix's' song gives courage to the pure and fear to the evil fits nicely. But wait, we aren't talking about Fawkes inducing these feelings anymore but Dumbledore who produces the same effect on each of them as Fawkes. Why? RMM stated: Well, I speculate, since Dumbledore used to teach Transfiguration, that he is an animagus. I also believe that his animagus form is a phoenix. Fawkes the phoenix is with Dumbledore.<<<< Even if Dumbledore is an animagus he could not be Fawkes, who is the connection between Harry, Dumbledore and ultimately Voldemort, because they appear together too many times. > mhbobbin writes: And lets not forget the "second death" at the MoM in OotP. During the duel between LV and DD, Fawkes takes one of curses for DD and dies. While it's not much of a sacrifice, he was there the instant DD needed him. Later, he rises from the ashes...<<<< Now this one could possibly lead somewhere to the connection between Fawkes and Dumbledore. Could Dumbledore have physically shared himself with Fawkes? For each time Fawkes has a burning day and is reborn through the ashes then Dumbledore would be partially reborn with him. Fawkes appears to be a bit more than just Dumbledore's right hand. Dumbledore shares in Phoenix's physical properties also: The phoenix can bear heavy loads GOF Veritaserum pg 672 Dumbledore bent down, and with extraordinary strength for a man so old and thin, raised Harry from the ground and set him on his feat. The phoenix tears have healing powers OOP The Lost Prophecy pg 844 Harry looked up at him and saw a tear trickling down Dumbledore's face into his long silver beard. Is this self healing from the ordeal with Harry? The phoenix is highly faithful As far as Dumbledore's faithfulness, it should be self-explanatory Dumbledore is the epitome of a Phoenix! Not just any Phoenix but the one who has the connection with both Harry and Voldemort; Fawkes. If Dumbledore had managed to share part of himself with the Phoenix Fawkes, this would be better than any sorcerer's stone. What were those twelve uses for dragon blood that Dumbledore discovered? Thanks to all who took time to read and answer my questions! Snow From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Thu Aug 12 23:55:59 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 19:55:59 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Prophecy Interpretations (re: vanquishing LV) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040812235559.46426.qmail@web52003.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109909 Pat wrote: I personally still think that Harry, in some way, has to be the one, and only one, to bring about the demise of Voldemort--not by killing him, but by causing that thing that Dumbledore says is worse than death--no idea what that might be though. Luckdragon64 guesses: according to Dumbledore: Peter owes Harry a life debt and there is a fate worse than death for Voldemort. What would be worse than death for Voldemort? Why, being a common muggle of course. Harry with the help of all his supporters must find a way to destroy all of LV's powers leaving him completely unable to produce any magic ever again. There has to be a way of doing this. This means Harry will not have to commit murder, and I believe Peter will in some way either knowingly or unknowingly help bring this about. He will either realize the error of his ways, get sick of being Voldemorts "punching bag" so to speak, or screw up in a big way. I do believe it possible that Harry will have to go far back in time either to change something in the past, or to get advice from someone who is no longer living. Harry may also have to give up his own powers to make this happen. From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 01:38:22 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 01:38:22 -0000 Subject: Longbottom's Torture to Insanity (Re: candy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109910 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jcb54me" wrote: > > Going off on a totally different thought. I think the candy, is symbol of nourishment, not only of the body but of the mind and > spirit. Note the repeated emphaise in all the books on the happy > community feasts of Hogwarts as opposed to the stingy, begrudged > meals provided by Harry's muggle family. > > My thought is, Alice's gift of candy wrappers means even in her > tormented mental condition she is still trying to provide loving > nourishment to her child. Even insane, she is thinking of him - > remember the comment along the lines of "you must have enough > wrappers to paper your bedroom", so this is no one-time gift but a > steady reaching out to Neville over the years. > > Jeanette dcgmck: I like the positive spin on this, even though I tend to frown at parents who let their children grow up believing that candy is one of the major food groups. ;-> If, in fact, Alice is no longer playing with a full deck, then candy as nourishment makes sense. One of the nice things about fantasy is its relative freedom from the constraints of muggle world realities such as cavities, dentists' drills, sugar highs and lows, stomach aches, and malnutrition. Clearly JKR is either like my disgusting friends with high metabolisms and stick figures or she is one of the world's many sugar junkies herself... :-) On a more serious note... perhaps Droobles has a salutary effect similar to chocolate after a dementor attack. That would certainly fit in with your suggestion that candy nourishes the soul, something Alice understands firsthand. From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Fri Aug 13 01:52:14 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 01:52:14 -0000 Subject: Harry's Use of Cruciatus curse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109911 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bex" wrote: > Danie wondered: > > I didn't see anything about this in the FAQ, so I'm not sure if > it's been discussed before. I found it very disturbing that Harry > attempted to use the cruciatus curse on Bellatrix. > Yb responds: > Re: his conscience and LV > I don't think Harry will lose much sleep about making Trixie feel a > few pin pricks. She deserved it IMHO. If there was ever a need for a > llightning bolt, I think it needs to be aimed in her direction. And > as for LV "lording" it over Harry? Highly doubtful. LV doesn't care > about using the UCs. He uses them more than "Accio" for crying out > loud, he won't care. The only thing he'll do to Harry regarding > Hartry casting a UC is taunt him into doing another. ("C'mon, do it > again! Whatsamatta? Ya scared? C'mon, do it again!") > > My thoughts, keep the change. There are still a few nickels to rub together, but I'll go ahead and spend 'em here, too. ;-) The biggest problem with Harry's use of Crucio is that even though it is righteous anger, it's still anger. Dumbledore _will_ find out about it, and, same as a certain short green guy in a different galaxy and time in that medium-we-dare-not-name, DD will be disappointed but not too much. Harry can't attack out of anger. Remember, although this is my opinion and I will repeat it often, this is a story about Love vs Hate. Our hero can't use hate. LV will actually be a little concerned about this development, I think. Remember that LV considers love weak... and hate strong. If he sees Harry, the possibile instrument of his own defeat, branching off into the Dark Arts for weapons, this is a bad sign from his POV. :) Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Fri Aug 13 02:07:58 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 02:07:58 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ Children's Books? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109913 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > I went back and looked and the original poster's statements on this > issue said/implied JKR was 'softening' the book because they were > /read/ by children. I may have taken that statement a little farther > than was intended. That implied to me that the books were written > /for/ children. Can't be sure _which_ original post (could be mine as I seem to remember you responding), but /including/ is what I meant, as I do know her own daughter is reading the books now (wasn't a couple years ago, but begging to do so). But that's why I say things might get complex enough... but won't require an IQ of 150 to comprehend afterwards. :-) > I find it very unlikely that Snape is a > vampire, or that Dumbledore is either Ron or Hedwig, or that someone > will time travel agiain in some extremely pivotal way. However, many > people have had a great deal of fun with those theories; so more power > to them. And a very fair scale on which to balance things, too. However, Angimagus!Crookshanks and Vampire!Snape have both been asked directly to JKR in a public forum (her website, online chats, etc) and both have been dismissed. I tend to get a bit testy when already-denied theories keep managing to pop up. BTW, is anyone else upset that the latest FAQ poll on her website is overwhelmingly favoring what "my last" meant over Undercover!Percy and MIA!Wormtail? *sigh* damned kids. Josh From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 02:13:16 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 19:13:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Longevity and Youth (was Re: Why Voldemort is a fascist..) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040813021316.50519.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109914 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "manawydan" >> I've noticed this also. Whatever else it is, the WW is certainly >> not the gerontocracy that you might imagine that it would be, >> given the greater longevity of wizards > A Goldfeesh here: > JKR (from her 4/2001 Comic Relief Chat-thanks to TLC Quick Quill > Quotes) says that: "Dumbledore's about 150 years old... wizards > have a longer life expectancy than us Muggles, Snape's 35 or 6.' The next time JKR does some kind of chat or interview I hope this question comes up. Because with the exception of Dumbledore and perhaps McGonagall, most of the other characters seem to be - you'll pardon the expression - acting their ages. Does the process slow down when you hit 60 or so, when every year suddenly becomes two? Or will we find in Book 6 that Dumbledore has been living on a dwindly supply of Elixer of Life, like his (presumably by now) late friend Nicholas Flamel? Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Fri Aug 13 02:18:13 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 02:18:13 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109915 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: > James would join the Death Eaters if his friends like Lupin and > Pettigrew said "Hey that would be a cool thing to do!" Valky: Arrrrrrgh! Wait Up!!! I was leaving just now. I had finished my posting today. What is this I hear? James Potter a DE? HARK the Call of Duty beckons, I made a promise. AND I will NOT STAND for THIS!!!! Who DARES challenge the Fox to another duel .... : she scans the room with narrowed eyes. (Not personal just getting into character ;D) AHA! R.M.M. RMM > You denigrate Lupin's influence here too much. Granted he couldn't maintain control over Sirius and James, but he himself said that HE LED THEM into becoming anamagi. So, if it came to something dangerous and exciting, and Lupin said YES, then they did it. See more below on Lupin. > Valky: Watch out for the quiet ones, eh? ..... Well, I wonder how you explain Remus in almost the same breath having said how terrified he was that his friends would *desert* him when they discovered he was a WereWolf. RMM: > Powerful magic, in my mind, is probably very intoxicating. If Professor Voldemort is teaching at Hogwarts, and I believe that he was, then he would certainly impress the students with his knowledge of DADA. > Valky: You are good at timelines so rationalise how Lord Voldemort could be a teacher at Hogwarts for me.... please... ;P [sinister smirk appearing on the Fox's face] While still of course allowing for the DE James to have happened during 6th year..... and allowing Harry's birth to occur at the correct time... and also keeping a distinct and recognisable ten year war in tact..... Good Luck... > KathyK: > > There is *nothing* to back up a claim that he > > performed Dark Arts while the canon that he hated said Dark Arts > > RMM: > I think you need to establish the fact that just because James Potter hated the Dark Arts that he did not perform them, before you can discount what I am saying about James Potter and his performing the dark arts. James had no problem doing all that illegal and dangerous stuff regarding animagism. He would be a perfect candidate for entry into a higher realm of powerful magic. After all, is there a class at Hogwarts that differientates for the students what is Dark Arts and what is not? I believe that is left with the DADA teacher no? And if the DADA teacher is teaching you powerful and impressive stuff, and he is after all the DADA teacher, it must be good right? I get the impression that James Potter jumped in with both feet and he realized only later what he was actually doing and in hindsight hated the thought of what he had done. > Valky: You are also being dismissive. Of the canon "James always hated the Dark Arts" For a start you need to prove that, not just any Hogwarts student, but specifically, *James* didn't know what the Dark Arts truly were. This canon statement from Sirius that 'James *always* hated the Dark Arts' demonstrates in complete context: 1 James knew what Dark Arts were from as far back a Sirius remembers knowing him. = James *always* 2 He Hated them! = *hated* 3 He did not confuse Dark Bloodlines with Dark Arts because this is Sirius talking....... (Sirius *is* the magnetic North of demonstrating that this confusion exists. And even up to the moment when choosing Secret Keepers James still was able to make the clear distinction between Dark Blood-Sirius and Dark Arts-DE.) = *The Dark Arts* 4 This canon is delivered in relating to the context of James behaviour at the end of his 5th year by an adult some twenty years later. Hence we can presume that, to some degree, Sirius accurately recalls "5th year James" as being opposed directly to DARK ARTS; and knowing what they are; and not confused about what they are either. = *Closure* > KathyK: > For what? The sake of cozying up to Voldemort who stands for soemthing else he disdains, Pure Bloodism? > > RMM: > James Potter disdains Pure Bloodism? Where does canon say that? > Are you, like Nora, equating Pure Bloodism with the Dark Arts? > Big mistake if you are. > Valky: In Snapes worst memory for a start; 'Apologise to Evans' ring a bell? 'I'd NEVER call you a you-know-what' he says to Lily and the emphasis on "never" is JAMES OWN, not mine! Pure bloodism does get brought up somewhere else in relation to James.. but I can't find it. I recall its definately in support of Kathy's claim, though. Fox surveys the destruction at her feet for a moment then straightens her collar and spins on her heel. She marches out not closing the door behind her. Bets to you From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Fri Aug 13 02:29:08 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 02:29:08 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ Children's Books? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109916 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Josh Warren" wrote: > I tend to get a bit testy when already-denied > theories keep managing to pop up. > > BTW, is anyone else upset that the latest FAQ poll on her website is > overwhelmingly favoring what "my last" meant over Undercover!Percy > and MIA!Wormtail? *sigh* damned kids. > > Josh Valky: Yes indeeedy Josh! I voted MIA!Wormtail blast it! Where is that little creep? From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 02:35:02 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 19:35:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Curse Scars In-Reply-To: <000f01c4808a$b6342790$73fae2d1@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: <20040813023502.90985.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109917 --- Cathy Drolet wrote: > Snow: > The quote in question is in GOF The Parting of the Ways U.S > edition: > > "You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've never heard of a curse > scar acting as an alarm bell before..."<<< > > DuffyPoo replyed: > "Snow, does your book really say "but I've *never* heard of a curse > scar?" Both of mine, Canadian HB and PB published in 2000 say > "You'll forgive me, > Dumbledore, but I've [I have] heard of a curse scar acting as an > alarm bell before." > If there is a correction is a subsequent publication to what I have > then it all makes sense." > > > DuffyPoo again: > FYI, the Canadian books are published by Raincoast Books in > Vancouver and the British by Bloomsbury Publishing in London. I > don't know if Raincoast is the Canadian subsidiary of Bloomsbury or > what, I've just always been led to believe that the UK and Canadian > editions are exactly the same. The OotP paperback I bought Tuesday > has the 'Prefects can't dock house points from other Prefects' > change that was noted by someone in the UK a few weeks ago. Raincoast is a separate Canadian publishing house that hit the jackpot when it got chosen to print the Potter books in Canada. It prints the UK version word for word. This dispute over the word "never" came up somewhere and JKR acknowledged that it was a mistake and that it should read "never heard of...". Now if you challenge me to say where she said it, I couldn't tell you. It was an interview I read and I don't read many of them. Sorry. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 02:42:24 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 02:42:24 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109918 > Valky: > You are good at timelines so rationalise how Lord Voldemort could be > a teacher at Hogwarts for me.... please... ;P > [sinister smirk appearing on the Fox's face] > While still of course allowing for the DE James to have happened > during 6th year..... and allowing Harry's birth to occur at the > correct time... and also keeping a distinct and recognisable ten > year war in tact..... Good Luck... Alla: I frankly don't see how it could be rationalised timelinewise. Lexicon places Tom Riddle's resurfaction as Lord Voldemort at 1970. Give or take one-two years, but Lexicon is usually correct. And this is the same time when Marauders start Hogwarts. So, Valky I guess that Dumbledore hired Voldie , when he already became Voldie. Why am I reluctant to believe that? :o) From juli17 at aol.com Fri Aug 13 02:46:20 2004 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 22:46:20 EDT Subject: Longbottom's Torture to Insanity Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109919 In a message dated 8/12/2004 5:05:58 PM Pacific Daylight Time, HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com writes: > >Brenda wrote: > > > > > >>Of course, one must ask, WHY on earth the Longbottoms were > tortured > >>to insanity in the first place. > > A questioned occured to me last week that may have something to do > with this. What is Alice's maiden name? We haven't been told, but she > had to be a pure blood. Possibly she is part of one of the large > pureblood families we know. She most likely isn't a Black, Harry > would have noticed that on the tapestry. It could be that she was > considered a blood traitor to her family and one of her DE relatives > decided to follow through on the attack out of spite after > Voldemort's fall. > > Beth G That's a great question! The answer could very well be significant. What if she's a Malfoy? Or a Snape--though are there any Snapes around besides Severus? Funny that we haven't seen or heard of any. Or, here's another thought. What if Alice's maiden name is Lupin? Her condition might be partly the reason for Lupin's mysterious comings and goings, and his reticience. It's all speculation, but I really think Alice will have something to contribute in the next two books, whether she regains her senses, and whatever her maiden name may be. Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From vmonte at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 03:46:17 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 03:46:17 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109920 Snow wrote: The phoenix tears have healing powers OOP The Lost Prophecy pg 844 Harry looked up at him and saw a tear trickling down Dumbledore's face into his long silver beard. Is this self healing from the ordeal with Harry? The phoenix is highly faithful As far as Dumbledore's faithfulness, it should be self-explanatory Dumbledore is the epitome of a Phoenix! Not just any Phoenix but the one who has the connection with both Harry and Voldemort; Fawkes. If Dumbledore had managed to share part of himself with the Phoenix Fawkes, this would be better than any sorcerer's stone. What were those twelve uses for dragon blood that Dumbledore discovered? Thanks to all who took time to read and answer my questions! vmonte responds: I might be remembering this incorrectly but wasn't there a wasp or bee outside of a Hogwarts class window when Harry was taking one of his exams? And I think there was another one in a scene with Ron where he almost kills it. If DD is an animagus he probably is more likely to be a bee since his name means Bumble Bee. Does anyone know the scenes I'm talking about? (This doesn't mean that he couldn't be masquerading as other things since he is probably good at transfiguration.) vivian From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 13 03:53:40 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 03:53:40 -0000 Subject: Prophecy Interpretations (re: vanquishing LV) In-Reply-To: <20040812235559.46426.qmail@web52003.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109921 Pat wrote: > I personally still think that Harry, in some way, has to be the > one, and only one, to bring about the demise of Voldemort--not by > killing him, but by causing that thing that Dumbledore says is > worse than death--no idea what that might be though. Luckdragon64 guesses: > according to Dumbledore: Peter owes Harry a life debt and there is > a fate worse than death for Voldemort. > > What would be worse than death for Voldemort? Why, being a common > muggle of course. SSSusan: I don't know. [Shudder.] I'm not so sure I'd want a de-magicked Voldy out there, royally pissed off. I don't think it'd take him long to pick up how to use an uzi. And while I love the idea of Harry somehow getting off the hook for having to kill Voldy [you know, vanquish vs. kill], deep down I do want Voldy to die. I'm not at all keen on Voldy living, even "reduced to" a Muggle, nor am I especially keen on the idea of a Redeemed!Tom somewhere inside Voldy who can live while essence-of- Voldy (or Sally) dies. Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 13 04:03:01 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 04:03:01 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ Children's Books? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109922 Josh Warren wrote: > > I tend to get a bit testy when already-denied > > theories keep managing to pop up. SSSusan: The thing is, as much as I *don't* believe in Vampire!Snape, there are still folks who can hang onto that theory because what JKR said to "Is there a link between Snape and vampires?" was "Erm...I don't think so." You see? It sounded like a "no" to me, but why doesn't she just come out and say "NO!" It's the way she leaves a teeny tiny window there that muddies the waters. Josh: > > BTW, is anyone else upset that the latest FAQ poll on her > > website is overwhelmingly favoring what "my last" meant over > > Undercover!Percy and MIA!Wormtail? *sigh* damned kids. Valky: > Yes indeeedy Josh! > > I voted MIA!Wormtail blast it! Where is that little creep? SSSusan: Well, this "kid" [kinda funny in that I'm 42] voted for "my last." So sue me. :-) Siriusly Snapey Susan From navarro198 at hotmail.com Fri Aug 13 04:09:37 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 04:09:37 -0000 Subject: Calendars was Re: biggest SPOILER In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109923 Yb wrote: >> Sooo... why would she give us Hermione's birthday on the website and in-chat if it was a major plot point? She would at least have hinted that Hermione's birthday is in September if it was at all relevant to the plot, not just handed it to us. Giving us something like that, especially with no hints in canon, implies that it will probably never even make it into the books. << HunterGreen: Not that I agree that Hermione could be "the one" (not only is it supposed to be male, the 19th is not as the 'month dies', and I don't see how her dentist parents could have defied Voldemort three times, and I believe JKR has said at one point in an interview that we wouldn't be hearing any more about them), but there HAVE been hints in the books about what her birthday is. Bookworm: There was another boy the prophecy *could* have applied to before Voldemort attacked the Potters - Neville. I don't remember any hint given in the books or interviews of when his birthday is. Oversight or plot devise? Ravenclaw Bookworm From flyballcairn at bellsouth.net Thu Aug 12 23:59:43 2004 From: flyballcairn at bellsouth.net (Danielle Arnt) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 18:59:43 -0500 Subject: Harry's Use of the Cruciatus Curse Message-ID: <028a01c480c8$700aff80$5302a8c0@Shadowfax> No: HPFGUIDX 109924 Yb: "Re: his conscience and LV I don't think Harry will lose much sleep about making Trixie feel a few pin pricks. She deserved it IMHO. If there was ever a need for a llightning bolt, I think it needs to be aimed in her direction. And as for LV "lording" it over Harry? Highly doubtful. LV doesn't care about using the UCs. He uses them more than "Accio" for crying out loud, he won't care. The only thing he'll do to Harry regarding Hartry casting a UC is taunt him into doing another. ("C'mon, do it again! Whatsamatta? Ya scared? C'mon, do it again!")" Well, what I was getting at was not so much it's effect on Bellatrix, as how the fact that he used it, or tried to, makes him more like Voldemort. This caused him a great deal of distress in COS when he saw the similarities between himself and Tom Riddle. Also, Voldemort might use this to force Harry to doubt and question himself, kind of like "come over to the dark side. See how much easier it is? Hey, you can practice on Bellatrix?" That was what I was thinking, not that Voldermort cares, just that he would use it, and any misgivings Harry may have about it, as a weapon. Danie in AL [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From vmonte at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 04:13:50 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 04:13:50 -0000 Subject: you CAN'T hurt a BABY!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109925 ballerinalaura wrote: She says, "you can't hurt a baby" and then something like 'there was no time to argue the suggestion' follows. Has this particular part stuck out to anyone else??? vmonte responds: Well, his body may not have been a baby's, but at that moment in time his head/brain was a baby. Wouldn't Harry be just as bad as Voldemort if he injured what was technically a child? I mean Voldemort did go after baby Harry who was an innocent child. I think that JKR was trying to make a point here. This scene reminds me of a conversation I had with my brother about time-travel. He thinks that if Dumbledore was really using TT he would just go back in time and kill Tom Riddle as a child. I don't think that it's that simple though. Could you (if you are not a maniac) kill a child that easily? Hermione often makes Harry think about his actions. And Harry often imagines what Hermione would think or do in certain situations. I think we are being set-up for another situation like the one above. Whether through the dreaded TT, or another DoM scene. Harry will be put in a situation where he will remember what Hermione has said to him, and he will act in the proper way. Has anyone come up with the theory that perhaps Voldemort will be vanquished but that somehow a new (baby) Tom Riddle will survive and be given a second chance at life? vivian From kempermentor at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 00:11:32 2004 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 00:11:32 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109926 snow wrote: Very, very important question: Are and were all the members of the Order of the Phoenix once in Gryffindor house (loyalty to Dumbledore)? This one could be interesting given Snape is part of the Order. Kemper gives one answer: I'm betting Mrs. Figg wasn't sorted into Gryffindor or any other house. There is no canon suggesting that Hogwart's has a special ed. program. No one seems to ride the short broom to school. From kempermentor at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 00:41:11 2004 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 00:41:11 -0000 Subject: Harry's Use of Cruciatus curse In-Reply-To: <020101c4809a$a6d851d0$5302a8c0@Shadowfax> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109927 Danie wrote: I found it very disturbing that Harry attempted to use the cruciatus curse on Bellatrix. If it's an unforgiveable curse, shouldn't he be sent to Azkaban for using it? Or, is it ok to use against Death Eaters or defending oneself against those who do use unforgiveable curses? I don't think "righteous anger" would be an excuse or anyone could claim it. Perhaps, because Harry tried to use the curse but essentially failed because it only hit Bellatrix but didn't cause her pain, he might not actually have been seen to have used it. --or will it be something Voldemort will use against him in the future? Any one have any thoughts about this? Kemper responds: Harry's use of the UC has nagged at me as well. I think the wizard/witch using an UC for the first time may find it even easier to use the next time the opportunity presents itself. Harry is on a slippery slope. Does he feel regret for using it, or does he feel righteous? If he does not regret using an UC, then he may use it again, giving in to the Dark Side of the Force like Anakin when he killed all those Tusken Raiders. I see the Dark Emperor, LV, using this to entice Harry to the Dark Order. (Any one else notice Moody!CrouchJr discussing his similarity with LV to Harry? "And both of us had the pleasure... the very great pleasure... of killing our fathers to ensure the continued rise of the Dark Order!") From snow15145 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 04:25:04 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 04:25:04 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109928 > vmonte responds: > > I might be remembering this incorrectly but wasn't there a wasp or > bee outside of a Hogwarts class window when Harry was taking one of > his exams? And I think there was another one in a scene with Ron > where he almost kills it. If DD is an animagus he probably is more > likely to be a bee since his name means Bumble Bee. Does anyone know > the scenes I'm talking about? (This doesn't mean that he couldn't be > masquerading as other things since he is probably good at > transfiguration.) > > vivian Snow: Your last statement, Vivian, is mostly what I am referring to. [You people make me think too much for your own good. :)] If Dumbledore is an animagus I think he would "bee" more than one, almost like a metamorphagus. Just look at what, I feel is the most complex inconspicuous riddling statement of all the books: OOP The Only One He Ever Feared pg. 818 "I will give you " Dumbledore pulled a watch with twelve hands from his pocket and surveyed it, " half an hour of my time tonight " Dumbledore pulls out his twelve planet watch with twelve hands (the discoverer of twelve uses for dragon blood) and states that he will give Fudge half an hour of his time What other time is there but his time? What does that watch of his actually tell him? To get back to the animagus of Dumbledore, what would make anyone believe that one of the greatest wizards of all times, along with, if you put what he has done into resume' format, could only produce One animagus form? Are sights have been set a bit low on underestimating such a powerful Wizengamot Warlock. What is Dumbledore capable of much more than Voldemort could ever dream of good thing he's on our side. Dumbledore's allowances are questionable concerning Harry but we don't know the whole story. From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Fri Aug 13 04:26:08 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 04:26:08 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ Children's Books? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109929 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > Josh Warren wrote: > > > I tend to get a bit testy when already-denied > > > theories keep managing to pop up. > > > SSSusan: > The thing is, as much as I *don't* believe in Vampire!Snape, there > are still folks who can hang onto that theory because what JKR said > to "Is there a link between Snape and vampires?" was "Erm...I don't > think so." You see? It sounded like a "no" to me, but why doesn't > she just come out and say "NO!" It's the way she leaves a teeny > tiny window there that muddies the waters. She has 4 answers... "yes" "no" "I can't say!" and "what are you, stupid?" I'll count her Vampire!Snape answer as #4, right along with DE!Lily, Granddaddy!LV, etc. ;-) > Josh: > > > BTW, is anyone else upset that the latest FAQ poll on her > > > website is overwhelmingly favoring what "my last" meant over > > > Undercover!Percy and MIA!Wormtail? *sigh* damned kids. > > SSSusan: > Well, this "kid" [kinda funny in that I'm 42] voted for "my last." > So sue me. :-) *rolls eyes* ;) Let's have our lawyers exchange contact info ;) hee hee... Seriously though... even if "my last" doesn't refer to the original letter from Nov 1, then it is next most likely to be a similar warning. Somehow I doubt that as nothing seems to have ever been said to the Dursleys to correct their behaviour before OotP, its instances being the Howler and the welcoming committee. :) We'll find out about Peter soon enough, but the possibility of DE! Percy is what interests me. We know the Dursleys are stupid, and we know Peter is evil but indebted to Harry in some way (didn't help in GoF) and most likely was either spying as a rat or home licking LV's snakeskin boots, but Percy is an unknown and very troublesome, as Prat!Percy could become DE!Percy (and pretend to come home), but Undercover!Percy is safe to come back. Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Fri Aug 13 04:28:16 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 04:28:16 -0000 Subject: Calendars was Re: biggest SPOILER In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109930 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "scoutmom21113" wrote: > Bookworm: > There was another boy the prophecy *could* have applied to before > Voldemort attacked the Potters - Neville. I don't remember any hint > given in the books or interviews of when his birthday is. Oversight > or plot devise? Umm, as the 7th month dies, of course. :-P ...though maybe not exactly the 31st, but close enough to be considered at least. Now, if Neville were a September baby, that would throw things into a new light; but still limit it to them two. I would say that he is also a July baby, July 29-31. Josh From sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com Fri Aug 13 04:33:15 2004 From: sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com (Amey Chinchorkar) Date: 13 Aug 2004 04:33:15 -0000 Subject: Fudge and Scar, Hagrid and Order, Dumbledore and Longbottoms Message-ID: <20040813043315.10635.qmail@webmail7.rediffmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109931 - DuffyPoo: - Snow, does your book really say "but I've *never* heard of a curse - scar?" Both of mine, Canadian HB and PB published in 2000 - say "You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've [I have] heard of a - curse scar acting as an alarm bell before." - Aggie: - My UK version (p613 published 2000) says the same as DuffyPoo's. As - it stands though it doesn't make sense (although I'm sure the English - bods on here will elaborate on that!). I have to admit I *read* it - as having the 'never' in there, it's the only way my little brain can - make sense of what Fudge is saying!! Amey: My edition also says the same thing. I took it as Fudge referring to Rita?s article on Harry or maybe his experience in Ministry (Magical Law Enforcement). But I agree, *never* makes much more sense given Fudge and is habit of not looking beyond his own nose. - RMM: - Well I think the episode with the dinosaur egg probably sealed it - for him. He becomes a weak link in the organization. - As much as I love him, and he can do great things for the cause, I - could not trust him with critical information -- like how to get - past Fluffy. :-) Amey: not dino egg, dragon egg.. there is a difference He was in the original photograph of the Order. Also, he was away most of the part with *his* Maxime and so could not attend the meetings. And also, he is *Keeper* of Hogwarts and so I doubt he attends the meetings. His presence in London will not go unnoticed. - Brenda - Of course, one must ask, WHY on earth the Longbottoms were tortured - to insanity in the first place. Voldemort has disappeared a year - prior to that, what made Bellatrix & co believe that they knew his - whereabouts, out of everyone in the Order? I know I am not the only - one thinking that it was just a cover-up excuse. - If it is the case of 3) or 4) from above, I think it has Ever-So-Evil! - Dumbledore written all over the place. Great, Kneasy will be - pleased... - If D-Dore indeed felt the need to orchestrate this cover-up, it makes - me wonder just whatever intel was that they had. Must be of utmost - importance. - I wonder, if DD did play a role in Longbottoms' supposed insanity and - the truth comes out, how Neville will take this... Will he feel much - rage to actually hurt Dumbledore? Hmm, something to think about... Amey: Where did you get the figure of 1 year? They were tortured when people had started feeling safe, so it can be even as early as 1 week or 1 month (I mean, they started full celebrations even on the rumour that *You-Know-Who* had vanished). And also, the Longbottoms were easy to get because they were Aurors and had to move out of security. Also, maybe Bella knew the two kids Voldemort was after and thought that since Potters are dead, they are the oinly ones remaining. Also, being Aurors (The Elite), they must have much more info about the War and its participants than anybody else. Also, they are known to be close to Dumbledore. This makes the Longbottoms perfect for getting information. As for Dumbledore playing a role, what are his motives? What information they can possibly have? Amey, who is ready to read about what Dumbledore finds so important to hide [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From snow15145 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 04:35:39 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 04:35:39 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109932 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kempermentor" wrote: > snow wrote: > > Very, very important question: > > Are and were all the members of the Order of the Phoenix once in > Gryffindor house (loyalty to Dumbledore)? This one could be > interesting given Snape is part of the Order. > > Kemper gives one answer: > > I'm betting Mrs. Figg wasn't sorted into Gryffindor or any other > house. There is no canon suggesting that Hogwart's has a special ed. > program. No one seems to ride the short broom to school. Snow: Touch?! Kempermentor, I am still laughing as bad as Luna when Ron made the joke about the baboon's backside. In rebuttal all I can say is that we don't know who Mrs. Figgs was married to, a Gryffindor house alumni perhaps! From nadinesaintamour at hotmail.com Fri Aug 13 04:44:31 2004 From: nadinesaintamour at hotmail.com (catimini15) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 04:44:31 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109933 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > > I might be remembering this incorrectly but wasn't there a wasp or > bee outside of a Hogwarts class window when Harry was taking one of > his exams? And I think there was another one in a scene with Ron > where he almost kills it. If DD is an animagus he probably is more > likely to be a bee since his name means Bumble Bee. Does anyone know > the scenes I'm talking about? (This doesn't mean that he couldn't be > masquerading as other things since he is probably good at > transfiguration.) > > vivian Nadine responds : That wasp (assuming it is always the same) ? Another animagus ? Maybe. Although, didn't JKR said there wouldn't be anymore unregistered animagus in the series ? Assuming the wasp is, indeed, an animagus, I doubt it is Dumbledore because if DD is a 19th Century ?registered? animagus - unchecked by Hermione - I picture him transfiguring in a more complex and powerful animal... Also : there is definetly something weird about that wasp ! It seems to always be in the right place at the right moment. Let's say the wasp is... Ludo Bagman. After all, wasn't Bagman a champion for the Wimbourne (sp ?) Wasp Quidditch team ? You are right Vivian. We see a wasp two times in the series. In GoF (The Tird Task), Ron is attempting an Impediment Jink on a wasp (the first one) who just happens to be buzzing in the room. Was Bagman checking on Harry's training for the final task ? After all, Bagman had a lot of money on this one... I think he was working for himself at this point. And then, in OotP (chapter ?), there is the second wasp. I don't have my book with me but isn't it during Harry's History of Magic exam (when he falls asleep and dreams of Sirius being tortured) that we hear the wasp buzzing again ? Assuming that Bagman is the wasp and that he has rejoigned his true reborned master (Voldy), he could have been keeping an eye on Harry, waiting for his cue : ?Ok ! The kid is having the dream ! Carry on with the MoM plan !? I know Bagman is an idiot so the wasp could, matter of factly, be any other DE. Malfoy is a good candidate as well ! As for Snow's inquiry about the 12 uses of Dragon's blood, didn't JKR confirmed, at one point, that the twelfth use is oven cleaner ? ? la prochaine ! Nadine From Meliss9900 at aol.com Fri Aug 13 05:23:16 2004 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 01:23:16 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts Message-ID: <87.1306254a.2e4daa44@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109934 In a message dated 08/12/2004 10.00 Central Daylight Time, susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net writes: > ? THIS seems to be the > crux of the issue--whether there's something magical about the orb > itself that automatically "knows" who can pick it up, or whether that > information is simply assigned by the witch or wizard in charge. > "Lifter upper. .I love it Umm I think that the final spell, ward . .whatever. . is probably placed on it when its officially recorded. For all we know prophecies that have no particular person attached to them might be kept somewhere else until they are named. I do agree that once Harry took it off the shelf that it became his to show to whomever he wanted. Melissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From romulus at hermionegranger.us Fri Aug 13 05:26:39 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 05:26:39 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109935 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Nora Renka" wrote: Nora: > Let me just say again that the idea of Voldemort as DADA teacher is > about as questionable as you can get. It's canonical that he > resurfaces AS Lord Voldemort--wow, just the kind of name and kind of > guy who Dumbledore-as-Headmaster is going to hire to teach the > kiddies. RMM: Happy Birthday! Okay, now back to the discussion... Well, if Voldemort is not a teacher at Hogwarts, he certainly has his top agents at school recruiting students for the DEs. Remember what Hagrid said? "Only mystery is why Voldemort didn't go after James and Lily -- they were Head Boy and Head Girl." This tells me that other top students were being pegged by Voldemort and/or his agents. And I don't see Slytherins trying to convince Gryffindors about the virtues of the new regime. Secondly, Lord Voldemort. In the early 1970s, what does the name invoke to you? The same as it would in 1981? Apparently so. You simply cannot look back in foresight and say -- hey its 1970 and Lord Voldemort is here and he is evil. I know because of what he does in 1980!! Has Voldemort been suspected of anything before starting the movement of the DEs? No, he left school with Honors. He was Head Boy, he won a special award. There is absolutely no reason that Voldemort, as Voldemort, would have any bad reputation preceding him when he arrived on the scene in 1970. Certainly, Dumbledore had suspicions of Tom Riddle. Voldemort shows up and Dumbledore says -- hey you're evil, I'm not hiring you!!! This is laughable, I'm sorry. That is not how the real world works. You have to put Dumbledore's statement about Voldemort in perspective. He made those statements to Harry after the whole affair of LV and DEs - Round 1 - had taken place. He is talking about what he learns about the man after much time with him, around him, probablyworking with him, learning about him through the Order of the Phoenix's work, etc. He could not say that about Voldemort upon seeing him for the first time in 25 years. Nora: Not to mention that it's generally better to try to prove > things from, you know, positive evidence. RMM: I am basing my speculations on canon. As they remain speculation, positive proof is not necessary. However, I do have to question your approach. Nora: > But there's a fairly clear difference in the Potterverse > between 'illegal and dangerous' and the Dark Arts. The Dark Arts, > from what we've seen of them, are things that either destroy a > person's nature as a subject (death, pain that destroys the ability > to act, mental control), or things that require the element of force > to work (blood of the enemy, forcibly taken and all of that jazz). RMM: Like the Polyjuice Potion for one? Knocking out a person and keeping them under wraps while you impersonate them? You know, like stealing someone's identity? Well, I know three 2nd years that did exactly that. But that's okay.. . they were just kids. As far and Good and Bad are concerned there was absolutely no difference between what Harry, Ron, and Hermione did and what B. Crouch Jr. did. Secondly, what happens to an individual who is found out to be an unregistered animagus? A slap on the wrist? Hardly. And I agree. The dark arts fall ito the category that making someone do something against their will is certainly not kosher. Like James' pranks with Snape for instance? How much more did James do to Snape in the name of fun and kicks? And Sirius' little "prank" with Snape! Just fun and games. Ho, ho, wouldn't that have been fun if Lupin had got a hold of Snape?? Giggle, giggle... What you are saying in effect is that just because the Marauders do it, or if Harry, Hermione, and Ron do it, it is OKAY. If a Slytherin does it, then it is THE DARK ARTS and THEY ARE EVIL. That is Situation Ethics, pure and simple. Nora, > Perhaps the situation with Dark Arts in the Potterverse is a little > more like that of the Supreme Court and pornography--"I can't define > it for sure, but I know it when I see it." Being good at dangerous > yet highly cool magic undertaken in order to aid a friend and > falling into the Dark Arts is walking across a line with some > ontological heft to it. RMM: Perhaps you can see a huge defining line between it, but to students at school who are already performing nasty things to each other, there is no defining line for it. Now that you go this route, it brings me to a conclusion. James decided he hated the Dark Arts after doing it.... He was doing things that he only regretted later and finally swore off. He shows at 15 that he is prime for bigger and better feats of nastiness, and there is nothing there to stop him....except Lily. Nora: > Again, WHY is James so truly pissed off about the use of the word > Mudblood and so insistent that he would never use it if he were into > pureblood philosophy? RMM: I don't see him "pissed off" about using the word. I see him telling Lily that he wouldn't call her that. He is not serious about the Purebloodism. He is seriously into the magic and what is being offered him in the DEs. Nora: > It's surely an insight into Young!Snape that > he throws it off, and another insight into James that he wouldn't > use it. Keep in mind, given that Voldemort's agenda is on people's > minds by this point in time, that 'Mudblood' has a little...heft > that it wouldn't have otherwise. RMM: Granted. There were various types of people with various agendas upon joining the DEs. There were the more extreme and the less extreme. But joining the DEs was bigger than that. I would say that based on the popularity of the group at the time, that it was the cool thing to do as a student. Nora: > > Now, let's play a game. Humor me--I'm the birthday girl. RMM: Happy birthday again!! Nora: > This game is called 'Let's list the social status of all the Death > Eaters we can think of'. > > Lucius Malfoy: old pureblood family, definitely into the Dark Arts > (per CoS--do I really need to go into this one?) Slytherin. > > Bellatrix Lestrange: old pureblood family, into the Dark Arts (given > the evidence of the Black family house). Slytherin. > > The Brothers Lestrange: must be pureblood because one of them made > an acceptable husband for Bellatrix. Slytherin. > > Barty Crouch Jr.: old pureblood family, child of a domineering and > magically powerful father. Don't know. > > Theodore Nott: pureblood family (per JKR's comments about Nott the > Younger on her website). Don't know. > > MacNair and Rookwood: don't know, but both of them have/had nice > good cushy Ministry jobs. > > Now, I am damn well aware that this is incomplete. However, it > makes a pretty solid argument from the evidence that this means > *something*--combine it with JKR's comments about HOW Death Eaters > think about half/pure/whatever, and we have a strong, strong, link > between Dark Arts, pureblood philosophy, Death Eaters, Voldemort. RMM: But they are still not the same thing. There were many into the Purebloodism. Many of those left after the Dark Arts methods for taking power agenda arose. There are many positive aspects of Purebloodism for instance. Dark Arts are practiced by non Purebloods for instance. Voldemort was a brilliant man -- not all EVIL -- unless you equate Evil with Brilliant. So while there are links, the concepts are different and independent of each other. Nora: > They're canonically knotted together. RMM: Give me some quotes that ties them together then. Otherwise, I dispute that claim. > > > RMM: > > Yes, I would agree when you put it in those terms. :-) > > I believe you oversimplify the situation here. I could write > > reams about this one, but I will confine myself to a few comments. > > First, James has always had a thing for Lily. > > Two, Lily doesn't like James big ego. > > Three, the DEs and Voldemort were preaching Pure Bloodism, but in > > terms, sugar coated enough, to convince the most sceptical that it > > was a good movement only interested in the rights of those Pure > > blood magical families. Pure bloods have rights too! We are an > > anti-death to the Pure bloods organization. We don't want to > > become extinct. Save the Purebloods. We are pro-pureblood. > > People always fall for the rhetoric. > Nora: > Canon for that? RMM: Come now. How else do you think people get drawn into political parties? Have you not heard of the Big Lie? or other such methods of gaining a following? Don't tell me you are one of those types that believe ALL GERMANS are evil because the majority of them were pro-Nazi in WWII. Check out any Save the ________ organization's charter and aims. Check out the political party platforms of your favorite political party. There is plenty to show that any organization wanting to grow and prosper, will always put on the best face for the public. No matter how nefarious its true goals and intentions. Take the benevolent orders of Freemasons for example. Nora: >Seems pretty clear what they were preaching, and > it's more of a reflection on just how damnably nasty wizarding > society is AND was that people thought it was a good idea. Remember > that Fudge is also accused by DD of putting too much belief in > blood. It's a canonically widespread bias. It's what Dumbledore > has been fighting against for a long, long time. It may well be the > main thread of the books, from the Founders to the present. It's > one thing that separates the 'good' good guys from the 'ewww' good > guys--Umbridge and Fudge think along blood lines, and therefore > share something deep with the DEs even though they purport to be > truly fighting them. RMM: Umbridge and Fudge in with the DEs? Sorry, but that is completely out there. Nora: > His Uncle Alphard left him the money, which is why he got blasted > off of the tree. Not shockingly, Sirius was being polite and moving > out and no longer mooching once he could afford his own place. No > sinister motive or deep schism needed for that, really? > RMM: > > He only visits the Potters for Sunday dinner. This tells me that > > his visits are with the parents (who have "adopted" him) and not > > to James. > Nora: > I always read this as more like "I got invited over for family > dinner on Sundays with James and his parents". James seems to have > had a good family life, and having dinner together--aww, that's > sweet and idyllic. It seems to me that dining with a friend's > parents without that friend there is really on the far side of > somewhat bizzare. RMM: Is it? Here is canon: <<'Your dad's place,' said Sirius. 'Your grandparents were really good about it; they sort of adopted me as a second son. Yeah, I camped out at your dad's in the school holidays, and when I was seventeen I got a place of my own. My Uncle Alphard had left me a decent bit of gold - he's been wiped off here, too, that's probably why - anyway, after that I looked after myself. I was always welcome at Mr and Mrs Potter's for Sunday lunch, though.'>> Not so bizarre after all. Mr. and Mrs. Potter "sort of adopt him as a second son". What is wrong with visiting then with your adoptive parents? What is so bizarre about that? hmmmmmmmmmmm......??? This brings up a real world example for me. I have friend, and I have met my friend's parents. I spend more time with my friend's parents than I do with my friend! Funny how things like that go. Anyway, I will grant that it does not preclude James not being there at the Sunday lunches. However, I will use the fact that there has been a change in James that Lily now sees him as attractive where she saw him as a jerk before. This change can be partially explained by a separation between the two troublemakers - Sirius and James. James probably became a little more mature outside the influence of his best buddy. So, there may be a double reason why James has altered his ego to the point that Lily now sees him in a different light and now begins to go out with him. (The other reason being James entry into the world of Voldemort.) RMM before: > > Where is James? > > And what happend to their relationship? Had James started seeing > > Lily at this time? NO, for we are told that they only started > > going out during their 7th year at Hogwarts. > > Something happened to cause a rift between James and Sirius -- > > being two of the closest friends imaginable. > Nora: > So the two of them made up later despite this deep rift of James > becoming a Death Eater? RMM: Correct. I believe Sirius and James became very close again before and/or after they both defied Voldemort, for I believe that Sirius ended up joining the DEs for at least a time, just so he could be close to James. And they probably left the DEs around the same time and took Peter with them. Nora: > So *how* do you square Remus-the-leader with Remus-who-utterly- > failed-at-keeping-his-friends-under-control? RMM: A soft hearted leader when it came to the Marauders. Nora: > JKR has told us that > Remus' fault is that he lets his friends get away with too much > because he values them so highly, as he hasn't had many friends. RMM: And I agree. Nora: > Keep in mind, also, the situation under which the 'I led them...' > comment is made--then the situation where it is *proven* to us that > Remus was really more of the passive type (yes, Pippin, I know... :) > It doesn't quite work out consistently, does it? RMM: It is only proven about how he "led" the Marauders. It is not proven as to how he "led others..." He was a prefect after all. Typically a prefect, with some exceptions, has a leadership type personality and carries himself with authority. RMM before: > > Now, James and Sirius enter their 7th year at Hogwarts. > > James begins to see Lily, because Lily likes what she sees in this > > young man now. James has changed. He seems less egotistical and > > more > > thoughtful and kind and less childish.... > > What has accomplished this change in James? > > I would speculate and say that James has been introduced to some > > very powerful magic that has completely impressed him. > > He sees how little he knows in terms of this and it makes him less > > inward looking. He now has no reason to think that he is great; > > he has just been humbled by the most powerful wizard of his age. > > He grows to admire and like Voldemort as a true mentor. Voldemort > > likes James and makes him feel special. They probably become very > > close friends. > > Meantime, Sirius is one who begins to miss his friend James > > terribly, now has to make a decision: join James or not. > > I believe he breaks down and joins up. > Nora: > There is absolutely zero to suggest any of this. RMM: There is plenty to show that: James and Sirius enter 7th year at Hogwarts; James and Lily begin dating in their 7th year; Voldemort is recruiting from among the best and brightest at Hogwarts (see Hagrid's comments); Sirius has nothing to do with the Purebloodism of his family; Lupin suspected Sirius of being a spy -- which implies that no matter who told Lupin he was a spy, if there was no basis for the belief, then Lupin would have doubted anyone saying that about Sirius. But Lupin believed whoever told him. That implies that Sirius was in fact associated with Voldemort. The rift between James and Sirius is implied, though not necessarily, by Sirius getting his own place between his 6th and 7th years at Hogwarts, and only visiting the Potters on Sundays for lunch. And James Potter had to have come very close to Voldemort in order to invoke Voldemort's own participation in James' death for his act of defiance. It seems that family or very close friends get this treatment. See the Riddle family graves for this one. Can anyone give me a list of those personally killed by Voldemort? And please excuse those who were killed by someone else using his wand. I think you will see that the known list is small. So quite a bit of canon can infer what I stated above. Nora: > James liking > Voldemort, when James is canonically rather close to Dumbledore? RMM: Sure why not? Nora: > Sirius joining the DEs, when he's completely clueless about the > existence of the Dark Mark? RMM: Nora, what do you know about the Dark Mark? Do you know when it is administered? Can a person get into the organization and not receive the Dark Mark? At what point does a person receive it? It is interesting that you should note that. Where is it in the books? That would fit in with my contention that he joined, but he did not advance very far. Probably due to insubordination and/or nearness to the critical date of departure for James. Nora: Again, none of this adds up on > canonical grounds, and that's not even going into the timeline and > thematic mess that it makes. RMM: I have constructed the timeline for Sirius and James and their 6th and 7th years at Hogwarts. All of it conforms to canon. Nora: > -Nora notes that there is an acute lack of cake in her house With all the best for your birthday, I remain, RMM From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 05:37:35 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 05:37:35 -0000 Subject: Harry's Use of Cruciatus curse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109936 Kemper wrote: > Harry's use of the UC has nagged at me as well. I think the > wizard/witch using an UC for the first time may find it even easier > to use the next time the opportunity presents itself. Harry is on a > slippery slope. Does he feel regret for using it, or does he feel > righteous? If he does not regret using an UC, then he may use it > again, giving in to the Dark Side of the Force like Anakin when he > killed all those Tusken Raiders. Now Cory: I've thought of this possibility as well. Harry's temperment in general was very disturbing throughout OotP, and the fact that he used an Unforgivable Curse during the final showdown was really the icing on the cake. Another thing that bothered me almost as much, however, was how come his use of Cruciatus went so unnoticed by everyone? The Ministry seems to know what Harry is doing 24/7; he was threatened with expulsion from Hogwarts for dumping his aunt's pudding in the floor, casting a Patronus to defend himself, and borrowing a flying car...but he casts an Unforgivable Curse inside the Ministry building and no one cares? Any thoughts? --Cory From Meliss9900 at aol.com Fri Aug 13 05:38:28 2004 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 01:38:28 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - But Why? Message-ID: <104.4dca1fe4.2e4dadd4@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109937 In a message dated 08/11/2004 11.22 Central Daylight Time, melclaros at yahoo.com writes: > > . As to why HP thought it was 'ancient', I have no clue. > > > > Because he often jumps to conclusions which are just as often wrong. > When he jumps to conclusions based on something Snape says (ie: "old > tree") he's ALWAYS wrong. > > Melpomene > > Or maybe he's being a typical kid and thinking that anything older than 19 is ancient. As my 10 year old daughter says " Mom, in the good old days . .you know when you were young. . . . . Melissa (who is feeling very ancient at the moment) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From romulus at hermionegranger.us Fri Aug 13 05:56:51 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 05:56:51 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109938 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > Valky: > Watch out for the quiet ones, eh? ..... > Well, I wonder how you explain Remus in almost the same breath > having said how terrified he was that his friends would *desert* him > when they discovered he was a WereWolf. RMM: If you are referring to the Marauders, there is no explanation needed; if there were "others" meaning not the Marauders as such but other Gryffindors that were under his prefectorship (is that a word?), friendship would have nothing to do with it but his example would have a great effect on others. "Hey, did you know that Lupin joined the DEs?" Cool, must be a good operation, Lupin is close to DD you know." > Valky: > You are good at timelines so rationalise how Lord Voldemort could be > a teacher at Hogwarts for me.... please... ;P > [sinister smirk appearing on the Fox's face] > While still of course allowing for the DE James to have happened > during 6th year..... RMM: Right. James probably got wrapped up with Voldemort in his 6th year. Valky: and allowing Harry's birth to occur at the > correct time... RMM: Not quite following you here, but Harry would be born about 4 years later. Valky: and also keeping a distinct and recognisable ten > year war in tact..... Good Luck... RMM: Distinct and recognisable ten year war? Don't think so. Voldemort had his downfall in 1981. According to Hagrid in 1991, Voldemort showed up about twenty years ago. According to Sirius Black, Voldemort was very popular with the Purebloods at first. So we have Voldemort showing up 1970-1971. Gaining in popularity: 1971-1978 (Remember Sirius saying something about Voldemort going into hiding 15 years ago? See PoA) War: 1978-1981. That is a 3 year hot war. not a 10 year war. > > > > KathyK: > > > There is *nothing* to back up a claim that he > > > performed Dark Arts while the canon that he hated said Dark Arts > > > > RMM: > > > I think you need to establish the fact that just because James > Potter hated the Dark Arts that he did not perform them, before you > can discount what I am saying about James Potter and his performing > the dark arts. James had no problem doing all that illegal and > dangerous stuff regarding animagism. He would be a perfect > candidate for entry into a higher realm of powerful magic. After > all, is there a class at Hogwarts that differientates for the > students what is Dark Arts and what is not? I believe that is left > with the DADA teacher no? And if the DADA teacher is teaching you > powerful and impressive stuff, and he is after all the DADA teacher, > it must be good right? I get the impression that James Potter jumped > in with both feet and he realized only later what he was actually > doing and in hindsight hated the thought of what he had done. > > > > Valky: > You are also being dismissive. > Of the canon "James always hated the Dark Arts" RMM: While he "hated the Dark Arts", this fact cannot preclude the idea that he did not "perform the dark arts". That is all I am saying. Secondly, as he was doing borderline stuff, and proto-dark arts pranks, he was a prime candidate to graduate into higher realms of darkness. Valky: > For a start you need to prove that, not just any Hogwarts student, > but specifically, *James* didn't know what the Dark Arts truly were. > This canon statement from Sirius that 'James *always* hated the Dark > Arts' demonstrates in complete context: > > 1 James knew what Dark Arts were from as far back a Sirius remembers > knowing him. = James *always* > > 2 He Hated them! = *hated* > > 3 He did not confuse Dark Bloodlines with Dark Arts because this is > Sirius talking....... (Sirius *is* the magnetic North of > demonstrating that this confusion exists. And even up to the moment > when choosing Secret Keepers James still was able to make the clear > distinction between Dark Blood-Sirius and Dark Arts-DE.) > = *The Dark Arts* > > > 4 This canon is delivered in relating to the context of James > behaviour at the end of his 5th year by an adult some twenty years > later. Hence we can presume that, to some degree, Sirius accurately > recalls "5th year James" as being opposed directly to DARK ARTS; and > knowing what they are; and not confused about what they are either. > = *Closure* RMM: And even with all that said, "hating the Dark Arts" cannot be equated with, nor can it necessarily exclude the fact that James performed Dark Arts. You are speculating, and so am I. > > RMM: > > James Potter disdains Pure Bloodism? Where does canon say that? > > Are you, like Nora, equating Pure Bloodism with the Dark Arts? > > Big mistake if you are. > > > > > Valky: > In Snapes worst memory for a start; 'Apologise to Evans' ring a bell? > 'I'd NEVER call you a you-know-what' he says to Lily and the > emphasis on "never" is JAMES OWN, not mine! > Pure bloodism does get brought up somewhere else in relation to > James.. but I can't find it. I recall its definately in support of > Kathy's claim, though. RMM: All one can say about James' statement to Lily is that he is not an extremist Purebloodite. He may go along with some of the Pureblood ideas, but he certainly has no time for calling others names or making them persona non grata. It says nothing of any disdain for Purebloodism in general. Please find that other reference for me re: James and pureblood. It will certainly aid in getting to the bottom of this. RMM From omphale at onetel.com Fri Aug 13 06:28:36 2004 From: omphale at onetel.com (saraquel_omphale) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 06:28:36 -0000 Subject: House Elves, Hermione And Freedom In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109939 Hi Pentzouli, thanks for your post, I didn't really expect to be moved to respond to this before I opened the post, but find that you have stirred me more than I thought. I think there are a lot of issues around house elves and I'm not sure that I take the tack of the previous posters, having read the thread. Pentzouli > Conclusion : all the three house-elves we are introduced to come > from "dark" wizards' families, even though their intentions are not > always evil. The main thing is that they certainly cannot be > trusted. Where are the good house-elves? Saraquel JKR, somewhere :-) (i.e. I can't remember where!) said that these books are about the nature of good and evil. I think that one of the things she tries to do is blur the distinction - Snape's and James' character for instance. I don't think it's as clear as good and evil house elves. Lots of the characters have stuff to hide in their past, but come down on the side of tOotP. Human beings are flawed, and I don't see why house elves should be any different. Pentzouli > So, why Hermione is so willing to set them free, when it is clear > that they will not only depreciate the gift of freedom,(at least > most of them will), but are capable of magic not easily tamed by > wizards? Saraquel Hmmm, now we are on dangerous ground IMO. Wow, where do I start. Firstly, why should wizards assume either a patriarchal role, or a master slave role towards HE (house elves) in the first place. Coming from a country (Britain) who has a long history of colonialism, I am well familiar with the very arguments which JKR has put into the book. They are the arguments of Imperial Britain. They begin and end with the assumption of superiority. Ghandi did not automatically have the whole of India on his side when he began his epic struggle for independence. Many Indian people thought that British rule was good, and to be fair, it had brought the Indian subcontinent benefits - the railway for instance and modern victorian technology as well as the benefits of world trade. So this enabled the British to say, well the Indians are better off like they are. But, Indian's had grown up under the Raj and did not have experience of anything other than British Rule - on what basis were they then able to make a choice about freedom? Choice is something you make when you have more than one option. Freedom was then an unknown quantity - a leap into the dark, a scary thing. It is easier to keep the status quo, rather than fight for something which is just an idea and has no tangible substance. It was Ghandi's vision, determination and powerful leadership that gradually won people over and the movement grew. (He wasn't the first to bid for freedom btw) The HE in the book, have been enslaved for generations. They do not know what freedom would be like, and are naturally scared of it. They do not have a "choice", because, as in the above example, they have no knowledge. It is very convenient for the WW to interpret this as a part of HE nature (i.e. they like to be enslaved), or a desire to keep the status quo. Hermione, is a born campaigner. Unfortunately in many ways, she is as bad as the ones who wish to keep them enslaved - she is trying to force freedom on them. Really, IMO, what they need if anything is insight into what freedom might give them. If anyone is responsible for doing this it's DD, as he is the one to whom they will listen. (back to that in a minute). As for the HE having a powerful magic of their own, and that's why it's better they are enslaved - that's the recipe IMO for disaster, and history has shown it to be the case again and again. Eventually, enslaved people realise the power they have and use it against their enslavers. Better to respect that power, treat them as equals and work together. OK back to DD - in the fight against LV, DD has a whole army of HE willing to be on his side, and I think they will play a significant role in the coming war. If they don't, then DD is not the strategist that I took him for. This war is an opportunity for DD to give opportunities to the HE that will help them on the road to greater choice and hence possible freedom. Looks like the kids'll be having beans on toast from now on folks. So there you go, I've never agreed with Hagrid's opinion or Hermione's tactics really, but then I forgive her because she's young and her heart's in the right place and at least she can see that there's something wrong in the situation. Perhaps Hermione will carry the standard and lead the charge of the HE on the storming of Malfoy's Manor! Wow, I've quite surpassed myself - thanks for that Pentzouli Saraquel From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Fri Aug 13 06:37:15 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 06:37:15 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109940 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" > wrote: > > Valky: > > Watch out for the quiet ones, eh? ..... > > Well, I wonder how you explain Remus in almost the same breath > > having said how terrified he was that his friends would *desert* > him when they discovered he was a WereWolf. > > RMM: > If you are referring to the Marauders, there is no explanation > needed; Valky: I am, well, actually *Lupin* is referring to the Marauders in this statement. How is no explanation required? This statement refers directly to the Marauders becoming animagii and you will find Lupin says it in POA. > > Valky: > > You are good at timelines so rationalise how Lord Voldemort could > be a teacher at Hogwarts for me.... please... ;P > > [sinister smirk appearing on the Fox's face] > > While still of course allowing for the DE James to have happened > > during 6th year..... > > RMM: > Right. James probably got wrapped up with Voldemort in his 6th year. > > Valky: > and allowing Harry's birth to occur at the > > correct time... > > RMM: > Not quite following you here, but Harry would be born about 4 years later. > > Valky: > and also keeping a distinct and recognisable ten > > year war in tact..... Good Luck... > > RMM: > Distinct and recognisable ten year war? Don't think so. > Voldemort had his downfall in 1981. According to Hagrid in 1991, > Voldemort showed up about twenty years ago. According to Sirius > Black, Voldemort was very popular with the Purebloods at first. > So we have Voldemort showing up 1970-1971. > Gaining in popularity: 1971-1978 (Remember Sirius saying something > about Voldemort going into hiding 15 years ago? See PoA) > War: 1978-1981. That is a 3 year hot war. not a 10 year war. > > > Valky: Big Flaw I am afraid RMM. How then do you explain DD's statement to MacGonagall about having precious little to celebrate for 11 years? Ch 1 SS/PS >> RMM: > And even with all that said, "hating the Dark Arts" cannot be equated with, nor can it necessarily exclude the fact that James performed Dark Arts. You are speculating, and so am I. > Valky: And the finality of that statement is Nothing Will preclude that James would practise Dark Arts short of it being entirely absent from his total and comprehensive history laid out before us. At the very least canon that he hated it doesnt demand so much history to be given to truth that he wouldn't perform it conciously and wilfully. Much like you wouldn't wilfully eat oranges if you Hated them. > RMM: > All one can say about James' statement to Lily is that he is not an extremist Purebloodite. He may go along with some of the Pureblood ideas, but he certainly has no time for calling others names or making them persona non grata. > It says nothing of any disdain for Purebloodism in general. > Please find that other reference for me re: James and pureblood. It will certainly aid in getting to the bottom of this. > Valky: I dont think that the emphasis on NEVER says *nothing* of any disdain. It certainly implies that if disdain exists it is certainly toward purebloodism as opposed to insulting the girl of his dreams or, as you say, wasting time expressing such feelings. I would say its canon 5th year James to *not* consider disdaining what he hates to be a waste of time. He takes full pleasure in expressing his feelings of disgust toward Snape, he wastes his time there, frivolously and gleefully. Suffice to say that James *has* time for name-calling and he would NEVER use it to express purebloodism. Its a pretty strong argument. Best to You From kempermentor at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 05:47:06 2004 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 05:47:06 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109941 snow wrote: Very, very important question: Are and were all the members of the Order of the Phoenix once in Gryffindor house (loyalty to Dumbledore)? This one could be interesting given Snape is part of the Order. Kemper gave one answer: I'm betting Mrs. Figg wasn't sorted into Gryffindor or any other house. There is no canon suggesting that Hogwart's has a special ed. program. No one seems to ride the short broom to school. Snow laughed and rebutted: Touch?! Kempermentor, I am still laughing as bad as Luna when Ron made the joke about the baboon's backside. In rebuttal all I can say is that we don't know who Mrs. Figgs was married to, a Gryffindor house alumni perhaps! Kemper again: True, we don't know who Mr. Figg was. But I believe that if Hogwarts did have a MR/DD (Magically Retarded/Developmentally Delayed), Arabella would have been sorted in Gryffindor. Her task the past 15 years has been watching over Harry, ensuring his safety (at least physical safety... mostly). If by some chance serious harm was coming his way from some Dark wizard who broke the ancient magic, Mrs. Figg would give her life to save Harry's. Of course, I also think that Snape would do the same. So maybe she would be in Slytherin;) From kempermentor at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 05:58:49 2004 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 05:58:49 -0000 Subject: Harry's Use of Cruciatus curse and why no one noticed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109942 Cory wrote: Another thing that bothered me almost as much, however, was how come his use of Cruciatus went so unnoticed by everyone? The Ministry seems to know what Harry is doing 24/7; he was threatened with expulsion from Hogwarts for dumping his aunt's pudding in the floor, casting a Patronus to defend himself, and borrowing a flying car...but he casts an Unforgivable Curse inside the Ministry building and no one cares? Any thoughts? Kemper thinks: Those incidents occur during summer holidays. Maybe the Deparment that's in charge of monitoring magic of the underage takes a well deserved rest during the school year, focusing mostly on the antics of those witches and wizards aged 11 and younger. From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Aug 13 06:52:05 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 06:52:05 -0000 Subject: "Old and Valuable" Whomping Willow - Info In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109943 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Brenda M." wrote: > >>> "lrcxrvo" wrote: > > I've always thought that was a bit of a nod to Tolkien? Old man > > willow? > > Brenda: > > Hahha, that's quite hilarious! I first thought you were referring > to a tree in LOTR or something, as I have yet to read the novels... > After re-reading OoP I will, this time for real! (my friends > going 'yeah right') Geoff: Ircxrvo was indeed referring to a tree in LOTR:FOTR. One of the characters who invariably disappears from any adaptation is Tom Bombadil, who is admittedly rather peripheral to the story. He rescues Frodo and Sam from Old Man Willow who/which is a malevolent tree in the Old Forest between the Shire and Bree. I must admit the same thought had occurred to me in regard to the Whomping Willow which also appears to be rather malevolent..... From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 07:17:17 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 07:17:17 -0000 Subject: Harry's Use of Cruciatus curse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109944 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ohneill_2001" wrote: > > Now Cory: > > I've thought of this possibility as well. Harry's temperment in > general was very disturbing throughout OotP, and the fact that he > used an Unforgivable Curse during the final showdown was really the > icing on the cake. Asian_lovr2: Harry has been angry in the other books as well, it's not just limited to OotP. However, in OotP, he is give much greater reason to be anger and is therefore appropriately angry. First, he's ignored by everyone and kept in th dark about what's going on. That in turn is compounded by his isolation. I still say it would kill anyone to allow Ron and Hermione to visit him, or for the three to get together for tea on neutral ground. Just having company and support would have softened his anger. But that's hindsight. In any event, when Harry gets Hogwarts he has more than enough justification for his anger; anger that compounds as his situation compounds. Although, I will admit, his anger was a bit 'off-putting'. > Cory continues: > > Another thing that bothered me almost as much, however, was how come > his use of Cruciatus went so unnoticed by everyone? The Ministry > seems to know what Harry is doing 24/7; ...but he casts an > Unforgivable Curse inside the Ministry building and no one cares? > > Any thoughts? > > --Cory Asian_lovr2: I don't think it is Harry who is being monitored, it's Privet Drive that is being watched. The magic he performs there is magic that is out of place; it's magic in the Muggle world. There wouldn't be much point in monitoring magic at the Ministry when magic happens there all day and all night. It would be monitor overload. That said, we don't know that someone won't figure it out. There was very little time at the end of the book. So, he could easily have to face it to some degree at the beginning of the next book. If nothing else, Hermione will give him a good telling off when she finds out. Or, perhaps Snape will get wind of it and bring the information back to Dumbledore. I think Harry will have to face his use of the Cruciatus Curse, but I think he will have to face it mostly in his conscience and before Dumbledore. And while there may be some limited degree of legal inquiry, I don't think Harry will have to face the full force of the law. I think they will see that he was a kid acting under extreme emotional distress, and therefore bares limited responsibility. In addition, I think they have far bigger problems to deal with than harrassing Harry for a failed curse. Just a thought. Steve/asian_lovr2 From patientx3 at aol.com Fri Aug 13 08:18:26 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 08:18:26 -0000 Subject: Calendars was Re: biggest SPOILER In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109945 Bookworm: > There was another boy the prophecy *could* have applied to before > Voldemort attacked the Potters - Neville. I don't remember any >hint > given in the books or interviews of when his birthday is. Oversight > or plot devise? Josh: >>Umm, as the 7th month dies, of course. :-P ...though maybe not exactly the 31st, but close enough to be considered at least. Now, if Neville were a September baby, that would throw things into a new light; but still limit it to them two. I would say that he is also a July baby, July 29-31.<< HunterGreen: And so does JKR. On July 30th her website had a 'Happy Birthday Neville' notice on it. Even without that, his birthday is not up to interpratation, really, since Dumbledore is going by the standard months of the year (otherwise Harry wouldn't be have been considered, and his birthday being July 31st is not up for interpretation). From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 13 08:19:29 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 04:19:29 -0400 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection Message-ID: <000e01c4810e$41d219f0$1cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109946 mhbobbin said: > And lets not forget the "second death" at the MoM in OotP. During > the duel between LV and DD, Fawkes takes one of curses for DD and > dies. While it's not much of a sacrifice, he was there the instant > DD needed him. Later, he rises from the ashes... > charme: "And then there's a DE who is apparently dead too - did anyone else catch that? I think it's Nott...." DuffyPoo: I've never thought Nott was dead, just too badly injured for the DE's to deal with at the moment. I think Nott, and probably BabyHead are in St Mungo's awaiting transfer - if they survive - to Azkaban. My two cents. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Aug 13 09:45:19 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 09:45:19 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore and Socks, Magical Contracts, and Bertie Botts Beans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109947 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dcgmck" wrote: > [snip] > Dumbledore, explaining the rules for the selection of champions: > > "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. > There can be no change of heart once you have become a champion." > (GoF U.S. pbk 256) > > The wording is such that the name, not the placer of the name, is the > one bound by the magical contract. A bit of selective quoting there, because it goes on: "Please be very sure, therefore, that you are whole-heartedly prepared to play, before *you* drop *your* name into the Goblet." (My emphases.) There's absolutely no point in placing an age restriction around the Goblet if some-one can put your name in for you and have it count as a valid entry. You enter yourself, not drop some-one else's name into the Goblet. In addition, Crouch!Moody burbles on about Confundus charms with Harry being entered as the sole would-be contestant from a non-existent 4th school, a school Harry does not attend. How can such an entry possibly be valid? It can't, but DD is willing to pretend that it is, because it gives him an edge. He knows where and when attempts will be made to get at Harry. Who are the two that insist the rules be followed? Bagman - a very dodgy character and probably a Voldy supporter (who I've commented on before), and Crouch Snr who we later find out was under Imperius control at the time. We all know why it's presented this way, of course. It's because otherwise there wouldn't be a plot, but it seems a very ropy and not very credible way of setting one up. First time you read it, it seems almost reasonable. Not the second time when you've had a chance to think about it a bit; too many questions start to surface. Four champions in a competition for three? Four schools in a competition for three? How does the Goblet recognise a non-existent school? A 'contract' when the person involved has never agreed to it? When that person does not attend the school his name is linked to? When it was patently impossible for that person to put his name in the Goblet? A fraudulent entry and therefore not valid. No contract exists. I've never liked this bit of plotting, much too threadbare. Maybe JKR was having an off-day. Kneasy From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Fri Aug 13 09:55:20 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (Jo Raggett) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 09:55:20 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109948 > vmonte responds: > > I might be remembering this incorrectly but wasn't there a wasp or > bee outside of a Hogwarts class window when Harry was taking one of > his exams? Aggie: Forgive me if i'm wrong but wasn't this 'bug' matter cleared up in canon? Was it not Rita Skeeter in beetle form? Or are you referring to another insect? From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Aug 13 10:13:02 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:13:02 -0000 Subject: Harry's Use of Cruciatus curse and why no one noticed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109949 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kempermentor" wrote: > Cory wrote: > Another thing that bothered me almost as much, however, was how come > his use of Cruciatus went so unnoticed by everyone? The Ministry > seems to know what Harry is doing 24/7; he was threatened with > expulsion from Hogwarts for dumping his aunt's pudding in the floor, > casting a Patronus to defend himself, and borrowing a flying > car...but he casts an Unforgivable Curse inside the Ministry building > and no one cares? > > Any thoughts? > > Kemper thinks: > Those incidents occur during summer holidays. Maybe the Deparment > that's in charge of monitoring magic of the underage takes a well > deserved rest during the school year, focusing mostly on the antics > of those witches and wizards aged 11 and younger. Geoff: Back in March, a similar discussion occurred and, in message 94642, I wrote: "The thought which occurs to me is that if the Ministry was monitoring what was going on in their building (when they should have been riding over the hill to the rescue?) was whether they could distinguish who was throwing each spell. The air was thick with jinxes and spells and the young people themselves had used a lot of them: they all used a Reducto spell at the same moment, Hermione used Stupefy, Colloportus, Accio and Silencio, Neville used Expelliarmus and Stupefy while Harry used Stupefy, Petrificus Totalis, Colloportus, Diffindo, Protego, Wingardium Leviosa, Crucio and I may have missed some... Several of these were used more than once, so there was a lot of underage wizardry performed within a very short time scale not to mention that performed by the adults." From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Aug 13 10:17:24 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:17:24 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: <000e01c4810e$41d219f0$1cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109950 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: charme: "And then there's a DE who is apparently dead too - did anyone else catch > that? I think it's Nott...." DuffyPoo: > I've never thought Nott was dead, just too badly injured for the DE's to deal with at the moment. I think Nott, and probably BabyHead are in St Mungo's awaiting transfer - if they survive - to Azkaban. My two cents. Geoff: Let's look at canon: 'Footsteps and shouts echoed from behind the door they had just sealed; Harry put his ear close to the door to listen and heard Lucius Malfoy roar, "Leave Nott, /leave him, I say/ - his injuries will be nothing to the Dark Lord losing that prophecy....."' (OOTP "Beyond the Veil" p.695 UK edition) From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Fri Aug 13 10:21:28 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (Jo Raggett) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:21:28 -0000 Subject: Longbottom's Torture to Insanity (Re: candy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109951 Kneasy: >>>>Major Snip>>>>>>> > There's a fair chance that there is something in a prophecy globe > that concerns Neville. Alice blows bubbles and they remind her and > she's desperate to get the concept across to Neville. And I doubt > that the globe is the same one as that Voldy was after. Mind you, > it could be one of the two that were broken, the ones where we > didn't quite hear the prophecies they contained. Wouldn't put it > past JKR, being sneaky like that. Aggie: Do you *really* believe that? Or are you just throwing it out there? As you said, the two broken prophecies *could* be relevant and it wouldn't be at all surprising to find this out!! *However*, if Neville's prophecy does not turn out to be one of these then I doubt it'll happen. It is canon that Trewlawney has only made two prophecies, and we now know both of them. IMO it is too late in the game to introduce another seer and just having a prophecy on the shelf already, without even a hint that it's there, is far too Blue Peter for me! (Here's one I made earlier!! Apologies to non-Brits, Blue Peter is a children's show where they make things out of old toilet rolls etc. They show you how to do it and then go Da Daaa and then produce one that has obvioulsy been rather expertly made!) Does Alice actually blow bubbles? Does she even chew the gum? Perhaps she justs unwraps them and gives the wrappers to Neville! From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 13 10:35:29 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 06:35:29 -0400 Subject: Case for Marauders Message-ID: <001f01c48121$41359130$1cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109952 RMM: "5th year ends and the boys go home from school. That summer, Sirius moves out and into the Potters, before his 6th year at Hogwarts. (This means that Voldemort is very popular at this time, because Sirius' parents are really being too much for Sirius.) Sirius and James enter their 6th year at Hogwarts. Something happens in the 6th year, because Sirius finds his OWN PLACE TO LIVE between his 6th and 7th years at Hogwarts. He only visits the Potters for Sunday dinner. This tells me that his visits are with the parents (who have "adopted" him) and not to James. Where is James?And what happend to their relationship? Had James started seeing Lily at this time? NO, for we are told that they only started going out during their 7th year at Hogwarts. Something happened to cause a rift between James and Sirius -- being two of the closest friends imaginable." DuffyPoo - who swore to herself she wouldn't get drawn back into this again...but... "'You ran away from home?' 'When I was about sixteen,' said Sirius. 'I'd had enough.' 'Where did you go?' asked Harry, staring at him. 'Your dad's place,' said Sirius. 'Your grandparents were really good about it; they sort of adopted me as a second son. Yeah, I camped out at your dad's in the school holidays, and when I was seventeen I got a place of my own. My Uncle Alphard had left me a decent bit of gold -- he's been wiped off here, too, that's probably why -- anyway, after that I looked after myself. I was always welcome at Mr and Mrs Potter's for Sunday lunch, though.' 'But...why did you..?' 'Leave?' Sirius smiled bitterly and ran his fingers through his long, unkept hair. 'Because I hated the whole lot of them: my parents, with their pure-blood mania, convinced that to be a black made you practically royal ... my idiot brother, soft enough to believe them...'" I think this answers the question quite simply. Sirius runs away from home when he is about sixteen, because of the attitude of his family, and spends the school holidays with the Potters. Sirius came of age at seventeen, inherited a "decent bit of gold" from his Uncle Alphard, and decides to get his own place instead of sleeping on the Potters' couch. No big 'rift' required. Sirius just has the means to support himself, after his 17th birthday, instead of living off of the Potter family's charity. Nora said: "So the two of them made up later despite this deep rift of James becoming a Death Eater? After all, Sirius is the person who James AND Lily entrust with being Harry's godfather and the switch of Secret Keepers." DuffyPoo again: Which was going to be my next point so I'll let Nora make it instead. (Happy birthday, by the way, I know....I'm a day late. I hope you got cake!) From personal experience, anyone I've had a 'deep rift' with, it has never been made up entirely. It is always there, a niggling doubt in the background. Which is not to say that James Potter could certainly be a better person than I am in making up old rifts, but I find it doubtful that James would so completely trust Sirius again (or vice versa for that matter) that he would want Sirius as Secret-Keeper or Harry's godfather. Nora said: "Sirius joining the DEs, when he's completely clueless about the existence of the Dark Mark?" DuffyPoo again: And when he said twice, that Regulus was an idiot, a stupid idiot for joining the DE's? Dumbledore says "We've had precious little to celebrate for eleven years." The eleven years before Oct 31, 1981 (whether you subscribe to the exact timeline on the Lexicon/DVD or not, it is close to that), is when LV was in power. That covers, approx., 1970-1981. While the Marauders were at Hogwarts, LV was running a war. 1976, when Sirius would have been 16 and moved to the Potters, LV, now halfway through that eleven years, was already showing his true colours. Sirius says, of his parents, "they thought Voldemort had the right idea, they were all for the purification of the wizarding race, getting rid of Muggle-borns and having pure-bloods in charge....they got cold feet when they saw what he was prepared to do to get power, though." Sirius, when he left home, was well aware of what LV was up to, because his parents thought LV had the right idea, and were all for it, until they saw what he was prepared to do to get power. Alla: "I frankly don't see how it could be rationalised timelinewise. Lexicon places Tom Riddle's resurfaction as Lord Voldemort at 1970. Give or take one-two years, but Lexicon is usually correct. And this is the same time when Marauders start Hogwarts. So, Valky I guess that Dumbledore hired Voldie , when he already became Voldie. Why am I reluctant to believe that? :o)" DuffyPoo: For the same reason I am reluctant to believe it? TR *resurfaced* as LV. I can't imagine DD inviting him to join the staff at Hogwarts as any teacher, never mind DADA. RMM: "He is talking about what he learns about the man after much time with him, around him, probablyworking with him, learning about him through the Order of the Phoenix's work, etc. He could not say that about Voldemort upon seeing him for the first time in 25 years." DuffyPoo again: Am I the only one who thinks DD kept tabs on TR from the moment he left school until he "resurfaced as LV?" He was already suspicious, quite suspicious, of TR from his opening the CoS days. "Only the Transfiguration teacher, Dumbledore, seemd to think Hagrid was innocent. Yes, *I think Dumbledore might have guessed.* Dumbledore never seemd to like me as much as the other teachers did....Well, he certainly kept an annoyingly close watch on me after Hagrid was expelled." Certainly, it can be argued that this only says DD watched TR while he was at school, for another year or so, but I suspect, what DD "might have guessed" caused him to keep a watch on TR even after he left school until he resufaced. In his keeping "an annoying close watch" on TR, he could possibly - likely - have heard TR himself, or his friends, referencing TR as Lord Voldemort. "Very few people know 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, consorded 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." But DD knew. LV was *barely* recognisable, but recognisable surely to someone who had "kept an annoyingly close watch on" TR. DD knew all the things that TR had gone through between leaving Hogwarts and 'resurfacing as LV' because he'd been keeping tabs on him. My speculation at least. RMM "Remember what Hagrid said? "Only mystery is why Voldemort didn't go after James and Lily -- they were Head Boy and Head Girl." This tells me that other top students were being pegged by Voldemort and/or his agents." DuffyPoo: The precise quote, from my book at any rate, is: "Now, yer mum an' dad were as good a witch an' wizard as I ever knew. Head boy an' girl at Hogwarts in their day! Suppose the myst'ry is why You-Know-Who never tried to get 'em on his side before ... probably knew they were too close ter Dumbledore ter want anythin' to do with the Dark Side." Read your way, I supposed it does say that other top students were being pegged by LV, but read in the context of how Hagrid said it, IMO, it does not say that at all. Hagrid knew LV had never gone after Lily and James before, probably because they were too close to DD to want anything to do with the Dark Side, maybe for some other reason, but it is obvious to Hagrid that LV 'never tried to get 'em on his side before." Hagrid knew James and Lily, too, after all, "knew yer mum an' dad, an' nicer people ye couldn't find." [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com Fri Aug 13 10:49:57 2004 From: sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com (Amey Chinchorkar) Date: 13 Aug 2004 10:49:57 -0000 Subject: A Case for Marauders Message-ID: <20040813104957.9047.qmail@webmail30.rediffmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109953 Amey: Gosh, and I thought one mail on this topic would be my only contribution . Ok here goes again . - RMM: - Secondly, Lord Voldemort. In the early 1970s, what does the name - invoke to you? The same as it would in 1981? Apparently so. - You simply cannot look back in foresight and say -- hey its 1970 and - Lord Voldemort is here and he is evil. I know because of what he - does - in 1980!! - Has Voldemort been suspected of anything before starting the movement - of the DEs? - No, he left school with Honors. He was Head Boy, he won a special - award. - There is absolutely no reason that Voldemort, as Voldemort, would - have any bad reputation preceding him when he arrived on the scene in - 1970. Amey: We have a canon that he was not recognized (still is not recognized) as Tom Riddle by many. So he had no history. He was not the person who was Head Boy, he was a totally new person and he was harping on pureblood thing I agree he might not have any bad reputation, but then he had no reputation... do you think Dumbledore would agree to take him as a teacher without proper background (even LockHart had a reputation) - RMM: - Like the Polyjuice Potion for one? Knocking out a person and keeping - them under wraps while you impersonate them? You know, like stealing - someone's identity? - Well, I know three 2nd years that did exactly that. But that's okay.. - . they were just kids. - As far and Good and Bad are concerned there was absolutely no - difference between what Harry, Ron, and Hermione did and what B. - Crouch Jr. did. Amey: Ok, there are 3 persons who kill another person. One of them get life sentence, second gets 5 yrs jail, third gets a medal. Now what is the difference between them? The first person commited cold-blooded murder (he is a murderer), the second killed in self-defence and the third person killed on duty (a soldier or law-enforcer). Barty Crouch Jr. did what he did for his personal gain, and he tried to kill Harry. The trio were trying to get to the truth, they had no intention of killing or harming anyone. - RMM: - Perhaps you can see a huge defining line between it, but to students - at school who are already performing nasty things to each other, - there - is no defining line for it. - Now that you go this route, it brings me to a conclusion. - James decided he hated the Dark Arts after doing it.... He was doing - things that he only regretted later and finally swore off. - He shows at 15 that he is prime for bigger and better feats of - nastiness, and there is nothing there to stop him....except Lily. Amey: SO you mean at 15 he and Sirius tried Dark Arts and dabbled in PureBlood theory and at 16, Sirius left his parents? home because he hated all these things. In 1 year, he changed so much???? - RMM: - I don't see him "pissed off" about using the word. I see him telling - Lily that he wouldn't call her that. He is not serious about the - Purebloodism. He is seriously into the magic and what is being - offered him in the DEs. Amey: He did not even mention the word, he was so pissed off with that word. 'What?' yelped James. I'd NEVER call you a - you-know-what!' (OOtP) What is this if not pissed off? - RMM: - However, I will use the fact that there has been a change in James - that Lily now sees him as attractive where she saw him as a jerk - before. - This change can be partially explained by a separation between the - two - troublemakers - Sirius and James. James probably became a little - more - mature outside the influence of his best buddy. - So, there may be a double reason why James has altered his ego to the - point that Lily now sees him in a different light and now begins to - go - out with him. (The other reason being James entry into the world of - Voldemort.) Amey: Out of influence of Sirius? Do you mean that James and Sirius were going apart? Show me canon for this please - RMM: - A soft hearted leader when it came to the Marauders. Amey: When did Lupin become a leader of marauders?? Sirius and James had that place jointly, if we believe canon. - RMM: - I have constructed the timeline for Sirius and James and their 6th - and - 7th years at Hogwarts. All of it conforms to canon. Amey, who would love to see how a person can change so much in just one year [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Fri Aug 13 12:29:28 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 12:29:28 -0000 Subject: Harry's Use of Cruciatus curse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109954 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ohneill_2001" > wrote: > Although, I will admit, his anger was a bit 'off-putting'. Yes, I know I jump in on angry Harry threads, but. ;) The only thing 'off-putting' to me about Harry's anger was his internalization or misdirection of it. That's my reasoning for the Molly thread, and why I was so happy to see him trashing DD's office. If something is pissing you off, you solve the problem, or at least file a complaint. Why hasn't Harry asked DD, "hey, it seems you want me to stay at Privet Drive, but can't I see my friends some way?" And besides, his anger is pretty tame for an average adolescent, much less The Boy Who Lived To Suffer. :) Josh From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 13 12:47:27 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 12:47:27 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109955 vmonte: > > I might be remembering this incorrectly but wasn't there a wasp > > or bee outside of a Hogwarts class window when Harry was taking > > one of his exams? Aggie: > Forgive me if i'm wrong but wasn't this 'bug' matter cleared up in > canon? Was it not Rita Skeeter in beetle form? Or are you > referring to another insect? SSSusan: Aggie, there were times when Rita was present in her beetle form--by the lake after the TWT task, in the hospital wing when Hermione catches her, for instance--but there were other times when a bee or wasp was present, and it's these vmonte's asking about. As usual, I'm sneaking a peek at the boards while at work & away from books, so I can't provide specifics of the bee encounters. Was one of them outside the Divination classroom window, or was that another Rita appearance? Siriusly Snapey Susan From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Fri Aug 13 12:46:56 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 12:46:56 -0000 Subject: Calendars was Re: biggest SPOILER In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109956 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" wrote: > Now, if Neville were a September baby, that would throw things into a > new light; but still limit it to them two. I would say that he is > also a July baby, July 29-31.<< > > HunterGreen: > And so does JKR. On July 30th her website had a 'Happy Birthday > Neville' notice on it. Even without that, his birthday is not up to > interpratation, really, since Dumbledore is going by the standard > months of the year (otherwise Harry wouldn't be have been considered, > and his birthday being July 31st is not up for interpretation). Wanted to say that I don't support the September theory, but will give it nods. If DD could be shown as having considered that possibility, it would lay to rest some of the arguement. I find it interesting that Neville is the 30th. Despite DD's assertion that the half-bloodedness was the reason for the choice, perhaps Harry's birthday being more literally 'as [the\ month dies' made him LV's first target? Although, having a way in b/c of Peter could also be a factor. Josh From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 13 12:53:39 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 08:53:39 -0400 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection Message-ID: <000a01c48134$8ede91d0$40c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109957 vmonte: > > I might be remembering this incorrectly but wasn't there a wasp > > or bee outside of a Hogwarts class window when Harry was taking > > one of his exams? Aggie: > Forgive me if i'm wrong but wasn't this 'bug' matter cleared up in > canon? Was it not Rita Skeeter in beetle form? Or are you > referring to another insect? SSSusan: "Aggie, there were times when Rita was present in her beetle form--by the lake after the TWT task, in the hospital wing when Hermione catches her, for instance--but there were other times when a bee or wasp was present, and it's these vmonte's asking about. As usual, I'm sneaking a peek at the boards while at work & away from books, so I can't provide specifics of the bee encounters. Was one of them outside the Divination classroom window, or was that another Rita appearance?" DuffyPoo: There was a "wasp buzzing distractingly against one of the high windows" when Harry & Co were writing their History of Magic exam. Perhaps this is what vmonte was referring to? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Fri Aug 13 13:06:57 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 13:06:57 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore and Socks, Magical Contracts, and Bertie Botts Beans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109958 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > A fraudulent entry and therefore not valid. No contract exists. > I've never liked this bit of plotting, much too threadbare. > Maybe JKR was having an off-day. I just wanted to say that this bit would have been comprehended by LV and Crouch!Moody in advance, and they recognized that Harry would be bound into competing. If the contract is within the Goblet, its confounded perception rules, and having gone out, it's too late to change its 'mind' so to speak. Always look for the simple, as-was-written explanation first. ;- ) ...even if you do choose to dismiss it. :) Josh From cruthw at earthlink.net Fri Aug 13 14:03:41 2004 From: cruthw at earthlink.net (caspenzoe) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 14:03:41 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ Children's Books? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109959 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "caspenzoe" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jcb54me" wrote: > > > Steve/asian_lovr2: > > > > JKRowling did not write these as children's books. She wrote the > > > >story for herself, and wrote it the way it came to her. She never > > > >took her original vision and in any way adapted it for children. > > Caspen: > > > > I really have to take issue with the whole debate about whether the > > HP books are written for children/are children's literature or not. > > I think it's a false issue for the following reasons: > > > > ...edited list... > > > > Therefore, with all due respect to Steve, I think his interpretation > > of JKR's comments is far too literal. I worry that Steve and some > > others here - Hans comes to mind (...) - perhaps all of us at some > > point - are in real danger of becoming addled HP fundamentalists. > > > > In other words, yes there is genuine artistry behind the books and > > yes there is liberal symbolism of various kinds - but the notion > > that these somehow confine JKR to any sort of rigid formula (such > > as Hermione and Ron must be beheaded) or level is simply absurd, > > and flies in the face of everything that makes great literature > > great. > > > > My two knuts - just don't think it works that way! > > > > Caspen > > Asian_lovr2: > > JKR has spoken many times in interviews and chats, and on her own > website about edits and changes that she and the publishers made to > the books, but she never allowed any edit that compromised the story. > She flat out said she would never alter her vision to appeal to any > else's sensibilities, expectations, or desires. Example, if the > original vision calls for Harry to die, then Harry dies, she said she > wouldn't change it to spare anyone's feelings. > > So, there is no doubt that a great deal of editing, proofreading, and > in some cases re-writing went into each and every book. But it was > done for the same reason all books are proofread and edited, for > continuity, consistency, error correction, grammar, punctuation, and > cultural idioms. However, none of that was to appeal to or appease a > specific audience, other than cultural phrases unfamiliar to American > audiences. ...but I take acception to > the idea that the books were written /for/ children. They were written > for a general audience which /includes/ children. .... > I went back and looked and the original poster's statements on this > issue said/implied JKR was 'softening' the book because they were > /read/ by children. I may have taken that statement a little farther > than was intended. That implied to me that the books were written > /for/ children. > > So, she does soften what she writes, but does so with the intent of > not excluding children as readers. In that sense, there is a limit to > what she will write, but I don't see her avoiding any hard issues or > simplifying or dumbing down the plot or it's complexities for anyone.... > Steve/asian_lovr2 Well, maybe our positions are not so far apart then Steve. Perhaps I was thrown off by your use of words like "never" as in "...She wrote the story for herself, and wrote it the way it came to her. She never took her original vision and in any way adapted it for children." If, in fact the books were written for a "general" audience as you go on to say - I guess including JKR herself (otherwise you'd have contradicted yourself here, no?), and children, then don't you agree that they'll "likely" continue to be written for the same "general" - including JKR and children - audience? I should note however, that your description of JKR's writing as it came to her, doesn't do justice to the years of work, thousand of pages of notes, ect. that she spent/produced in developing the story, plot etc., also well documented in her interviews. That process simply doesn't take place in a vacuum sealed off from concerns for audience. Once again though, we are both right, in that she both wrote it as it came to her and worked it out while conciously aware of many complex factors, including audience. Again, the greater the scope - levels, audience, etc. - it speaks to, the greater (and less formulaic and predictable) the work of art . Caspen From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 13 14:06:01 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:06:01 -0400 Subject: Tonks a traitor? Message-ID: <001301c4813e$aad57d90$40c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109960 Miz Storge' said: "We know half-breeds can be as vicious as full-bloods since we have Tom Riddle's example and dear Tonks is half-muggle on her dad's side and a Black on her Mum's side" DuffyPoo: Half-blood, not half-breed. I can't see it is the same thing. Just because one half-blood (Riddle) is off his nut, doesn't mean they all are or that Tonks has any reason to be. She's been raised in a family that doesn't buy in to the purist pure-blood fanaticism, after all. She believes LV is back, what he stood for before, and what he stands for now. I just can't see her joining up of her own accord. Miz Storge' "We know she's a metamorphmagi and that would certainly come in handy for being a traitor." DuffyPoo: Granted, but it would come in handy for the good side, as well. A little spying for the order while in disguise? The OotP has only been back in place for about a month and already Tonks has been convinced to join and work as a spy for them within the ministry. Metamorphmagi or not, she's still a half-blood and wouldn't be wanted as part of the DEs. Yes, yes, I have a very naive view of things. ;-) Miz Storge' said: "-The best evidence, however, is the battle at the Ministry of Magic. Tonks shoots one spell, and it goes over the head of the target. Then she has a brief scuffle with Bellatrix and conveniently falls down several tiers and conveniently hurts herself enough to get out of the fight." DuffyPoo: I can't see anywhere, in my OotP, that Tonks shoots a spell that goes over anyone's head. She shoots a Stunning Spell at Malfoy, Sr. that HP notes he did not hang around to see if it hit the mark. Then we see "Tonks, still halfway up the tiered seats, was firing spells down at Bellatrix" then "across the room Harry saw Tonks fall from halfway up the stone steps, her limp form toppling from stone seat to stone seat and Bellatrix, triumphant, running back towards the fray." Bella would have to be in on the double cross for this to work, but she seems genuinely triumphant, to me. charme "I noticed in OoP JKR doesn't write *anything* about him fighting anyone in DoM. He simply jumps in front of Malfoy while Malfoy is aiming at Harry at the last minute - everyone there has detail surrounding who they're fighting, when they fall," etc." DuffyPoo: There's precious little about Moody, either. Just that Harry saw the "magical eye spinning away across the floor", and "the owner lying on his side, bleeding from the head" then his attacker, Dolohov, comes at Harry. It seemed to me, that the Death Chamber is quite a large place, and I think it quite simply that they all weren't in Harry's line of vision at the same time. "Harry, take the prophecy, grab Neville and run!" Sirius yelled, dashing to meet Bellatrix. Harry did not see what happened next; Kinglsey swayed across his field of vision..." Not to mention Harry was a bit busy himself keeping control of the prophecy, fight off stray DEs and trying to get Neville moving. We've already had one Pettigrew-type spy, I'm not sure we're going to see another one in those same lines. At first I wanted to put Percy in this position, but I really don't think he's going to go back to his family, at least not in HBP, so I don't think he's a prime candidate for the spy position. However, I do think Mundungus is, not because he is the most obvious, but because he is an idiot. I don't think he will be a Pettigrew-type spy, but I think he is quite capable of getting caught up in something due to his crook nature. Loyalty to DD will not prevent him saving his own neck, IMO. The following is complete speculation, based, very loosely, on canon. - Harry, listening to the evening news hears this, "then a helicopter that had almost crashed in a field in Surrey." - We already know that Umbridge sent the Dementors, but why send them if she doesn't have some idea HP is going to be out and about where the Dementors are? The Dementors aren't going to be able to get into the Dursley residence, I don't think. - We find out that the crack HP heard was Mundungus disapparating to go looking for a load of stolen cauldrons. Who informed Mundungus about the cauldrons? - It's quite conceivable that if the members of the Order know Mundungus is a crook, the Ministry knows as well. What if the helicopter had almost crashed because the pilot saw someone on a broom? Someone on a broom with a load of cauldrons or dropping a load of cauldrons? Umbridge has to have been keeping an eye on HP, or she wouldn't have known when/where exactly to send the Dementors. Like she's watching the Potter-watchers. What if Umbridge set the whole thing up (not the helicopter, obviously) for Dung to hear about the stolen cauldrons - informed him herself or had someone else do it, Willy Widdershins perhaps - and knew he would go off to get them? It's not a stretch for me to hear him tell his informant, "I'm watching that Potter kid now, Willy, oh well, Figgy's still here, I'll just go and get those cauldrons." Mrs. Figg is off Umbridge's radar because she's a Squib, so Umbridge wouldn't know Figg's also watching HP. Now, Umbridge's plan has gone awry, HP didn't get soul-sucked, didn't get expelled from Hogwarts or otherwise taken out of the picture, but she's still got evidence of Mundungus buying up stolen cauldrons. Information she can blackmail him with; in exchange for a bit of info Dung, you can stay out of Azkaban. I've said before the reference to "DUNG" and "UMBRIDGE" from the Quibbler poster jumped off the page and nearly strangled me one day when reading OotP "Seen and Unforseen." Of course, the biggest problem with this speculation is that we don't know what is going to become of Umbridge. Have we seen the last of her? Will she show up back at the Mininstry after a rest at St. Mungo's? Will she stay on at the Ministry in some other capacity - easy enough for her to say that Fudge put her up to all that she did (nobody official yet knows about the blood-sucking pen). He certainly was her enabler writing Educational Decrees every few weeks. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Meliss9900 at aol.com Fri Aug 13 14:08:01 2004 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:08:01 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the ... Message-ID: <154.3c5d86d3.2e4e2541@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109961 In a message dated 08/06/2004 18.41 Central Daylight Time, romulus at hermionegranger.us writes: > I keep insisting on his presence at the school due to the fact that > most of the Death Eaters were attending school in the 1970s. > They had two months, in essence, outside of school to be > indoctrinated or attracted by Voldemort in any given year. School > year ended in late June and started in September. If Voldemort was > not at the school, he had agents at the school actively recruiting. > How else does he gain his following? > If Voldemort was afraid of Dumbledore then there's no way IMO that he'd try ANY type of recruitment at the school. DD seems to have a very effective warning system there with the paintings. No. Better to wait until they left the safe confines of Hogwarts for good and then approach them. Melissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Aug 13 14:22:41 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 14:22:41 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109962 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jo Raggett" wrote: > > vmonte responds: > > > > I might be remembering this incorrectly but wasn't there a wasp or > > bee outside of a Hogwarts class window when Harry was taking one of > > his exams? > > > > Aggie: > Forgive me if i'm wrong but wasn't this 'bug' matter cleared up in > canon? Was it not Rita Skeeter in beetle form? Or are you referring > to another insect? There's a wasp buzzing against one of the upper windows in the History of Magic Owl exam. Harry finds it distracting. Kneasy From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Aug 13 14:44:02 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 14:44:02 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109963 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" > wrote: > > Valky: > > Watch out for the quiet ones, eh? ..... > > Well, I wonder how you explain Remus in almost the same breath having said how terrified he was that his friends would *desert* him when they discovered he was a WereWolf. << > > RMM: > If you are referring to the Marauders, there is no explanation needed; if there were "others" meaning not the Marauders as such but other Gryffindors that were under his prefectorship (is that a word?), friendship would have nothing to do with it but his example would have a great effect on others. "Hey, did you know that Lupin joined the DEs?" Cool, must be a good operation, Lupin is close to DD you know."<< As far as Lupin's leadership abilities go, I agree with RMM. But Lupin's ability to lead is rather like Harry's ability to speak parseltongue-- it's possible to have an ability and not use it very often. On the few occasions when Lupin tells Sirius what to do, he is obeyed. I have to say that Lupin's "I led others along with me" refers to the way he betrayed Dumbledore's trust while he was at school by "breaking the rules he had made for my own and others safety." This cannot apply to either becoming Animagi *or* dabbling in the Dark Arts, because the rules against those apply to everybody, not just Lupin. IMO, Lupin is talking about observing the precautions that Dumbledore wanted to take so that Lupin could come to school. Lupin was supposed to make sure that no one else was endangered by his condition by staying in the Shrieking Shack while he was transformed. In planning his escape every month with the others, Lupin led them into violating Dumbledore's trust as well. Pippin whose comprehensive Ever So Evil Lupin draft is at 11 pages and counting -- Ack! From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk Fri Aug 13 15:01:25 2004 From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (Jo Raggett) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 15:01:25 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109964 > vmonte responds: > > I might be remembering this incorrectly but wasn't there a wasp or > bee outside of a Hogwarts class window when Harry was taking one of > his exams? And I think there was another one in a scene with Ron > where he almost kills it. If DD is an animagus he probably is more > likely to be a bee since his name means Bumble Bee. Aggie: Thanks to SSSusan and Kneasy for pointing out to me that there are several mentions of insects, not just Rita!! Even after her (Rita) spying, I *still* don't pick up these titbits of information!!!! Shame on me!! Anyway on to topic or the elves will be after me! DD could be a bee animagus as Hermione's research into registered animagi only went for 'this' (20th) Century. DD would have, more than likely, been registered the previous century. My only problem is *why*?? Not why would he be an animagus, but why would he be watching Harry doing his History of Magic exam? Was it the one when Harry had a vision? If it was, AND DD *is* the wasp (just checked with Kneasy's post, it was a wasp not a bee!), does this mean that DD KNOWS Harry's about to get a vision? It *does* make sense for DD to keep an eye (or 6!) on Harry in this way. Someone also mentioned about Ludo Bagman being a wasp, as he played for the Wasps. If it wasn't for the fact that it would mean yet *another* unregistered animagi then I would prefer this theory! It would account for his whereabouts in OotP AND he could be using his wasp form as a way of spying on Harry for LV. . .couldn't it Kneasy!! I'm *convinced* (to the point of working on a Ludo essay) that he WILL be back! Could Ludo be over 100 years old? Could he have registered in the 19th century? Could Hermione have read his name but just not mentioned it? This is the only problem I have, I *really* don't want another unregistered animagi!! From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Aug 13 15:26:05 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 15:26:05 -0000 Subject: you CAN'T hurt a BABY!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109965 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "theredshoes86" wrote: > > I mean, why else would Hermione say that? the guy was a Death Eater, she wouldn't have minded hurting him. And there are no other accounts of babies being hurt in any of the books .... > > ANY THOUGHTS?????? Actually, Neville's people are always trying to hurt him, in hopes of activating his magic. We don't know how old he was when he got tossed off the pier, but he was younger than eight. Baby Harry is prodded and pinched, and later punched, by cousin Dudley. I think JKR is drawing a line between chivalric sentiment and true chivalry. It's easy to defend the weak and innocent when they're cute and harmless. Even Umbridge has a soft spot for kittens. But Hermione, an unsentimental sort who refuses to gush over baby unicorns, is a true Gryffindor and will protect even Kreacher and babyhead. Pippin From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 15:50:59 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 15:50:59 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109966 *huge snip* RMM wrote: > Umbridge and Fudge in with the DEs? > Sorry, but that is completely out there. Now Cory: Is it really? Fudge is Lucius Malfoy's puppy dog, and he spent most of OotP trying to discredit Harry and Dumbledore in the Wizarding World. Umbridge sent two dementors to Privet Drive to attack Harry, and that was the first of many evil things she did in OotP. Both of them seem very Death Eater-like to me. Granted, it would not shock me to learn that both of them are *not* DEs either, but I certainly don't think it's such a leap to argue that they could be. Sorry to snip so much; I really can't respond to this entire post right now (and the current participants in the thread are doing a great job anyway). I just had to respond to this one point. Best, --Cory From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Aug 13 16:01:08 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 16:01:08 -0000 Subject: biggest SPOILER _ Children's Books? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109967 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Josh Warren" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" > wrote: > > Josh Warren wrote: > > > > I tend to get a bit testy when already-denied > > > > theories keep managing to pop up. > > > > > > SSSusan: > > The thing is, as much as I *don't* believe in Vampire!Snape, there are still folks who can hang onto that theory because what JKR said to "Is there a link between Snape and vampires?" was "Erm...I don't think so." You see? It sounded like a "no" to me, but why doesn't she just come out and say "NO!" It's the way she leaves a teeny tiny window there that muddies the waters. Josh: > She has 4 answers... "yes" "no" "I can't say!" and "what are you, > stupid?" > > I'll count her Vampire!Snape answer as #4, right along with DE!Lily, Granddaddy!LV, etc. ;-) > Your privilege, Josh, but how do you know she hasn't got another category: #5 Tricky Dumbledore uses misleading locutions, such as "Unless you are suggesting that Harry and Hermione are able to be in two places at once, " "If you think Buckbeak has been stolen, do you think the thief will have led him away on foot" (this, when there are flattened patches of grass suggesting that someone has done just that) and his whole conversation as he leads Fudge away from arresting Harry in OOP. He does it rarely, since a reputation for straight talk is a trickster's best friend. I can't prove that JKR does it too. But if you accept JKR's "Dumbledore is goodness" statement, it's hard to see that she would regard this as wrong. Pippin From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com Fri Aug 13 16:15:27 2004 From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 16:15:27 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109968 > vivian wrote: > > I might be remembering this incorrectly but wasn't there a wasp or > bee outside of a Hogwarts class window when Harry was taking one of > his exams? And I think there was another one in a scene with Ron > where he almost kills it. If DD is an animagus he probably is more > likely to be a bee since his name means Bumble Bee. Does anyone know > the scenes I'm talking about? (This doesn't mean that he couldn't be > masquerading as other things since he is probably good at > transfiguration.) boyd: I often wonder if we are all (myself included) sometimes too obsessed with trying to repeat past events in the future books. Such as, "Rita was an insect animagus, so who else could be?" Or "LV was an anagram, so what else could be?" So while these pursuits can be entertaining (the creativity of the Droobles posts was mind-boggling), they also seem a bit too narrow-minded. JKR has demonstrated tremendous ingenuity in developing a wizard world of many wonders, and we seem to be short-changing her a bit. If DD knows too much, I hope it's neither through being an animagus or using a time-turner, but instead because he's been there, done that before. Or he uses a bit of Legimency. Or because JKR just made him uber-smart to help the plot along. Or maybe there's still more wonders to be seen. Paranormal vision? Channeling Godric? Alternate universes? Jo only knows. Further, the stronger wizards seem to have more powerful animagus forms. Else why would Peter, who reportedly struggled for a bit, be only able to become a rat? Sure, it helps that he can touch the base of the Whomping Willow, but certainly many more interesting forms could have done that. So if stronger wizards become stronger animagi, wouldn't it stand to reason that if Albus were an animagus, then it would be a bit more spectacular? A dragon, phoenix or giant squid? I still don't think he's an animagus, though. We have no evidence that LV is, and he's at least the second strongest wizard alive. Perhaps it takes more than simple wizarding power to do--and perhaps few find it useful enough to learn. --boyd feeling a bit unworthy of predictions today From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 13 16:23:54 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 16:23:54 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109969 vivian wrote: > > I might be remembering this incorrectly but wasn't there a wasp > > or bee outside of a Hogwarts class window when Harry was taking > > one of his exams? And I think there was another one in a scene > > with Ron where he almost kills it. If DD is an animagus he > > probably is more likely to be a bee since his name means Bumble > > Bee. boyd: > I often wonder if we are all (myself included) sometimes too > obsessed with trying to repeat past events in the future books. > Such as, "Rita was an insect animagus, so who else could be?" > Or "LV was an anagram, so what else could be?" > > If DD knows too much, I hope it's neither through being an animagus > or using a time-turner.... SSSusan: I think you share this hope with many posters here, boyd, but I also think there *are* at least three reasons which, esp. when put together, explain why many people think DD is likely to be an animagus. One, there's that Dumbledore = Bee thing; second, there must be some explanation for how DD knows so much, and this could explain it; third, Hermione made that statement that there are only 9 [or 7 or 11? I've forgotten the precise number] registered animagi *this century*. That "this century" sent a red flag up for lots of readers, and it really does fit, with DD's age, that he could be fully registered but simply have done so in the previous century. Those three things together make it more plausible than some of the other theories out there, imho. Siriusly Snapey Susan, who doesn't care one way or the other if DD's an animagus, but who *would* like to see an explanation for how DD knows so much w/o knowing everything before the series ends. From Ali at zymurgy.org Fri Aug 13 16:28:05 2004 From: Ali at zymurgy.org (Ali) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 16:28:05 -0000 Subject: Accio Call for Papers Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109970 Accio UK is pleased to announce the release of the Call for Papers (CFP) for the first Harry Potter conference sponsored by HPfGU, to be held in the UK between 29th- 31st July 2005 at the University of Reading. The text of the CFP follows this introduction, and may also be found at this link: http://www.accio.org.uk/call4papers.shtml We welcome submissions by both members of the academic/professional community, and also adult fandom participants. Please note that the topic areas noted in the CFP are only suggestions - we are open to proposals on any aspect of the Harry Potter fandom. Proposals may take the form of a 500 word abstract or a completed conference paper (no more than 4,000 words). Please note that submissions must be sent electronically by 31st December 2004. Please contact us at submissions @ Accio.org.uk if you wish to make alternative arrangements. Please read the CFP carefully to note all of the particulars. We are looking forward to receiving your submissions! Ali Hewison For Accio UK ********************************************************************* Accio 2005 University of Reading, UK July 29-31, 2005 Call for Papers Accio UK is aimed at both academics and adult fans of the Harry Potter series. The Programming Committee is therefore inviting proposals from both sectors for presentations, moderated panels, debates and workshops on any topic relating to the Harry Potter phenomenon. Suggested Topics for Presentations, Panels and Workshops Topics may include, but are certainly not limited to: - Characterisation Archetypal yet unconventional or merely one-dimensional stereotypes? The scope here is enormous, and papers are welcomed on individual/group character studies or thematic overviews. - Religious Studies: Religious and spiritual responses and interpretations of the series. - Social Issues, including Gender Studies: the role of women in the Harry Potter Series. - Race Relations in HP: Real and analogous Class portrayal: A pretence of meritocracy? - Legal Issues: The Legal System, Government and Justice in the Wizarding World. - Comparative Studies: Areas of interest within this area include: Religion. How various religious groups use the series and how this compares with treatment of other fantasy series by authors such as CS Lewis, Tolkien, Philip Pullman. The phenomenon and appeal of Cross-Over literature (e.g., Philip Pullman's His Dark Materials trilogy), and the serious life issues this recently classified genre frequently explores. - Mythopoeia, Etymology and other sources of inspiration: How appreciation of JK Rowling's use of "what has gone before" is important to our understanding of the series. - Education: The inclusion of the Harry Potter series in curricula (from primary education through to graduate studies) and dealing with the issues involved. For example, for those educating pre-teens, the treatment of death in the series. An Educator's perspective on teaching in the Wizarding World. - The Heroic Quest: What makes a Hero? Could include discussion of predestination and the idea of the "Chosen One" and the much stressed concept of individual choice. - Alchemy and Symbolism: The search for the Philosopher's Stone, Hidden Meanings within the text, and other Gnostic Elements. - Concepts of Power: The Battle between Good and Evil and the controversial depiction of "grey" areas. - Fandom Concerns: May include: Battles with Interpretation, including character portrayal and their potential relationships in the series (and beyond): Fanfiction and Intellectual Property issues. Reinventing the Series: The relationship between a continuing series and the fanfiction community Reclaiming the Canon: JK Rowling's relationship with the online fandom community Time Blocks Two concurrent tracks will run over two days of programming. Time blocks in multiples of 30 minutes will be available: proposals should therefore specify the estimated amount of time required for the presentation, and should also indicate how much time allowance should be made for post-talk discussion/ Q&A sessions. Submissions Deadline: 31st December 2004 Proposals should be either an abstract (500 word max) or a completed conference paper (4,000 word max). We are accepting e-mail submissions only, and any attachments should be in Microsoft Word. Please send to the following address, including "Accio 2005 Proposal Submission" in the subject line. Submissions @ accio.org.uk. Selected Presenters will be notified by week ending 31st January, 2005, and will be expected to register for the conference when confirming that they will be present. Presenters are expected to submit a conference paper for publication in the Proceedings by 21st June 2005. This paper should be no greater than 4,000 words. Please note that publication in the Proceedings will be dependent upon attendance. Attendees All presenters and participants must be at least 18 years of age, as Accio is an adults-only event. Disclaimers Accio UK is an unofficial event and is not endorsed by JK Rowling or her representatives, Warner Bros., or the Harry Potter book publishers. From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com Fri Aug 13 16:31:04 2004 From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 16:31:04 -0000 Subject: Tonks a traitor? In-Reply-To: <001301c4813e$aad57d90$40c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109971 > DuffyPoo wrote: > I can't see anywhere, in my OotP, that Tonks shoots a spell that goes over anyone's head. She shoots a Stunning Spell at Malfoy, Sr. that HP notes he did not hang around to see if it hit the mark. Then we see "Tonks, still halfway up the tiered seats, was firing spells down at Bellatrix" then "across the room Harry saw Tonks fall from halfway up the stone steps, her limp form toppling from stone seat to stone seat and Bellatrix, triumphant, running back towards the fray." Bella would have to be in on the double cross for this to work, but she seems genuinely triumphant, to me. < >< boyd: OTOH, DuffyPoo, perhaps Tonks isn't bad *yet*. Maybe a visit with LV would set her on the less-travelled path, though. Since she's already been demonstrated as a bit of a klutz, how hard is it to imagine her accidentally getting caught by a DE or LV and taken off to be reprogrammed or Imperio'd? Hmmm, Imperio'd!Tonks ... sounds potentially bangy! Especially if Harry has a crush on her next book! Then DD and Snape might have to rush to save Harry and DD would get killed, leaving Snape to uncomfortably tutor Harry on the overthrow of evil Dark Lords. Sorry, I've written that bit before! --boyd From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 16:48:23 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 09:48:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Molly-- Thoughts on a witch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040813164823.91720.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109972 --- huntergreen_3 wrote: > Josh wrote: >>Yes, absolutely Molly is very well intentioned, but she's >>certainly a terror... and I'm still counting her among the short >>list Harry is going to tell off rather convincingly in the nearer >>chapters of HPB. She deserves it!<< > > HunterGreen: > But does she deserve it *from Harry*? She's the closest thing to a > mother that Harry has ever known (Lily can't count because he > barely even remembers her). And many of the things she's done to > her own children (listed in the original post, like playing > favorites) Harry hasn't had to experience. I agree with Josh that good intentions can only take you so far - and I'm not sure that her "that's everyone in the family!" comment about Ron's prefect appointment has anything to do with good intentions rather than dissing the twins.... But I don't think he'll yell at her. Quite the bottler-up is Mr. Potter Jr. But if he did it wouldn't be because of something she did to him, it would because she was ragging Ron about something unfairly. And he'd have my wholehearted support. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From romulus at hermionegranger.us Fri Aug 13 16:55:37 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 16:55:37 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109973 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > > RMM: > > Distinct and recognisable ten year war? Don't think so. > > Voldemort had his downfall in 1981. According to Hagrid in 1991, > > Voldemort showed up about twenty years ago. According to Sirius > > Black, Voldemort was very popular with the Purebloods at first. > > So we have Voldemort showing up 1970-1971. > > Gaining in popularity: 1971-1978 (Remember Sirius saying something > > about Voldemort going into hiding 15 years ago? See PoA) > > War: 1978-1981. That is a 3 year hot war. not a 10 year war. > > > > > > > Valky: > Big Flaw I am afraid RMM. How then do you explain DD's statement to > MacGonagall about having precious little to celebrate for 11 years? > Ch 1 SS/PS RMM: I explain it thusly. As soon as Voldemort showed up "eleven years ago" things probably began to feel different and uneasy around the place. One could not put a finger on it just yet for the source of it wasn't identified, but something sure was odd. Looking back in hindsight, Dumbledore can say "there's been precious little to celebrate for the last eleven years" and imply just what I've stated above. The bad atmosphere, the growing unease with this new political movement, and the war that ensues all form a basis for "little to celebrate". > Valky: > And the finality of that statement is Nothing Will preclude that > James would practise Dark Arts short of it being entirely absent > from his total and comprehensive history laid out before us. > At the very least canon that he hated it doesnt demand so much > history to be given to truth that he wouldn't perform it conciously > and wilfully. Much like you wouldn't wilfully eat oranges if you > Hated them. RMM: And some people have occupations that they hate but perform willingly and consciously. RMM www.hermionegranger.us From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Aug 13 16:56:31 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 16:56:31 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109974 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jo Raggett" wrote: > > Someone also mentioned about Ludo Bagman being a wasp, as he played > for the Wasps. If it wasn't for the fact that it would mean yet > *another* unregistered animagi then I would prefer this theory! > > It would account for his whereabouts in OotP AND he could be using > his wasp form as a way of spying on Harry for LV. . .couldn't it > Kneasy!! I'm *convinced* (to the point of working on a Ludo essay) > that he WILL be back! Could Ludo be over 100 years old? Could he > have registered in the 19th century? Could Hermione have read his > name but just not mentioned it? This is the only problem I have, I > *really* don't want another unregistered animagi!! I get very restive when posters start imaging animagi all over the place; they're supposed to be rare, yet we've come across more unregistered animagi than officially recognised ones. Even worse, every so often an outbreak of animagitis sweeps across the board; no character is safe. I wouldn't mind if they were something interesting - a hippo, or a crocodile or a skunk. It's amazing that no-one's yet suggested that DD is the Hogwarts squid, he's been suspected of being everything else. And JKR doesn't seem to like the unofficial ones much - look what's happened to the four of them. Dead, dead, Igor and the ultimate horror - chipped nail-varnish! Is there a worse fate? And having two of 'em as insects stretches my credulity beyond breaking point. I shall be severely pissed off if that comes to pass. Bagman is a baddy; of that I have no doubt (see 73901). Unlikely that's he's that old though; at his trial he talks of Rookwood being a friend of his fathers. How old would that make Rookwood and Bagman Snr.? Spying is an activity talked about much more often than it seems to be performed IMO. Only Pettigrew fits the traditional pattern; forget Snape, he's up to something, but it won't be traditional spying as envisaged by some. All the potential methods for disguise in the books and they never seem to be used to their full potential as intelligence tools. Pity, really. I did a round up of the various means available last year. Why would Bagman spy on Harry anyway? Voldy creeps into Harrys mind whenever he feels like it, in fact he sends one of his visions during this same exam. All Baggy could tell him is that Harry passed out, that's if he noticed. Imitating a beastie is all very well, but it'd be over-egging the cake to spend your time bashing your head against a window. Bagman will be back, I think. Treacherous, he is. An animagus, I doubt. Kneasy From cruthw at earthlink.net Fri Aug 13 17:11:34 2004 From: cruthw at earthlink.net (caspenzoe) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 17:11:34 -0000 Subject: House Elves, Hermione And Freedom In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109975 > > Caesian responds: > My pleasure pentzouli :-). Let's say my point is in the school of > Dumbledore's approach vs. that of - say - Barty Crouch Sr. When things > are most dangerous - that is the worst possible time to start making > arguments about restricting basic civil liberties. For example, the > right to a trial, or to defend oneself in court (cough * Sirius * > cough). Do you agree that in the WW, these same arguments have > probably been made against Muggleborns? - "how do we know we can trust > them?" or, "maybe we'll let them be full members of our community when > things seem safer, but not now". > > I'm not saying that these issues are the same as the reason the elves > are enslaved - we agree we don't know why. (Wouldn't it be nice if our > brainiac Hermione could bother to update us on that topic before > rushing off to the library sans explanation again - I'm feeling like > Ron here.) > > Cheers, > Caesian - who apologizes for being a bit touchy about this topic at the > moment (cough * American politics suck * cough) Hi Caesian! Sorry to interject! I would like to know a lot more about the history of the House Elves' enslavement too, because I can't make any sense of it as it is - seems terribly unenlightened even for the more conservative elements of the WW. And I agree that "cough * American politics suck * cough" right now. and *cough* at the risk of violating some rules here *cough* (I swear I'll never do it again!) I responded to your latest e-mails Caesian (thank you!) but they got returned. Are you having some difficulty with your provider by any chance? I'll be happy to try again! Caspen From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 13 17:14:59 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 13:14:59 -0400 Subject: Tonks a traitor? Message-ID: <001201c48159$10930700$125ad0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 109976 boyd: "OTOH, DuffyPoo, perhaps Tonks isn't bad *yet*. Maybe a visit with LV would set her on the less-travelled path, though. Since she's already been demonstrated as a bit of a klutz, how hard is it to imagine her accidentally getting caught by a DE or LV and taken off to be reprogrammed or Imperio'd?" DuffyPoo: That's why I said "I just can't see her joining up of her own accord." Not hard to imagine at all, I'm just hoping otherwise. While I do expect a spy of some sort in the order, I'm hoping against a reincarnation of the Peter Pettigrew type. I'm also hoping against a host of imperio'd folks running around also, I've had quite enough of that already. Besides, now even all the kids at Hogwarts - at least Harry's DADA class - know to 'watch [the] eyes, that's where you see it.' boyd: "Hmmm, Imperio'd!Tonks ... sounds potentially bangy! Especially if Harry has a crush on her next book! Then DD and Snape might have to rush to save Harry and DD would get killed, leaving Snape to uncomfortably tutor Harry on the overthrow of evil Dark Lords. Sorry, I've written that bit before! " DuffyPoo: Which bit, the Imperio'd!Tonks bit or the Harry has a crush on her bit? Don't get me started on SHIPS! ;-) If DD gets killed and leaves Snape to tutor Harry on the overthrow of evil Dark Lords, we'd better hope some speculation about who else could be "the one" pans out, I'm not sure what Harry has managed to learn from Snape so far. Precious little potions - which I think HP needs to get a grip on and remember that Snape told him in his very first potions class, that he can teach them how to stopper death - and probably even less Occlumency. Oh yes, that James really was arrogant! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Fri Aug 13 17:22:27 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 17:22:27 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109977 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "boyd_smythe" wrote: > Further, the stronger wizards seem to have more powerful animagus > forms. Else why would Peter, who reportedly struggled for a bit, be > only able to become a rat? Sure, it helps that he can touch the base > of the Whomping Willow, but certainly many more interesting forms > could have done that. > > So if stronger wizards become stronger animagi, wouldn't it stand to > reason that if Albus were an animagus, then it would be a bit more > spectacular? A dragon, phoenix or giant squid? But animagi forms are characteritic of the person, not their magical strength... unless you want to get into magical forms, like a phoenix, but that last is pure hypothetical. Now, we can safely assume that JKR chose Siruis and Remus' names due to their animalistic alter egos, but is that the same for DD? Possibily, but "dumbledore" is much less commonly known pre-books, so perhaps not. Think of DD's personality and mannerisms, and go from there. Josh From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Fri Aug 13 17:29:08 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 17:29:08 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109978 >>> Kemper wrote: > I'm betting Mrs. Figg wasn't sorted into Gryffindor or any other > house. There is no canon suggesting that Hogwart's has a special ed. program. No one seems to ride the short broom to school. > > GEOFF laughed and rebutted: > Touch?! Kempermentor, I am still laughing as bad as Luna when Ron > made the joke about the baboon's backside. In rebuttal all I can say is that we don't know who Mrs. Figgs was married to, a Gryffindor house alumni perhaps! > > Kemper again: > True, we don't know who Mr. Figg was. But I believe that if Hogwarts did have a MR/DD (Magically Retarded/Developmentally Delayed), Arabella would have been sorted in Gryffindor. Brenda now: I don't even think she went to any magical school, let alone prestigious Hogwarts. She is a squib! What good is magical training if you haven't got a dose of magic in you! It appears that magical schools do not provide the MR/DD service either, hence Filch's Kwickspell course letter. If Mrs. Figg went to any magical school, I think the chances are at least someone else in WW would know of her existence. Harry's trial in OoP suggests otherwise; even the Ministry had no idea there was a squib living nearby 4 Privet Drive. And given that the Ministry is keeping a very close tab on Harry's summer residence, that is surprising. Brenda From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Fri Aug 13 17:48:48 2004 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:48:48 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] ADMIN: We Need Your Opinions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <251444276.20040813104848@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109979 Thursday, August 12, 2004, 5:17:03 AM, hpfgu_elves wrote: h> The survey can be found at: h> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/surveys?id=1349463 I'm finding it a bit difficult to respond to this poll because it appears that some of the options are truncated, e.g. "I would like to have occasional no posting days so that everyone can" Everyone can what?? Can you clarify some of these? Options 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, & 16 are the ones that appear incomplete. Thanks... -- Dave From romulus at hermionegranger.us Fri Aug 13 17:53:10 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 17:53:10 -0000 Subject: A Case for Marauders In-Reply-To: <20040813104957.9047.qmail@webmail30.rediffmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109980 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Amey Chinchorkar" wrote: > Amey: > We have a canon that he was not recognized (still is not recognized) as Tom Riddle by many. So he had no history. He was not the person who was Head Boy, he was a totally new person and he was harping on pureblood thing I agree he might not have any bad reputation, but then he had no reputation... do you think Dumbledore would agree to take him as a teacher without proper background (even LockHart had a reputation) RMM: No, I do not believe that Dumbledore would take anyone on without good references. And that is where the Head of Durmstrang comes into play. Igor Karkaroff, I speculate, had Voldemort teaching at Durmstrang for a time. Maybe, maybe not. However, we know that Karkaroff is a LV disciple. Karkaroff gives Dumbledore a glowing reference for this Lord Voldemort. "He is a very good teacher, and I highly recommend him for the open position at Hogwarts. - signed I. Karkaroff, Headmaster Durmstrang" > > - RMM: > - Like the Polyjuice Potion for one? Knocking out a person and keeping > - them under wraps while you impersonate them? You know, like stealing > - someone's identity? > - Well, I know three 2nd years that did exactly that. But that's okay.. > - . they were just kids. > - As far and Good and Bad are concerned there was absolutely no > - difference between what Harry, Ron, and Hermione did and what B. > - Crouch Jr. did. > > Amey: > Ok, there are 3 persons who kill another person. One of them get life sentence, second gets 5 yrs jail, third gets a medal. Now what is the difference between them? The first person commited cold- blooded murder (he is a murderer), the second killed in self-defence and the third person killed on duty (a soldier or law-enforcer). > Barty Crouch Jr. did what he did for his personal gain, and he tried to kill Harry. The trio were trying to get to the truth, they had no intention of killing or harming anyone. RMM: Certainly mitigating circumstances help to constitute the seriousness of the crime. However, in all the cases I enumerate, the same type of violations of another person took place. The SITUATION cannot make what was wrong now right. Taking the above examples you provide, only the first applies here. Harry, Hermione, and Ron did not do what they did in self-defence nor did they do it as part of an official agency. They did it on the sly, just as B. Crouch Jr. did it. Intention has nothing to do with violation of the law, that is, the End does not Justify the Means. That is an anti-civilized mentality. > Amey: > SO you mean at 15 he and Sirius tried Dark Arts and dabbled in PureBlood theory and at 16, Sirius left his parents' home because he hated all these things. In 1 year, he changed so much???? RMM: I don't know what stuff you are reading, because what you say makes no sense to me. Please re-phrase the question. > Amey: > He did not even mention the word, he was so pissed off with that word. RMM: Not necessarily. He KNEW Lily WAS UPSET with the word. - so why repeat it and make Lily more upset? > - RMM: > - However, I will use the fact that there has been a change in James > - that Lily now sees him as attractive where she saw him as a jerk > - before. > - This change can be partially explained by a separation between the > - two > - troublemakers - Sirius and James. James probably became a little > - more > - mature outside the influence of his best buddy. > - So, there may be a double reason why James has altered his ego to the > - point that Lily now sees him in a different light and now begins to > - go > - out with him. (The other reason being James entry into the world of > - Voldemort.) > > Amey: > Out of influence of Sirius? Do you mean that James and Sirius were > going apart? Show me canon for this please RMM: Well, getting into trouble is implied by the way the two fed off each other. They were best friends. Together they were jerks, and Sirius admitted it. Secondly Sirius' comment: <<'Your dad's place,' said Sirius. 'Your grandparents were really good about it; they sort of adopted me as a second son. Yeah, I camped out at your dad's in the school holidays, and when I was seventeen I got a place of my own. My Uncle Alphard had left me a decent bit of gold - he's been wiped off here, too, that's probably why - anyway, after that I looked after myself. I was always welcome at Mr and Mrs Potter's for Sunday lunch, though.'>> Always welcome at Mr. and Mrs. Potter's for Sunday lunch .....THOUGH? THOUGH? "Though" means "in spite of the fact that" So, in spite of the fact that Sirius looked after himself, he was always welcome at Mr. and Mrs. Potter for Sunday lunch? What sense does that make? Are we to take this to mean that if Sirius wasn't looking after himself, then he would be more welcome at the Potters? It's nonsense. The only sense one can make of Sirius' statement is: In spite of the fact that I was not associating with James any more, I was always welcome at "Mr. and Mrs." Potter for Sunday lunch. And please note he says "Mr. and Mrs.". Why not say -- I was always welcome at the Potters for Sunday lunch. Why distinguish between the parents and James? Because I aver that James and he were not on speaking terms. And you ask: How can best friends be that way? Well, I answer: Ron and Harry sure had a rough time communicating for awhile in GoF didn't they? > Amey: > When did Lupin become a leader of marauders?? Sirius and James had that place jointly, if we believe canon. RMM: Well Dumbledore made Lupin a prefect so he could have some influence over Sirius and James. Second, Lupin himself admits to LEADING James, Sirius, and Peter into becoming animagi. Third, Sirius implies Lupin's authority in the group when he said that Lupin did not exercise much control over the two of them. To "exercise control" is to lead. I acknowledged already that Lupin was a poor leader in the group. He let James and Sirius get out of hand. And he admits that. > Amey, who would love to see how a person can change so much in just one year RMM: I changed a lot between my junior and senior years at high school. I am sure others have as well. RMM www.hermionegranger.us From romulus at hermionegranger.us Fri Aug 13 17:58:00 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 17:58:00 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109982 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ohneill_2001" wrote: > *huge snip* > > RMM wrote: > > Umbridge and Fudge in with the DEs? > > Sorry, but that is completely out there. > > Now Cory: > > Is it really? Fudge is Lucius Malfoy's puppy dog, and he spent most > of OotP trying to discredit Harry and Dumbledore in the Wizarding > World. Umbridge sent two dementors to Privet Drive to attack Harry, > and that was the first of many evil things she did in OotP. Both of > them seem very Death Eater-like to me. > > Granted, it would not shock me to learn that both of them are *not* > DEs either, but I certainly don't think it's such a leap to argue > that they could be. > RMM: Yes, I see your point. What comes to mind is the following adage: The enemy of your enemy is not necessarily your friend. RMM www.hermionegranger.us From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 17:57:55 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 17:57:55 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109983 > > Valky: > > And the finality of that statement is Nothing Will preclude that > > James would practise Dark Arts short of it being entirely absent > > from his total and comprehensive history laid out before us. > > At the very least canon that he hated it doesnt demand so much > > history to be given to truth that he wouldn't perform it conciously > > and wilfully. Much like you wouldn't wilfully eat oranges if you > > Hated them. > > RMM: > And some people have occupations that they hate but perform willingly > and consciously. Now Cory: There is a world of difference between performing a job that you "hate" (out of a need to earn a livlihood, or for whatever reason), and becoming a DE even though you hate the Dark Arts. If a person sincerely believes that killing is morally wrong, he is not going to become a professional hitman, no matter what the incentives. Are you seriously trying to equate that (or becoming a DE even though you hate the Dark Arts) with getting out of bed every day to go to a 9-to-5 job that you hate? --Cory From romulus at hermionegranger.us Fri Aug 13 18:03:44 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 18:03:44 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109984 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ohneill_2001" wrote: > Cory: > > There is a world of difference between performing a job that > you "hate" (out of a need to earn a livlihood, or for whatever > reason), and becoming a DE even though you hate the Dark Arts. If a > person sincerely believes that killing is morally wrong, he is not > going to become a professional hitman, no matter what the > incentives. Are you seriously trying to equate that (or becoming a > DE even though you hate the Dark Arts) with getting out of bed every > day to go to a 9-to-5 job that you hate? > > --Cory RMM: My only point is that "hating something" does not necessarily mean that one "will not" or "has not performed" that something. When someone shows me canon to the effect that James Potter never performed Dark Arts, then I will pack my "James Potter, DE" bags and leave town. RMM www.hermionegranger.us From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 18:23:36 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 18:23:36 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders (was Re: Marauders, Voldemort and the Map) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109985 RMM wrote: > My only point is that "hating something" does not necessarily mean > that one "will not" or "has not performed" that something. > When someone shows me canon to the effect that James Potter never > performed Dark Arts, then I will pack my "James Potter, DE" bags and > leave town. Now Cory: The reality is, there's no canon either way on the question of whether James performed Dark Arts. The definition of the term "Dark Arts" is a bit of a point of contention; we know that he became an unregistered animagus and that he helped create the Marauder's map. If those two things are considered "Dark Arts," then yes, he he has performed them. I personally would argue that they are not, but the term "Dark Arts" is not defined anywhere in canon either, so we could debate that point to eternity. Given that we do not know whether any of the things he *did* do would be considered "Dark Arts," and that there is no canon to support a conclusion that he did any of the things that we *do* know constitute Dark Arts, I think we can agree that there is no canon - positive or negative - as to whether James ever performed any Dark Arts. Agreed? So what canon *do* we have? We know that he "hated" the Dark Arts. We know that he was close to Dumbledore. We know that he ultimately died fighting against Voldemort. Now -- based on all of the above (which, to summarize, consists of substantial canon that he hated the Dark Arts and fought Dumbledore's fight, and no canon that he ever performed any Dark Arts), you are prepared to conclude, not only that James performed some Dark Arts, but that he was a Death Eater. (!) To slightly mis-quote the old joke about the economist stranded on the deserted island: "You can't assume a can opener." Anyway, those are my thoughts. I won't stand here and tell you that there's no possible way you could be right; maybe you will be, but right now I think your argument flies in the face of substantial canon, and is supported by very little. --Cory From erinellii at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 18:36:47 2004 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (Erin) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 18:36:47 -0000 Subject: How long were Voldemort and Quirrell "together"? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109986 Here's something that's been bugging me lately. The timeline of Quirrell. In PS/SS, after Harry meets Quirrell while buying his school supplies and asks if he is always that nervous, Hagrid says: "Oh, yeah. Poor bloke. Brilliant mind. He was fine while he was studyin' outta books but then he took a year off ter get some first- hand experience... They say he met vampires in the Black Forest, and there was a nasty bit o' trouble with a hag-- never been the same since. Scared of the students, scared of his own subject--" Okay. Now, if I was judging purely from that statement alone, I'd guess that the year of PS/SS was *at least* Quirrell's fourth year at Hogwarts. Here is my reasoning for that. 1.) Quirrell was fine when studying out of books. That would be year one, though there might have been more than one year of Quirrell being "fine", there's no way of telling. 2.) Quirrell took a year off. That would be year two, when he picked up Voldemort. 3.) Hagrid says he hasn't been the same since-- scared of the students, scared of his own subject. That would be year three, the year before Harry came to Hogwarts. This also might have been a period of more than one year, we can't know. 4.) And PS/SS would be Quirrell's fourth year. Evidence throughout PS/SS would also seem to support this conclusion. There's no "Welcome Back, Professor Quirrell," speech from Dumbledore at the start-of-term feast, for instance, as you would expect had he been absent the previous year. When Percy tells Harry about Snape, he says Snape is after "Quirrell's job", not "The Defense Against the Dark Arts job," which to me would seem more natural had someone else been in the job last year. During his speech at the end of the book, Quirrell says, "I met him when I traveled around the world. A foolish young man I was then, full of ridiculous ideas about good and evil. Lord Voldemort showed me how wrong I was....Since then, I have served him faithfully, although I have let him down many times." No mention of "last year". Indeed, Quirrell's speech sounds to me as though he is talking about a period of time much greater than a year. "A foolish young man I was then..."? Granted, he's still a young man, but he has almost this air of reminiscing that shouts out to me, "A long period of time has passed since these events occured!" Hagrid's speech remains the most telling to me. In it he says Quirrell is scared of the students and of his own subject. BUT, if it had truly been the previous year Quirrell had taken off, then Quirrell must have just gotten back that summer! When would he have had time to see any students, or teach his subject?? Also, if Quirrell had just returned from the trip around the world, I'd expect Hagrid to not be so...lighthearted... about Quirrell's fears. Read Hagrid's speech again. He doesn't say anything like, "Poor bloke. He just came back from his trip a month ago and he's been trembling ever since. Hopefully he'll snap out of it in time to teach this year." No, for Hagrid the fearfulness and stuttering seem an accepted part of Quirrell's personality, not a recent change in it. When Harry asks if Quirrell is always that way, Hagrid replies without hesitation, "Oh yeah." And then there's the gossip factor. "They say he met vampires...". "They say" usually means "everyone says", but put in such a way so as to give it the status of legend. Think your favorite old scary ghost story: "They say no one's ever spent the night in that house and come out alive...". But if Quirrell's just returned from Albania, when has the gossip on him ever had time to reach legendary status? Back at Hogwarts, "everyone" says the smell of garlic in Quirrell's classroom is to ward off vampires, but only the twins are commenting on the turban, which would be the new factor if this timeline is correct. My guess is that had Quirrellmort lasted another year, "everyone" would have then accepted the twins' explanation and would also be saying that the turban was stuffed with garlic. In short, nothing in PS/SS rules out the conclusion that Quirrell's world trip did not happen the year before Harry came to Hogwarts. So where do we get the idea that in did? From one place and one place only: Voldemort's speech at the end of Goblet of Fire. "Then... four years ago... the means for my return seemed assured." But what "means" is Voldemort really talking about here? Is he talking of finding Quirrell, or of stealing the Philosopher's/Sorcerer's Stone? Later he says, "But my plan failed. I did not manage to steal the Sorcerer's Stone. I was not to be assured immortal life." To me this indicates that the means for his return was the Stone, not Quirrell. Also in the speech he says "...and after a while, I took possession of his body, to supervise him more closely as he carried out my orders." How long is "after a while" for Voldemort? Would it be a matter of mere weeks as it would have had to have been had Quirrell picked up Voldemort the year before PS/SS? Wouldn't Quirrell and Voldemort also have needed time to locate the stone and plan how to break into Gringotts, or locate and contact someone who could show them how to break into Gringotts? The Lexicon timeline for PS/SS definitely say's Quirrell's trip took place in the 1990-1991 school year. Are there other clues I've missed, or should we be petitioning Lexicon Steve for a change? --Erin This message has been cross-posted at The Hog's Head http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Hogs_Head/ for the benefit of those who prefer a smaller and more intimate group of adult fans who are extremely knowledgeable about Harry Potter. From manawydan at ntlworld.com Fri Aug 13 18:54:22 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:54:22 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Longbottom's Torture to Insanity (Re: candy) References: <1092344777.10658.22572.m24@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <001b01c48166$f2c105c0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 109987 Eustace wrote: >I think that Bellatrix knew that Voldemort intended to attack both the >Longbottoms and the Potters but not necessarily why (i.e., they didn't > know about the prophecy and the importance of a baby). When it >became evident that Voldemort had vanished and the Potters were dead, >Bellatrix and the others drew the conclusion that the Longbottoms had >somehow defeated or captured their master; in other words, his plans >had gone awry not at Godric's Hollow but at his next stop. That's why >the Longbottoms were tortured. I've surmised elsewhere that Hagrid wasn't sent alone to Godric's Hollow that night, and that possibly the Longbottoms went with him. Why? Because by the time the hue and cry arrived, Hagrid was away and gone with Harry on Sirius's motorcycle. But _someone_ had to bear witness as to what had happened, otherwise how would the WW have known that Voldemort was dispersed by Harry rather than having just walked away after killing James and Lily. I'd go even further and say that that someone actually had to have witnessed what happened. If they were there at the time, then Dumbledore wouldn't have had to send someone to rescue Harry, so they had to have been part of the rescue party. I surmise that Hagrid and the Longbottoms arrived just as Voldemort confronted Lily in the bedroom, too late to do anything to help, but in time to see (and possibly hear) what was happening through the window. Hagrid rescues Harry and disappears, but the Longbottoms stay around to report what happened (a) to Dumbledore, (b) to the Ministry, and (c) to the media in time for the WW to be out and partying by the time Vernon goes off to work the following morning. Now if the Longbottoms were on the front page of the Prophet or interviewed on the Wireless, then they'd be an obvious target for the DEs still at large. But JKR alone knows all Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From vmonte at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 19:04:23 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:04:23 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109988 Aggie: Forgive me if i'm wrong but wasn't this 'bug' matter cleared up in canon? Was it not Rita Skeeter in beetle form? Or are you referring to another insect? vmonte responds: page 724, OOTP, U.S. edition "Harry felt exhausted. He just wanted this to be over so that he could go and sleep. Then tomorrow, he and Ron were going to go down to the Quidditch pitch--he was going to have a fly on Ron's broom and savor their freedom from studying..." page 725 "Turn over your papers," said Professor Marchbanks from the front of the Hall, flicking over the giant hourglass. "You may begin..." "Harry stared fixedly at the first question. It was several seconds before it occurred to him that he had not taken in a word of it; there was a wasp buzzing distractingly against one of the high windows. Slowly, tortuously, he began to write an answer." I cannot find the other scene with Ron... vivian From caesian at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 19:08:00 2004 From: caesian at yahoo.com (caesian) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 12:08:00 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <180D4744-ED5C-11D8-B586-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109989 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jo Raggett" wrote: > > > vmonte responds: > > > > > > I might be remembering this incorrectly but wasn't there a wasp or > > > bee outside of a Hogwarts class window when Harry was taking one > of > > > his exams? > > > > > > > > Aggie: > > Forgive me if i'm wrong but wasn't this 'bug' matter cleared up in > > canon?? Was it not Rita Skeeter in beetle form?? Or are you > referring > > to another insect? > > There's a wasp buzzing against one of the upper windows in the > History of Magic Owl exam. Harry finds it distracting. > > Kneasy also... > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "boyd_smythe" > wrote: > > Further, the stronger wizards seem to have more powerful animagus > > forms. Else why would Peter, who reportedly struggled for a bit, be > > only able to become a rat? Sure, it helps that he can touch the > base > > of the Whomping Willow, but certainly many more interesting forms > > could have done that. > > > > So if stronger wizards become stronger animagi, wouldn't it stand > to > > reason that if Albus were an animagus, then it would be a bit more > > spectacular? A dragon, phoenix or giant squid? > > But animagi forms are characteritic of the person, not their magical > strength... unless you want to get into magical forms, like a > phoenix, but that last is pure hypothetical. > > Now, we can safely assume that JKR chose Siruis and Remus' names due > to their animalistic alter egos, but is that the same for DD? > Possibily, but "dumbledore" is much less commonly known pre-books, so > perhaps not. > > Think of DD's personality and mannerisms, and go from there. > > Josh > Caesian: Also, an insect was buzzing lazily in the corridor beneath Trelawney's classroom right before Harry's divination exam in PoA - the episode where she makes the 2nd Prophecy: Professor Trelawney's Prediction, page 237 UKHB "Harry was now the only person left to be tested. He settled himself on the floor with his back against the wall, listening to a fly buzzing in the sunny window, his mind on the grounds with Hagrid." It is stated that the insect is a fly (by sound), but Harry did not actually look at it. This detail has always struck me oddly - as there are so few random descriptions in the book. (Whenever Harry pauses at a window to watch the twillight, he sees and owl from Lord Voldemort for heavens sake! *don't take that literally, please ;-) I have also always wondered why Dumbledore did not need a more complete explanation of Trelawney's 2nd prediction from Harry. Did he get it from Trelawney? Legilimens? No portraits are mentioned in the classroom. I suppose it is possible that he was there. I also do not have a strong feeling about Dumbledore being an animagus, but JKR's explanation of his name - that she imagines him wandering around humming - seems so charming and unlikely. His wizard card states that he enjoys chamber music, and he does lead the school in a song - with a notable quotation at its conclusion - but I have never heard him humming, have you? Also, it seems rather humorous to me to think of the most powerful wizard in the WW transforming into a bee to go putter around - very Dumbledore. Gets the job done without an overt display of power. Caesian [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ejblack at rogers.com Fri Aug 13 12:16:19 2004 From: ejblack at rogers.com (jcb54me) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 12:16:19 -0000 Subject: Longbottom's Torture to Insanity (Re: candy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109990 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dcgmck" wrote: > I like the positive spin on this, even though I tend to frown at > parents who let their children grow up believing that candy is >one .of the major food groups. ;-> If, in fact, Alice is no >longer playing with a full deck, then candy as nourishment makes >sense. Actually I was thinking of candy in a symbolic sense. In Canada we have a phrase "eye candy" for something yummy to look at, and "brain candy" for something that is mentally pleasurable or stimulating. It seems to me that the candy is used in the books as a symbol of joy or fun. Harry NEVER gets candy from his aunt or uncle, but does get candy at Hogwarts or from his friends. Food, I think, is an important symbol in the books; celebration, comunity, friendship is expressed in food, as is emotional denial and starvation (re Harry's muggle family) > One of the nice things about fantasy is its relative freedom from >the constraints of muggle world realities such as cavities, >dentists' drills, sugar highs and lows, stomach aches, and >malnutrition. Clearly JKR is either like my disgusting friends >with high metabolisms and stick figures or she is one of the >world's many sugar >junkies herself... :-) Not a sugar junkies in my view, but definately hooked on positive relationships. Jeanette From finwitch at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 13:06:55 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 13:06:55 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore and Socks, Magical Contracts, and Bertie Botts Beans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109991 > dcgmck: > Dumbledore, explaining the rules for the selection of champions: > > "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. > There can be no change of heart once you have become a champion." > (GoF U.S. pbk 256) > > The wording is such that the name, not the placer of the name, is the > one bound by the magical contract. Finwitch: Right - and Dumbledore cannot do anything about it. And although Madame Maxime and Prof. Karkaroff object most strongly, they're silenced at the request for another solution... Also, a magical contracts, well, in *any* tale of magic I've read, a contract best be kept at all costs. The one who is brave enough to face and honour a *seemingly* lethal contract - (like um - permit the other to hit you in the head with a hammer or something...) - is the one who survives. (because, for the honesty, the hit is gentle...). The horrid consequences of breaking a magical pact (by ancient magic?) are enough that Dumbledore is unwilling to even *consider* any attempt to break a contract. It's yet another explanation of Voldemort's vanishing and loss of power. (And Harry was glad he had kept his promise to the fountain...) I wonder about those who had died when Triwizard-competitions had been organised before, a long time ago (pre-Voldemort, I suppose). Was it an attempt of breaking the contract that killed them? Oh, and the *only* time Albus Dumbledore breaks his word is when he doesn't expel Harry&Ron (when they broke the rules, thus revealing the Chamber of Secrets, killing the Basilisk and saving Ginny's life...) Dumbledore seeing himself holding a pair of thick socks in the mirror of Erised... I think it's more that a pair of socks would be one to him as a person, acknowledging him as a human being, one with as much tendency to have cold feet in a stony castle... a token of love. Besides, by using books, you might get a paper cut; using socks your feet are protected... Finwitch From finwitch at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 13:48:00 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 13:48:00 -0000 Subject: Curse Scars In-Reply-To: <000f01c4808a$b6342790$73fae2d1@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109992 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > Snow: > The quote in question is in GOF The Parting of the Ways U.S edition: > > "You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've never heard of a curse scar > acting as an alarm bell before..."<<< > > DuffyPoo replyed: > "Snow, does your book really say "but I've *never* heard of a curse scar?" > Both of mine, Canadian HB and PB published in 2000 say "You'll forgive me, > Dumbledore, but I've [I have] heard of a curse scar acting as an > alarm bell before." I was trying to figure out when Fudge had heard it before > > Aggie replying to DuffyPoo: > >>My UK version (p613 published 2000) says the same as DuffyPoo's. As > it stands though it doesn't make sense (although I'm sure the English > bods on here will elaborate on that!). I have to admit I *read* it > as having the 'never' in there, it's the only way my little brain can > make sense of what Fudge is saying!!<< Finwitch: Odd - to me it's *without* the never that it makes most sense. To me, Fudge is thus kind of saying indirectly: "I'm not naive enough to believe that curse scars act as alarm bells. (Moody, other wizards?) has given me enough trouble with alarming curse scars as it is. Such a lunacy. Wasn't real then, and neither is this. Give me better evidence or I won't believe any of this". He's just too much a politician to put it in those words - he just cannot accuse Albus Dumbledore of lunacy - it'd be political suicide. With never... dunno - it'd sound too much like admitting a lack in his knowledge on the subject than expression of disbelief. The one who knows not, and admits it is a child and needs to be educated, you know. So if Fudge would admit he has never heard of curse scars acting as alarm bells, Dumbledore could simply give him a bit of education on the subject or otherwise use that to discredit Fudge's opinion... Finwitch From iosonoregina at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 14:30:20 2004 From: iosonoregina at yahoo.com (Balac Marija) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 07:30:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Lilys grandparents Message-ID: <20040813143020.9330.qmail@web50304.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109993 "kmcbears1" karen at dacafe.com wrote: IMO JKR wants us to know that Lily and Petunia are Muggles. Harry is a half-blood as is Voldemort. IMO this is a crucial part of the story. If Lily's Grandparents are Muggles then we must go back 6 or 7 generations to find magical blood. Not exactly: If we apply the rules of genetic inheritance, we must presume that being a witch or a wizard is a dominant characteristic (D). In that case, purebloods would be DD. Therefore, an old wizard family would follow this pattern: parents: (mother) DD ---- (father) DD children: all 100% DD purebloods. If a pureblood married a muggle (dd, where d is recessive) we?d have these possibilities: parents: (m) dd ---- (f) DD children: dD dD Dd Dd all halfbloods Mudbloods could be explained only by genetic mutation (not something unnatural). That's why Lily didn?t need to have any magical ancestors. For Harry to be a halfblood (Dd), she had to be (Dd). James must have been pureblood (DD), since he was from an old wizarding family (if I?m not mistaken). (Lily) Dd ---- (James) DD children: DD DD dD dD It even would have been possible for Harry to be a pureblood. Did I miss any categories? Maya P.S. My question is, why muggle parents would be so pleased to have a witch in a family? From finwitch at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 14:32:02 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 14:32:02 -0000 Subject: Harry's Use of Cruciatus curse/Killing Voldemort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109994 > Asian_lovr2: > > I don't think it is Harry who is being monitored, it's Privet Drive > that is being watched. The magic he performs there is magic that is > out of place; it's magic in the Muggle world. There wouldn't be much > point in monitoring magic at the Ministry when magic happens there all > day and all night. It would be monitor overload. > > That said, we don't know that someone won't figure it out. There was > very little time at the end of the book. So, he could easily have to > face it to some degree at the beginning of the next book. If nothing > else, Hermione will give him a good telling off when she finds out. > Or, perhaps Snape will get wind of it and bring the information back > to Dumbledore. > > I think Harry will have to face his use of the Cruciatus Curse, but I > think he will have to face it mostly in his conscience and before > Dumbledore. And while there may be some limited degree of legal > inquiry, I don't think Harry will have to face the full force of the > law. I think they will see that he was a kid acting under extreme > emotional distress, and therefore bares limited responsibility. In > addition, I think they have far bigger problems to deal with than > harrassing Harry for a failed curse. Finwitch: That's one point. It's Muggle areas that get monitored, and number 4 Privet Drive especially. They can identify the spell used and possibly also was it loss of control (Accidental) or deliberate (Misuse). What comes to the use of Unforgivable: "The use of one of them on a human being is enough for a lifetime in Azkaban". The Ministry officials might tell that *someone* shouted Crucio - but: 1) With Voldemort and all the DEs in there - I doubt that anyone is going to doubt Harry or any other kid, for that matter 2) For Harry's part, it was an *attempt*, not actual using of the curse. I don't know whether an attempt is punishable. 3) Why do they specialize three curses as unforgivable? My theory is that it has to do with required emotion in order to accomplish one of them... I mean, it's one thing to want to hurt someone in anger and even hurting them as such, but to *enjoy* doing it!!! (Accoding to Beatrix Lestrange, one MUST enjoy giving pain if one is to cast a cruciatus curse... I think the real Moody never used one of those curses - there ARE loads of other ways to kill people, after all...). ----- Anyway, even if Harry is to kill Voldemort, he doesn't have to do it with Avada Kedavra. A full grown Mandrake would do (it'd also get rid of all the DEs within earshot). Use the Sword of Gryffindor to chop his head off, Transfiguring into a fish on dry land, poison them... (There's a trick - Harry uses Mandrake, but he, too, hears it cry and dies.. No more Harry Potter). Finwitch From kanbei at tangmonkey.com Fri Aug 13 15:05:46 2004 From: kanbei at tangmonkey.com (aajarjour) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 15:05:46 -0000 Subject: you CAN'T hurt a BABY!!! (FF) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109995 Vivian wrote: > Has anyone come up with the theory that perhaps Voldemort will be > vanquished but that somehow a new (baby) Tom Riddle will survive and > be given a second chance at life? Andrew: I don't know if anyone has come up with such a theory yet in this group (mostly because I'm new to it!), but I came across a fanfic that addressed a variation of it. It's not the best-written fic I've ever read, but it raises some interesting possibilities, and, if nothing else, is an intriguing "what if" sort of story. It can be found here: http://www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/ReaderRavenclaw/The_Phoenix_And_The_Serpent/ ElfNote: Fanfic may be referred to as illustrations of particular theories, but if you want to discuss the fanfic itself, please do so on HPfGU-OTChatter, the Schnoogle forums, or other venue. Also note that when fanfic is referenced, you must include the prefix FF (as shown here) in your subject line. From steve51445 at adelphia.net Fri Aug 13 17:26:44 2004 From: steve51445 at adelphia.net (Steve) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 17:26:44 -0000 Subject: Intro, Q's Lupin/Tonks Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109996 Hi everyone. Thought I'd introduce myself and ask a couple of questions. My name is Steve, I'm 30 and from Buffalo, NY. I started reading HP after the 2nd adaptation was released on DVD. Absolutely love them, and have read all 5 at least twice each. On with the questions: 1. In PoA, Lupin is on the train with the students. Ron asks who Lupin is as they enter the compartment. Hermione says Professor R. J. Lupin. She gets this from his trunk which has it written out in peeling letters. PoA US ed. PB pg. 74. Why are the letters peeling? If he had just been hired by DD in the last 2 months the letters wouldn't be peeling yet. Was he a teacher before? A secret desire to be a teacher? 2. How long does Auror training take? In OotP Tonks says she qualified a year ago. OotP US ed. Pg 52. Even if it takes 2 years, she would have been at Hogwarts as a 7th year during PS/SS. I seem to remember her saying she was in Gryffindor but I can't find the quote right now. From JKR's descriptions of Tonks she does seem to be part of the part of the generation born in the mid 70's and grew up during the 80's. The odd hair colors, and the talking back to authority figures (Moody) "Steve" From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 19:49:12 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:49:12 -0000 Subject: Harry's Use of Cruciatus curse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109997 Josh wrote: > The biggest problem with Harry's use of Crucio is that even though it > is righteous anger, it's still anger. Dumbledore _will_ find out > about it, and, same as a certain short green guy in a different > galaxy and time in that medium-we-dare-not-name, DD will be > disappointed but not too much. Harry can't attack out of anger. > Remember, although this is my opinion and I will repeat it often, > this is a story about Love vs Hate. Our hero can't use hate. Now Cory: After I posted my last response, I thought a little more about this scene, and had a slightly less disturbing view of the situation. Remember what Bellatrix said after Harry's failed attempt at the curse: "You have to mean it; you have to want to cause pain and enjoy it." (I'm paraphrasing; sorry...don't have my book with me.) I wonder if it's possible that Harry, no matter how angry he was at the moment, is not *capable* of having that type of hatred? I agree with you about Love vs. Hate being a central theme in the story, and perhaps the real message of the scene is that deep down, Harry is a loving person, and thus cannot use Cruciatus, no matter how badly a part of him might have thought he wanted to at the time. Thoughts? --Cory From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Fri Aug 13 16:51:11 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 12:51:11 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Prophecy Interpretations (re: vanquishing LV) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040813165111.42242.qmail@web52009.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 109998 cubfanbudwoman wrote: Pat wrote: > I personally still think that Harry, in some way, has to be the > one, and only one, to bring about the demise of Voldemort--not by > killing him, but by causing that thing that Dumbledore says is > worse than death--no idea what that might be though. Luckdragon64 guesses: > according to Dumbledore: Peter owes Harry a life debt and there is > a fate worse than death for Voldemort. > > What would be worse than death for Voldemort? Why, being a common > muggle of course. SSSusan: I don't know. [Shudder.] I'm not so sure I'd want a de-magicked Voldy out there, royally pissed off. I don't think it'd take him long to pick up how to use an uzi. And while I love the idea of Harry somehow getting off the hook for having to kill Voldy [you know, vanquish vs. kill], deep down I do want Voldy to die. I'm not at all keen on Voldy living, even "reduced to" a Muggle, nor am I especially keen on the idea of a Redeemed!Tom somewhere inside Voldy who can live while essence-of- Voldy (or Sally) dies. Luckdragon64 replies: While I agree that Voldemort deserves to die, so did Peter and when Harry spared his life he set a precedent and showed that his self restraint is what may save him in the end. If voldemort is forced to live out his life as a muggle he will receive more punishment than he would in death(he would be jailed of course). Also were Voldemort to die who is to say he would not come back as an evil spirit who cannot be done away with at all(100x worse than the bloody Baron). Remember Sir Nick's "Some ghosts choose to stay". Just a thought... From vidarfe at start.no Fri Aug 13 19:18:33 2004 From: vidarfe at start.no (vidar_fe) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:18:33 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 109999 SSSusan: > One, there's that Dumbledore == Bee thing; second, there must be some > explanation for how DD knows so much, and this could explain it; > third, Hermione made that statement that there are only 9 [or 7 or > 11? I've forgotten the precise number] registered animagi *this > century*. That "this century" sent a red flag up for lots of > readers, and it really does fit, with DD's age, that he could be > fully registered but simply have done so in the previous century. > Those three things together make it more plausible than some of the > other theories out there, imho. I think it?s more likely DD can become invisible. In PS, chapt 12 "The Mirror of Erised", p.230, he and Harry talks about the Mirror of Erised: 'So,' said Dumbledore, slipping of the desk to sit on the floor with Harry, 'you, like hundreds before you, have discovered the delights of the Mirror of Erised.' 'I didn?t know it was called that, sir.' 'But I expect you?ve realised by now what it does?' 'It - well - it shows me my family -' 'And it showed your friend Ron himself as Head Boy.' 'How did you know -?' 'I don?t need a cloak to become invisible,' said Dumbledore gently. vidar_fe, who belives Dumbledore can become invisible at will! From griffinclaw at comcast.net Fri Aug 13 19:56:31 2004 From: griffinclaw at comcast.net (mantoinettewood) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:56:31 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110000 Good day! I must agree with Brenda, on the fact that Mrs. Figg doesn't seem to have gone to any magical school. There is no canon saying that she did. As such, did Filch go to any Magic school? I highly doubt it. Though one must wonder how he got on at Hogwarts, maybe through some connection of a relative. Morgana Wood From tzakis1225 at netzero.com Fri Aug 13 20:00:35 2004 From: tzakis1225 at netzero.com (demetra1225) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 20:00:35 -0000 Subject: Tonks a traitor? was: Is Lupin is James In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110001 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mizstorge" wrote: Don't know about anyone else's ideas either, but > I don't trust Tonks. (snip) > > -We know she's clumsy - but how did someone that clumsy get to be an > Auror in the first place? Or is her clumsiness a way to hide > activities which members of the Order might find suspicious? During > the battle at the Ministry, was she just trying to preserve her cover? > As for her tripping at Grimmauld Place, awakening Mrs. Black's > portrait, was she actually looking for something - some magical > heirloom perhaps? > > Maybe she's just a ditsy girl, but I'm very sceptical! Demetra: I don't trust Tonks either, from my first reading of OotP I've always had the feeling that there was something just not right about her. She seems to try too hard to make friends with H,R,H and Ginny. She is also awfully eager to help Harry pack up when the Advance Guard comes to get him from Privet Drive. And this is the first time she meets him. Then she uses magic to do it - knowing full well that Harry just got in trouble with the ministry for just that infraction. Funny how she comments on the extreme cleanliness of the Dursley's kitchen. That was my first reaction to her clumsiness - she seems just a bit too clumsy, almost unnaturally so. From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Fri Aug 13 20:17:49 2004 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 20:17:49 -0000 Subject: Unicorns/"Stargazing"/Prophecy In-Reply-To: <20040812163313.72107.qmail@web50905.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110002 --- Neisha Saxena wrote: > > Has anyone else wondered about the centaur's reading > of the stars in Sorceror's/Philosopher's Stone in > light of the prophecy revealed in OOTP? IIRC, the > centaurs try to dissuade Firenze from saving Harry by > saying something like, you know what is coming, we > don't interfere with what is written in the stars. > They also keep repeating to Hagrid that "Mars is > bright tonight," which is exactly what Firenze says in > Divination class in OOTP. It seems that when Mars is > bright, Voldemort is about to make a move toward the > upcoming war. I think that the centaurs are actually being fairly direct, within the confines of their own "neutrality" policy, when they make the astrological comments. It is a symptom of the breakdown of interspecies communication that Hagrid (and, to a lesser extent, Harry) does not understand them ("ruddy stargazers"). "Mars is bright tonight" was pretty clearly supposed to indicate a premonition of war, Mars being the god of war, and of course Firenze confirmed that in his first Divination lesson in OP (ch. 27). I'm pretty confident that if the centaurs had said that to Dumbledore (or even to Hermione, now that she has broadened her mind a bit), there would have been no confusion about what they meant. -- Matt From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 13 20:18:43 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 20:18:43 -0000 Subject: Intro, Q's Lupin/Tonks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110003 Steve wrote: > Thought I'd introduce myself and ask a couple of questions. > My name is Steve, I'm 30 and from Buffalo, NY. I started reading HP > after the 2nd adaptation was released on DVD. Absolutely love them, > and have read all 5 at least twice each. > > On with the questions: > > 1. In PoA, Lupin is on the train with the students. Ron asks > who Lupin is as they enter the compartment. Hermione says Professor > R. J. Lupin. She gets this from his trunk which has it written out > in peeling letters. PoA US ed. PB pg. 74. Why are the letters > peeling? If he had just been hired by DD in the last 2 months the > letters wouldn't be peeling yet. Was he a teacher before? A secret > desire to be a teacher? SSSusan: Welcome aboard, Steve. There was a discussion about this not too long ago--maybe 2 or 3 weeks ago? You might *try* to get the Yahoo search feature to work [good luck!] and see if you can track down the thread. But anyway, about those peeling letters. Some wondered what Remus' dad's (or mom's) name was and whether he/she was a professor. Others have guessed [and I believe at this point it really is guessing, not canon-based hypothesizing] that Lupin did teach before, perhaps at Durmstrang...which would at least explain his familiarity with & competence in teaching DADA. Siriusly Snapey Susan From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Fri Aug 13 20:22:10 2004 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 20:22:10 -0000 Subject: Calendars was Re: biggest SPOILER In-Reply-To: <001c01c4808b$dd9c8b50$73fae2d1@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110004 --- "Cathy Drolet" (DuffyPoo) wrote: > Except for GoF where both Sept 1 and Sept 2 are Mondays. > > "'It's been absolute uproar,' Percy told them importantly, > the Sunday evening before they were due to return to > Hogwarts." >-the next day, Sept 1 then, they get the train to Hogwarts > and learn about the Triwizard Tournament at the feast, then: > "The storm had blown itself out by the following morning.... > Harry, Ron and Hermione examined their new timetables at > breakfast....'Today's not bad .. outside all morning, ' said > Ron, who was running his finger down the Monday column of his > timetable." > > I read GoF at least a dozen times before I had this pointed > out to me, I just don't pay that much attention to what day > of the week it is. I don't like Mondays myself; I wouldn't > want two in the same week, never mind following each other. ;-) That's really funny -- I just poked through specifically looking for the weekday stuff (see my post #109862) and missed Percy's comment. I guess maybe I should start to forgive JKR's editors for missing all of these date problems.....Nah! -- Matt From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 13 20:28:20 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 20:28:20 -0000 Subject: Prophecy Interpretations (re: vanquishing LV) In-Reply-To: <20040813165111.42242.qmail@web52009.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110005 Luckdragon64 guesses: > > > What would be worse than death for Voldemort? Why, being a > > > common muggle of course. SSSusan: > > I don't know. [Shudder.] I'm not so sure I'd want a de-magicked > > Voldy out there, royally pissed off. I don't think it'd take him > > long to pick up how to use an uzi. > > And while I love the idea of Harry somehow getting off the hook > > for having to kill Voldy [you know, vanquish vs. kill], deep down > > I do want Voldy to die. I'm not at all keen on Voldy living, > > even "reduced to" a Muggle, nor am I especially keen on the idea > > of a Redeemed!Tom somewhere inside Voldy who can live while > > essence-of-Voldy (or Sally) dies. Luckdragon64 replies: > While I agree that Voldemort deserves to die, so did Peter and when > Harry spared his life he set a precedent and showed that his self > restraint is what may save him in the end. If voldemort is forced > to live out his life as a muggle he will receive more punishment > than he would in death(he would be jailed of course). Also were > Voldemort to die who is to say he would not come back as an evil > spirit who cannot be done away with at all(100x worse than the > bloody Baron). Remember Sir Nick's "Some ghosts choose to stay". SSSusan: Interesting points, Luckdragon. For some dumb reason I wasn't thinking about a magicless Voldy going to jail; I was making the very LARGE leap of thinking that he was somehow considered "wiped clean" and allowed to go. *That* I truly cannot imagine happening--and don't WANT to happen. But an imprisoned magicless Voldy? Eh, maybe. "Some ghosts choose to stay." I wonder how much power ghosts have? What all can they *do*? I don't know, but I would agree that a Ghost! Voldy would probably manage to be more powerful than your average ghost. Siriusly Snapey Susan...who still thinks Voldy should die but agrees that a precedent was set when Harry spared Peter. (Maybe that was simply to set up a life debt plot point???) From caesian at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 20:34:42 2004 From: caesian at yahoo.com (caesian) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 13:34:42 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Intro, Q's Lupin/Tonks In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <34BC184E-ED68-11D8-B586-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110006 On Aug 13, 2004, at 10:26 AM, Steve wrote: > Hi everyone. > > Thought I'd introduce myself and ask a couple of questions. > On with the questions: > > 1. In PoA, Lupin is on the train with the students. Ron asks > who Lupin is as they enter the compartment. Hermione says Professor > R. J. Lupin. She gets this from his trunk which has it written out > in peeling letters. PoA US ed. PB pg. 74. Why are the letters > peeling? If he had just been hired by DD in the last 2 months the > letters wouldn't be peeling yet. Was he a teacher before? A secret > desire to be a teacher? > > "Steve" > > Hi Steve: I'm relatively new too, having been here a few short months. Welcome! I too often wonder about the the faded and peeling "Prof. R. J. Lupin" while listening to that scene on the Hogwarts Express. I've come up with two plausible explanations - that Lupin has been a professor in the past (i.e., since he himself graduated from Hogwarts), or that a relative, such as his father, having the same initials was a professor. Impossible to say, but his skillful handling of his students and his lessons suggests to me that he may have prior teaching experience. (Although I admit that given his character in general, he may be naturally gifted.) now comes a speculation. Has he taught in the past, enough to garner a reasonable degree of experience, but not at Hogwarts? He could have been at a foreign school, but wouldn't they pay him? Here is my speculation - maybe he has been serving as a special tutor to muggle children afflicted with lycanthropy? I would assume this is quite rare, but that a wizard child would come to Hogwarts - DD would allow it. But Muggles cannot attend. This might also explain why he had been employed with very little material gain - I could imagine him providing these services to families in need. Just a thought. Usually I abstain from such rampant speculation - but I guess I'm losing my touch ;-) Cheers, Caesian [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 20:46:42 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 20:46:42 -0000 Subject: Curse Scars In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110007 > > Snow: > > The quote in question is in GOF The Parting of the Ways U.S edition: > > > > "You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've never heard of a curse scar acting as an alarm bell before..."<<< > > > > DuffyPoo replyed: > > "Snow, does your book really say "but I've *never* heard of a curse scar?" > > Both of mine, Canadian HB and PB published in 2000 say "You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've [I have] heard of a curse scar acting as an alarm bell before." I was trying to figure out when Fudge had heard it before > > Aggie replying to DuffyPoo: > > >>My UK version (p613 published 2000) says the same as DuffyPoo's. As it stands though it doesn't make sense (although I'm sure the English bods on here will elaborate on that!). I have to admit I *read* it as having the 'never' in there, it's the only way my little brain can make sense of what Fudge is saying!!<< > dcgmck: Both the U.S. hardback and paperback first release editions include the word "never" on page 706. This is, in fact, the volume that seems to have yielded the most errata to date. JKR admits that her proofreading deadline was such that everyone was cross-eyed and sleep- deprived; hence, the infamous priori incantatem reversal between hardback and paperback editions. Still, Finwitch makes an interesting case for the earlier misprint, especially for those enthusiastic about the ESE!Fudge theory. From patientx3 at aol.com Fri Aug 13 21:06:06 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 21:06:06 -0000 Subject: Intro, Q's Lupin/Tonks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110008 Steve wrote: > Thought I'd introduce myself and ask a couple of questions. > My name is Steve, I'm 30 and from Buffalo, NY. I started reading HP > after the 2nd adaptation was released on DVD. Absolutely love them, > and have read all 5 at least twice each. > > On with the questions: > > 1. In PoA, Lupin is on the train with the students. Ron asks > who Lupin is as they enter the compartment. Hermione says Professor > R. J. Lupin. She gets this from his trunk which has it written out > in peeling letters. PoA US ed. PB pg. 74. Why are the letters > peeling? If he had just been hired by DD in the last 2 months the > letters wouldn't be peeling yet. Was he a teacher before? A secret > desire to be a teacher? SSSusan: >>Some wondered what Remus' dad's (or mom's) name was and whether he/she was a professor. Others have guessed [and I believe at this point it really is guessing, not canon-based hypothesizing] that Lupin did teach before, perhaps at Durmstrang...which would at least explain his familiarity with & competence in teaching DADA.<< HunterGreen: Someone else also suggested that he might have been a tutor for pre- Hogwarts non-muggleborns. We know from JKR that they don't go to school before Hogwarts, but they have to learn to read and write somewhere. I imagine the richer families don't teach their children themselves. From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Fri Aug 13 21:07:24 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 21:07:24 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?magic_inheritance/Re:_Lily=92s_grandparents?= In-Reply-To: <20040813143020.9330.qmail@web50304.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110009 Maya surmised: > If we apply the rules of genetic inheritance, we must presume that > being a witch or a wizard is a dominant characteristic (D). > > In that case, purebloods would be DD. > > If a pureblood married a muggle (dd, where d is recessive) we'd > have these possibilities: > > Mudbloods could be explained only by genetic mutation (not > something unnatural). That's why Lily didn't need to have any > magical ancestors. Yb thinks: I thought about this long and hard when I learned about Squibs, and it seemed hard to swallow. Then I found this link: http://www.redhen-publications.com/Magic%26Wizards.html This theory is excellent. It explains Squibs, Muggleborns, half- bloods (I use the HB term to mean non-purebloods that aren't muggle- born), and it has good reasoning why some wizards only excel at one or two magical subjects (Neville) while a muggleborn (Hermione) is at the top of her class. Not that your theory doesn't hold water. Just I have a hard time believing that /every/ Squib and Muggle-born is the result of a genetic mutation. They (especially Squibs) are not all that common, but common enough for a name/social standing. A single pondering: Where did the word Squib come from? Why use that term? Maya also asked: > My question is, why muggle parents would be so pleased to have > a witch in a family? Yb responds: It's different, and cool. Who wouldn't be psyched if someone in the family could levitate things or Apparate? (Except Petunia, of course.) Plus, it's pretty clear that Lily excelled at this strange new school (she made Prefect (I think) and Head Girl), so she's doing well, another reason to be proud. I'll bet Hermione's parents are fit to burst when they see her report card. ~Yb From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 21:07:56 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 21:07:56 -0000 Subject: Prophecy Interpretations (re: vanquishing LV) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110010 > Luckdragon64 guesses: > > > > What would be worse than death for Voldemort? Why, being a > > > > common muggle of course. > > SSSusan: > > > [snip] And while I love the idea of Harry somehow getting off the hook for having to kill Voldy [you know, vanquish vs. kill], deep down I do want Voldy to die. I'm not at all keen on Voldy living, even "reduced to" a Muggle, nor am I especially keen on the idea of a Redeemed!Tom somewhere inside Voldy who can live while essence-of- Voldy (or Sally) dies. > > > Luckdragon64 replies: > > While I agree that Voldemort deserves to die, so did Peter and when Harry spared his life he set a precedent and showed that his self restraint is what may save him in the end. If voldemort is forced to live out his life as a muggle he will receive more punishment than he would in death(he would be jailed of course). [snip] > SSSusan: > Interesting points, Luckdragon. For some dumb reason I wasn't > thinking about a magicless Voldy going to jail; I was making the very LARGE leap of thinking that he was somehow considered "wiped clean" and allowed to go. *That* I truly cannot imagine happening-- and don't WANT to happen. But an imprisoned magicless Voldy? Eh, maybe. [snip] > > Siriusly Snapey Susan...who still thinks Voldy should die but agrees that a precedent was set when Harry spared Peter. (Maybe that was simply to set up a life debt plot point???) dcgmck: How would you feel about a devolved LV reduced past his near-immortal evilness, back beyond the arrogant adolescent still smarting from familial rejection, back to a baby with a fresh start and a clean slate? We've seen a DE's head reduced to infancy: why not an entire Dark Lord? If evil doers and social malcontents simply lack the proper opportunities and upbringing, wouldn't a fresh start with so much potential be just the ticket? Why waste so much talent? >-? From hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu Fri Aug 13 21:19:08 2004 From: hubbarrk at rose-hulman.edu (Bex) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 21:19:08 -0000 Subject: Intro, Q's Tonks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110011 Steve asked: > 2. How long does Auror training take? In OotP Tonks says she > qualified a year ago. OotP US ed. Pg 52. Even if it takes 2 years, > she would have been at Hogwarts as a 7th year during PS/SS. I seem > to remember her saying she was in Gryffindor but I can't find the > quote right now. From JKR's descriptions of Tonks she does seem to > be part of the part of the generation born in the mid 70's and grew > up during the 80's. The odd hair colors, and the talking back to > authority figures (Moody) Hi there Steve! Yblitzka here: I'm going on pure speculation here, but I suppose it takes 3-4 years at least to be fully trained as an Auror. There's probably a lot to learn. I see Tonks as early 20's, maybe 21 to 23, so she could be an 80's child. If we take CoS to be '92-'93, then OotP would be '95-'96, so that would put her born in the early 80's. I have a hard time seeing her being older than 25, though she may just have a thing against acting her age. Her being in 7th year when Harry was an "Ickle firstie" just doesn't seem right. I know the oldest student we saw that year was 5th year Flint, so maybe Harry could have just missed her, but someone who makes that much noise is bound to be noticed. I see Auror training as about the length of a University program, or perhaps longer. The knowledge it requires (Tranfiguration, Potions, Charms, DADA, and ?Herbology?) is pretty broad, so it would take a while to get Advanced training in all those areas, plus probably a year in the field for practice. Just my thoughts. ~Yb From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Fri Aug 13 22:15:09 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 22:15:09 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Lily=92s_grandparents?= In-Reply-To: <20040813143020.9330.qmail@web50304.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110012 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Balac Marija wrote: > If we apply the rules of genetic inheritance, we must presume that being a witch or a wizard is a dominant characteristic (D). > > In that case, purebloods would be DD. > > It even would have been possible for Harry to be a pureblood. > > Did I miss any categories? Umm... so you suggest that a 1000+ year old prejudice that predates the discovery of genetics is based on an impossible to determine double-dominate? *shrugs* Anyway, JKR has already pre-empted you. These labels are based on the prejudice, and the prejudice is independant of ability or genetics, but mere ancestory (which is completely separate from genetics). The same as I have some Native American 'blood' on behalf of both my parents, but I retain none of the genetics. However, if someone had similar prejudices and knew of my ancestory... a drop of Red would taint the whole barrel, or some such nonsense. Josh From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Fri Aug 13 20:44:57 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Brenda) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 20:44:57 -0000 Subject: Prophecy Interpretations (re: vanquishing LV) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110013 > > > "Some ghosts choose to stay." I wonder how much power ghosts have? > What all can they *do*? I don't know, but I would agree that a Ghost! > Voldy would probably manage to be more powerful than your average > ghost. > > Luckdragon recalls: Look at the damage Peeves is able to do terrorizing students and damaging school property and he is really just an annoying mischief maker. Imagine what terror a ghostly Voldemort could bring. I just have a difficult time believing Harry can bring himself to kill. Peter not only caused the downfall of Harry's Parents but also allowed his Godfather to go through hell in jail and he was spared. Even when Bellatrix fought Sirius leading to his demise Harry was unable to perform the death curse with conviction despite his anger and grief. From kempermentor at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 21:32:42 2004 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 21:32:42 -0000 Subject: Harry's Use of Cruciatus curse/Killing Voldemort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110014 Finwitch wrote: 1) With Voldemort and all the DEs in there - I doubt that anyone is going to doubt Harry or any other kid, for that matter. 2) For Harry's part, it was an *attempt*, not actual using of the curse. I don't know whether an attempt is punishable. 3) Why do they specialize three curses as unforgivable? My theory is that it has to do with required emotion in order to accomplish one of them... I mean, it's one thing to want to hurt someone in anger and even hurting them as such, but to *enjoy* doing it!!! (Accoding to Beatrix Lestrange, one MUST enjoy giving pain if one is to cast a cruciatus curse... I think the real Moody never used one of those curses - there ARE loads of other ways to kill people, after all...). Kemper responds: 1) I don't think MoM is monitored. Also, I don't think Hogwarts' students are monitored during the school season... only during summer holidays. 2) Harry's 'attempted' use of the unforgivable curse does not make it ok. Sure, it may not deserve a life sentence in Azkaban, but the attempted pain/assault may get some time there. 3) I haven't heard your theory of the criteria for being an Unforgivalbe Curse. I like it. It's giving me something to chew on. Thanks. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 13 22:27:01 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 22:27:01 -0000 Subject: Prophecy Interpretations (re: vanquishing LV) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110015 Luckdragon64 guesses: >>>What would be worse than death for Voldemort? Why, being a common muggle of course. <<< SSSusan: >>> [snip] And while I love the idea of Harry somehow getting off the hook for having to kill Voldy [you know, vanquish vs. kill], deep down I do want Voldy to die. I'm not at all keen on Voldy living, even "reduced to" a Muggle, nor am I especially keen on the idea of a Redeemed!Tom somewhere inside Voldy who can live while essence-of- Voldy (or Sally) dies. <<< Luckdragon64 replied: >> While I agree that Voldemort deserves to die, so did Peter and when Harry spared his life he set a precedent and showed that his self restraint is what may save him in the end. If voldemort is forced to live out his life as a muggle he will receive more punishment than he would in death(he would be jailed of course). << SSSusan: >> Interesting points, Luckdragon. For some dumb reason I wasn't thinking about a magicless Voldy going to jail; I was making the very LARGE leap of thinking that he was somehow considered "wiped clean" and allowed to go. *That* I truly cannot imagine happening-- and don't WANT to happen. But an imprisoned magicless Voldy? Eh, maybe. [snip] Siriusly Snapey Susan...who still thinks Voldy should die but agrees that a precedent was set when Harry spared Peter. (Maybe that was simply to set up a life debt plot point???)<< dcgmck: > How would you feel about a devolved LV reduced past his near- > immortal evilness, back beyond the arrogant adolescent still > smarting from familial rejection, back to a baby with a fresh > start and a clean slate? We've seen a DE's head reduced to > infancy: why not an entire Dark Lord? If evil doers and social > malcontents simply lack the proper opportunities and upbringing, > wouldn't a fresh start with so much potential be just the ticket? > Why waste so much talent? >-? SSSusan: Hmmmm. Because he might be somewhat predisposed to make the same choices again?? (Ooooh, have I gotten myself into hot water with this one?) In all seriousness, what kinds of safeguards could be put into place to ensure that *this* Tom Riddle would take a different path? Would anyone watch over him? Would he go back into a Muggle orphanage? Would Snapey take him in? :-) I don't know-- would it be worth the risk...or would it be a risk at all? ARE some people predisposed to "going bad" or is it all nurture, and no nature? So many questions! Siriusly Snapey Susan From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Fri Aug 13 23:21:48 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 23:21:48 -0000 Subject: Harry vs. AK Curse (re: vanquishing LV) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110016 >>> Luckdragon recalls: > Imagine what terror a ghostly Voldemort could bring. <<< Brenda now: Hiya Brenda! ;) Oh god Ghost!Voldy!Mort is *not* a pleasant thought. The ghost trapped in display case (bound by anti-apparition jinx and necessary protection of course) in the National Museum of History of DADA, however, is a great way of finish him up, IMO. *giggles* >>> I just have a difficult time believing Harry can bring himself to kill. <<< Well the lad came really close to killing Sirius in PoA and that was before his hormones started racing like crazy. And this is my personal humble opinion of course, but I believe any human being is capable of committing such indictable crimes in certain situations. The question lies how far one must be pushed and how much control can be exerted. >>> Even when Bellatrix fought Sirius leading to his demise Harry was unable to perform the death curse with conviction despite his anger and grief. <<< Brenda: Again this is my humble opinion but I don't know if Harry holds such high 'opinion' on AK curse. Let me explain: 1. First time he learns of Ak curse, Crouchy!Moody states that it requires much practice before gets it right. He goes on to say he will probably just get nose bleed if a student tried. 2. Harry is the only known wizard to survive AK curse (not counting Lily's sacrifice here) 3. He survives another AK in graveyard scene, through Priori Incantatum effect. So Harry must know that if he wishes to actually kill someone he needs some practice. And there is a chance it will not work, he himself is the living proof of that, regardless of circumstantial luck. The situation regarding Bellatrix in Department of Mysteries: 1. Bella Crucio-ed Neville and Ginny (?) 2. Bella used a different spell to send Sirius behind the veil (I believe it was the red light, not green light) Seems to me that Cruciatus curse might have been a more appealing option for Harry than AK. It must be easier (for a first-time user) than AK, he has seen it being used many times that night, and he probably wanted to cause more pain for Bella before finishing her off, if he thought he could. Brenda From patientx3 at aol.com Fri Aug 13 23:44:42 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 23:44:42 -0000 Subject: Harry's Use of Cruciatus curse/Killing Voldemort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110017 Finwitch wrote: >>> 2) For Harry's part, it was an *attempt*, not actual using of the curse. I don't know whether an attempt is punishable. <<< Kemper replied: >> 2) Harry's 'attempted' use of the unforgivable curse does not make it ok. Sure, it may not deserve a life sentence in Azkaban, but the attempted pain/assault may get some time there. << HunterGreen: I don't know about that. " 'Now. . . those three curses - Avada Kedavra, Imperius, and Cruciatus - are known as the Unforgivable Curses. The use of any one of them on a fellow human being is enough to earn a life sentence in Azkaban.' " [GoF, chpt 14, pg 217, US edition] Pay attention to the wording there. 'Is enough', not 'will'. Otherwise there's no reason Moody (or any other teacher) would have got away with putting the imperius curse on students in class. Harry was in battle, he was using other dark curses and hexes and all that, and while the use of one of those *alone* may not be enough to get in a life sentence in Azkaban, I'm sure that if a wizard was walking down the street and just tossed one of them off at someone with no provocation they would get in *some* trouble. I think using crucio turning into a life sentence would be in the case of Umbridge using it against Harry for example. Bellatrix was an escaped Death Eater, and was making her way out of the MoM, Harry (even if his reasons for using that particular curse was because of other emotions) was trying to stop her from leaving. If someone found out about it (which they never would anyway) I doubt anyone would care enough to prosecute him (unless it was another attempt to get at Harry). Finwitch: >>> 3) Why do they specialize three curses as unforgivable? My theory is that it has to do with required emotion in order to accomplish one of them... I mean, it's one thing to want to hurt someone in anger and even hurting them as such, but to *enjoy* doing it!!! <<< HunterGreen: But they are already bad enough without that. Avada kedarva is *only* a killing curse, and there is no way to block it. Imperius forces people to do things against their will, and crucio causes unbearable pain. Those are all extreme enough to ban. We know that crucio requires certain emotions, but imperius and AK might not require that. Crucio is about causing pain and nothing else, so it makes sense that it would require certain emotions to summon it (like expecto patronum). The other to might just need a certain amount of practice and power to do correctly. From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Fri Aug 13 23:54:34 2004 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 23:54:34 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?magic_inheritance/Re:_Lily=92s_grandparents?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110019 Yb: A single pondering: Where did the word Squib come from? Why use that > term? Antosha: 'Squib' is, I believe, a British term roughly equivalent to the American slang, 'dud'. A squib is a firework or shell that doesn't explode. (Cross-the-ponders--is that correct?) So a Squib in the WW is a non-magical person from a magical family. > > Maya also asked: > > My question is, why muggle parents would be so pleased to have > > a witch in a family? > > Yb responds: > It's different, and cool. Who wouldn't be psyched if someone in the > family could levitate things or Apparate? (Except Petunia, of > course.) Plus, it's pretty clear that Lily excelled at this strange > new school (she made Prefect (I think) and Head Girl), so she's doing > well, another reason to be proud. I'll bet Hermione's parents are fit > to burst when they see her report card. > > ~Yb Let's also remember that the source for our info re: Lily's family's reaction is Petunia, who seems to have some unresolved issues viz-a-viz Lily. I don't think we can take that at face value. (Though I don't doubt the Evanses loved and supported Lily...) From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 14 00:10:25 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 00:10:25 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore and Socks, Magical Contracts, and Bertie Botts Beans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110020 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: dcgmck wrote: > > [snip] > > Dumbledore, explaining the rules for the selection of champions: > > > > "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. There can be no change of heart once you have become a champion." > > (GoF U.S. pbk 256) << > Kneasy continues with an additional quote: > > A bit of selective quoting there, because it goes on: > > "Please be very sure, therefore, that you are whole-heartedly prepared to play, before *you* drop *your* name into the Goblet." > (My emphases.) > > There's absolutely no point in placing an age restriction around the > Goblet if some-one can put your name in for you and have it count > as a valid entry. Asian_lovr2: The two quotes above are related, but they are not one and the same, one is not a true extension of the other. In the first quote Dumbledore is explaining the nature of the Goblet and the tournament; subject: Goblet. In the other, Dumbledore is addressing the students and explaining the nature of their actions; subject: Students. Yes, they are both related but not so related that one is an extension of the definition of the other. The first is a statement about the inner working of the Goblet. The second, is a generalized warning about the students actions and the consequence of those actions. Restated; the use of 'you' and 'your' does not define the function of the Goblet and is among other things a reminder to the students that putting someone else's name in the Goblet will NOT be considered a joke by anyone. At that point, it hasn't occurred to Dumbledore or anyone else, that an additional catagory might exist. So the chance of one student entering another student that results in the second student being selected is extremely slim. Finally, it is a mistake to assume that people always speak in absolute truths. Much of speech, both real and fictional, is made up of generalizations, usually spoken for simplicity and clarity. Although, admittedly, sometimes resulting in exactly the opposite. > Kneasy continues: > > You enter yourself, not drop some-one else's name into the Goblet. > In addition, Crouch!Moody burbles on about Confundus charms with > Harry being entered as the sole would-be contestant from a > non-existent 4th school, a school Harry does not attend. How can > such an entry possibly be valid? It can't, but DD is willing to > pretend that it is, because it gives him an edge. He knows where > and when attempts will be made to get at Harry. > Asian_lovr2: I believe JKR chose her words very carefully when defining the nature of the Goblet. Words chosen in a way that attempt to eliminate the very inconsistency we are discussing. First let's look at the nature of the Goblet and it's intelligence. Obviously, it is an intelligent magical object. It engages in resolving a very complex task. But the nature of it's intelligence is very specific and goal oriented. It was invented and programmed for one specific purpose, and I don't think it has the intelligence to engage in broad non-specific non-programmed general problem solving. In other words, it's not equipped to solve problems that deviate from the standard course of events. Now to that limited purpose-specific task oriented intelligence add a bit of confusion; a Confundus Charm. The Goblet's specific purpose is to select the best candidate from each catagory, which it did faithfully. The confusion force upon it was remembering the catagories were limited to three. At this point, we can also consider the possibility for the existance of a degree of flexability in the Goblet's programming. What if a fourth European school came into prominence? Suffciently large and prominent that it was a contender for the competition, would they abondon the centuries old cup in favor of a new object, or would they reprogram it to accept a fourth catagory? Don't know; just wondering. Back to the main point. The Goblet is a little confused, but still capable of carrying out it's most basic program; select the best champion for each catagory. If the slip of paper with Harry's name on it had nothing but his name (no school), that creates a new catagory for evaluation by virtue of the fact that it is not one of the other three. In a sense, the catagories for evaluation have now become Durmstrang, Beauxbatons, Hogwarts, and /other/ (or 'none of the above'). If you insist on a school name, then the name could have been "." (period/full-stop mark) or " " (blank or space character). > Kenasy concludes: > > Four champions in a competition for three? > Four schools in a competition for three? > How does the Goblet recognise a non-existent school? > A 'contract' when the person involved has never agreed to it? > When that person does not attend the school his name is linked to? > When it was patently impossible for that person to put his name in > the Goblet? > > A fraudulent entry and therefore not valid. No contract exists. > I've never liked this bit of plotting, much too threadbare. > Maybe JKR was having an off-day. > > Kneasy Asian_lovr2: Most of your question are answered in my explanation above. I think JKR, foreseeing this possibility, carefully chose Dumbledore's words so that the name coming out creates the /binding magical contract/ rather than the name going in. Since Harry's name came out, he is bound to compete; the contract is binding. Her game; her rules. However, while I can explain how things did work, my personal curiousity is intensely piqued by wonder what the penalty or consequences are for breaking that contract. Does the Goblet psychologically compel you to continue, sort of a competative Imperius Curse? Does it turn you into a warty toad until you agree? That would be an interesting bit of trivia to know. Just a thought. Steve/asian_lovr2 From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Sat Aug 14 00:16:07 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 00:16:07 -0000 Subject: How long were Voldemort and Quirrell "together"? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110021 >>> Erin wrote: > Okay. Now, if I was judging purely from that statement alone, I'd > guess that the year of PS/SS was *at least* Quirrell's fourth year at Hogwarts. Here is my reasoning for that. > > 1. Quirrell was fine when studying out of books. That would be > year one, though there might have been more than one year of Quirrell being "fine", there's no way of telling. > 2. Quirrell took a year off. That would be year two, when he > picked up Voldemort. > 3. Hagrid says he hasn't been the same since-- scared of the > students, scared of his own subject. That would be year three, the year before Harry came to Hogwarts. This also might have been a > period of more than one year, we can't know. > 4. And PS/SS would be Quirrell's fourth year. > [snip] > When Percy tells Harry about Snape, he says Snape is after "Quirrell's job", not "The Defense Against the Dark Arts job," [snipping rest of intriguing post] Brenda now: Thank you Erin, for bringing up a point that had puzzled me before! When I first started HP, Percy's remark on "Quirrell's job" as opposed to DADA position made me think that Quirrell had the job for as long as Percy was there. Assuming your logic is correct, then it must be only recent that DADA job got its reputation of 'jinked'. The words spread pretty fast though, seeing how Lockhart was the only applicant for the job. And seeing how the next three DADA teachers took the position from either DD's personal request (Lupin, Moody) or Ministry interference (Umbridge), I wonder who will take over next. A member of the Order? A potential unknown DE? Spy? Evil Temptress? Interesting... My vote goes to either Tonk or disguised Bella. Then why on earth DD let Quirrell!Mort around Hogwarts for so long?? And I know this is highly unlikely, but I wonder if Voldemort will hold personal grudge towards the Weasley twin for bewitching snowballs to bounce off of Quirrell's turban... >>> Erin ends her post with: The Lexicon timeline for PS/SS definitely say's Quirrell's trip took > place in the 1990-1991 school year. Are there other clues I've > missed, or should we be petitioning Lexicon Steve for a change? <<< Brenda: Hehe, I think he will be pleased. I can't think of any other clues myself, it is a shame we didn't get to see more of Quirrell. Brenda From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 14 01:21:28 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 01:21:28 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore and Socks, Magical Contracts, and Bertie Botts Beans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110022 > Asian_lovr2: > > The two quotes above are related, but they are not one and the same, > one is not a true extension of the other. > > In the first quote Dumbledore is explaining the nature of the Goblet > and the tournament; subject: Goblet. In the other, Dumbledore is > addressing the students and explaining the nature of their actions; > subject: Students. [snip, very reluctantly] > > [snip] > Most of your question are answered in my explanation above. I think > JKR, foreseeing this possibility, carefully chose Dumbledore's words > so that the name coming out creates the /binding magical contract/ > rather than the name going in. Since Harry's name came out, he is > bound to compete; the contract is binding. Her game; her rules. dcgmck: Thank you, Steve, for finding the words. I love your programming analogy. There does seem to be a muggle world counterpart for almost everything magical these days, a point that continually delights Arthur Weasley. My only quibble is that JKR's wording does seem to state pretty clearly that the magical contract is effected by the insertion of a name, not by its output. That, too, would be an easy enough programming hack to execute. > Asian_lovr2: > However, while I can explain how things did work, my personal > curiosity is intensely piqued by wonder what the penalty or > consequences are for breaking that contract. > > Does the Goblet psychologically compel you to continue, sort of a > competitive Imperius Curse? > > Does it turn you into a warty toad until you agree? > > That would be an interesting bit of trivia to know. dcgmck: If, as others have speculated, LV's taking of Lily's life created a magical contract that he attempted to violate by taking Harry's life as well, then we may already have seen a potential consequence of the violation of a magical contract. It stands to reason that Nature, the Universe, or whatever serves as the source of magic for the wizarding world would/will exact a harsher, more effective punishment than the judicial systems that 'enlightened' societies have. From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sat Aug 14 02:10:21 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 02:10:21 -0000 Subject: How long were Voldemort and Quirrell "together"? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110023 Erin wrote: Here's something that's been bugging me lately. The timeline of Quirrell. Also in the speech he says "...and after a while, I took possession of his body, to supervise him more closely as he carried out my orders." How long is "after a while" for Voldemort? Neri: Erin, I agree with practically everything you wrote, but there are two points I'd like to add. First, I'm not sure from your post if you fully realize it, but we should be clear on one thing: In the beginning of the SS/PS year, when Harry meets Quirrell in The Leaky Cauldron, Quirrell is not possessed yet. He does not wear the turban and he shakes Harry's hand with no ill effects. So Voldy is "with him" but not possessing him. Only after Quirrell failed to steal the stone from Gringotts he was possessed: ----------------------------------------------- SS/PS Ch. 17: "He has had to be very hard on me." Quirrell shivered suddenly. "He does not forgive mistakes easily. When I failed to steal the Stone from Gringotts, he was most displeased. He punished me decided he would have to keep a closer watch on me " ----------------------------------------------- So Voldy could be "with" Quirrell for more than a year before SS/PS, but he wasn't possessing him at that time. He only possessed him from the beginning of the school year in SS/PS The second thing is that in the beginning of CoS year Hagrid says, when talking about Lockhart and why DD hired him: ------------------------------------------------ CoS, Ch. 7: "Gettin' very difficult ter find anyone fer the Dark Arts job. People aren't too keen ter take it on, see. They're startin' ter think it's jinxed. No one's lasted long fer a while now." -------------------------------------------------- When Hagrid says this he doesn't mean Lockhart, who has only just started. So he must be including Quirrell as one (but not the only) who didn't last for long. Of course, "last for long" is a relative thing. At that time Snape is 11 years in his job, Trelawney is 13 years and McGonagall is something like 26 years, so Hagrid might regard Quirrell's 4 years (with one of them off) as not "long". Neri From snow15145 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 14 02:52:25 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 02:52:25 -0000 Subject: Umbridge and Fudge and DEs (Was: Case for Marauders) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110024 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Nora Renka" wrote: > > Nora: > >> Seems pretty clear what they were preaching, and > >> it's more of a reflection on just how damnably nasty wizarding > >> society is AND was that people thought it was a good idea. > >> Remember that Fudge is also accused by DD of putting too much > >> belief in blood. It's a canonically widespread bias. It's what > >> Dumbledore has been fighting against for a long, long time. It > >> may well be the main thread of the books, from the Founders to > >> the present. It's one thing that separates the 'good' good guys > >> from the 'ewww' good guys--Umbridge and Fudge think along blood > >> lines, and therefore share something deep with the DEs even > >> though they purport to be truly fighting them. > > > > RMM: > > Umbridge and Fudge in with the DEs? > > Sorry, but that is completely out there. > > If you're going to object, you might as well object to what I > *actually* said, O Close Reader. > > Umbridge and Fudge, I will contend, because they believe too much in > blood, and have (in Umbridge's case) the particularly nasty > attitudes towards the other magical creatures, share a certain > amount of their philosophical BASIS with the DEs. > > Fudge may be anti-Voldemort, but he still believes in and uses the > blood principle, which is what fueled Voldemort's rise to gaining > supporters in the first place. Umbridge, in her eager desire to > help Fudge stay in power, ends up doing a whole hell of a lot of > things that aid the DEs. This, it seems fairly obvious to me, was > one of the major points of OotP--the world isn't divided into Order > members and DEs, and the wrong methods towards the right end can end > up being assistance to those very things that they purported to be > fighting. > > -Nora gets back to important things, such as watching TV and lazing > around in house-slippers Snow: Snow: I totally agree with you, Nora, except for this last statement: > -Nora gets back to important things, such as watching TV and lazing > around in house-slippers You forgot eating bonbons! It should have read watching TV and lazing around in house-slippers eating bonbons. Nora how could you forget the bonbons! Must have been the lack of cake ;-) From mietoesarepink at comcast.net Sat Aug 14 00:41:21 2004 From: mietoesarepink at comcast.net (Maren Gest) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 18:41:21 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Dumbledore Connection References: Message-ID: <000801c48197$6bb9a5b0$6501a8c0@C3P0> No: HPFGUIDX 110025 My take on squibs was that they were just really poor at magic but were still considered a wizard. So because you're a squib, it dosen't mean that Hogwarts is not for you, you just have to work harder and realize chances are you'll never be super at spells. "Maren" From tipper_sarah at yahoo.com Sat Aug 14 04:16:53 2004 From: tipper_sarah at yahoo.com (Sarah) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 04:16:53 -0000 Subject: Harry's Use of Cruciatus curse and why no one noticed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110026 > Cory wrote: > Another thing that bothered me almost as much, however, was how come > his use of Cruciatus went so unnoticed by everyone? The Ministry > seems to know what Harry is doing 24/7; he was threatened with > expulsion from Hogwarts for dumping his aunt's pudding in the floor, > casting a Patronus to defend himself, and borrowing a flying > car...but he casts an Unforgivable Curse inside the Ministry building > and no one cares? > Kemper thinks: > Those incidents occur during summer holidays. Maybe the Deparment > that's in charge of monitoring magic of the underage takes a well > deserved rest during the school year, focusing mostly on the antics > of those witches and wizards aged 11 and younger. Is it possible that the Ministry uses a bit of deduction in catching underage magic? After all, the falling pudding was made to do so by Dobby, but it just happened to occur at the registered home of one Harry Potter. Same with the dementors--in Harry's neighborhood, but the MoM did not seem to know that the Dementors were there. The only reason the Ministry would know HP performed the Cruciatus curse is if Bella told (and she's not telling) or if HP revealed it, after all, there were over a dozen there at the time. If they didnt know who smashed the pudding or why HP did the Patronus, how could they know that he did the Cruciatis? "Sarah" From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 14 04:22:33 2004 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 04:22:33 -0000 Subject: Prophecy Interpretations (re: vanquishing LV) & Newbie here In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110027 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > Luckdragon64 guesses: > >>>What would be worse than death for Voldemort? Why, being a > common muggle of course. <<< > > SSSusan: > >>> [snip] And while I love the idea of Harry somehow getting off > the hook for having to kill Voldy [you know, vanquish vs. kill], > deep down I do want Voldy to die. I'm not at all keen on Voldy > living, even "reduced to" a Muggle, nor am I especially keen on the > idea of a Redeemed!Tom somewhere inside Voldy who can live while > essence-of-Voldy (or Sally) dies. <<< > > dcgmck: > > How would you feel about a devolved LV reduced past his near- > > immortal evilness, back beyond the arrogant adolescent still > > smarting from familial rejection, back to a baby with a fresh > > start and a clean slate? We've seen a DE's head reduced to > > infancy: why not an entire Dark Lord? If evil doers and social > > malcontents simply lack the proper opportunities and upbringing, > > wouldn't a fresh start with so much potential be just the ticket? > > Why waste so much talent? >-? > > SSSusan: > Hmmmm. Because he might be somewhat predisposed to make the same > choices again?? (Ooooh, have I gotten myself into hot water with > this one?) In all seriousness, what kinds of safeguards could be > put into place to ensure that *this* Tom Riddle would take a > different path? Would anyone watch over him? Would he go back into > a Muggle orphanage? Would Snapey take him in? :-) I don't know-- > would it be worth the risk...or would it be a risk at all? ARE some > people predisposed to "going bad" or is it all nurture, and no > nature? Marcela here: Hello, I am new here and have been lurking in other sites for a while now, only posting in The Great Debate, so far. I read the five books last Summer, and I am afraid to say that I must have read/listened to audio versions dozens of times, is it just me or do you also re-read them only to find 'new' clues or interpretations every time you do? LOL About myself: late 30s, married with two kids, have been an expat for the past 15 years in pretty much all continents except Antartica... currently residing in Texas, USA. Italian and Spanish are my mother tongues, studied English since I was seven, and learned French and Arabic in my expat years, so forgive my spelling and/or grammatical mistakes, please. Now to business: I agree/disagree with some of the above posts, I do not want Harry to actually kill Voldemort, by the end of OoTP he feels repulsion at the idea that he could be a murderer. On the other hand, I do want Voldemort to die or at least pay for his evil actions. I do not agree with 'dcgmck', I believe that every evil action Voldemort did has to be accounted for, what you are proposing there is sort of like Descartes' Tabula Rassa, a clean start, and worse, in the name of 'let's not waste such a talented wizard'.... How about giving Harry a 'clean start' with his parents alive for a change? BTW, Wizards could very well do that, what is the 'Obliviate' charm for anyways? Why bother with time-turners and risk SSSusan's scenario, when a simple spell such as Obliviate could do the trick? But I think that you are forgetting about the Prophecy's part: ...'and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives...'. I just can't think of any other alternative other than one of them 'kicking the bucket', like Hermione says. Which really saddens me, because Harry is no winner in either situation, though by now Harry has seen and suffered so many horrors and pains that one more might not 'scar' him so much. (Maybe that was discussed before, sorry if this sounds repetitive, and if it was, could some of you please give me some pointers/reference numbers?) Thank you, Marcela From erinellii at yahoo.com Sat Aug 14 05:51:34 2004 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (Erin) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 05:51:34 -0000 Subject: How long were Voldemort and Quirrell "together"? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110028 Neri wrote: > I'm not sure from your post if you fully realize it, but : In the beginning of the SS/PS year, when Harry meets Quirrell in The Leaky Cauldron, Quirrell is not possessed yet. Erin: Yes, I do realize it, sorry that wasn't clear enough in my previous post! Neri: So Voldy could be "with" Quirrell for more than a year before SS/PS, but he wasn't possessing him at that time. He only possessed him from the beginning of the school year in SS/PS Erin: Exactly. This is the point that I was trying to make, that Vapormort could have been hiding out at Quirrell's place for quite a while before joining Quirrell inside his head. (Incidently, where does one store a disembodied evil overlord? In the linen closet? Under the bed? If Quirrell, like all the other teachers to date, had lodgings at Hogwarts was Vapormort right there under Dumbledore's nose? The mind boggles.) This extra time between the Albanian pick-up and the possession was what allowed Quirrell to perfect his fearful, stuttering act and what allowed everyone around him to get used to the new Quirrell. We see that "everyone"-- all the students-- already has an explanation for why Quirrell's classroom smells of garlic, but only the twins are commenting on the new factor; the turban. Now, you also brought up Hagrid's comments in CoS about the jinx making it difficult to find anyone for the DADA job and how no one has lasted long in the position. Another poster, Brenda, spotted the same thing: Neri wrote: > When Hagrid says this he doesn't mean Lockhart, who has only just > started. So he must be including Quirrell as one (but not the only) > who didn't last for long. Brenda wrote: Assuming your logic is correct, then it must be only recently that the DADA job got its reputation of 'jinxed'. The word spread pretty fast though, seeing how Lockhart was the only applicant for the job. Erin: Never fear, I have an explanation for this also! Let's go with the four-year model again. Year 1: Quirrell's first year of teaching, the year he is fine while "studyin' outta books" according to Hagrid. Suppose, however that there was an incident near the end of the year, a nasty incident (perhaps involving a Dark Creature) that convinces Quirrell he needs to travel in order to get some firsthand experience. That would be viewed as a part of the jinx. Year 2: Quirrell is traveling, and there's a substitute DADA teacher. (S)he comes to a sticky end. That's viewed as part of the jinx. Year 3: Quirrell returns, only now he's "scared of the students, scared of his own subject". He trembles and stutters all the time. His new fearfulness is viewed as part of the jinx. Year 4: Quirrell dies when Voldemort leaves his body. This, of course, is viewed as part of the... ah well, you get the idea. Even if you reject the year one incident (pure speculation, there's no canon for it), I'd think years two through four would be enough to get the idea of a jinx going. ---Erin From ladypensieve at yahoo.com Sat Aug 14 06:19:44 2004 From: ladypensieve at yahoo.com (Lady Pensieve) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 06:19:44 -0000 Subject: Prophecy Interpretations (re: vanquishing LV) & Newbie here In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110029 >>---I just can't think of any other alternative other than one of them 'kicking the bucket', like Hermione says. Which really saddens me, because Harry is no winner in either situation, though by now Harry has seen and suffered so many horrors and pains that one more might not 'scar' him so much.Thank you,Marcela<< I was just re-reading all of the books again. Got to GOF and for some reason something clicked when everyone was wondering why Krum caught the snitch when he did. "He knew they were never going to catch up!" Harry shouted back over all the noise, also applauding loudly. "The Irish Chasers were too good. . . . He wanted to end it on his terms, that's all. . ." We've seen Harry willing to sacrifice himself before...I wonder if it will come to a point where he too decides to end it on his terms? Kathy From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Aug 14 06:34:24 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 06:34:24 -0000 Subject: Harry's Use of Cruciatus curse and why no one noticed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110030 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sarah" wrote: > > Cory wrote: > > Another thing that bothered me almost as much, however, was how come > > his use of Cruciatus went so unnoticed by everyone? Sarah: > The only reason the Ministry would know HP performed the Cruciatus curse > is if Bella told (and she's not telling) or if HP revealed it, after > all, there were over a dozen there at the time. If they didnt know > who smashed the pudding or why HP did the Patronus, how could they > know that he did the Cruciatis? Geoff: I commented yesterday that there would be problems identifying the source of spells because of the number cast - I quoted my reply 94642 of last March. Someone mentioned the matter of the Crucio which Harry tried to cast. Don't forget that there were at least two attempts because Bellatix cast a return Crucio in Harry's direction and there were at least two Avadra Kedavra spells cast, one cast by a Death Eater (possibly Jugson or Dolohov) at Hermione and one by Voldemort at Harry. From erinellii at yahoo.com Sat Aug 14 06:34:35 2004 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (Erin) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 06:34:35 -0000 Subject: Prophecy Interpretations (re: vanquishing LV) & Newbie here In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110031 "Lady Pensieve" wrote: "He knew they were never going to > catch up!" Harry shouted back over all the noise, also applauding > loudly. "The Irish Chasers were too good. . . . He wanted to > end it on his terms, that's all. . ." > > We've seen Harry willing to sacrifice himself before...I wonder if > it will come to a point where he too decides to end it on his terms? Erin: Silly random thought: Perhaps it will be Voldemort who decides to end it on *his* terms, for instance, suppose he's willing to go but wants to take his greatest enemy, Dumbledore, out with him? What if the situation in the ministry at the end of OotP had been reversed? What if Harry had one shot at Voldemort, but Voldemort was holding Dumbledore around the throat at the time? And Dumbledore was urging Harry to take the shot? What would Harry do? More importantly, what will he do in two years? "Ireland wins but Krum gets the snitch!" --Erin From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 14 06:49:19 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 06:49:19 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Lily=92s_grandparents_-Squib_Defined.?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110032 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bex" wrote: > > Yb thinks: > > A single pondering: Where did the word Squib come from? Why use that > term? > > ...edited... > > ~Yb Asian_lovr2: The most common definition that I know of for 'Squib' is a firecracker or other explosive device that did go off; that is, it refused to explode. Transferring this the wizard world; on the muggle hand, a Squib is an explosive with no power, by extension, a Squib is a wizard with no power. Another alternate name for a firecrack 'squib' would be a 'dud'. The alternate definition of 'dud' is one that is disappointingly ineffective or unsuccessful. The alternate definition of squib is a lampoon or other brief satirical or witty writing. But I don't see how that applies. Hope that helps. Steve/asian_lovr2 From gwennie357 at msn.com Sat Aug 14 05:27:53 2004 From: gwennie357 at msn.com (Wendi Williams) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 01:27:53 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's Use of Cruciatus curse/Killing Voldemort? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110033 HunterGreen: But they are already bad enough without that. Avada kedarva is *only* a killing curse, and there is no way to block it. Imperius forces people to do things against their will, and crucio causes unbearable pain. Those are all extreme enough to ban. We know that crucio requires certain emotions, but imperius and AK might not require that. Crucio is about causing pain and nothing else, so it makes sense that it would require certain emotions to summon it (like expecto patronum). The other to might just need a certain amount of practice and power to do correctly. gwennie357: Well, I'm de-lurking in order to respond to this one. I know for me, the most emotional part of OotP was when Harry cast the cruciatus on Bellatrix. I didn't cry for Sirius until after that happened, and it was mostly because of Harry's desire to inflict harm. Which is what I think this boils down to: the will or desire to inflict lasting harm on another person. The Unforgiveables are unforgiveable - I think - because the person WANTS to cast them. No, I don't think Harry's wrong or should go to Azkaban for attempting the cruciatus on Bellatrix - let's face it, she deserved it - but the fact remains that he WANTED to hurt her. Wanted to kill her actually, as he said earlier in the chapter. I believe the UCs are all about motivation: I don't think it would be possible to cast any of them without the clear desire to use them. Certainly I think in order to kill someone using AK, the desire to kill must be present. With imperious as well, unless you truly desire to physically, mentally, and emotionally control another person, you wouldn't be able to properly cast it. So while I too worried (and cried) over Harry being able to summon enough anger and pain to even attempt the cruciatus, I think the fact that it was unsuccessful is a testament to his true nature. We all feel angry enough to say we want to hurt someone at some time, but the difference is in the true will and desire to follow through with it -- that's what would make it unforgiveable. In my opinion. Happy to de-lurk! gwennie _________________________________________________________________ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar ? get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From msturbo209 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 14 06:52:18 2004 From: msturbo209 at yahoo.com (stellablue571) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 06:52:18 -0000 Subject: Umbridge and Fudge and DEs (Was: Case for Marauders) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110034 Nora wrote: > Umbridge and Fudge, I will contend, because they believe too much > in blood, and have (in Umbridge's case) the particularly nasty > attitudes towards the other magical creatures, share a certain > amount of their philosophical BASIS with the DEs. > > Fudge may be anti-Voldemort, but he still believes in and uses the > blood principle, which is what fueled Voldemort's rise to gaining > supporters in the first place. Umbridge, in her eager desire to > help Fudge stay in power, ends up doing a whole hell of a lot of > things that aid the DEs. This, it seems fairly obvious to me, was > one of the major points of OotP--the world isn't divided into > Order members and DEs, and the wrong methods towards the right end > can end up being assistance to those very things that they purported > to be fighting. Stella says: Hello, and you couldn't have said it better! Fudge and Umbridge have a very strong supportive relationship with the Death Eaters and Voldemort, as you've observed, noting all the inadvertent help they have given to the dark cause. The root of this important connection is what they represent, or rather the negative human traits they represent. Actually, many behaviors they both exhibit are consistent with the "Seven Deadly Sins", often associated with the downfall of humanity. (pride, greed, gluttony, etc. you get the picture...) Anyway, these human weaknessess are displayed so prominently in these two that they are almost caricatures. The selfish motivations, subversion, lust for power...all of these play out in such a way that they ultimately aid the "bad side" time and again. Unfortunately for both, (and everyone else) Voldemort's power is strengthened through just such ignorance. They play right into those putrid hands of his without any magical intervention or imperio curse; just by following their own human nature, they are feeding into that power. Regards to all,(and watch out for those deadly sins!) ;D Stella From msmerymac at yahoo.com Sat Aug 14 07:05:51 2004 From: msmerymac at yahoo.com (Meredith) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 07:05:51 -0000 Subject: Intro, Q's Lupin/Tonks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110035 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" wrote: > Steve wrote: > > Thought I'd introduce myself and ask a couple of questions. > > My name is Steve, I'm 30 and from Buffalo, NY. I started reading HP > > after the 2nd adaptation was released on DVD. Absolutely love them, > > and have read all 5 at least twice each. > > > > On with the questions: > > > > 1. In PoA, Lupin is on the train with the students. Ron asks > > who Lupin is as they enter the compartment. Hermione says Professor > > R. J. Lupin. She gets this from his trunk which has it written out > > in peeling letters. PoA US ed. PB pg. 74. Why are the letters > > peeling? If he had just been hired by DD in the last 2 months the > > letters wouldn't be peeling yet. Was he a teacher before? A secret > > desire to be a teacher? > > > SSSusan: > >>Some wondered what Remus' dad's (or mom's) name was and whether > he/she was a professor. Others have guessed [and I believe at this > point it really is guessing, not canon-based hypothesizing] that > Lupin did teach before, perhaps at Durmstrang...which would at least > explain his familiarity with & competence in teaching DADA.<< > > HunterGreen: > Someone else also suggested that he might have been a tutor for pre- > Hogwarts non-muggleborns. We know from JKR that they don't go to > school before Hogwarts, but they have to learn to read and write > somewhere. I imagine the richer families don't teach their children > themselves. Was Lupin's father's name John? That either comes from an interview or I'm making it up. I know that's Remus's middle name. This brings up that same old point about Lupin's name again... is his name Remus Lupin because he's a werewolf, or is he a werewolf because his name is Remus Lupin? Chicken or the egg theory... Obviously Lupin is his family name (Lupus, Lupine, wolf, wolflike). Does lycanthropy run in his family? Was he bitten by his father, or perhaps his uncle Remus? ~Luckie (I am also from Buffalo, Steve!) From hpfgu_elves at yahoo.co.uk Sat Aug 14 07:27:51 2004 From: hpfgu_elves at yahoo.co.uk (hpfgu_elves) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 07:27:51 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Make Your Posts Count Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110036 Hello, everyone, As we all know, the posting volume here has been quite overwhelming lately. A great many of us are finding it quite difficult to keep up. In light of this, and to help improve the quality of discussions, the Admin Team would like to give a reminder of our posting rules and make a request: *Make Your Posts Count.* All posts to the list must discuss canon, be relevant to canon, make a canon point. If you find yourself posting many times per day to the list, please practice some restraint. Do you best to limit yourself to a handful of substantive posts each day. If your comments are not furthering the discussion, do not make the post. If you find yourself reading a thread and dashing off replies to each post as you come to it, instead make note of which posts you want to reply to and make *one* post commenting on all of them. (This is for posts in the same thread, of course.) If you're complimenting another list member on a post or thanking them for something, making comments that are specifically directed to one list member, but not adding to the *canon* discussion, send your comments to that person offlist or save them to add to your next canon post. If you find yourself stating that you don't have your books at hand and are asking for confirmation of info, save your post for later when you can check, or consult the Lexicon, ask the elves, ask on OTC for confirmation. If you find yourself not sure whether a point you want to make is based on the movies or canon, hold off on your post. List members are becoming quite frustrated by 'movie contamination.' Granted, it's usually accidental, but think before you send your post and double-check first -- check your books, ask the elves, check the Lexicon. Do not post one-liners; rare is the one-liner post that is so substantive it's just right by itself. If you want to make a case for an argument or theory, flesh out your comments. The humorous short exchanges are fun too, yes, but they add to the noise-to-signal ratio too greatly. Do not post glorified 'me too!' messages. If you're using a lot of words to make no more significant point than "I agree with this person," that is a glorified 'me too.' Send the post offlist to the list member, or save your 'me too' for a more substantive canon post. Remember, posts to the main list should discuss canon and they should add to or further the discussions. Thanks, everyone! The List Elves [Note: This message is being sent by the Admin Team as a Special Notice to the entire list. Do not respond to this message onlist. If you would like to comment on it, please do not do so by 'replying' to it by email, as your comments will go to the entire list. Instead, please respond to us at HPforGrownups-owner@ yahoogroups.com, or by posting to our Feedback list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Feedback/. (Also know that email at the hpfgu_elves@ yahoo.co.uk address is only checked sporadically, so for a faster response, please use the above 'owner' address.) Thank you!] From earendil_fr at yahoo.com Sat Aug 14 07:37:39 2004 From: earendil_fr at yahoo.com (earendil_fr) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 07:37:39 -0000 Subject: Intro, Q's Tonks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110037 > Steve asked: > > 2. How long does Auror training take? In OotP Tonks says she > > qualified a year ago. OotP US ed. Pg 52. Even if it takes 2 years, > > she would have been at Hogwarts as a 7th year during PS/SS. I seem > > to remember her saying she was in Gryffindor but I can't find the > > quote right now. From JKR's descriptions of Tonks she does seem to > > be part of the part of the generation born in the mid 70's and grew > > up during the 80's. The odd hair colors, and the talking back to > > authority figures (Moody) > > Yblitzka replied: > I'm going on pure speculation here, but I suppose it takes 3-4 years > at least to be fully trained as an Auror. Earendil: The training takes 3 years. 'Well, you'll need to demonstrate the ability to react well to pressure and so forth,' said Professor McGonagall, 'perseverance and dedication, because Auror training takes a further three years [...]' [OotP, p586, UK ed.] > Yblitzka again: > Her being in 7th year when Harry was an "Ickle firstie" just > doesn't seem right. Earendil: We know that Auror training takes 3 years, and that Tonks qualified 1 year before OotP. This means she graduated from Hogwarts 4 years before the summer between Harry's 4th and 5th year (the moment she stated she qualified a year before). So she probably graduated from Hogwarts just before Harry arrived. This also means Tonks is 21 or 22 years old at the beginning of OotP, depending if she was 17 or 18 when she graduated from Hogwarts. Hope it helps. Earendil. From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Sat Aug 14 07:58:42 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 07:58:42 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Lily=92s_grandparents_-Squib_Defined.?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110038 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bex" wrote: > > Yb thinks: > > Where did the word Squib come from? Why use that term? > Asian_lovr2: > > The most common definition...is a firecracker...that did go off...a > 'dud'. Yeah, heavy editting. Considering this, and that we're supposed to find out belatedly about certain dementor-induced visions, and that there is going to be one (and only one) character that develops magical powers later on in life than pre-11 (sources both interviews and chats)... ...and yes, I hope this isn't too rehashed, or at least bringing in one more element? ...what are the odds that a certain cousin named Dud.. err... Dudley is going to be the aforementioned late bloomer? Josh From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 14 08:03:02 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 08:03:02 -0000 Subject: The End By Assorted Plot Devices Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110039 It occurred to me as I was reading several semi-related posts about the ending of the series, that we have numerous plot devices available to us to facilitate the ending of the Series- 1.) The ever present Death Curse -Avada Kadavra. 2.) The mysterious Veiled Archway in the Death Camber. Voldemort with or without Harry may pass through the Veil in the final battle. Others have suggested that it will be Dumbledore who sacrifices himself by rescuing Harry once again, and in the process, dragging Voldemort along with himself through the Veil. 3.) Recently suggested, 'vanquished by Time'. Much as the Death Eater's head was reduced to a babies head, the Last Battle could have the Jar of Time shattered, thereby deluging Voldemort in Time and reducing him to a baby, ready to start life fresh. 4.) As long as we are on the subject of time, let's not forget the much loved and equally hated, resolution by use of a Time Turner. 5.) A good old stabbing by the Sword of Gryffindor might go a long way to vanquishing Voldy. 6.) The Mysterious Locked Room in the Dept of Mysteries which contains a power that is both wonderful and terrible. Although, Harry might use it's power, I'm not sure how he might use the room. 7.) Peter/Wormtail's Magical Silver Hand - I've had vision of Harry near death on the virge of total annihilation by Voldemort, when Peter, overcome by conscience and life debt, slams his Silver Hand into Voldemort's chest and rips out his heart. Kind of a strange twisted irony, if you add a little imagination; Voldemort dead by his own hand. 8.) While it doesn't involve a plot device, Voldemort becoming a Muggle has a fair group of supporters. 7.) Vanquish by Sacrifice which is more of a theme than a device. Voldemort is once again vanquished by one or more person's selfless sacrifice. Could be Ron, he's a very likely candidate to sacrifice himself for Harry, and his sacrifice thereby strengthen Harry's 'Love Shield' to the point where it becomes a weapon capable of destroying Voldemort. Again, a lovely iron, Voldemort again tries to kill Harry, and is again vanquished by his own hand. An alternate is that Harry sacrifices himself, say protecting Neville and that gives Neville the power to vanquish Voldy. 8.) Death by House Elf. This is more subplot than plot device. I think I'm the only supporter for this one. Perhaps the 'twist' in the end is that the least of us becomes the best of us. The lowly house elf, Dobby, steps in at the last moment and vanquishes Voldemort in a loving effort to save Harry. 9.) Death by Uncontrolled Possession - In an odd twist, Harry possesses Voldemort (or visa-vera), and more importantly, Harry takes control and rushed headlong into the Veiled Archway, thereby killing himself and Voldemort in the process. Note: I really don't like the idea of Harry flat out killing Voldemort. However, I could live with Harry inadvertantly or indirectly causing Voldemort's death. Example; Harry hits the Dark Lord with a Stunning Curse and that causes Voldy to fall through the Veil; Harry caused his death, but didn't actually kill him. There must be more. Feel free to add to the list; what + how. Steve/asian_lovr2 From patientx3 at aol.com Sat Aug 14 08:37:23 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 08:37:23 -0000 Subject: Intro, Q's Lupin/Tonks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110040 Luckie wrote: >> This brings up that same old point about Lupin's name again... is his name Remus Lupin because he's a werewolf, or is he a werewolf because his name is Remus Lupin? Chicken or the egg theory... Obviously Lupin is his family name (Lupus, Lupine, wolf, wolflike). Does lycanthropy run in his family? Was he bitten by his father, or perhaps his uncle Remus? << HunterGreen: Someone mentioned once that it might have been an assumed name that he took on when he started Hogwarts to hide his werewolfness (do werewolves have to be registered?), because perhaps even an eleven- year-old werewolf might have already been heard of. However, I don't understand why he would choose such an obviously wolfish name. It could have been a nickname though (something his family started calling him as a joke and then it just stuck). I do like the idea of lycanthropy just being something that happens in the Lupin family (and that they're called Lupin because of that history), maybe the family home is in a werewolf infested area, or there's something about them that just attracts werewolves. Mr. and Mrs. Lupin could have named him 'Remus' as a hint at that history, sort of an inside joke (like the family in 'Holes' naming their sons 'Stanley' because their last name is 'Yelnats', which is Stanley backwards). This is all speculation of course. The truth could just be that its JKR's inside joke and that's it. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 14 09:28:04 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 05:28:04 -0400 Subject: Intro, Q's Tonks Message-ID: <002301c481e1$00af7520$9bc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 110041 Steve asked: > 2. How long does Auror training take? In OotP Tonks says she > qualified a year ago. OotP US ed. Pg 52. Even if it takes 2 years, > she would have been at Hogwarts as a 7th year during PS/SS. I seem > to remember her saying she was in Gryffindor but I can't find the > quote right now. From JKR's descriptions of Tonks she does seem to > be part of the part of the generation born in the mid 70's and grew > up during the 80's. The odd hair colors, and the talking back to > authority figures (Moody) Yblitzka here: "I'm going on pure speculation here, but I suppose it takes 3-4 years at least to be fully trained as an Auror. There's probably a lot to learn. I see Tonks as early 20's, maybe 21 to 23, so she could be an 80's child. If we take CoS to be '92-'93, then OotP would be '95-'96, so that would put her born in the early 80's. I have a hard time seeing her being older than 25, though she may just have a thing against acting her age." DuffyPoo: "because Auror training takes a further three years." [McGonagall- OotP Careers Advice] McGonagall also said "It's a difficult career path, Potter, they only take the best. I don't think anybody has been taken on in the last three years." That must mean 'taken to start the training' as Tonks herself, said "I only qualified [as an Auror] a year ago. Nearly failed on Stealth and Tracking." All this is four years....that would put Tonks out of Hogwarts the June before HP starts in Sept (if I did the math right, it is quite likely I did not as I am both calendar and math-challenged). 1995 in Aug the Advance Guard comes to Privet Drive 1994-1995 for the year before that Tonks is an Auror (for sake of argument July 1994-present) 1991- 1994 for the three years of Auror Training, starting right out of school July 1991- June 1994 Pre June 1991 she would be at Hogwarts HP would have started Sep 1991 (using the cake for dates) If you add in Yblitzka's "plus probably a year in the field for practice" that would be five years and she would have been out of Hogwarts in June 1990. My two cents. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 14 09:52:45 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 05:52:45 -0400 Subject: A Case for Marauders Message-ID: <003301c481e4$73495990$9bc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 110042 RMM said: "Always welcome at Mr. and Mrs. Potter's for Sunday lunch .....THOUGH? THOUGH? "Though" means "in spite of the fact that" So, in spite of the fact that Sirius looked after himself, he was always welcome at Mr. and Mrs. Potter for Sunday lunch? What sense does that make?" DuffyPoo replied: It makes perfect sense to me. In 'spite of the fact that' Sirius was no longer living with the Potter family, that he was an adult, that he had gotten his own place and was looking after himself, he was *always* welcome for Sunday lunch because he was still like "a second son" to Mr & Mrs P and they wanted him to have a family environment (a family meal) in which to share. This may be purely speculation, but I get the feeling from the series, that 'of age' wizards - those seventeen and above - are seen more as adults than they would be in the real world. "'Molly, you can't stop Fred and George,' said Mr. Weasley wearily. 'They /are/ of age.' 'They're still at school.' 'But they're legally adults now,' said Mr. Weasley in the same tired voice." Most seventeen year olds I've known have been treated pretty much still like children. Maybe it comes from being a wizard that they are expected to be more mature, more responsible. So, even though Sirius was now an adult, was responsible for himself, the Potters still looked on him as a son, and wanted him to have a place to call a family home, since he'd left his family behind. Let's look at it this way. Say HP moves in with the Weasleys in the summer between OotP and HBP. He turns 16 on July 31, spends Christmas and Easter holidays with them, and the first month of the summer after HBP, until he turns 17. Then, from the gold Sirius (speculation!) leaves him, he 'gets his own place, looks after himself, feeds himself, etc.' he is still, in spite of the fact that he is an adult on his own, always welcome at the Weasleys' for Sunday lunch. Simply because they still want him to feel like he belongs and has a nuturing, family environment in which to participate. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From theadimail at yahoo.co.in Sat Aug 14 11:38:56 2004 From: theadimail at yahoo.co.in (theadimail) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 11:38:56 -0000 Subject: Late Bloomer Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110043 Hi, There has been a lot of talk about a person who develops magic late in life. Did JKR say something about this that led to the rise of the discussion? I don't know about that so please help me with that. Anyway I have a theory about it. I think the person who'll develop magic late in life is Filch. He is a squib, he hates students, he was happy under Umbridge and he is desperate for acquiring magic. So he has enough motivation. I think Voldy or somebody under his directions will tempt Filch with magic in return for some fifth column work on Harry. Well, how's the theory? Bye Adi From sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com Sat Aug 14 14:03:16 2004 From: sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com (Amey Chinchorkar) Date: 14 Aug 2004 14:03:16 -0000 Subject: The Name Game Message-ID: <20040814140316.13978.qmail@webmail31.rediffmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110044 Hi all, Hats off to JKR!!! I know most of you must have stumbled across this, but she is great. I was translating the names and came across: Voldemort: Flight of (from???) Death Malfoy : Evil Faith (Double cross??) Dumbledore: Of Gild (cant make any sense of this.. but will work on it) Nymphadora: Gilded Nymph (a minor nature goddess usually depicted as a beautiful maiden; "the ancient Greeks believed that nymphs inhabited forests and bodies of water") I could not make anything out of Dumbledore . And the definition of Nymphadora fits her character (playful, having magical quality). Of course Flight from Death fits, as does evil faith (but I am assuming that he is playing his own game) Any other inputs and brickbats???? If this is discussed before, any pointers??? Amey P.S. A bit OT, I got a mention of Nicolas Flamel in a different book, around 1665. If needed, I will give the details. Tells me JKR has arrived in literary world. - A [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 14 14:11:48 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 10:11:48 -0400 Subject: Case for Marauders Message-ID: <001801c48208$a52c2720$10c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 110045 RMM said: "5th year ends and the boys go home from school. That summer, Sirius moves out and into the Potters, before his 6th year at Hogwarts. (This means that Voldemort is very popular at this time, because Sirius' parents are really being too much for Sirius.) Sirius and James enter their 6th year at Hogwarts." DuffyPoo: Agreed, to this point, at least as far as Sirius moving in with the Potters goes. We don't know if Sirius' leaving was a cumulative effect of years of hearing the pure-blood purist crap, or caused because he now knows lots of half-bloods and muggle-borns at school and doesn't think they are any better or worse than anyone else, or if something specific happened at home which caused him to finally split. I believe Sirius and James (and his family) share the same pure-blood mentality. Or, I guess, don't share the mentality that to be pure-blood makes you better than anyone else. If James, or the Potter family, had the same mentality about pure-bloodism as Sirus' family, he would never have gone there to live, IMO, and probably wouldn't have been best friends with James. RMM said: "Something happens in the 6th year, because Sirius finds his OWN PLACE TO LIVE between his 6th and 7th years at Hogwarts." DuffyPoo: Yes, something happens. Sirius turns seventeen, becomes an adult in the wizarding world, and has been given a good bit of gold by his Uncle Alphard. Sirius now is of age to move out on his own and has the means to do so, so doesn't need to rely on the kindness of the Potter family any longer. RMM said: "He only visits the Potters for Sunday dinner. This tells me that his visits are with the parents (who have "adopted" him) and not to James. Where is James?" DuffyPoo: That's quite a stretch for me to follow. Sirius visits the Potters for Sunday dinner, in a family environment to share a family meal with friends, including James, because the Potter family is kind to their son's friends and don't want to see Sirius alone for Sunday lunch. I see no evidence, in canon, that James ever left his family home until he married Lily. [How many people here who had a child fall out with a best friend, would continue to invite the former best friend for Sunday lunch? I can imagine not many. I certainly wouldn't, no matter how much I cared for the child, it is disloyal to my own child, even if I think my own child is the one in the wrong and is being a perfect idiot.] RMM said: "Remus, being a prefect, has influence over others." "And I believe what Remus says when he said that HE LED OTHERS and himself...." DuffyPoo: Canon shows Lupin had very little, if any, influence over his friends. "'No one would have made me a prefect, I spent too much time in detention with James. Lupin was the good boy, he got the badge.' [Sirius] 'I think Dumbledore might have hoped I would be able to exercise some control over my best friends,' said Lupin, 'I need scarcely say that I failed dismally.'" I think this shows, quite well, that Lupin couldn't have led James and Sirius anywhere; he had no control over them, he says so himself. He doesn't make one move to interfere in the 'Snape's worst memory' scene, yet he knows what they are doing is wrong, and he should be putting a stop to it, "Lupin was still staring down at his book, though his eyes were not moving and a faint frown line had appeared between his eyebrows." I don't think he could have had much influence over anyone else, either, or perhaps he would have been made Head Boy instead of James. "He never knew I had led three fellow students into becoming Animagi illegally." I think Lupin is merely taking the responsibilty for the whole werewolf/Animagi situation here. He never suggested, that I can see, that James, Sirius and Peter learn how to become Animagi. They did so, on their own, because they were his friends, because they figured out what his monthly absences meant, and knew, as animals, they could spend time with him when they couldn't do so as humans. Sirius and James worked it out on their own probably letting Lupin in on their progress, so he feels he led them into becoming Animagi because he never did anything to stop them. He never told DD because he had friends, for the first time in his life, who were willing to do anything for him, no matter how dangerous. Lupin had two years to try to stop them, but he chose not to, therefore, in his mind, leading them into it. When they did finally get it worked out in fifth year, they not only accompanied Lupin in the Shrieking Shack, they went on rampages around Hogsmeade and Hogwarts grounds, not caring about the safety of others, which had been one of DD's chief concerns. Lupin, having to admit to DD that the others were Animagi, would mean "admitting I'd betrayed his trust while I was at school, admitting that I'd led others along with me..." Lupin would have to admit that they, together, had broken the rules that DD had set down for his, and others' safety, and had run around Hogsmeade and the Hogwarts grounds, regardless of the danger in which that placed themselves, and others, students and townsfolk included. (Very like Harry, actually, who despite the security measures put in place at Hogwarts to protect him from Sirius Black, went into Hogsmeade - illegally - anyway, which Ron and Hermione both knew about and took part in.) RMM said: "That something is the entrance of James, Remus, and Peter into the clutches and organization of Voldemort." DuffyPoo: Canon please? RMM said: "Meantime, Sirius is one who begins to miss his friend James terribly, now has to make a decision: join James or not. I believe he breaks down and joins up." DuffyPoo: I think the fact that canon states that Sirius left his family of Dark Wizards because of their pure-blood mania precludes Sirius ever joining this group, had James, himself ever joined (which, from what has been told in canon about James, I find highly doubtful). First off, I don't believe, from canon, that there ever was a rift between James and Sirius. James and Sirius are supposed to be very bright. It wouldn't have taken either of them long, if they were in the organization, to figure out just what was going on. We already know that Sirius wouldn't be interested in that deal, and, IMO, we can take from canon that James would never have been interested in it either (he has *always* hated the dark arts, and certainly appears to have disdain for the use of the word Mudblood - insisting Snape apologise to Lily, saying he would /NEVER/ call her a you-know-what - he's certainly not coming from the same blood purity prejudice as Snape or Malfoy, at least). IF (big IF IMO) they ever were involved in such a group, no matter how well sugar-coated the lie was, they would have run quickly away when they figured it out, and wouldn't have thought twice about exposing the group to DD. I posted the other day, that if the Marauders had all been part of this group, and then all but PP left the group, I can't see how James, Sirius or Lupin would ever trust PP again with anything, never mind anything as important as being James and Lily's Secret-Keeper. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From catportkey at aol.com Sat Aug 14 14:12:42 2004 From: catportkey at aol.com (catportkey at aol.com) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 10:12:42 EDT Subject: JK Rowling quote Message-ID: <1ca.288850dd.2e4f77da@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110046 I know we are supposed to focus on the books, but a line from J. K. Rowling on the future PoA DVD relates to both. "He [Director, Alfonso Cuaron] put things in the film that foreshadow things that are going to happen in the next two books." http://l.warnerbros.1nc025.com/l/r/03PUeWeb08mRb0Evze Click on Explore the DVD Pook [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sat Aug 14 14:35:53 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 14:35:53 -0000 Subject: The End By Assorted Plot Devices In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110047 Steve/asian_lovr2 wrote: It occurred to me as I was reading several semi-related posts about the ending of the series, that we have numerous plot devices available to us to facilitate the ending of the Series- There must be more. Feel free to add to the list; what + how. Neri: All good points, Steve. I especially like your house-elf suggestion. Could Dobby's parents defy Voldy three times? ("Bring the Dark Lord a nice cup of tea, Debbie". ? "Won't, Mistress Malfoy! Bad, bad Debbie! Must run to iron her hands"). Or could Dobby be the hand? Or the "other"? (note to self: add the Dobby option to RPD v.2). My own contribution to the list of terminal plot-devices: The mind link between Harry and Voldy, naturally. A huge surge of The-Power- The-Dark-Lord-Knows-Not through the link might do it. In moments of fluffiness I imagine this surge as a mental Patronus taking the form of a great black dog. ("Expecto Padfoot!") Also, the priori incantatem scene in GoF makes me think: could Voldy be somehow vanquished by the ghosts of all his past victims? Neri, spending an enjoyable Saturday thinking of creative ways to get rid of dark lords. From griffin782002 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 14 13:15:15 2004 From: griffin782002 at yahoo.com (sp. sot.) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 06:15:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] The End By Assorted Plot Devices In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040814131515.39517.qmail@web90010.mail.scd.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110048 Steve wrote: (EDIT) 7.) Peter/Wormtail's Magical Silver Hand - I've had vision of Harry near death on the virge of total annihilation by Voldemort, when Peter, overcome by conscience and life debt, slams his Silver Hand into Voldemort's chest and rips out his heart. Kind of a strange twisted irony, if you add a little imagination; Voldemort dead by his own hand. Griffin782002 now: Well, it seems to fit with the 'by the hand of the other'. I was wondering what about someone that now seems unlike to attack L.V. Steve/asian_lovr2 also said 9.) Death by Uncontrolled Possession - In an odd twist, Harry possesses Voldemort (or visa-vera), and more importantly, Harry takes control and rushed headlong into the Veiled Archway, thereby killing himself and Voldemort in the process. Griffin782002 again: I was thinking, was if Harry manages to possess L.V. and start making all these thoughts about his loved ones or things that he loves. The thought of Sirius in the end of OotP, was enough to drive away L.V. Imagine Harry making all doing this thing inside L.V. head. I wonder if this can destroy L.V. and bring back T.R. as a normal human, although it seems he is now beyond redemption. And Steve/asian_lovr's final thought: Note: I really don't like the idea of Harry flat out killing Voldemort. However, I could live with Harry inadvertantly or indirectly causing Voldemort's death. Example; Harry hits the Dark Lord with a Stunning Curse and that causes Voldy to fall through the Veil; Harry caused his death, but didn't actually kill him. Steve/asian_lovr2 And my final thoughts: As I have said in a previous post, I can't understand how a veil can kill. In fact in the thread about the veil in the D.o.M. I expressed some further thoughts about its function as a gate to the Underworld. But it seems it proved too complicated an arguement that there was no reply. If this was the case, I am sorry :-( Griffin782002 From bccissell at hotmail.com Sat Aug 14 13:31:58 2004 From: bccissell at hotmail.com (bciss1) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 13:31:58 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: <000801c48197$6bb9a5b0$6501a8c0@C3P0> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110049 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Maren Gest" wrote: > My take on squibs was that they were just really poor at magic but were > still considered a wizard. So because you're a squib, it dosen't mean that > Hogwarts is not for you, you just have to work harder and realize chances > are you'll never be super at spells. > > "Maren" Hi Maren, This is my first post, so I hope I get it right. I believe that we do know that being a squib means that Hogwarts is not for you. I can't find the quote right now -- in fact I don't remember which book it is in! But at one point Neville says something like--we thought that I was going to be a squib, but then I got my letter from Hogwarts--so, being admitted to Hogwarts meant that he was NOT a squib. I will keep looking for that quote and post it when I find it (unless someone else does first.) Brenda From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Aug 14 15:01:34 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 15:01:34 -0000 Subject: The Name Game In-Reply-To: <20040814140316.13978.qmail@webmail31.rediffmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110050 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Amey Chinchorkar" wrote: I could not make anything out of Dumbledore . Geoff: Dumbledore is an old name for a bumble bee. In the village where I now live, one of the older cottages is called "Dumbledory"; I assume this is where the beekeeper lived. From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 14 16:24:19 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 16:24:19 -0000 Subject: The Name Game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110051 >"Amey Chinchorkar" wrote: > > I could not make anything out of Dumbledore . > > Geoff: > Dumbledore is an old name for a bumble bee. In the village where I > now live, one of the older cottages is called "Dumbledory"; I assume this is where the beekeeper lived. dcgmck: While many of the posts I've read on various sites generally accept the definition of Dumbledore as bumble bee, the ensuing discussions have never really satisfied me. Inspired by Amey, I ran a few Internet searches on "dumble" and "dore". "Dumble" is a pretty elusive word, but what I've found of interest is not so much the Texas geologist as the brand-name association with amplifiers for musical instruments. Now, if one understands "Dumbledore" to be a golden amplifier, things get really interesting. DD's clearly a master strategist, a canonically adept legilemens, and "the only one he (TR/LV) ever feared." Despite all this, we have only only seen him engage in actual physical combat once in OotP and heard about his late arrival in PS/SS when he is helping Harry get caught up on three days' lost time in the hospital ward (wing?). We hear of his dedication to his position as headmaster of Hogwarts and we hear from his own lips that precious little can pry him from his post. The two times he is forced out of office (CoS, OotP), his spirit (and presumably spies) retain a close watch on all that is happening and he himself is within short hailing range. His primary function, then, seems to be that of an educator, one who helps others to "amplify" their own potential into useful skills for future endeavors. Unlike LV, who is also eager to make use of others, DD's aim is positive (golden), like his search for helpful uses of dragon's blood, like his co-creation of the philosopher's stone. (I use the term 'golden' instead of 'gilded' because of the negative connotations that have crept into contemporary understanding of the latter term.) Thoughts? From doliesl at yahoo.com Sat Aug 14 16:43:18 2004 From: doliesl at yahoo.com (doliesl) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 16:43:18 -0000 Subject: The Name Game In-Reply-To: <20040814140316.13978.qmail@webmail31.rediffmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110052 Amey wrote: (snipped unrelated stuffs) > I was translating the names and came across: > Malfoy : Evil Faith (Double cross??) D writes: JKR said it's loosely translated as "Bad Faith." "Bad Faith" (mauvaise foi), is a term used by French philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre regarding the state of being when a person try to convinced himself there is no free will and no choice, and blaming how his actions, attitude and behavior are not determined by himself (ex: blame it on environment or whatever external factors). D. From earendil_fr at yahoo.com Sat Aug 14 16:48:01 2004 From: earendil_fr at yahoo.com (earendil_fr) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 16:48:01 -0000 Subject: The Name Game In-Reply-To: <20040814140316.13978.qmail@webmail31.rediffmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110053 Amey wrote: > I was translating the names and came across: > > Voldemort: Flight of (from???) Death (snip) > Of course Flight from Death fits Earendil replies: Sorry to be a nit-picker, but it can't be translated exactly to 'Flight *from* death'. 'vol' means 'flight' indeed, as in flying, but not as in fleeing. A more interesting translation of 'vol' IMO is 'theft'. Which makes Voldemort a Death Stealer... Fits much better with his Death Eaters ;-) That's always been my personal understanding of the name anyway! Earendil. From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Sat Aug 14 17:13:37 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 17:13:37 -0000 Subject: The End By Assorted Plot Devices In-Reply-To: <20040814131515.39517.qmail@web90010.mail.scd.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110054 Great post, Steve! I believe someone (Kneasy, I think it was) wrote a post while back on different possibities of the ending, but not the specifics of death mechanisms. I think Voldemort's death by Peter's hand is the most likely scenario, combined with the 'by the hand of the other' bit from the prophecy, as Griffin782002 has pointed out. Death by house-elf is not something I had considered. While I have no doubt Dobby will prove himself to be very instrumental in the final battle, I think the actual countdown will come upon... humans, shall we say. I am personally rooting for the case in which Voldemort becomes a powerless mort! and gets locked up in the National Museum for the History of Defence Against Dark Arts... Locked behind the glass door (display case), bound by anti-apparition and all sorts of protection, and be ridiculed by many once 'less-powerful' wizards and witches for centuries to come... That will serve him right. Also wanted to suggest "reduced to ashes", but on the second thought, that can be highly dangerous. Special gratitude to Snow here who brought up a very valid point of Phoenix connection between Dumbledore and Harry. Since Voldemort's wand shares Fawkes' tail as well, I'm afraid if he is indeed 'reduced to ashes' he might come back to life. If the connection turns out to be that strong, that is. >>> Neri wrote: The mind link between Harry and Voldy, naturally. A huge surge of The-Power-The-Dark-Lord-Knows-Not through the link might do it. In moments of fluffiness I imagine this surge as a mental Patronus taking the form of a great black dog. ("Expecto Padfoot!") <<< Brenda: AWESOME, bring Sirius back, he didn't *really* die! Jo, have you heard of SAD DENIAL??? It's the state you are in when you put awful lot of effort into creating a character, naming a whole book (1/7) after him AND finishing him off after 2 books! >>> Neri: Also, the priori incantatem scene in GoF makes me think: could Voldy be somehow vanquished by the ghosts of all his past victims? <<< Bren: Nice touch, I was surprised to see they didn't strangle Voldy in GoF! >>> Griffin: I expressed some further thoughts about its function [the veil] as a gate to the Underworld. But it seems it proved too complicated an arguement that there was no reply. <<< Brenda: Oh really? When did you post it? I think the reason you did not receive any replies (I know it sucks, really) might be that there was a thread on Return from Underworld, comparing various mythologies and legends. Around Post #104308... (I would not have mentioned this since I found your name in one of the top threads, but since I went through the trouble of searching, I thought I'll play ignorant ;P) Brenda From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Sat Aug 14 17:26:38 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 17:26:38 -0000 Subject: Intro, Q's Lupin/Tonks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110055 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Meredith" wrote: > This brings up that same old point about Lupin's name again... is > his name Remus Lupin because he's a werewolf, or is he a werewolf > because his name is Remus Lupin? Chicken or the egg theory... If it were just Remus, then I'd be more interested, however, the names and characteristics of the respective characters match all too well in too many cases to be an exception. Is Professor Sprout's family one of herbologists? Did the Blacks realize that Sirius was fated to become an animagus dog, colored black, even? Professor Vector's family must come from a long line of math lovers? And don't forget enough alliteration amongst names to make you long for comic books! LOL, all the names give you is the quick hint as to the character's possible nature before it is revealed. Any of us that were surprised (guilty raised hand here) to see Remus as a werewolf at any point past his full name, if not the peeling letters, should feel foolish. Same with Sirius and the supposed grim. This is why Dudley and the late-bloomer hint stick in my mind (although I might want to change my theory... Petunia could be the late bloomer, which would make Dudley a true Squib). I'm also a little more suspicious of the route JKR is taking with Percy as he shares his name with Dumbledore's impressive collection. But beyond the possible forewarnings... Juliet's soliloquy applies, or perhaps since children are *included* (nod to previous discussion) in the audience, some of the names are simply to help us with our associations? Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Sat Aug 14 17:37:24 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 17:37:24 -0000 Subject: Late Bloomer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110056 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "theadimail" wrote: > Hi, > There has been a lot of talk about a person who develops magic late > in life. Did JKR say something... Yes she did... the below link will take you to a transcript of an online chat from an easily deduced date: http://www.hogwarts- library.net/reference/interviews/19990319_BarnesNoble.html#Question34 Also of note in this chat, which is otherwise so old as to not be of too much use, is the following: "Dumbledore, which means "bumblebee" in Old English...seemed to suit the headmaster, because one of his passions is music and I imagined him walking around humming to himself." Well, so much for that being his hypothetical animagus form... perhaps? :) Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Sat Aug 14 17:50:38 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 17:50:38 -0000 Subject: JK Rowling quote In-Reply-To: <1ca.288850dd.2e4f77da@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110057 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, catportkey at a... wrote: > "[Alfonso Cuaron] put things in the [his unmentionable medium] that > foreshadow things that are going to happen in the next two books." The obvious question from this is to which "next two" she refers. >From various sources, I've never gotten the impression that she gives away much solid information about unpublished books, beyond editors proofing said book and the occasional terminal child. Also, Mr. ...er... Thingy's predecesor made comments about similar foreshadowings asking if the interviewer had read book 4. So, I think JKR is merely pointing out that the GoF and OotP have influenced this particular... instantiation, and not wild guesses or rare hints about HPB and #7. Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Sat Aug 14 18:20:19 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 18:20:19 -0000 Subject: The End By Assorted Plot Devices In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110058 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Brenda M." wrote: > I think Voldemort's death by Peter's hand is the most likely > scenario, combined with the 'by the hand of the other' bit from the > prophecy, as Griffin782002 has pointed out. I hate being repetative, but unless you can justify the rest of the prophesy (i.e. why is Peter's death necessary to prevent the death of both Harry and LV? And if so, why must one of them kill him? And how does that require that Peter's death in a preventative role?) The best I can twist things around to attempt to fit, would be that Harry's power of compassion sparing Peter in PoA is the manifestation of Harry's role as the One, and that LV's fate is sealed unless Peter kills Harry. But so long as Peter doesn't die in the successful attempt to kill Harry or LV, then the side he has just helped must kill him, else Peter will turn around and kill the survivor? This just doesn't make any sense. Thus far, the only character that would seem possibly willing to consider killing both our protagonist and antagonist deliberately would be Lucious Malfoy, but any defeat of the Dark Lord requires the power of Harry Potter, the One. I just don't see it. The only flex I see in the prophesy is that "One must die" could mean that _only_ one must die... or that _at least_ one must die so long as one of them is killed in the battle between them (a follow-up death with Harry taking Lily's role from 15.5 years before is an example of how the second death could occur). But anyway... if there is seriously any further discussion on 'other' refering to a third person, can you please settle the above discrepancies in your theory? Josh From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Aug 14 19:00:16 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 19:00:16 -0000 Subject: The Name Game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110059 dcgmck: > While many of the posts I've read on various sites generally accept > the definition of Dumbledore as bumble bee, the ensuing discussions > have never really satisfied me. Inspired by Amey, I ran a few > Internet searches on "dumble" and "dore". Jen: JKR also said in the Connection interview in 1999 that she always imagined Dumbledore walking around humming, like a bumble bee, and that this was the connection between the old English word for bumblebee and his personality. That fits in with Dumbledore's whimsical style, when he's in a good mood anyway, and neither Harry nor the school is being threatened! JKR also said in the Royal Albert Hall appearance that Albus means both 'white and wisdom'. dcgmck: > Now, if one understands "Dumbledore" to be a golden amplifier, things > get really interesting. DD's clearly a master strategist, a > canonically adept legilemens, and "the only one he (TR/LV) ever > feared." Despite all this, we have only only seen him engage in > actual physical combat once in OotP and heard about his late arrival > in PS/SS when he is helping Harry get caught up on three days' lost > time in the hospital ward (wing?). We hear of his dedication to his > position as headmaster of Hogwarts and we hear from his own lips that > precious little can pry him from his post. The two times he is > forced out of office (CoS, OotP), his spirit (and presumably spies) > retain a close watch on all that is happening and he himself is > within short hailing range. His primary function, then, seems to be > that of an educator, one who helps others to "amplify" their own > potential into useful skills for future endeavors. Unlike LV, who is > also eager to make use of others, DD's aim is positive (golden), like > his search for helpful uses of dragon's blood, like his co- creation > of the philosopher's stone. Jen: This is one of the better interpretations of Dumbledore I've read! We know so little about his life prior to the Prophecy, but since the Prophecy, his role is very much that of a person behind the scenes, attempting to strategize and, indeed, 'amplify' Harry's ability to defeat Voldemort. Dumbledore knows and accepts he cannot defeat Voldemort, no matter how hard he tries. His role is that of the coach waiting in the wings: guiding, critiquing, analyzing, strategizing, but in the end, allowing Harry to move forward on his own (and all the students as you said). It's not easy to surrender the outcome after so much involvement, the endless planning and especially his emotional connection to Harry, but that's exactly what Dumbledore is starting to do by the end of OOTP. Here's more support for your thoughts, dcgmck, from JKR at the Royal Albert Hall appearance in 2003: "Dumbledore, um, I don't want to say too much on this because you may find that it gives too much away but Dumbledore is a very wise man who firstly knows that Harry is going to have to learn a few hard lessons to prepare him for what may be coming in his life. So he allows Harry to do an awful lot of things he maybe wouldn't allow another pupil to do and he also unwillingly permits Harry to confront a lot of things rather than protect him from... but as people who have finished Order of the Phoenix will know, Dumbledore has had to step back a little bit from Harry in an effort to teach him some of life's harder lessons." Jen Reese, who likes the image of Dumbledore humming as he walks around Hogwarts, looking for a mug of hot chocolate. From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Aug 14 19:11:02 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 19:11:02 -0000 Subject: The Name Game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110060 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dcgmck" wrote: > >"Amey Chinchorkar" wrote: > > > > I could not make anything out of Dumbledore . > > > > Geoff: > > Dumbledore is an old name for a bumble bee. In the village where I > > now live, one of the older cottages is called "Dumbledory"; I > assume this is where the beekeeper lived. > > dcgmck: > While many of the posts I've read on various sites generally accept > the definition of Dumbledore as bumble bee, the ensuing discussions > have never really satisfied me. Inspired by Amey, I ran a few > Internet searches on "dumble" and "dore". > > "Dumble" is a pretty elusive word, but what I've found of interest is > not so much the Texas geologist as the brand-name association with > amplifiers for musical instruments. Geoff: Yes, but... the place in my village dates from before amplifiers were though of; think i'll stick with the Old English for now. At least, I'll apparently be with Jo Rowling for company. From jjpandy at yahoo.com Sat Aug 14 21:06:50 2004 From: jjpandy at yahoo.com (jjpandy) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 21:06:50 -0000 Subject: focus on Hermione Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110061 If you haven't read the theories about Hermione at http://www.hermionegranger.us/pages/hermepower.htm then you MUST read then now! Besides making a great argument for proving Hermione's age, there is a very interesting theory that Hermione is the one mentioned in the prophecy! JJPandy - who would be heart-broken if Lupin turns out evil! From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 14 21:53:54 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 17:53:54 -0400 Subject: Harry's Use of Cruciatus curse and why no one noticed Message-ID: <001201c48249$3200c030$5462d1d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 110062 Geoff said: "Someone mentioned the matter of the Crucio which Harry tried to cast. Don't forget that there were at least two attempts because Bellatix cast a return Crucio in Harry's direction and there were at least two Avadra Kedavra spells cast, one cast by a Death Eater (possibly Jugson or Dolohov) at Hermione and one by Voldemort at Harry." DuffyPoo: I don't mean to be contradictory, but the spell Dolohov used on Hermione, the one that put her out of commission, was described as, "a streak of what looked like purple flame passed right across Hermione's chest." I thought Avada Kedavra was green? Harry always dreams about or remembers green light connected to his mother's death. "'Avada Kedavra!' Moody roared. There was a flash of blinding green light and a rushing sound." (GoF The Unforgivable Curses) It is also described as a green light when Wormtail kills Cedric, and there are two jets of green light shot by LV in the Atrium at DD, once DD vanished, and the second time the centaur came between DD and the spell. The AK LV used at HP isn't described by colour. I agree, though, there were way too many spells going on in the MoM for anyone to determine whether or not HP cast a Crucio, without at least doing the Priori Incantato on his wand, as Mr. Diggory did in GoF. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kinsfire at earthlink.net Sat Aug 14 16:58:17 2004 From: kinsfire at earthlink.net (Keith McComb) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 12:58:17 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Name Game References: <20040814140316.13978.qmail@webmail31.rediffmail.com> Message-ID: <001601c4821f$e627edb0$1501a8c0@Hogwarts> No: HPFGUIDX 110063 Amey Chinchorkar: P.S. A bit OT, I got a mention of Nicolas Flamel in a different book, around 1665. If needed, I will give the details. Tells me JKR has arrived in literary world. You are aware, of course, that Nicholas Flammel is a real world person? Depending on your view of things in the world, he either sought for the Philosopher's Stone and failed, or found it and hid the information. Interesting subject of study, I might add. But ol' Nicky there was real. Kinsfire From ctcasares at sbcglobal.net Sat Aug 14 17:51:14 2004 From: ctcasares at sbcglobal.net (tylerswaxlion) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 17:51:14 -0000 Subject: Lilys grandparents -Squib Defined. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110064 > > > Yb thinks: > > > Where did the word Squib come from? Why use that term? > > Asian_lovr2: > > The most common definition...is a firecracker...that did go off...a > > 'dud'. > Josh: > Yeah, heavy editing. Considering this, and that we're supposed to > find out belatedly about certain dementor-induced visions, and that > there is going to be one (and only one) character that develops > magical powers later on in life than pre-11 (sources both interviews > and chats)... > > ...what are the odds that a certain cousin named Dud.. err... Dudley > is going to be the aforementioned late bloomer? OK, but what about the Magical Quill that writes all the magical babies' names in the book at Hogwarts so they can be contacted on their 11th birthdays? Even if the magical talent were latent longer than typical, wouldn't the quill be aware of "latency" since presumably the babies all grow into their talents anyway? We've seen that students' abilities grow as they mature, and I assume it's not only due to training, but also to a maturation in magic ability. Just how "latent" would a baby's magic have to be to escape the Quill, yet produce a wizard? "Tyler" From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Aug 14 22:42:57 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 22:42:57 -0000 Subject: Harry's Use of Cruciatus curse and why no one noticed In-Reply-To: <001201c48249$3200c030$5462d1d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110065 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > Geoff said: > "Someone mentioned the matter of the Crucio which Harry tried to cast. > Don't forget that there were at least two attempts because Bellatix > cast a return Crucio in Harry's direction and there were at least two > Avadra Kedavra spells cast, one cast by a Death Eater (possibly > Jugson or Dolohov) at Hermione and one by Voldemort at Harry." > > > DuffyPoo: > I don't mean to be contradictory, but the spell Dolohov used on Hermione, the one that put her out of commission, was described as, "a streak of what looked like purple flame passed right across Hermione's chest." I thought Avada Kedavra was green? Geoff: Wrong place.... I said possibly Jugson or Dolohov because I was extrapolating from the text: 'As the door flew open, Harry, Hermione and Neville dived under desks. They could see the bottom of the two Death Eaters' robes drawing nearer, their feet moving rapidly. "They might've run straight through to the hall," said the rough voice. "Check under the desks," said another. Harry saw the knees of the Death Eaters bend; poking his wand out form under the desk, he shouted, "STUPEFY!" A jet of red light it the nearest Death Eater; he fell backwards into a grandfather clock and knocked it over; the second Death Eater, however, had leapt aside to avoid Harry's spell and was pointing his own wand at Hermione who was crawling out from under the desk to get a better aim. "Avada - " Harry launched himself across the floor and grabbed the Death Eater around the knees, causing him to topple and his aim to go awry.' (OOTP "Beyond the Veil" p.695-96 UK edition) I'm not sure it was Jusgson and Dolohov. I was working on what they heard Malfoy shouting beyond the door just before this. But is was certainly another attempt at Avada Kedavra. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Aug 14 22:49:39 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 15:49:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lily?s grandparents -Squib Defined. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040814224939.31773.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110066 > Josh: > ...what are the odds that a certain cousin named Dud.. err... > Dudley is going to be the aforementioned late bloomer? Actually I think the late blooming magic-user will be Petunia and she will use it in a frantic burst of motherliness because Dudley and Harry are being menaced again. It would be one of those moments of dramatic irony that she does the same thing as her "freak" sister to protect her child. And I'm still half-convinced that she's the one who broke Aunt Marge's wine glass in POA. If it isn't Petunia, I'd like it to be Filch just so he can have some payback for all those years of cleaning up after dungbombs. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sat Aug 14 22:50:15 2004 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 14 Aug 2004 22:50:15 -0000 Subject: New poll for HPforGrownups Message-ID: <1092523815.60.77539.w10@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110067 Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the HPforGrownups group: Gender poll: Are you male or female? o Male o Female To vote, please visit the following web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/surveys?id=1353311 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 aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com Sat Aug 14 23:35:14 2004 From: aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com (aboutthe1910s) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 23:35:14 -0000 Subject: The Name Game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110068 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > Geoff: > Yes, but... the place in my village dates from before amplifiers were > though of; think i'll stick with the Old English for now. At least, > I'll apparently be with Jo Rowling for company. Yeah, but the brilliant thing about literature is that you don't *have* to pick *one* thing for something to be an allusion to--while I do believe that Jo fully intended the bumblebee allusion, I don't think that the simple fact of that entirely rules out the possibility of anything else being alluded to in Dumbledore's name. Just to throw another name out there--Madame Pomfrey. Pomme frais? Fresh apple? The fact that her name has been changed to Madame Pomfresh in the French translations inclines me to think so. But I find her last name less interesting that her first, given her position--Poppy. As in the seed from which opiates are derived. While not the most fasinating allusion in a name ever, considering that she is a healer, I find it at least worth of being noted in passing. aboutthe1910s From kempermentor at yahoo.com Sat Aug 14 23:32:38 2004 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 23:32:38 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Lily=92s_grandparents_-Squib_Defined.?= In-Reply-To: <20040814224939.31773.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110069 Josh wrote: ...what are the odds that a certain cousin named Dud.. err... Dudley is going to be the aforementioned late bloomer? Magda thinks differently: Actually I think the late blooming magic-user will be Petunia and she will use it in a frantic burst of motherliness because Dudley and Harry are being menaced again. It would be one of those moments of dramatic irony that she does the same thing as her "freak" sister to protect her child. And I'm still half-convinced that she's the one who broke Aunt Marge's wine glass in POA. If it isn't Petunia, I'd like it to be Filch just so he can have some payback for all those years of cleaning up after dungbombs. Kemper agrees: I think you got it right, Magda. I posted (108486) similarly, though no one responded to it. But, if it's not Petunia, then I hope it is neither Filch nor Figg. This obviously cuts the list down a bit. But I don't think JKR would have the Squibs develop magic, it would water down one, maybe more, of her themes. Also, I just really want it to be Petunia. From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Sun Aug 15 00:12:25 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Brenda) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 00:12:25 -0000 Subject: The End By Assorted Plot Devices In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110070 > Josh wrote: > I hate being repetitive, but unless you can justify the rest of > the prophecy (i.e. why is Peter's death necessary to prevent the > death of both Harry and LV? And if so, why must one of them kill > him? And how does that require that Peter's death in a preventative > role?) > > The best I can twist things around to attempt to fit would be > that Harry's power of compassion sparing Peter in PoA is the > manifestation of Harry's role as the One, and that LV's fate is > sealed unless Peter kills Harry. But so long as Peter doesn't die > in the successful attempt to kill Harry or LV, then the side he has > just helped must kill him, else Peter will turn around and kill the > survivor? This just doesn't make any sense. Luckdragon trying to put it all together: "The one with the power (Love, compassion, empathy) to vanquish the dark lord approaches...(Harry) born to those (James & Lily) who have thrice defied him (LV), born as the seventh month dies (July 31)...and the dark lord will mark him as his equal (curse scar), but he will have the power (love, compassion, empathy) the dark lord knows not...and either (Harry or LV) must die at the hand of the other (Peter) for neither (Harry or LV) can live while the other (Harry or LV) survives... Neither Harry nor Voldemort can live the life they want as long as both of them live so Peter must kill one of them and the other one will live happily ever after and since Voldemort's downfall is the power in Harry and Peter owes Harry a lifedebt based on this power it is Voldemort who will die at Peter's hand. From meltowne at yahoo.com Sun Aug 15 01:42:20 2004 From: meltowne at yahoo.com (meltowne) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 01:42:20 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Lily=92s_grandparents_-Squib_Defined.?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110071 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tylerswaxlion" Tyler: what about the Magical Quill that writes all the magical babies' names in the book at Hogwarts so they can be contacted on their 11th birthdays? Even if the magical talent were latent longer than typical, wouldn't the quill be aware of "latency" since presumably the babies all grow into their talents anyway? We've seen that students' abilities grow as they mature, and I assume it's not only due to training, but also to a maturation in magic ability. Just how "latent" would a baby's magic have to be to escape the Quill, yet produce a wizard? Meltowne: Just because Harry's name was recorded as soon as he was born doesn't mean all babies are. I suspect the quill doesn't record the names until they show magical ability. Remember Neville's family wasn't sure he had any magical ability - if his name had been recorded at birth, why would they worry about whether he would get into Hogwarts? I think Dudley's name is a red herring - he really is a dud, but not the one who will developer late blooming talent. I do think the Evans family had wizarding ancestors, but don't know how many generations back. Remember the only information we really have about Lily is from 2 sources - Snape's memory and what Petunia tells Harry. Petunia knows too much about the wizarding world to not have grown up in it. Perhaps someone in the family spent some time in Azkaban, and leter had the memory of how to cast spells obliviated. I would assume there must be a way of supressing someone's spellcasting ability, or what do they do with muggleborns whose parents don't want to send to Hogwarts? They won't have anyone to teach them magic, and could be a real danger. If there were such a family member, perhaps the rest of the family decided to live among the muggles in order to stay together. Or perhaps there were family members in hiding - whoever they were hiding from was in Azkaban at some point. What better place to hide than to pretend to be a muggle; marry a muggle. Maybe Lily was a halfblood, but knew to correct Snape was to bring attention (and harm) to the rest of the family - better to let Snape think she's a mudblood. From dontask2much at yahoo.com Sun Aug 15 01:54:50 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 21:54:50 -0400 Subject: James & Snape: Related? Message-ID: <015b01c4826a$da6fc9c0$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 110072 Charme: Maybe what I'm about to say is "out there" but I think it might be worth considering? A lot of folks have focused on who the "Half Blood" prince is, and I think I might have a different context for that definition. I'm specifically focused on James' comment to Lily in the Pensieve scene in OoP where Harry observes his father reply to Lily's inquiry why he curses Snape so, and he replies it's the fact "he *exists*, if you know what I mean." I've always found the context and way that sentence is written intriguing, and came across a definition that might explain why James disliked Snape so much (and vice versa.) I'm wondering if it's possible the Half Blood Prince could really be Snape. (Don't shoot me people, stranger things have happened in these books.) Here's the definition "Half Blood" can have from the Merriam-Webster Law Dictionary: Main Entry: half blood Function: noun 1 : the relation between persons having only one parent in common 2 : a person so related to another I have always found the James/Snape relationship to remind me of Sirius' mindset when in OoP he's explaining the Black ancestry tapestry and he is defensive that he's not proud to be related to the infamous DE's in his family. I'm sure we've all known people who are related in some fashion who have dysfunctional relationships like James and Snape, so I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility. Perhaps there's some other character who could also fall under this context of half-blood..... charme From ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com Sun Aug 15 02:20:33 2004 From: ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com (A.J.) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 02:20:33 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Lily=92s_grandparents_-Squib_Defined.?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110073 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "meltowne" wrote: > I do think the Evans family had wizarding ancestors, but don't know > how many generations back. > > Or perhaps there were family members in hiding - whoever they were > hiding from was in Azkaban at some point. What better place to hide > than to pretend to be a muggle; marry a muggle. You could be onto something because that is exactly what Dean Thomas' father did. We now know from jkrowling.com that Dean's father was a wizard who tried to protect his family, and got killed by Death Eaters. Dean's mother didn't know this, and Dean was raised in the muggle world. Only after Dean showed signs of magic did his mother start to wonder if his father had actually been a wizard. HM! That may back up your theory. A.J. From terpnurse at qwest.net Sun Aug 15 00:37:29 2004 From: terpnurse at qwest.net (Steven Spencer) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 17:37:29 -0700 Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?[HPforGrownups]_Re:_Lily=92s_grandparents_-Squib_?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Defined.?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <49A0B1F2-EE53-11D8-B420-0003930C168E@qwest.net> No: HPFGUIDX 110074 > Magda thinks differently: > Actually I think the late blooming magic-user will be Petunia and she > will use it in a frantic burst of motherliness because Dudley and > Harry are being menaced again. It would be one of those moments of > dramatic irony that she does the same thing as her "freak" sister to > protect her child. And I'm still half-convinced that she's the one > who broke Aunt Marge's wine glass in POA. > > If it isn't Petunia, I'd like it to be Filch just so he can have some > payback for all those years of cleaning up after dungbombs. > > > Kemper agrees: > I think you got it right, Magda. I posted (108486) similarly, though > no one responded to it. But, if it's not Petunia, then I hope it is > neither Filch nor Figg. This obviously cuts the list down a bit. > But I don't think JKR would have the Squibs develop magic, it would > water down one, maybe more, of her themes. > Also, I just really want it to be Petunia. > Terpnurse agrees as well: I'm with both of you. A squib, I would imagine, would spend a good part of their childhood *trying* to do magic, to imitate their otherwise magical families. Clearly Filch continues to try magic with no avail with his Quik Spell course. In my mind, that would rule out both Figg and Filch. Petunia, on the other hand, has fought hard to squelch it. She likely wishes her sister had squelched it, and she tried her hardest to squelch it out of Harry. People who sublimate their inner selves tend to be the most fervent in trying to get others to sublimate those same drives. I rather suspect that Petunia *does* have some trace of magic. And since magic appears so closely linked with emotions and one's emotional state, I think Magda hit the nail on the head when she said that Petunia would work magic in a burst of motherliness toward Dudley. From dk59us at yahoo.com Sun Aug 15 02:57:25 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 02:57:25 -0000 Subject: The End By Assorted Plot Devices In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110075 luckdragon interpreted the prophecy: >"The one with the power(Love,compassion,empathy) to vanquish the dark >lord approaches...(Harry)born to those(James & Lily) who have thrice > defied him (LV), born as the seventh month dies (July 31)...and the > dark lord will mark him as his equal (curse scar), but he will have > the power (love, compassion, empathy) the dark lord knows not...and > either (Harry or LV) must die at the hand of the other (Peter) for > neither(Harry or LV) can live while the other(Harry or LV) survives... > > Neither Harry nor Voldemort can live the life they want as long as > both of them live so Peter must kill one of them and the other one > will live happily ever after and since Voldemort's downfall is the > power in Harry and Peter owes Harry a lifedebt based on this power > it is Voldemort who will die at Peter's hand. Eustace_Scrubb: The main problem I can see with this interpretation is that you identify "the other" as Peter in the phrase "hand of the other" but then you identify either Harry or Voldemort as "the other" whose survival threatens the life of...Harry or Voldemort. I know it's possible grammatically that there are two different "others" referenced here, but I tend to doubt that. Then again, I'm not much good at interpreting prophecies myself, so don't take this too seriously! Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From navarro198 at hotmail.com Sun Aug 15 03:00:31 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 03:00:31 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore and Socks, Magical Contracts, and Bertie Botts Beans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110076 Steve/asian_lovr2: At that point, it hasn't occurred to Dumbledore or anyone else, that an additional catagory might exist. So the chance of one student entering another student that results in the second student being selected is extremely slim. Bookworm: Reading this thread made be wonder about some other possibilities? 1. Would the protective line prevent someone from entering two names? For example, *if* Fred had persuaded Angelina to enter his name as well as her own, would she have been stopped because she had two papers in her hand? 2. What if an older student who decided not to enter tried to put someone else's name in (i.e. Fred or George) at their request. Would the line recognize that the name on the paper wasn't the same as the person holding it? We know it worked for Crouch!Moody, but was it because he confused the line as well as the goblet, or because the line was only to prevent under-aged wizards from crossing? Ravenclaw Bookworm From HP5Freak at aol.com Sun Aug 15 03:02:36 2004 From: HP5Freak at aol.com (HP5Freak at aol.com) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 23:02:36 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] James & Snape: Related? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110077 > Charme: > > Maybe what I'm about to say is "out there" but I think it might be worth > considering? A lot of folks have focused on who the "Half Blood" prince is, > and I think I might have a different context for that definition. I'm > specifically focused on James' comment to Lily in the Pensieve scene in OoP > where Harry observes his father reply to Lily's inquiry why he curses Snape > so, and he replies it's the fact "he *exists*, if you know what I mean." > I've always found the context and way that sentence is written intriguing, > and came across a definition that might explain why James disliked Snape so > much (and vice versa.) > I have always found the James/Snape relationship to remind me of Sirius' > mindset when in OoP he's explaining the Black ancestry tapestry and he is > defensive that he's not proud to be related to the infamous DE's in his > family. Amber: Charme makes an excellent point here. Since my second reading of OoP, I have wondered about the true nature of the relationship between James and Severus, or even Sirius and Severus. In the same passage mentioned above, the boys both refer to Snape as "Snivellus." (OoP, Am Ed, pg 645, Snape's Worst Memory). Now, maybe this is just me and the people I know, but it sounds like the kind of name one comes up with at an age younger than the 11 year old first years at Hogwarts. This sounds like a name my cousins who picked on me would give me. Perhaps we do have a case of Severus Snape being related to one of James or Sirius (although I lean more toward James at this point given the introduction of the tapestry). However, I do think there is a relationship of some blood here. This would explain the animosity we feel before the werewolf incident. And if James is from a line of Gryffindors, and Snape, his cousin, was placed in Slytherin which he seems to be against, then he is a blood traitor in reverse to the Weasleys situation. Amber, who now folds the cloak of lurking back over herself and dips under the surface of the email flood, wading deep, deep to the bottom... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Sun Aug 15 03:12:17 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 03:12:17 -0000 Subject: The End By Assorted Plot Devices In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110078 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Brenda" wrote: > > Josh wrote: > > I hate being repetitive, but unless you can justify the rest of > > the prophecy (i.e. why is Peter's death necessary to prevent the > > death of both Harry and LV? And if so, why must one of them kill > > him? And how does that require that Peter's death in a preventative > > role?) > > Luckdragon trying to put it all together: > either (Harry or LV) must die at the hand of the other (Peter) for > neither (Harry or LV) can live while the other (Harry or LV) survives... *rings the giant gong* Prophesy is delivered in verbal form... there would be no way to deliniate between the two versions of "the other". That 'the' is mighty important, as it pins down an identity. It's not 'an-other'. The only way 'the other' could mean a third person if it is used in a proper noun sense, "the Other", which is somewhat possible... but then the second other would have to be so as well. Otherwise, different terminology would be required. True prophesies don't have to be instantly obvious at the time they are given, but if they do not attempt to impart some kernal of knowledge, then they would be completely useless. This and the following is why I remain convinced that aside from "those" the prophesy refers to only two individuals. The One and the Dark Lord... either (which is singular) and the other... neither (also singular) and the other. There is no way to construct the more popular 2-person reading the prophesy without the word 'other' except to get totally redundance, or use 'vice-versa'. However if a 3rd party were indicated, it would be indicated by using 'both', as the 'neither' wouldn't be required to keep it as a singular reference... as both would be doomed lest the Other were felled. Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Sun Aug 15 03:20:33 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 03:20:33 -0000 Subject: James & Snape: Related? In-Reply-To: <015b01c4826a$da6fc9c0$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110079 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "charme" wrote: > Charme: > Here's the definition "Half Blood" can have from > the Merriam-Webster Law Dictionary: No living being beyond the Dursleys has a known relationship to Harry, as Dumbledore says "They're the only family he has left now." The Potters were pureblood, so their branches on all sides would be well known in the WW, and Albus would have this information if anyone did. DD could have use a modified explanation to MM had there been an exception... sticking to 'safest place' or some such. DD has never lied, merely presented truth out of context in the closest to an exception to that rule at the end of PoA. Josh From snow15145 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 15 03:38:40 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 03:38:40 -0000 Subject: James & Snape: Related? In-Reply-To: <015b01c4826a$da6fc9c0$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110080 Charme snipped: I have always found the James/Snape relationship to remind me of Sirius' mindset when in OoP he's explaining the Black ancestry tapestry and he is defensive that he's not proud to be related to the infamous DE's in his family. I'm sure we've all known people who are related in some fashion who have dysfunctional relationships like James and Snape, so I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility. Perhaps there's some other character who could also fall under this context of half-blood..... Snow: Actually, Charme, this logic falls in line somewhat to what I had been recently thinking about Snape. I very much doubt anyone will like my referencing but Snape, as I see him, was most likely a Gryffindor (which is basically beside the point right now). His embarrassing father to him is mentioned in every book. Snape is the product of a squib marriage; Filch. Why did Severus ask Filch with help when Fluffy attacked him? If Filch were Severus' dad in the scene that Harry saw when Snape's dad was freaking on his mom, I can definitely see Filch being Mr. Aggressive. Filch is that way with the students. Stay with me here don't be one of those people who don't read but just wait for their turn to talk ;-) Try to look at it from James point of view of Snape "It's the fact that he exists (as the son of a squib)" Or Snape saying to Lily you're a mudblood but thinking I am just a bit more than even you Or Snape attempting to prove himself because of his father who is a squib Or Snape, a Gryffindor student, who is always trying to prove himself or be accepted and no one allows it Except James who saves him and now he feels indebted to the one person who always messed with him, who he always hated because of jealousy, who knew who he really was and whom Snape was related to; Filch and yet James saved him. I don't know that I explained this well but if you think about it what a twist! And I sincerely think it does fit. From patientx3 at aol.com Sun Aug 15 04:03:34 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 04:03:34 -0000 Subject: Intro, Q's Lupin/Tonks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110081 Meredith wrote: > This brings up that same old point about Lupin's name again... is > his name Remus Lupin because he's a werewolf, or is he a werewolf > because his name is Remus Lupin? Chicken or the egg theory... Josh replied: >> If it were just Remus, then I'd be more interested, however, the names and characteristics of the respective characters match all too well in too many cases to be an exception. Is Professor Sprout's family one of herbologists? Did the Blacks realize that Sirius was fated to become an animagus dog, colored black, even? Professor Vector's family must come from a long line of math lovers? And don't forget enough alliteration amongst names to make you long for comic books! << HunterGreen: The thing with Lupin is that its BOTH his first and his last name that hint at his werewolfness. With Sprout she may have indeed been from a long line of Herbologists (perhaps the family was always interested in plants BECAUSE of their name), and the last name 'Black' is too common for me to see it as a clue (I think the dog may have black fur simply because Sirius has black hair, but that's just me). >> LOL, all the names give you is the quick hint as to the character's possible nature before it is revealed. Any of us that were surprised (guilty raised hand here) to see Remus as a werewolf at any point past his full name, if not the peeling letters, should feel foolish. Same with Sirius and the supposed grim. << Indeed. I think it might just be a joke that JKR has, like a wink at the readers. It does make the story more fun that the character who is a dog Animagus is named 'Sirius', and the herbology teacher is named 'Professor Sprout'. Its actually sort of funny how often this happens in real life (I knew a librarian in middle school with the last name Bookwurm and I had a dentist named Dr. Jia [pronounced 'jaw']). I will admit to being one of the people who didn't notice Lupin's name during the first read (his werewolfness is so obvious after you find it out that its amazing that anyone wouldn't notice it before its revealed). I had never heard of Sirius the dogstar before I read the book (I know realize that's the name of a satelite radio station here in the US, which even has a dog on its logo). >>This is why Dudley and the late-bloomer hint stick in my mind (although I might want to change my theory... Petunia could be the late bloomer, which would make Dudley a true Squib). << Dudley *is* a rather uncommon name (which Vernon himself comments on in SS/PS), and the fact that 'dud' is HALF of it, does make it look like a large clue. I can't shake the feeling though, that it would be such a cheat if Lily turns out to not be a muggleborn (as interesting of a theory it is). I think the theory only works if Dudley was *expected* to have magical ability. From romulus at hermionegranger.us Sun Aug 15 04:28:01 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 04:28:01 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders In-Reply-To: <001801c48208$a52c2720$10c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110082 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > RMM said: > "Something happens in the 6th year, because Sirius finds his OWN PLACE > TO LIVE between his 6th and 7th years at Hogwarts." > > DuffyPoo: > Yes, something happens. Sirius turns seventeen, becomes an adult in the wizarding world, and has been given a good bit of gold by his Uncle Alphard. Sirius now is of age to move out on his own and has the means to do so, so doesn't need to rely on the kindness of the Potter family any longer. RMM: I understand. And I agree to a point. However, there is canon to show that a rift occurs between Sirius and James. Let me explain. First the excerpt from OotP: <<'You ran away from home?' 'When I was about sixteen,' said Sirius. 'I'd had enough.' 'Where did you go?' asked Harry, staring at him. 'Your dad's place,' said Sirius. 'Your grandparents were really good about it; they sort of adopted me as a second son. Yeah, I camped out at your dad's in the school holidays, and when I was seventeen I got a place of my own. My Uncle Alphard had left me a decent bit of gold - he's been wiped off here, too, that's probably why - anyway, after that I looked after myself. I was always welcome at Mr and Mrs Potter's for Sunday lunch, though.'>> Sirius and James are best friends when they leave school at the end of the 5th year. Sirius moves in with the Potter family after school ends, and spends the next summer with them before returning to Hogwarts for their 6th year. James' parents "sort of adopt" Sirius as a second son. James and Sirius attend 6th year at Hogwarts. After 6th year, Sirius gets a place on his own, since he has money to do so. So why not go live with the Potters, who have essentially adopted him, and be with his best friend, and save his money? Now why do I think he and James were not getting along? See what he says next: "I was always welcome at Mr and Mrs Potter's for Sunday lunch, though." Note some things about this statement: 1. "welcome at Mr. and Mrs. Potters". Why didn't he say "the Potters"? Earlier he said "your dad's". Now it's "Mr. and Mrs. Potter's". 2. "for Sunday lunch". He is welcome at Mr. and Mrs. Potter's for "Sunday lunch"?????? What about any meal or any time of the week? For crying out loud, they have practically adopted him! "Sunday lunch"??? 3. "though". "Though" means "in spite of the fact that". So, Sirius is welcome at Mr. and Mrs. Potter's for Sunday lunch, in spite of the fact that he was now living on his own???? So he would be more welcome to visit more if he wasn't living on his own? The Potters are upset with him because he is living on his own and so will only welcome him on Sunday at lunch? Sorry, but the way this sentence is phrased is loaded with a circumstantial case for the fact that Sirius was living on his own and was welcome at the Potters ONLY for Sunday lunch because he and James were not getting along. And if you think that is a stretch, I have seen other hypotheses posted here that are based on a lot less. > DuffyPoo: > That's quite a stretch for me to follow. Sirius visits the Potters for Sunday dinner, in a family environment to share a family meal with friends, including James, because the Potter family is kind to their son's friends and don't want to see Sirius alone for Sunday lunch. I see no evidence, in canon, that James ever left his family home until he married Lily. RMM: And no one is implying that James left home until he married Lily. But the only time Sirius is welcome to see his adoptive parents is Sunday for lunch. DuffyPoo: [How many people here who had a child fall out with a best friend, would continue to invite the former best friend for Sunday lunch? RMM: If that person was an adopted second son, I would. Mr. and Mrs. Potter have a very close relationship with Sirius, that much is clear. > RMM said: > "That something is the entrance of James, Remus, and Peter into the > clutches and organization of Voldemort." > > DuffyPoo: > Canon please? RMM: This is inference based on what I have been posting from canon for several days now. If you want, I can repost the things from canon that give the basis for the idea that Lupin, Black, and Pettigrew were associated with Voldemort. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110083 Magda wrote: >>I think the late blooming magic-user will be Petunia and she will use it in a frantic burst of motherliness because Dudley and Harry are being menaced again. It would be one of those moments of dramatic irony that she does the same thing as her "freak" sister to protect her child. And I'm still half-convinced that she's the one who broke Aunt Marge's wine glass in POA.<< HunterGreen: Hmm, I like that scenario. Also, I think Petunia is a prime canidate because she might have got magical blood from the same place Lily got it. I wonder what percentage of muggleborn siblings are magical? I used to think an occurance like Colin and Dennis Creevey was a strange and amazing coincidence, but if magic is some sort of recessive gene, wouldn't a muggleborn have a good chance of having a magical sibling? I've never heard the theory that Petunia broke the wine glass in PoA...I went back and re-read that part, and it does seem very possible that it was her (it wasn't *directly* started that Harry caused it). I can't imagine that Petunia distanced herself so much from her family that someone saying her sister (and therefore she) had bad blood wouldn't upset her. Even if Marge didn't mean it that way. From patientx3 at aol.com Sun Aug 15 05:18:39 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 05:18:39 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore and Socks, Magical Contracts, and Bertie Botts Beans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110084 HunterGreen: You know, I have to wonder about this thread, I just quickly re-read part of GoF, and its rather clear on the subject. Moody himself says that the whoever put Harry's name in the goblet would have to 'hoodwink a very powerful magical object' and seeing how its HIM who did this, I can't see the room to argue. Anyone could have probably just slipped Harry's name under 'Hogwarts', but he had to make *sure* that Harry was the one picked, hence the submitting under a false school and tricking the goblet into picking four champions. Bookworm wrote: >>1. Would the protective line prevent someone from entering two names? For example, *if* Fred had persuaded Angelina to enter his name as well as her own, would she have been stopped because she had two papers in her hand?<< HunterGreen: I think she wouldn't. The line was just a line. All it did was prevent students under the age of 17 from crossing. That's it. There's no evidence that the line and the goblet were tied together magically or that the line did anything but what we've been told. I think it was sort of an honor system method (considering the older students) combined with the fact that IF a younger student was picked, everyone would know that they cheated, and the older student who helped them would be found out and punished. This couldn't happen in the case of Harry, because no one DID help him (that he knew of at least). Also, I can't see an older student being willing to help unless they were sure that the younger student they were helping would NOT be picked over them. It was a competition and all. >>2. What if an older student who decided not to enter tried to put someone else's name in (i.e. Fred or George) at their request. Would the line recognize that the name on the paper wasn't the same as the person holding it? We know it worked for Crouch!Moody, but was it because he confused the line as well as the goblet, or because the line was only to prevent under-aged wizards from crossing?<< Again, I think the goblet wouldn't care. What Moody did was confuse into thinking there were four schools in the competition when it knew there weren't. As for an older student Imagine if Fred or George's name came out instead of Cedric's (and not in the weird 4th champion way that Harry's name came out). You can bet there would have been an investigation. Fred or George would indeed have to compete, but whoever it was that helped them might have ended up expelled, as well as the offending twin as soon as the competition was over. With the WW full of things like truth serum and people with legimency, it would be impossible to keep this type a thing a secret (look at chapter 17 of GoF, I definitely think this is one of the few times Dumbledore would use legimency). From navarro198 at hotmail.com Sun Aug 15 05:23:01 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 05:23:01 -0000 Subject: focus on Hermione In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110085 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jjpandy" wrote: > If you haven't read the theories about Hermione at > http://www.hermionegranger.us/pages/hermepower.htm > then you MUST read then now! Besides making a great argument for > proving Hermione's age, there is a very interesting theory that > Hermione is the one mentioned in the prophecy! > > JJPandy - who would be heart-broken if Lupin turns out evil! I have to admit that being told I MUST do something usually gets my back up. But just for the fun of it, I read the article you linked. Unfortunately, I found the arguments to be illogical. <> It is only natural to expect the next question to be about Hermione's birthday ? JKR just anticipated that and answered it. If an author has to use interviews or a website to add important clues to what is written in the books, he/she has failed. The books must stand on their own. << [Quoted from JKR's website] "In the dim and distant past Hermione's surname was 'Puckle', but it didn't suit her at all and was quickly changed for something a little bit less frivolous.">> Notice the phrase "less frivolous", not "more symbolic". The relationship of quicksilver/mercury to the discussion of whether she was born in 1979 or 1980 doesn't matter if the initials HG aren't important. << In the Q&A at the National Press Club, October 20, 1999, Jo Rowling stated, in regard to Hermione's name, that it came from a character in Shakespeare's play A Winter's Tale, although Jo says that the characters are not at all similar. Jo thought it made sense for a couple of professional dentists to name their only daughter something like that to show how clever they were.>> Clever, as in pretentious, as in `look how well-read we are'. << If you remember her second prophecy, which occurred in The Prisoner of Azkaban, that prophecy was fulfilled less than 12 hours later. If this is any indicator as far as prophecies go, then it may imply that the one approaching will be born in a very short time.>> As you said, it *may imply* that it does. Then again, it may not. Using one example to predict another isn't a reliable indicator. We know nothing about how prophecies work. << One can see the relationship now between Ron Weasley's birthday and that of Hermione. Ron's birthday was originally the first day of the year. In general, the Roman calendar was built around the phases of the moon or the lunar cycle. The lunar cycle begins with the New Moon, hits the midway point of its cycle when the moon waxes to Full, and then wanes (or dies) until the New Moon is again reached. September 19th is a day in the seventh month, which historically occurred during the waning or "dying" of the moon. More specifically, the word "month" comes from the old English word "moonth" which means "lunar cycle". If one counts from March 1st of 1979 and proceeds to September of 1979, they will find that the SEVENTH MOONTH or Lunar Cycle of 1979 DIED on September 20th!! The New Moon, in September 1979, occurred on September 21st thus beginning the next lunar cycle..>> This is partially correct. The Roman calendar was a lunar calendar. But your logic doesn't hold up. First, the Roman calendar started on the vernal equinox, not March 1st. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_calendar.) Are you counting from the full moon, new moon, or the phase of the moon that occurred on the equinox? To say that the moon is "historically" waning on September 19th is inaccurate. It was waning in 1979; it was waxing in 1980. It was waning in 2003; it will be waxing in 2004. Second, there were originally only ten months. Then the Romans started adding days and months. Then they changed to the Julian calendar, but the priests miscalculated the leap days and added too many before Augustus Caesar took leap days away to adjust. Finally, Pope Gregory XIII removed 10 days each year to correct the calendar. So the calendar we use today has little resemblance to the calendars used by the Romans. Third, if you are counting seven months from Ron's birthday you get ? September 19, 1980. Why not count from March 1972? Counting from March 1979 is purely arbitrary. << Traditionally, or "in the old days", when referring to a non- gender specific noun, the personal pronoun "him" was employed to make that non-gender specific reference.>> We aren't in the "old days", fortunately. JKR has said she (and Trelawney) worded the prophecy very carefully. IMO, if she were trying to hide the gender of the One she would have written something like: "but [the One] will have power the Dark Lord knows not ..." She didn't ? she specifically said "he". More importantly, if Hermione is the One, why are the books about Harry? Ravenclaw Bookworm From gwennie357 at msn.com Sun Aug 15 02:34:58 2004 From: gwennie357 at msn.com (Wendi Williams) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 22:34:58 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] James & Snape: Related? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110086 Charme: Maybe what I'm about to say is "out there" but I think it might be worth considering? A lot of folks have focused on who the "Half Blood" prince is, and I think I might have a different context for that definition. I'm specifically focused on James' comment to Lily in the Pensieve scene in OoP where Harry observes his father reply to Lily's inquiry why he curses Snape so, and he replies it's the fact "he *exists*, if you know what I mean." I've always found the context and way that sentence is written intriguing, and came across a definition that might explain why James disliked Snape so much (and vice versa.) I'm wondering if it's possible the Half Blood Prince could really be Snape. (Don't shoot me people, stranger things have happened in these books.) gwennie357: Actually, that's one of the better theories I've heard!! I too was thinking of the possibility of half blood referring to someone's relation, particularly because of the lack of hyphen. But what would the relation be, in this case? Half brothers would be too close, don't you think? Half cousins? Is that possible? Anyway, you're right, it's not as strange as some of the things going on in canon, or some of the other theories going on. I've come up with my own crazy theory, in which Harry and Draco are cousins (which would also make it possible for Draco to the HBP, though I don't believe he is). The only three adult females in the books named after flowers are Lily, Petunia, and Narcissa, and we all know how important names are to Jo. Also, Narcissa is described as being very similar physically to Petunia (blonde hair and sharp features). So yes, I am insinuating that Narcissa is a long-lost Evans sister (don't throw things at me!). She would have had to have been adopted by a rich, pure-blood wizarding family -- the Blacks, so that still fits (and she doesn't look like any of them, that we know of) -- but I can't imagine why the Evans's would have given her up, unless there was some Nefarious Plot going on. Yeah, crazy, I know, but who knows? In any case, your theory isn't crazy.... in fact, it bring a lot of interesting things to light! gwennie _________________________________________________________________ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar ? get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com Sun Aug 15 06:11:49 2004 From: sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com (Amey Chinchorkar) Date: 15 Aug 2004 06:11:49 -0000 Subject: The Name Game Message-ID: <20040815061149.19540.qmail@webmail30.rediffmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110087 Amey: I didn?t know this post will generate so much response. Thanks to all. - - D writes: - JKR said it's loosely translated as "Bad Faith." - "Bad Faith" (mauvaise foi), is a term used by French philosopher - Jean-Paul Sartre regarding the state of being when a person try to - convinced himself there is no free will and no choice, and blaming - how his actions, attitude and behavior are not determined by himself - (ex: blame it on environment or whatever external factors). Amey: Yes, this fits to his *Imperio?d* version of events in first war. But I wouldn?t put it past JKR to limit our view to this explanation and then spring suddenly a Malfoy with his own *evil faith* or intentions. - Earendil replies: - Sorry to be a nit-picker, Amey: Not at all... I was not aware of the finer meanings (talk about the translators available) - Earendil replies: - but it can't be translated exactly - to 'Flight *from* death'. - 'vol' means 'flight' indeed, as in flying, but not as in fleeing. - A more interesting translation of 'vol' IMO is 'theft'. Which makes - Voldemort a Death Stealer... Fits much better with his Death - Eaters ;-) Amey: Stealing death?? Oh no, I was loving his image as a person trying to flee from death. Still, the names are really ironic, right? I mean, the Death Eaters don?t *eat* death (as in eating somebody for breakfast), but seem more to eat something to keep them away from death, or else eating others to death. And also, the legendary *thief of death* is mortally afraid of death and tries his best to steal life from the clutches of inevitable death. - Kinsfire - You are aware, of course, that Nicholas Flammel is a real world person? Depending on your view of things in the world, he either sought for the Philosopher's Stone and failed, or found it and hid the information. - Interesting subject of study, I might add. But ol' Nicky there was real. Amey: Sorry, I didn?t have much time yesterday to search for Flamel. But now I will search for it, maybe I will get something which will give some clue to the future??? (though I wont say no to the recipe of the Stone ;)) I mean, he was partner of Dumbledore, so Dumbledore must be aware of his secrets. And we sure would like to know secrets of Dumbledore, right??? Amey, who is really getting lost in all the great names [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kempermentor at yahoo.com Sun Aug 15 04:21:26 2004 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 04:21:26 -0000 Subject: Intro, Q's Lupin/Tonks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110088 HunterGreen wrote : This is why Dudley and the late-bloomer hint stick in my mind (although I might want to change my theory... Petunia could be the late bloomer, which would make Dudley a true Squib). Dudley *is* a rather uncommon name (which Vernon himself comments on in SS/PS), and the fact that 'dud' is HALF of it, does make it look like a large clue. I can't shake the feeling though, that it would be such a cheat if Lily turns out to not be a muggleborn (as interesting of a theory it is). I think the theory only works if Dudley was *expected* to have magical ability. Kemper challenges the possible cheat: HunterGreen, what if Lily's grandparents were Muggle/Muggle and Muggle/Squib? Would you still feel cheated that Lily isn't Muggleborn, even though none of the grandparents are witch/wizards? I also encourage you to change your theory from Dudley to Petunia as the late bloomer. It would mean more to character development that Petunia use that which she most abhors (magic) to save that which she loves most (Dudley... and maybe Vernon.) From mietoesarepink at comcast.net Sun Aug 15 04:16:59 2004 From: mietoesarepink at comcast.net (Maren Gest) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 22:16:59 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] James & Snape: Related? References: Message-ID: <000801c4827e$b595cc80$6501a8c0@C3P0> No: HPFGUIDX 110089 Well that's definitely an interesting theory. It's rather convincing as well; however, if Snape and James were brothers, why don't they have the same last name? All the Weasley brothers have the same name. Perhaps James and Snape are related, but I'd say their last names would rule out brothers. Maren From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Sun Aug 15 05:56:53 2004 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 05:56:53 -0000 Subject: Colonel Fubster.. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110090 I would like to have more information on this subject than most at this time in the series... Harry is apparently the reason Aunt Marge's glass explodes. Aunt Marge claims it's because her "grip" is so strong and that the SAME thing happened at Colonel Fubster's home previously. The reader gets another allusion to him in OotP (Snape inquires about a dog keeping Harry up a tree during occlumency lessons). Is it too much of a coincidence for me to wonder if both Petunia AND Mr. Dursley BOTH have connections to the wizarding world? Is this more proof that Dudley may be the HBP?!?! Have the Dursley's for all these years treated Harry poorly to keep his "magic inside"...only to treat their own son to everything he wanted so it wouldn't "come out"?!? Hence he may be the latent squib we've all been waiting for? In the books, thus far, Dudley's Birthday is not so far from Harry's. Was he also born as the seventh month dies? I have no answers yet...simply more questions. Doddie From laurens at leroc.net Sun Aug 15 06:48:54 2004 From: laurens at leroc.net (lauren_silverwolf) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 06:48:54 -0000 Subject: The Name Game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110091 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dcgmck" wrote: > > >"Amey Chinchorkar" wrote: > > > > > > I could not make anything out of Dumbledore . > > > > > > Geoff: > > > Dumbledore is an old name for a bumble bee. In the village where > I > > > now live, one of the older cottages is called "Dumbledory"; I > > assume this is where the beekeeper lived. > > > > dcgmck: > > While many of the posts I've read on various sites generally accept > > the definition of Dumbledore as bumble bee, the ensuing discussions > > have never really satisfied me. Inspired by Amey, I ran a few > > Internet searches on "dumble" and "dore". > > > > "Dumble" is a pretty elusive word, but what I've found of interest > is > > not so much the Texas geologist as the brand-name association with > > amplifiers for musical instruments. > > Geoff: > Yes, but... the place in my village dates from before amplifiers were > though of; think i'll stick with the Old English for now. At least, > I'll apparently be with Jo Rowling for company. Lauren: There's a lovely defintion & etymology on http://www.worldwidewords.org/weirdwords/ww-dum1.htm where "dumble" is used for its rhyming abilities, and "dore" is an old English word for a flying insect that makes a loud humming sound. Hope this helps, Lauren. From eeyore6771 at comcast.net Sun Aug 15 06:26:48 2004 From: eeyore6771 at comcast.net (Pat) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 06:26:48 -0000 Subject: JK Rowling quote In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110092 catportkey at a... wrote: > > "[Alfonso Cuaron] put things in the [his unmentionable medium] > > that foreshadow things that are going to happen in the next two > > books." [snipping] Josh wrote: > The obvious question from this is to which "next two" she refers. Pat: Just a minor clarification. I just went to the link and listened to the whole thing. What she says is that it foreshadows what happens in "the final two books". So that, in my mind, means the two that are as yet unpublished, not GoF and OotP. What a difference a few words can make. (And we've found out that JKR is a master at doing that to us all.) Pat From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Aug 15 06:51:16 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 06:51:16 -0000 Subject: Colonel Fubster.. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110093 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "doddiemoemoe" wrote: Doddie: > In the books, thus far, Dudley's Birthday is not so far from > Harry's. Was he also born as the seventh month dies? > > I have no answers yet...simply more questions. Geoff: There was a longish thread on this which you might like to follow: "Seventh Month Dudley" which started at message 89608. From catlady at wicca.net Sun Aug 15 06:52:32 2004 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 06:52:32 -0000 Subject: AlwaysMonday/book date/orphan TMR/Salicylic/HouseElves/Names/Narcissa/Quill Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110094 Marita wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/109461 : << I believe that in every book, the letters they get from Hogwarts mention catching the train on September 1. I don't remember it giving the day of the week, just the date. Funny, though, I never caught the next day/first day of classes always being Monday, though. Which, of course, is impossible. >> Some things are different in magic places like Hogwarts than in muggle places, like paintings that converse with viewers, and go visit other paintings. Maybe the day of the week is one of those differences. Maybe part of why the kids travel on the Hogwarts Express is to move gradually from whatever day it was when they left London into Sunday evening. I do wonder a little about ALL THOSE SUNDAYS and no mention of ANYONE going to church or feeling bad about missing church. The idea of September 2 is always a Monday reminds me of this poem by Thomas Digby: http://bubbles.best.vwh.net/poetry/EverybodyTalksAboutIt.txt and while I was searching for it, I found this other poem that seemed relevant to recent list dicussions: http://bubbles.best.vwh.net/poetry/BlindWizard.txt Mhbobbin wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/109506 : << As For the release of Book Five on June 21: Do we think that was coincidental? >> Actually, I thought the release dates for GoF and OoP were chosen near the beginning of English schoolkids' summer holiday, so that their schoolwork wouldn't suffer from staying up all night and the next day to buy the book at midnight and read it immediately. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/109642 : << In fact, how did [Tom Marvolo Riddle] find out about his father abandoning his mother in the first place? I can't accept the coincidence of another letter that explains everything left with a baby. >> Tom's mother must have lived SOMEWHERE before he was born. With her parents sounds like one likely possibility. I like to think that baby Tom Marvie lived with his maternal grandparents long enough to remember all they told him about their wonderful ancestry and his father's bad behavior. I also like to think that they, um, *exaggerated* how married his parents were... They must have died for him to end up in an orphanage. Perhaps he killed them with childish accidental magic in a fit of rage. bamf wrote, of salicylic acid coming from willows: <> To which, Just Carol replied in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/109794 : << That's ironic, considering that willow switches were used for punishing American and Canadian pupils in the one-room schoolhouses of the nineteenth century. Maybe they were used in England as well; I don't know. If so, "whomping" could suggest whipping in the sense of old-fashioned corporal punishment. (I can see Filch coveting one of the branches and the right to use it on the students.) [I] thought it was birch trees that had salicylic acid >> I know that salicylic acid is named after Salix, which bamf mentioned is the genus name of willows, but I checked Ask Jeeves and found enough hits to convince me that it is found in birch trees as well as willows ... apparently also in wintergreen and gaultheria, whatever that is. But the irony would work just as well with birch bark tea, because birch switches were traditional enough for 'birching' 19th century American pupils that there's that word: "NOUN: 2. A rod from a birch, used to administer a whipping. TRANSITIVE VERB: To whip with or as if with a birch." http://www.bartleby.com/61/31/B0273100.html Saraquel wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/109939 : << This war is an opportunity for DD to give opportunities to the HE that will help them on the road to greater choice and hence possible freedom. Looks like the kids'll be having beans on toast from now on folks. >> The House Elves apparently *like* doing housework. They don't like physical pain and being insulted, as at Malfoy Manor, but that isn't done at Hogwarts. I can't see any reason why Hogwarts shouldn't have a full staff of free House Elves with salaries and the freedom to leave whenever they want. So the kids would still get great meals and clean rooms. Arielock wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/109670 : << for example Hagrid is a play on haggard >> Yes, but also, 'hagrid' is a dialect word for 'hag-ridden' as in http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/1999/109 9-connectiontransc.html JKR: "Hagrid is also another old English word meaning if you were hagrid, it's a dialect word meaning you'd had a bad night. Hagrid's a big drinker. He has a lot of bad nights." It *literally* means that the person was ridden by night-mares (there is some folklore in which the night-mara is a type of hag) but I've only ever heard it used to mean the person is suffering from a hangover. AMey wwrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110044 : << Voldemort: Flight of (from???) Death >> Flight from Death, as in, he flies away from dying, because he got immortal, OR Flight of Death, as in, people die when he lands on them (with the Dark Mark hanging over the ruins of their home), OR Theft from Death, as in, he stole his life from death by becoming immortal, OR Theft of Death, as in, he stole the right to decide who dies << Malfoy : Evil Faith (Double cross??) >> Bad Faith would be the more natural English phrase. It means making a promise when you *intend* to break it. << Dumbledore: Of Gild (cant make any sense of this.. but will work on it) >> Your source was thinking of "dore" as "d'or" (of gold) or "dor?" (gilded), but not of the bumblebee reference so many posts have mentioned, nor the sound of "door", as in, a way to get into another place. It's probably irrelevant that "dor" is also the agential suffix in words like 'matador" ("death" plus "doer" = "killer"). << Nymphadora: Gilded Nymph (a minor nature goddess usually depicted as a beautiful maiden; "the ancient Greeks believed that nymphs inhabited forests and bodies of water") >> Your source repeats the error of assuming that "dora" is "dor?e". Actually, the word "dora" and "doros" appears all over names that come from Classical Gift, as it means 'gift'. "Theodore" is a Doros (gift) from Theos (god) and Isidora is gift from Isis and Nymphadora is a gift from the nymphs. aboutthe1910s wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110068 : << Just to throw another name out there--Madame Pomfrey. Pomme frais? Fresh apple? The fact that her name has been changed to Madame Pomfresh in the French translations inclines me to think so. (snip) her first [name], given her position -- Poppy. As in the seed from which opiates are derived. (snip) considering that she is a healer, I find it at least worth of being noted in passing.>> I thought that the French edition called her Madam Chips, thinking that Pomfrey is Pommes Frites is fried potatoes, what USAns call French Fries and Brits call Chips. A listie suggested that her name is a combination of 'pomade' and 'comfrey'. I prefer to think 'pomander' rather than 'pomade' (both are, or were originally, sweet-smelling herbal products made with apples), but pomander doesn't mean greasey hair dressing. Pomander can be said to have a medical connationk, as I was told that medieval people believed that smelling a pomander would prevent catching plague. Comfrey is an herb that was recommended to people with colds before echinacea became fashionable. Poppy you have already mentioned. Gwennie wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110086 : << The only three adult females in the books named after flowers are Lily, Petunia, and Narcissa, and we all know how important names are to Jo. >> Poppy Pomfrey is named after a flower. << Also, Narcissa is described as being very similar physically to Petunia (blonde hair and sharp features). So yes, I am insinuating that Narcissa is a long-lost Evans sister >> My version of that theory was that Petunia was Narcissa's sister who was discarded by her parents for being a Squib. I thought they gave her to the Evanses because they were Muggles who somehow already knew of the existence of the wizarding world. But JKR proved us both wrong in http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/extras/JKRWorldBookDay2004.html : "queenmarion: I noticed in the Black Family tree that everyone is named after a constellation. Is this intentional? Does this have any bearing on the plot? JK Rowling replies -> It's just one of those family traditions, although Narcissa breaks the trend. I had always thought of her as 'Narcissa' so I decided not to change her to match the others when I came up with their names. There's been a lot of speculation that she is in some way linked to Lily and Petunia, because of the flower theme, but I can put that rumour to rest here: she isn't related to them." Meltowne wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110071 : << Just because Harry's name was recorded as soon as he was born doesn't mean all babies are. I suspect the quill doesn't record the names until they show magical ability. Remember Neville's family wasn't sure he had any magical ability - if his name had been recorded at birth, why would they worry about whether he would get into Hogwarts? >> You're assuming that Neville's grandmother would have been allowed to look into that book. http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2000/020 0-scholastic-chat.htm JKR: "In Hogwarts there's a magical quill which detects the birth of a magical child, and writes his or her name down in a large parchment book. Every year Professor McGonagall checks the book, and sends owls to the people who are turning 11." >From that, I get the impression that no one but McGonagall looks into the book, and she turns the pages back 11 years to get all the names from end of last intake class to next cut-off birthday. If children were written down later, after showing spontaneous magic, she would have to go through all the pages since 11 years ago, looking for birth dates in the right year interspersed among birth dates in other years. I think it would have been better to enchant the pen so that it addressed all the letters, skipping the intermediate step of having a book. From catlady at wicca.net Sun Aug 15 07:12:39 2004 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 07:12:39 -0000 Subject: My Oops! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110095 To immediately have to post a correction to my post -- I am ashamed. --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/109642 : I left off Magda's NAME! I am so SORRY! I *like* her name! Mag(ic)da Grant(wishes)wi(t)ch ... > Amey wwrote in > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110044 : > > << Dumbledore: Of Gild >> I completely forgot to go on with the bumblebee! Apparently medieval English people like to play with the first sound of their words (like 'Robert' being nicknamed Rob, Bob, Dob, Hob) and our bumblebee used to be called humble bee. Which allows me to transition to humble pie (a person who has been vanquished is said to be 'eating humble pie' meaning he has to act humble). I have read that 'humble pie' was originally named 'umble pie' or 'numble pie', with 'umbles' meaning either entrails (chitlins) or testicles (prairie oysters). Uncoerced humility is a good Dumbledore trait, altho' I feel it would be pushing it to say his name means he has 'guts' or 'balls'. From eeyore6771 at comcast.net Sun Aug 15 07:00:02 2004 From: eeyore6771 at comcast.net (Pat) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 07:00:02 -0000 Subject: The Name Game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110096 > Amey wrote: (snipped unrelated stuffs) > > I was translating the names and came across: > > Malfoy : Evil Faith (Double cross??) > > D writes: > JKR said it's loosely translated as "Bad Faith." > "Bad Faith" (mauvaise foi), is a term used by French philosopher > Jean-Paul Sartre regarding the state of being when a person tries to > convince himself there is no free will and no choice, and blaming > how his actions, attitude and behavior are not determined by > himself (ex: blame it on environment or whatever external factors). Pat here: I find this to be particularly appropriate when you remember all the times Dumbledore has talked about how important our choices are. This really shows that the Malfoys are the exact opposite of everything for which Dumbledore stands--and of everything he is trying to teach Harry about how to live his life. He rewards Neville because he chose to stand up to his friends, which can be extremely difficult. DD says they will have to make the right choices but that isn't always the easy way. Dumbledore sees that we always have a choice in how we respond to events and people in our lives, and tells Harry so. But the Malfoys, using Sartre's interpretation of the name, would see that they have no choice; everything that happens to them is beyond their control. So then we have Lucius joining with Voldemort (of course, that was a choice, but maybe he didn't see it that way). Voldemort takes away any free choices from his DE's, as we see with the Dark Mark, to which many of them still respond even though they think he is gone. The Death Eaters are to obey him in every thing and in every way. They aren't given a choice, and they seem to accept that. I think this is one way that JKR is showing us what her beliefs are about how we live our lives and interact with other people in the world. Unlike the Malfoys, we do have to take responsibility for our choices and our actions. Pat From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 15 07:43:07 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 07:43:07 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Lily=92s_grandparents_-Petunia_Blows_a_Gasket!?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110097 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" wrote: > Magda wrote: > >>I think the late blooming magic-user will be Petunia and she > will use it in a frantic burst of motherliness because Dudley and > Harry are being menaced again. .<< > HunterGreen: > Hmm, I like that scenario. Also, I think Petunia is a prime canidate > because she might have got magical blood from the same place Lily got > it. ... > > I've never heard the theory that Petunia broke the wine glass in > PoA...I went back and re-read that part, and it does seem very > possible that it was her ... Asian_lovr2: Pardon me while I speculate. (HA! Like you didn't know I was going to do that.) What if Petunia is older, and Petunia got her letter from Hogwarts and decided she didn't want to go to any 'freak' school. So, a year or two later, Lily gets her letter and decides to go, then it's all... 'Oooo.... look Lily's a witch. Ooooo....look at Lily doing magic. Ooooo....Lily this and Lily that ...blah, blah, blah'. Petunia thinks she made the correct choice, the only reasonable, proper, and socially acceptable choice, but now everybody is fawning over Lily like she's something /special/. Well, Petunia missed her chance, she chose not to go ,and now she's stuck with that decision even though being a witch suddenly looks very appealing. The more filled with jealousy Petunia becomes and the more attention Lily gets, the more entrench in her position Petunia must become. So, back to the 'Petunia blows a gasket' scenerio, suddenly after years of denial and suppression, magic explodes from her. Hey, it could happen. There must be a certain number of candidates who chose not to go to Hogwarts. Just a thought. Steve/asian_lovr2 From msturbo209 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 15 07:06:58 2004 From: msturbo209 at yahoo.com (stellablue571) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 07:06:58 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110098 > RMM: > I understand. And I agree to a point. However, there is canon to > show that a rift occurs between Sirius and James. Let me explain. > > First the excerpt from OotP: > <<'You ran away from home?' > 'When I was about sixteen,' said Sirius. 'I'd had enough.' > 'Where did you go?' asked Harry, staring at him. > 'Your dad's place,' said Sirius. 'Your grandparents were really good > about it; they sort of adopted me as a second son. Yeah, I camped out > at your dad's in the school holidays, and when I was seventeen I got > a place of my own. My Uncle Alphard had left me a decent bit of gold > - he's been wiped off here, too, that's probably why - anyway, after > that I looked after myself. I was always welcome at Mr and Mrs > Potter's for Sunday lunch, though.' > > Stella says: This scene seems to be an opportunity for JKR to let Harry and the rest of us learn a little more about Sirius in general, not really the dynamics of his and James' friendship. The image "Sunday lunch" conjures for me is one of family unity. Isn't Sunday the day when, in the absence of the stresses and time constraints of the work/school week, many grown children return to the comforts of the nest for a meal and some family togethernes? (I always smile to see my elderly neighbors' large and usually empty driveway crammed full of cars each Sunday by noon as all of their children and grandchildren arrive.) Sorry to disagree about the rift between Sirius and James. In fact I think the passage actually strengthens the idea that they were still very close, "in spite of" Sirius no longer living there. Of course best friends have arguments all the time, and I'm sure with those two egos, they would have had their share. But I just don't think Sunday lunch is enough canon to support an actual estrangement. My humble opinion, :D Stella From patientx3 at aol.com Sun Aug 15 07:50:36 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 07:50:36 -0000 Subject: focus on Hermione In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110099 [quote from an online essay] << If you remember her second prophecy, which occurred in The Prisoner of Azkaban, that prophecy was fulfilled less than 12 hours later. If this is any indicator as far as prophecies go, then it may imply that the one approaching will be born in a very short time.>> Ravenclaw Bookworm wrote: >>As you said, it *may imply* that it does. Then again, it may not. Using one example to predict another isn't a reliable indicator. We know nothing about how prophecies work.<< HunterGreen: Also, why would he be interviewing a teacher in *September*? I don't see how a time limit on the prophecy makes any sense here, that's pointing a finger at Harry and Neville more than Hermione. I don't see how Hermione being born in 1979 proves the prophecy, if anything it *disproves* it. If she was born in 1979, then she would have already been 8-10months old at the time the prophecy was made (since it was made a little before Harry was born, 16 years before the events in the DoM). The prophecy says that "the one with the power to vanquish the dark lord *approaches*" (emphasis mine). By a fair interpretation, that would mean that 'the one' is not born yet. So, if you want to make a case for a different month being the 'seventh month', or a different year, 'the one' would still need to be born in June/July 1980 or later. << Traditionally, or "in the old days", when referring to a non- gender specific noun, the personal pronoun "him" was employed to make that non-gender specific reference.>> Ravenclaw Bookworm: >>We aren't in the "old days", fortunately. JKR has said she (and Trelawney) worded the prophecy very carefully. IMO, if she were trying to hide the gender of the One she would have written something like: "but [the One] will have power the Dark Lord knows not ..." She didn't ? she specifically said "he". More importantly, if Hermione is the One, why are the books about Harry?<< HunterGreen: And all dates aside, that would be a HUGE secret about Hermione's parents if they turned out to have defied Voldemort three times (according to an interview, JKR said we wouldn't be hearing any more about them either). This is what happens when people get so focused on *dates*, they forget that there are OTHER parts of the prophecy. HOWEVER, since the subject of Hermione's age has been brought up once again, while I was looking up something in GoF, a thought occured to me. I always assumed that the cutoff date was the end of the year, but then I came across this quote: " A tall black girl who played Chaser on the Gryffindor Quidditch team, Angelina came over to them, sat down, and said, 'Well, I've done it! Just put my name in!' 'You're kidding!' said Ron, looking impressed. 'Are you seventeen, then?' asked Harry. 'Course she is, can't see a beard, can you?' said Ron. 'I had my birthday last week,' said Angelina. " [GoF chpt 16, pg 261, US ed] Now, Angelina is in her sixth year at this point. Unless she was held back (which I doubt very much), that means the cutoff date is no later than October 28th (since this happened right around Halloween, and October 30th was the beginning of a new week in 1994, so if her birthday was Saturday the 29th, she *could* call it 'last week'). I'm guessing the cutoff date is either Sept 1st, or Oct 1st. If it is October, then it means that Hermione barely missed it. From patientx3 at aol.com Sun Aug 15 08:03:56 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 08:03:56 -0000 Subject: Squibs / Magic late in life (was Intro, Q's Lupin/Tonks) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110100 Kemper challenges the possible cheat: >>HunterGreen, what if Lily's grandparents were Muggle/Muggle and Muggle/Squib? Would you still feel cheated that Lily isn't Muggleborn, even though none of the grandparents are witch/wizards?<< HunterGreen: Probably not. I assume that the Evans (or Mrs. Evans' family) have a magical relative *somewhere* along the line, since magical genes have some relation to actual genes. >>I also encourage you to change your theory from Dudley to Petunia as the late bloomer. It would mean more to character development that Petunia use that which she most abhors (magic) to save that which she loves most (Dudley... and maybe Vernon.)<< Oh, don't worry, I already favor Petunia as the late bloomer. Dudley would be far less interesting (I can't see him being any more than a Crabbe or Goyle like wizard, one who has *some* magic, but still uses fists more than a wand). I was just referring to Dudley's name being a play on the word 'dud', since he certainly can't be a dud unless he was *expected* to be a magical baby. Here's a question though (and I just realized that this thread has nothing to do with the subject line any more), if a muggle and a muggleborn (or pureblood, I suppose), have a baby and that baby isn't magical, is that baby a squib or a muggle? Are wizarding genes expected to prevail 100% over muggle genes, or is there a 50/50 shot? (this might be one of those unanswerable questions) From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 15 09:58:57 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 05:58:57 -0400 Subject: Orphan TMR (was AlwaysMonday/book date/orphan TMR/Salicylic/HouseElves/Names/Narcissa/Quill) Message-ID: <002001c482ae$7b810570$63c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 110101 Marita said: << In fact, how did [Tom Marvolo Riddle] find out about his father abandoning his mother in the first place? I can't accept the coincidence of another letter that explains everything left with a baby. >> Catlady replied: "Tom's mother must have lived SOMEWHERE before he was born. With her parents sounds like one likely possibility. I like to think that baby Tom Marvie lived with his maternal grandparents long enough to remember all they told him about their wonderful ancestry and his father's bad behavior. I also like to think that they, um, *exaggerated* how married his parents were... They must have died for him to end up in an orphanage. Perhaps he killed them with childish accidental magic in a fit of rage." DuffyPoo: "My mother died just after I was born, sir. They told me at the orphanage she lived just long enough to name me: Tom after my father, Marvolo after my grandfather." (CoS - The Very Secret Diary) GoF indicates that a murder occurred in Little Hangleton, at the Riddle house "half a century ago" and we learn, from Frank Bryce, 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, according to the HP Lexicon, would be 17 at this time, and was described as having jet-black hair, although I can't find a reference to him being pale. "You stand, Harry Potter, upon the remains of my later father,' he [LV] hissed softly. "...*I* killed my father." (GoF The Death Eaters) - emphasis mine "He left her and returned to his 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." (Gof The Death Eaters) Tom Riddle, Sr., has removed himself so far from his witch wife that he isn't even aware that the child is born or if it lived or died, I think. He would want nothing to do with it because, "he didn't like magic, my father" and assumed the child would be magical as the mother was. I think Tom Riddle, Jr, in stating that he and HP were alike, said "both half-bloods, both orphans, raised by Muggles" because TR considered himself an orphan since he was abandoned by his father. His father was, to him, as good as dead. When he was of age, and out of school, he murdered his father, then he was truly an orphan. It is odd that neither as TR, or as re-bodied LV, does he make reference to his maternal grandparents. All he says is "I, in whose veins runs the blood of Salazar Slytherin himself, through my mother's side?" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From BlissInvestigations at hotmail.com Sun Aug 15 08:35:48 2004 From: BlissInvestigations at hotmail.com (Adrian Bliss) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 08:35:48 +0000 Subject: focus on Hermione Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110102 JJPandy: > If you haven't read the theories about Hermione at > http://www.hermionegranger.us/pages/hermepower.htm > then you MUST read them now! I also had a look round that site and even posted a couple of messages in the fourm on my problems with the theories, but in the end I've decided to just give up, I'm not going to even bother looking for evidence to disprove them because there all so out there it's just a waste of time. One of my favs was that this guy has tried to prove Hermione was actually hit with a killing curse in the department of mysteries and got all excited because now he thinks Hermione's extra super because she survived a killing curse. Read the theory, it's good for a laugh. "Adrian Bliss" From kempermentor at yahoo.com Sun Aug 15 12:32:28 2004 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 12:32:28 -0000 Subject: Squibs / Magic late in life (was Intro, Q's Lupin/Tonks) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110103 HunterGreen: > Here's a question though, if a muggle and a muggleborn (or > pureblood, I suppose), have a baby and that baby isn't magical, > is that baby a squib or a muggle? Are wizarding genes expected > to prevail 100% over muggle genes, or is there a 50/50 shot? Kemper: I posed the Squib/Muggle offspring question in a way earlier post. I call the non-magical offspring of a Squib and Muggle a Squiggle. This is obviously not canon, but I like the way it sounds. From dklopp at ptd.net Sun Aug 15 11:58:49 2004 From: dklopp at ptd.net (Diane Klopp) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 11:58:49 -0000 Subject: revelations from the Edinburgh Festival Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110104 At the Edinburgh Festival, JKRowling has reveled the following: * Aberforth Dumbledore is the barman in the Hog's Head * Dumbledore's patronus is a phoenix * Grawp will be more controllable in the sixth book * We will see a bit more of Rita Skeeter * There will be a new character called McLagan * Harry does NOT have a godmother Also, Petunia is NOT a squib, she is definately muggle-born. She gave two questions for us to think about: 1. Why didn't Voldemort die when he tried to kill Harry? JK said that in the end of book four, Voldemort had said he had taken various steps against dying, but we should be wondering exactly what he did. 2. Why didn't Dumbledore try to kill Voldemort in that scene at the end of book five? Dumbledore gave a kind of reason to Voldemort but it's not the real answer, and that Dumbledore knows something more. JK said if we are wondering about the overall plot, we should be concentrating on those two questions. The full transcript of the Q&A session will be available on JK's official website soon. Diane From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 15 13:20:19 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 09:20:19 -0400 Subject: Case for Marauders Message-ID: <006301c482ca$9cd361c0$63c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 110105 RMM said: "3. "though". "Though" means "in spite of the fact that". So, Sirius is welcome at Mr. and Mrs. Potter's for Sunday lunch, in spite of the fact that he was now living on his own???? So he would be more welcome to visit more if he wasn't living on his own? The Potters are upset with him because he is living on his own and so will only welcome him on Sunday at lunch?" DuffyPoo: Yes, exactly. In spite of the fact (using your words) that Sirius is considered an adult, quite capable of looking after himself, and is living in his own residence, he is still 'always' welcome at the Potters for Sunday lunch. The Potters are not 'upset' with Sirius because he is living on his own, they are sympathetic that he has separated himself from his family, and they are attempting to be a surrogate family. He is still 'always' welcome in their home for a family meal - Sunday lunch. Actually, my dictionary shows "though" to mean "nevertheless" (although I'm not here to battle dictionary definitions with you). So, "When I turned seventeen I got my own place but I was always welcome for Sunday lunch, nevertheless." RMM said: "Sorry, but the way this sentence is phrased is loaded with a circumstantial case for the fact that Sirius was living on his own and was welcome at the Potters ONLY for Sunday lunch because he and James were not getting along." DuffyPoo: To you, perhaps, but not to me. Sirius doesn't say he was *only* allowed for Sunday lunch, that is something you are reading into the text. He says he was *always welcome* for Sunday lunch, regardless of the fact that he was now an adult, living on his own, responsible for himself, the Potters still wanted him to share family meal with them. By this time, Sirius had divorced himself from his real family and wouldn't want to share a family meal with them, yet the Potters wanted him to have a sense of family by sharing Sunday lunch with them. --- RMM: "I understand. And I agree to a point. However, there is canon to show that a rift occurs between Sirius and James. Let me explain." DuffyPoo: We not going to be able to reconcile on this one. The canon you use to explain that a rift occurred between Sirus and James is the canon I use to prove there is no rift. RMM: "After 6th year, Sirius gets a place on his own, since he has money to do so. So why not go live with the Potters, who have essentially adopted him, and be with his best friend, and save his money?" DuffyPoo: Because he is an adult and doesn't want to rely on the kindness of the Potter family any longer? (It is exactly what I would have done) He would only have needed a boarding house, he only needed a place for a bit in the summer - from whenever he turned 17, and removed himself from the Potter residence, until Sept 1. He could have stayed at Hogwarts for Christmas and Easter holidays. Even children who are legally adopted, move out of the 'family' home at some point. There is no reason for Sirius's moving into his own home to be considered a rift between he and James. At least not as I read it and not to some others who have also posted to this topic. The Potters' "sort of" adopting Sirius, to me, means they fed him and let him sleep on the sofa-bed (or spare room, or camp cot in James' room - he would only ever be there for a short periods of time). If JKR had said "essentially" adopted, as you said, I would think they were taking full responsibility for Sirius, providing not only food and shelter, but clothing, school supplies, medical care, etc., and I just don't get that from Sirius saying he was "sort of adopted". I was 'sort of' adopted by a two of my friends' familes and I don't think I ever spent a night under either roof. My best friend in grade school called my house her "second home" and my mom "her other mother" but I don't think she ever spent a night at my house, either. DuffyPoo: >> [How many people here who had a child fall out with a best friend, would continue to invite the former best friend for Sunday lunch?<< RMM: "If that person was an adopted second son, I would. Mr. and Mrs. Potter have a very close relationship with Sirius, that much is clear." DuffyPoo again: You said it yourself, "IF that person was an adopted second son." Sirius wasn't adopted, he was 'sort of adopted.' He knows the difference, he was given food and a place to sleep when he needed it (school holidays). I don't see any indication that Mr and Mrs Potter have a 'very close' relationship with Sirius. He is James' friend and is welcomed into their home because they are sympathetic with his plight (despising what his own parents stand for). By the time James is 17, possibly the only meal the family eats together is Sunday lunch, so that would be the only one Sirius joins them for. Why would he go for tea on Tuesday if James wasn't going to be there as well? As close as I was to some of my friends' parents, I wouldn't have gone for a meal if my friend wasn't going to be there as well. It was, after all, their child that was the friend, not the parents themselves. As to Sirius saying "Mr & Mrs Potter" perhaps JKR (or her editor) was just making things clear. Sirius has said "your dad's place." This could mean, James had his own place, apart from his parents, or that he was living with Lily's parents. Sirius goes on to explain, though, that "your grandparents were really good about it" which could still indicate Lily's parents. "I was always welcome at Mr. and Mrs. Potter's, though" is indicating to the reader, that it is clearly James' parents Sirius was staying with, to avoid any speculating that James living with or raised by anyone other than Mr and Mrs Potter, or that the 'grandparents' were Lily's parents. ---Just an aside, as I was looking for something else, I saw this "Sirius' face was fuller, and he looked younger, much more like the only photograph Harry had of him, which had been taken at the Potters' wedding." (GoF The Hungarian Horntail) Now, why did Harry think "at the Potters' wedding" instead of "at his parents' wedding?" Maybe those pesky editors are trying to clarify things again, because "much more like the only photograph Harry had of [Sirius], which had been taken at his parent's wedding" could be misconstrued, by some, to mean at Sirius' parents' wedding? Best say "the Potters' wedding" and remove all doubt. Best to say "always welcome at Mr and Mrs Potters, though" and remove all doubt about where Sirius spent his school holidays before he turned 17. During this whole conversation in OotP, Sirius has the opportunity to say that he and James had a falling out and that's why he left the Potters and got his own place. He doesn't, however. That alone, indicates to me, that they did not, at least, not one that was the cause of his leaving the Potter home. Sirius has the perfect opportunity to show Harry that even the best of friends fall out, but he didn't, because it didn't happen, at least not in this situation. Sirius knows Harry and Ron had a brief spell (about three weeks) of not talking to/misunderstanding each other, Harry told him about it when Sirius' head appeared in the Gryffindor fire, "and about Ron, Ron not believing him, Ron's jealousy..." (GoF The Hungarian Horntail). Here, Sirius has another opportunity to tell Harry that he and James had fallen out, but he didn't; no "Don't worry about Ron, he'll come around. Your dad and I had a big blow up in sixth year but we got over it," but straight into Karkaroff, Moody, Jorkins, the Dragon. Yes, Sirius was in a precarious situation and didn't know how long he would have to talk, but as I wrote it, the statement would have only taken a second. HP is not a questioner normally, but if he had asked why, Sirius could simply have said it was too complex to get into and there were more important things to talk about, like Karkaroff, etc. RMM: "Best friends cannot have a fight? Best friends can't fallout over something as serious as one of them wanting to join a pureboodism group?" DuffyPoo: Certanly best friends can fight and fall out. The problem here is both James and Sirius are on the same side of the pure-bloodism issue (from canon which has been pointed out before) and would have nothing to fall out over. Neither of them would be interested in joining a pure-bloodism group. (Also, I said previously, any time I had a serious falling out with a friend, even though it may have been made up, nothing was ever quite the same - which is not to say James and Sirius wouldn't be better at it than I was - just that I would never have trusted that someone with anything as important as being a child's godparent or a Secret-Keeper, after such a falling out.) RMM: "I would say that all four "appeared" to have left the group. They all went to DD and told him what was going on, and they all joined the Order of the Phoenix when it was formed." DuffyPoo: Back a few days ago you said, "The true purpose was exposed. The loyal stayed and the others left. The Marauders, minus one, left." You didn't say then, that the Marauders "appeared" to leave, you said they "left," all except PP. My point to that post was that, if James, Sirius and Lupin left the 'organization' and PP stayed behind, when the time came for DD to start the Order of the Phoenix (or probably before, IMO, as soon as they left the group they would have gone to DD and informed him of the crap the organization leader was spouting, and how they got caught up in it), the three deserters would have explained about the 'organization' and that PP had stayed behind, still 'in' the 'organization.' PP would likely not have been in the OotP, (unless Puppetmaster!Dumbledore wanted a spy in the Order!) Sirius would never have considered switching places with him as S-K, and James would have never gone for the idea anyway. I guess I just can't reconcile that DD would be stupid enough to hire LV to teach at Hogwarts. Canon says TR resurfaced as LV, so he would have been hired as LV. If we believe that LV resurfaced in 1970, he would be busy gaining power and associates until 1976, I'd think, not teaching Dark Arts at Durmstrang so he could get an employment reference from Karkaroff to work at Hogwarts (would Karkaroff have been the Headmaster then? How would he explain absences to go run LV's errands and do his dirty work? How would he explain having to disapparate at a second's notice when the Dark Mark burned on his arm? The people he squealed on were "Important supporters, mark you. People I saw with my own eyes doing his bidding." He would have had to be away from the school for more than just school holidays, one would think, with all the descriptions he gave of seeing the DEs he was turning in.) I believe DD was one of the few who knew TR was LV, because he had been keeping a close eye on him ever since the original CoS incident. TR said himself that he believed DD had guessed it was he who opened the Chamber, and kept an annoyingly close eye on him after. TR told HP, through the diary, that "In my day, they told us it [the chamber of secrets] was a legend, that it did not exist." DD would have been aware of the 'legend' as well, and when the legendary chamber was opened, and he guessed it was TR who opened it, he would have continued keeping an annoyingly close eye on TR even after he left Hogwarts. DD would know from the legend that only Slytherin's heir could open the chamber, knew what Slytherin's opinion of Muggle-borns was, may suspect TR was after accomplishing the same thing, and on a path to becoming another SS. That's why DD knew TR had gone travelling far and wide, consorting with the worst of our kind, sinking deeply into the Dark Arts, undergoing dangerous magical transformations, because he kept an eye on him, an annoyingly close eye. DD said "when he resurfaced as Lord Voldemort, he was *barely* recognizable." (emphasis mine). Barely recognizable, but recognizable to him, DD, who had kept a close eye on him for years. Oh, something I just thought of. The Marauders have joined this 'special DE organization.' Would Snape not have belonged to it as well, it was right up his alley and he ended up a DE? Yet Snape never, ever, tells HP that his father had been a DE, or that Sirius had been a DE, or that they had ever belonged to such an organization and it would certainly be in character for Snape to do so. "Your father was a DE too, you know, but turned chicken and ran. That's why he was murdered by the Dark Lord." Doesn't happen. The DEs were kept in the dark about each other, we know that from canon. Yet this 'special organization' would have brought a good number together, too many. Only the ones that needed to be aware of each other were, and only LV knew who they all were. Good thing or Karkaroff would have spilled his guts on all of them. "Voldemort moved on, and stopped, staring at the space -- large enough for two people -- which separated Malfoy and *the next man.*" Why did LV not mention *the next man's* name? Either because it is not important to the story (doubtful) or because LV (and JKR) doesn't want the others (or us) to know who he is (more likely). The same reason he passed by so many others without mentioning the name of who was behind the mask. Harry figures he's out-numbered 30 to 1 in the graveyard, yet the only names spoken by LV are Wormtail, of course, Avery, Malfoy, Crabbe, Goyle, Nott, the Lestranges, and Macnair, the DEs the others he passed by are already aware of, IMO. Every one of the thirty in that group know Malfoy, Avery, Macnair, etc are DEs but they (Malfoy, etc) don't know the others who are under the masks. That's enough for me on this subject. I've been working on this e-mail for nearly four hours. I cannot read the books and see anywhere that LV taught anything at Hogwarts, never mind had a special activities group going. I cannot see that the Marauders would have ever joined this group, knowing what we have been shown of them, or became DE's (apart from PP of course). I cannot see that Sirius left the Potters' home at seventeen because he was no longer friends with James. So I will forthwith stay out of the subject, which I'm sure will be appreciated by all who read these huge postings of mine. ;-) I will, however, be the first to admit I am wrong if any of this pans out in the next two books. DuffyPoo [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Sun Aug 15 13:51:31 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 13:51:31 -0000 Subject: TBAY: AUCTION GOODS (Police Seizure and Repossessed Items) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110106 In the cramped hall, whispering among the crowd flooding the narrow spaces between, some were settling themselves into the cushioned seats, others lingered in the edge passages sampling fares. Without warning the white noise dissipated and all eyes turned to the stage where a curious looking auctioneer was taking up his hammer...... 'First cab off the rank now folks..... Collector Cards we have some five of these, each emblazoned with the gold standard in "Clean Dishes" company seal here on the back. This great little nicknack is really an amazing party trick for the user...... use it to be everywhere at once.... so how shall we start bidding for a peice... do I hear 10 knuts... 10 knuts... 12... thats 12 a piece ladies and gentlemen.." The cards sold quickly at the low bid. The takers all looked pleased with their aquisition, but those seated beside them were a little apprehensive, murmurs began among them 'You need a timepiece for that trick...' was said and 'The front is not that animated is it? I'd expect more life in the illustration.' said another. Attention soon returned to the auctioneer as he announced the next item to to the group; 'This magnificent timepiece ladies and gentlemen....' he held up a tall hourglass carved in ebony like a chess piece, sculpted long fingers adorned the edges interwoven with mirror pieces. 'A piece of finecraft if I ever saw one....' The bidders looked at each other for a tense moment, one would suppose wondering who dared bid for this obviously rich ask. The auctioneer continued... 'This red substance inside, everyone, is pure sugar... you'll all agree that makes it entirely reliable... then I'll have an opening bid at 500 galleons. Something happened at that moment that took the room by complete surprise. '500 Galleons' A bidder had raised her hand, willing to pay such riches for the masterpiece. The crowd hushed. The name on the card was Vivian. 'Sold!' cried the auctioneer 'and onto the next item here today, an authentic working model of Galadriels Raft.... lovely craftsmanship here... look at these abstract details on the bow.... all finished off nicely with these E motifs delicately placed and polished... now lets aim high here lets say 150 sickles anybody...' Some interests had been raised and someone raised their card... 'Do I hear more than 150 sickles.....' Another card levitated... '155.... any advance on 155...' '200' The Fox contracted shyly into her chair realising suddenly that she was attracting attention and some contemptuous glares from the crowd, 'I'm really only interested in it's ornamental value' she offered in a small voice 'It is very pretty..' From meriaugust at yahoo.com Sun Aug 15 14:24:55 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 14:24:55 -0000 Subject: Colonel Fubster.. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110107 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "doddiemoemoe" wrote: > I would like to have more information on this subject than most at this > time in the series... > > Harry is apparently the reason Aunt Marge's glass explodes. Aunt > Marge claims it's because her "grip" is so strong and that the SAME > thing happened at Colonel Fubster's home previously. > > The reader gets another allusion to him in OotP (Snape inquires about > a dog keeping Harry up a tree during occlumency lessons). > > Is it too much of a coincidence for me to wonder if both Petunia AND > Mr. Dursley BOTH have connections to the wizarding world? > snips I believe on JKR's website, possibly in the section where she debunks Mark Evans' name, she says that the good Colonel is, in fact, a muggle. Or maybe it is in the rumors section, my memory escapes me at the moment. Remember also that Aunt Marge was pretty sauced in that scene. She probably could have said anything she was so hammered. And after all she is a very large, beefy woman, so it's not too hard to believe that she would break a glass every now and again. Meri - who is pretty sure that Uncle Vernon's only connections with the WW are his wife and his nephew and that those are bad enough for him... From eloiseherisson at aol.com Sun Aug 15 14:40:12 2004 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloise_herisson) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 14:40:12 -0000 Subject: Case for Marauders In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110108 RMM said: > > "Something happens in the 6th year, because Sirius finds his OWN > PLACE > > TO LIVE between his 6th and 7th years at Hogwarts." > After 6th year, Sirius gets a place on his own, since he has money to > do so. > So why not go live with the Potters, who have essentially adopted > him, > and be with his best friend, and save his money? I actually think that a clue may be found in what you quoted from OoP: "Yeah, I camped out at your dad's in the school holidays, and when I was seventeen I got a place of my own." The phrase "camped out" suggests that the Potter residence may not have been that big and that Sirius was making do with a put-you-up bed, etc., not that he had a room of his own or that James' room was suited to two. Even if there was room for him, it sounds as if Sirius didn't think of it as a permanent home even back then. Sirius is proud and I'm sure that he would have wanted to be independent as soon as possible. In the WW that's when you reach your majority at 17. RMM: > Now why do I think he and James were not getting along? > See what he says next: "I was always welcome at Mr and Mrs Potter's > for Sunday lunch, though." > Note some things about this statement: > 1. "welcome at Mr. and Mrs. Potters". Why didn't he say "the > Potters"? Earlier he said "your dad's". Now it's "Mr. and Mrs. > Potter's". Because this was how he referred to them when they were alive. He could equally as well have said "your grandparents'" but he didn't and the fact that he didn't doesn't mean there's a rift between himself and Harry. ;-) > 2. "for Sunday lunch". He is welcome at Mr. and Mrs. Potter's for > "Sunday lunch"?????? What about any meal or any time of the week? > For crying out loud, they have practically adopted him! "Sunday > lunch"??? I think this is merely a cultural thing. In saying that he was always welcome for *Sunday lunch* he's saying that he was always welcome at that meal in the week seen as the quintessential family gathering. Not just welcome to drop round for tea or invited to dinner, but welcome at the most important family occasion of the week. I think also that the "always" element of it implies just that; he's talking about the fact that he was welcome *for always and forever* at the Potters', not just in that final year of school. > 3. "though". "Though" means "in spite of the fact that". So, > Sirius > is welcome at Mr. and Mrs. Potter's for Sunday lunch, in spite of the > fact that he was now living on his own???? So he would be more > welcome to visit more if he wasn't living on his own? The Potters > are > upset with him because he is living on his own and so will only > welcome him on Sunday at lunch? No, the opposite. Even though he's chosen to move out, they still welcome him. Together with the "always" this can equally well be interpreted to mean that even after James had moved out as well, Sirius was always welcome to come back to the most important family gathering of the week. ~Eloise From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Aug 15 14:59:15 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 07:59:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] James & Snape: Related? - or Snape & Sirius? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040815145915.38976.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110109 If Snape has to be related to anyone (something I'm not convinced about but for the sake of speculation...), then there are good (or at least not-bad) indications that he might be related to Sirius. How about as an illegitimate half-brother? Why do Sirius and Snape have such a personal hatred going on between them? JKR has said that the two loathed each other by the time of the Prank, which was a result of this hatred. We've all speculated that while we can understand why Snape might hate Sirius, we're not sure why Sirius reciprocated. So here's my theory. There are many references in OOTP to 12GP being Sirius' mother's house - and one very pointed one from Snape. It might be simply that Mr. Black died first so that it was her house alone after that. But perhaps the house (and the money) belonged to Mrs. Black's family and all Mr. Black brought to the marriage was his pureblooded heritage. But why would Snape know or care? Answer: he's Mr. Black's illegitimate son by a poor Miss Snape. The Black marriage was not a love match; these kind of little mistakes are tolerated provided that discretion is maintained. Snape's memory of being a little boy crying in the corner while a hook-nosed man yells at a cowering woman? A near-destitute Miss Snape has come to 12GP begging for child support with her little boy who looks so much like his father and Mr. Black threatens her never to approach him again. That would be a pretty traumatic memory especially if its the first time Severus has ever seen his father. Who is the hook-nosed man? Well, we've never seen a picture of Sirius' father, have we? Snape never eats at 12GP? He refuses to stay one second longer than necessary in the home where he and his mother were humiliated - although he greatly enjoys the fact that Sirius has to put up with his presence. Why does Snape hate Sirius? He was the legitimate son who had ready access to the money and resources of the family and didn't appreciate the importance of them (NEVER underestimate the effect of lack of material security on the truly destitute - it's where revolutions come from) and yet who were willing to see his mother and him starve. Why does Sirius hate Snape? He saw Snape trying to be the son that Sirius should have been with an interest in the DA and Sirius despises anyone who thinks that the Blacks were worth emulating, not realizing what it means to really be poor and feel unprotected against the world. There's no doubt that there's something very personal in the Snape-Sirius hatefest. Most assume it's because of the Prank but the Prank was the result of the hatred, not the cause of it. In the Pensieve Scene, it was James who initiated the confrontation and fought with Snape while Sirius was the back-up but there was something very creepy about the way that Sirius worked to disarm Snape and keep his temper roiling with his interventions. James was being, as someone on another site put it, a teenage-alpha-male-jerk but it was pretty straightforward. Sirius's constant stream of put-downs are much more vicious (JKR's term) and he does display an interesting obsession with Snape's physical appearance - looks like his dad, perhaps? Is Snape an acceptable substitute for Sirius' growing antipathy to his/their father? It's easy for Sirius as a grown-man in his 30's to say that he hated his parents and everything they stood for but would a teenager still coming to grips with his heritage and personal identify really not have found his growing distance from his parents to be more troublesome? Would he not focus a lot of that developing revulsion against an external target? And if Mr. Black told Sirius about Snape's existence before he went to Hogwarts (one of those man-to-man-father-son chats) and forbade him to fight with Snape, wouldn't it be perfect teen logic to think that as long as he was just backing James up, then it wasn't the same as fighting with Snape? Gives a certain undercurrent of emotion to James' response to Lily's question - "It's more the fact that he exists, if you know what I mean" - doesn't it? I'm not wedded to this theory, especially since it's very unlikely that either Snape's or Sirius' backstories are that relevent to the Harry-plot; also that there already are (IMO too many) instances of characters we've already met turning out to be related to each other. But I think it does answer some questions that otherwise seem a bit perplexing. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Aug 15 15:02:13 2004 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 15 Aug 2004 15:02:13 -0000 Subject: Reminder - Weekly Chat Message-ID: <1092582133.21.37243.m14@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110110 We would like to remind you of this upcoming event. Weekly Chat Date: Sunday, August 15, 2004 Time: 11:00AM CDT (GMT-05:00) Don't forget, chat happens today, 11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern, 7 pm UK time. Chat times do not change 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 Hope to see you there! From MadameSSnape at aol.com Sun Aug 15 15:18:35 2004 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 11:18:35 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: biggest SPOILER _ graveyard at Hogwarts Message-ID: <1c3.1d13371b.2e50d8cb@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110111 In a message dated 8/10/2004 6:50:04 PM Eastern Daylight Time, squeakinby at tds.net writes: Hermione is a Libra ---------------------- Sherrie here: Hermione's birthday is 19 September - that makes her a Virgo, not a Libra. I don't have my table of Sun sign changes here (it's home, I'm at Mom's), so she MIGHT be on the cusp of the two signs (the Sun changes signs at slightly different times each year) - but that would only overlay her Virgo nature (which is obvious in her behavior!) with some Libra traits. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From MadameSSnape at aol.com Sun Aug 15 15:23:34 2004 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 11:23:34 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: JKR web update Message-ID: <55.5eba9a19.2e50d9f6@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110112 In a message dated 8/10/2004 11:21:16 PM Eastern Daylight Time, sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com writes: Snow wrote: > > Happy Birthday to Ginny Weasley August 11th! Which means that she is a Leo the same as Harry. It also means that she is only 11 days younger than him. If the Harry/Ginny shippers needed any more ammunition, it's this. Although, I'm dreadfully confused as to how Ron could have been born in March, and then Ginny in August, unless she was FOUR MONTHS early. ============= Sherrie here: That's a YEAR and eleven days, actually - Ginny is a year behind Harry & Ron. And two Leos together? :::shuddering::: Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tookishgirl_111 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 15 15:36:29 2004 From: tookishgirl_111 at yahoo.com (tookishgirl_111) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 15:36:29 -0000 Subject: James & Snape: Related? In-Reply-To: <000801c4827e$b595cc80$6501a8c0@C3P0> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110113 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Maren Gest" wrote: > Well that's definitely an interesting theory. It's rather convincing as well; > however, if Snape and James were brothers, why don't they have the same last > name? All the Weasley brothers have the same name. Perhaps James and Snape > are related, but I'd say their last names would rule out brothers. > > Maren This is a great theory, and talk about coincidence...my friends and I just discussed this possibility last night. It explains the instant hatred they have towards one another and the "it's more the fact that he exsists" comment. Were Snape to be the illegimate son of James's mother from an affair with Snape's father (we got a glimpse of what was most likely Snape's father in book 5 and looks nothing like James so it's unlikely he's also James's father) than it would explain a number of other things as well. It would explain the different last names, the general difference in appearance, and possibly why Snape continuely claims that James was arrogant and would "strut" about the castle (it wasn't just because he was good at Qudditch; it was because he was favored over Snape by his mother - he was not the one born out of an affair). Tooks - who thinks this idea clever and not at all impossible From entropymail at yahoo.com Sun Aug 15 16:50:03 2004 From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 16:50:03 -0000 Subject: revelations from the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110114 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Diane Klopp" wrote: > At the Edinburgh Festival, JKRowling has reveled the following: > > 1. Why didn't Voldemort die when he tried to kill Harry? JK said that > in the end of book four, Voldemort had said he had taken various steps > against dying, but we should be wondering exactly what he did. > > 2. Why didn't Dumbledore try to kill Voldemort in that scene at the > end of book five? > > Dumbledore gave a kind of reason to Voldemort but it's not the real > answer, and that Dumbledore knows something more. > > JK said if we are wondering about the overall plot, we should be > concentrating on those two questions. Ooh, interesting! Let's see...knowing that : 1)Lily used Ancient Magic to protect Harry (I believe the scar on Harry's head is actually a protective rune, rather than a lightning bolt) and 2)Voldemort has knowledge of "ancient magic" (he used it to restore his body in GoF's graveyard scene) ...could it be that Voldemort has used ancient magic before? Did he perform a protection charm on himself, similar to the one Lily may have used on Harry? And how might this tie into the deaths of his grandparents and father at the Riddle House? Stay with me here: Sorry, I can't find where, but someone mentioned before that all of the Ancient Magic we've seen seems to follow a similar pattern of sacrifice. Harry's mother was sacrificed for Harry, Wormtail's hand was sacrificed for Voldy, and the charm DD put on the Dursley House to protect Harry seems to have required something (some sacrifice?) from Petunia. So, could Voldy (as Tom Riddle) have murdered his family as part of an elaborate protection charm? Seems to fit. And, if DD knew this, he probably wouldn't have bothered to try to kill Voldemort, knowing it was futile. He knows (or believes) that the only one who can kill Voldemort is his secret weapon, Harry. Yummy! :: Entropy :: From caesian at yahoo.com Sun Aug 15 17:05:41 2004 From: caesian at yahoo.com (caesian) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 10:05:41 -0700 Subject: Petunia's pact (long) Message-ID: <56D58EE2-EEDD-11D8-B917-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110115 When I first read PS (ah, those were the days...), the following exchange between Harry and Petunia caught my eye: '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 house in ruins?" she snarled. 'I won't blow up the house," said Harry.... (PS, The Vanishing Glass) At this point in the story, before Harry knows he is a wizard, we already know that the Potter's "house was almost destroyed" (Hagrid's quote, PS, The Boy Who Lived), "nearly ten years" ago (although Harry doesn't). We also know that Dumbledore left a letter for the Durlsey's, explaining everything. Perhaps he explained that the Potter's house had been destroyed, and that it had something to do with Harry. But I've wondered about Aunt Petunia's "ruins" comment ever since, and what she knows. On "the dull, grey Tuesday our story starts", while Uncle Vernon is plagued by visions of literate cats and the absence of collecting tins, "Mrs Dursley had a nice, normal day." The way this sentence is structured leaves little room for doubt - the authorial voice has proclaimed it so. That Petunia might have had a terrible Halloween night, including any knowledge of the Potter's fate, seems unlikely. It seems that the only way she could have learned of the fate of the Potter's house is through Dumbledore's letter. That must have been an incredibly persuasive letter. Harry has never seen the letter, nor does he understand why Aunt Petunia agreed to "grudgingly, furiously, unwillingly, bitterly" (DD, OotP, The Lost Prophecy) seal a "pact" by taking Harry in. By the time Harry is sitting in Privet drive on Dudley's 11th birthday, the pact has been sealed nearly 10 years, and as far as anyone can see "Privet Drive had hardly changed at all." I doubt Dumbledore resorted to falsehood or deception in his letter. If Petunia knew, at the time she found the letter and sealed the pact, that the Potter's house had been destroyed in a deadly struggle concerning her nephew - knew, as stated by Dumbledore, that "allowing [Harry] houseroom may well have kept [him] alive for the past fifteen years" (OotP, The Lost Prophecy) - why did she agree? It seems she was aware of the possibility of danger to herself, Vernon or Dudley as a consequence of doing so. Dumbledore sends a Howler to Privet Drive ("REMEMBER MY LAST, PETUNIA" OotP, A Peck of Owls), because he "suspected the dementor attack might have awoken her to the dangers of having you as a surrogate son." /Awoken./ 1. To rouse from sleep; waken. 2. To stir the interest of; excite. 3. To stir up (memories, for example). She takes Harry and seals a pact of which Vernon and Dudley seem completely unaware. OotP, A Peck of Owls: Aunt Petunia looked as though she might faint. She sank into the chair beside Dudley, her face in her hands. The remains of the envelope smoldered into ash in the silence. "What is this?" Uncle Vernon said hoarsely. "What - I don't - Petunia?" Aunt Petunia said nothing. Dudley was staring stupidly at his mother, his mouth hanging open. The silence spiraled horribly. Harry was watching his aunt, utterly bewildered, his head throbbing fit to burst. "Petunia, dear?" said Uncle Vernon timidly. "P-Petunia?" She raised her head. She was still trembling. She swallowed. "The boy - the boy will have to stay, Vernon," she said weakly. "W-What?" "He stays," she said. She was not looking at Harry. She got to her feet again. "He ... but Petunia ..." Vernon has always known that Harry is a wizard, and that Lily and James had been a witch and a wizard, although they tried to keep this a secret from Dudley and Harry. Why is Petunia keeping the terms of this agreement secret from Vernon? There seems to be no evidence to suggest that the Dursley's themselves needed protection after Voldemort's fall, or that it had been provided prior. And if Petunia's motive was the protection of the family, less secrecy and anti-wizard feeling might have been one expected result. Why did Dumbledore feel confident enough to merely leave Harry on the doorstep of an unknown (?) woman, with only a letter for persuasion. The letter must have been persuasive. And, I suspect, Dumbledore knew a good deal about Petunia - enough to make him certain that she would accept his terms. When Professor McGonagall expresses shock and outrage on hearing the nature of Dumbledore's errand (PS, The Boy Who Lived), mentioning the dubious character of the inhabitants of 4 Privet Drive, Dumbledore does not express surprise. He knew already what the Dursley's were like, and knew he was "condemning you [Harry] to ten dark and difficult years." (OotP, The Lost Prophecy) You might ask - and with good reason - why it had to be so. What is the nature of the pact between Petunia and Dumbledore? September 8, 1999 Barnes&Noble.com Chat Transcript Q: My children and I love your books, and we care about Harry Potter. We are wondering if Harry will continue to live with the Dursley's every summer. A: Well, you have to decide whether you want to give up the fun of seeing Harry getting the better of the Dursley's or whether you'd rather see Harry happy. I've made my choice, but I can't tell you what it is because it will ruin future plots. Dumbledore has now explained to Harry what he gained by the pact. Harry is somehow protected from physical harm (if not psychological abuse), by Voldemort, his followers, and probably even muggles* ("Then, as the pain in the top of Harry's head gave a particularly nasty throb, Uncle Vernon yelped and released Harry as though he had received an electric shock - some invisible force seemed to have surged through his nephew, making him impossible to hold"), when he near the house at 4 Privet Drive. (" ... DO NOT LEAVE YOUR AUNT AND UNCLES HOUSE ..." OotP, A Peck of Owls) As it happens, Harry was outside the house in the flower bed when the invisible surge forced Vernon to release him. Perhaps this protection extends to the surrounding neighborhood as well, because Harry is allowed to roam Little Whinging freely, observed only by that "doleful basset hound", Mundungus. But this seems unlikely. Dudley punches Harry in the narrow alleyway between Magnolia Crescent and Wisteria Walk. "A fist made contact with the side of Harry's head, lifting Harry off his feet. Small white lights popped in front of Harry's eyes; for the second time in an hour he felt as though his head had been cleaved in two; next moment he had landed hard on the ground, and his wand had flown out of his hand." And then, of course, there are the dementors. Perhaps the protection extends in a gradient from a center at Privet Drive. *October 19, 2000 America Online, Chat Transcript Q: Does everyone have a little magic in them? Even if they are Muggles? And if not, how did magic start? A: I think we do (outside the books), but within my books -- do you really think there's any magic in Uncle Vernon? Magic is one of those odd talents which some have and some don't. At any rate, it seems likely that this facilitated protection for Harry is sufficient reason for the pact on Dumbledore's side, and there may be little else he expects of Petunia. Clearly, kind treatment of Harry was not part of the bargain. 16 November 2000 Dateline Harry Pottermania in Vancouver, with J.K. Rowling A question also surfaced surrounding Harry Potter?s non-magical relatives, the Muggles who have always tortured or mistreated Harry, because of their fear of magic. For revenge, Harry has magically tortured his cousin Dudley. `I like torturing them,` said Rowling. `You should keep an eye on Dudley. It?s probably too late for Aunt Petunia and Uncle Vernon. I feel sorry for Dudley. I might joke about him, but I feel truly sorry for him because I see him as just as abused as Harry. Though, in possibly a less obvious way. What they are doing to him is inept, really. I think children recognize that. Poor Dudley. He?s not being prepared for the world at all, in any reasonable or compassionate way, so I feel sorry for him. But there?s something funny about him, also. The pig?s tail was irresistible.` Q: Which character do you most enjoy writing for? A:Good question... Gilderoy Lockhart was loads of fun, but he was a bit of a one-joke character, and I think I did as much as I could with him. I love writing Hagrid and the Dursleys, too oh, and Fred and George,all of them, now I come to think of it. J.K. Rowling's World Book Day Chat: March 4, 2004 LRGS School: Which character do you most dislike ? JK Rowling replies -> Probably Uncle Vernon. So what is Petunia getting that she won't admit to Vernon? First of all, if it is something she did not have at the time the pact was sealed, she hasn't got it yet. If Dumbledore is not long for this world, as many have speculated, Petunia may get her bargained reward at the time of his death, or when Harry comes of age. But it somehow seems unlikely to me that Dumbledore has agreed to reward her - he is fully aware of her treatment of Harry and does not approve of it. His small expressions of disapproval ("Harry Potter, The Cupboard Under the Stairs/The Smallest Bedroom/ The Floor...") suggest he is unlikely to give Petunia anything that he considers to be valuable. Furthermore, their pact does not seem to be amicable in nature: "An awful voice filled the kitchen, echoing in the confined space, issuing from the burning letter on the table. REMEMBER MY LAST, PETUNIA. Aunt Petunia looked as if she might faint.... She was still trembling. (OotP, A Peck of Owls) I would suggest, given Ms. Rowlings statements in interviews, that she has something planned for Aunt Petunia - something Petunia deeply wants, but the rest of us will find somehow sad or just in a karmic sense. Therefore, I believe that what Petunia is getting from this pact is a secret. 4 /Privet/ Drive. "The Dursleys had everything they wanted, but they also had a secret, and their greatest fear was that somebody would discover it." There is one other small detail which may pertain: "And what the ruddy hell are dementors?" "They guard the wizard prison, Azkaban," said Aunt Petunia. Two seconds ringing silence followed these words and then Aunt Petunia clapped her hand over her mouth as though she had let slip a disgusting swear word. Uncle Vernon was goggling at her. Harry's brain reeled. Mrs. Figg was one thing - but Aunt Petunia? "How d'you know that?" he asked her, astonished. Aunt Petunia looked quite appalled with herself. She glanced at Uncle Vernon in fearful apology, the lowered her hand slightly to reveal her horsey teeth. "I hear - that awful boy - telling her about them - years ago," she said jerkily. ... [Harry] was astounded that [Aunt Petunia] had remembered this scrap of information about the magical world for so long, when she usually put all her energies into pretending it didn't exist. (OotP, A Peck of Owls) I speculate that the secret Petunia is keeping from Vernon (and everyone else), the secret that perhaps only Professor Dumbledore also knows - /is/ the pact. He will keep her secret. And that the secret, in some way, involves Dementors - that Petunia has good reason to remember this particular detail very well. It does not seem that she has any personal experience with a Dementor, as she does not seem to recognize Dudley's symptoms. Perhaps she has been warned that if she goes against her pact, she'll be sent to Azkaban - but that certainly does not seem like Dumbledore's style. I would speculate, instead, that she did something prior to Lily's death that could have been punishable by a sentence in Azkaban (assuming, of course, that muggles like Petunia may be tried according to wizard law for crimes within/against the magical community). Her crime would have been shameful, and having to do with her nosy, spying habits - but probably cannot be so bad as to make her, for example, culpable in the death of her sister. Dumbledore knows of her guilt, and has promised to keep her secret, and thus keep her away from Azkaban, provided she keeps Harry. This, for him - seems like perfect justice - we know he disapproves of Dementors anyway. And Petunia, by living her life as she is - may be inflicting a punishment on herself nearly as terrible. my two bits, for what they're worth Cheers, Caesian From squeakinby at tds.net Sun Aug 15 17:16:53 2004 From: squeakinby at tds.net (squeakinby) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 13:16:53 -0400 Subject: Oh Darn! I mistranslated ehwaz! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <411F9A85.7010005@tds.net> No: HPFGUIDX 110116 entropymail wrote: >- > >1)Lily used Ancient Magic to protect Harry (I believe the scar on >Harry's head is actually a protective rune, rather than a lightning bolt) > > > OOTP (UK hardcover page 631) OWLS chapter After leaving her O.W.L.S. test, Hermione is kicking herself for mixing up 2 runes:. Eihwaz--defense against danger Ehwaz--rune of trust Entropy is correct--Eihwaz is lightning boltish. Well done, Entropy! It would not surprise me in the least now to get to the end of Book 7 and find out it was never a lightning bolt, it was a rune mark all along. Jem From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Sun Aug 15 17:29:34 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 17:29:34 -0000 Subject: James & Snape: Related? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110117 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Wendi Williams" wrote: > The only three adult females in the books named after flowers are > Lily, Petunia, and Narcissa, and we all know how important names > are to Jo. Also, Narcissa is described as being very similar > physically to Petunia (blonde hair and sharp features). So yes, I > am insinuating that Narcissa is a long-lost Evans sister (don't > throw things at me!). She would have had to have been adopted > by a rich, pure-blood wizarding family -- the Blacks, so that still > fits (and she doesn't look like any of them, that we know of) -- > but I can't imagine why the Evans's would have given her up, unless > there was some Nefarious Plot going on. Yeah, crazy, I know, but > who knows? JKR has indeed verified that Narcissa is merely an exception because she'd already liked that name for her character, and that there is no relation to the Evans sisters. Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Sun Aug 15 17:50:31 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 17:50:31 -0000 Subject: revelations from the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110118 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" wrote: > 1)Lily used Ancient Magic to protect Harry (I believe the scar on > Harry's head is actually a protective rune, rather than a lightning bolt) JKR has specifically said that the shape of the scar is not what is significant. Elsewhere, she remarked that she chose a lightening bolt because it is easily recognizable (i.e. to make Harry stand out in a crowd). Josh From HPGroup at colinogilvie.co.uk Sun Aug 15 13:09:48 2004 From: HPGroup at colinogilvie.co.uk (Colin O) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 14:09:48 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] revelations from the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <411F609C.2030609@colinogilvie.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 110119 Diane Klopp wrote: > * Dumbledore's patronus is a phoenix > > I am not particularly surprised by this revelation to be honest, particularly with the way Fawkes comes to Dumbledore (and Harry's) aid at times. -- Regards, Colin From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Sun Aug 15 17:53:27 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 17:53:27 -0000 Subject: revelations from the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110120 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Diane Klopp" wrote: > At the Edinburgh Festival, JKRowling has reveled the following: > > * Aberforth Dumbledore is the barman in the Hog's Head > * Dumbledore's patronus is a phoenix Ha! So much for some of those questions. ;-) > * Grawp will be more controllable in the sixth book > * We will see a bit more of Rita Skeeter > * There will be a new character called McLagan > * Harry does NOT have a godmother > > Also, Petunia is NOT a squib, she is definately muggle-born. That's not all... she gave further hints identifying that Petunia is indeed the late-bloomer. > She gave two questions for us to think about: Oh, let's see... there was also another incident about not giving away any shippy clues as there are quite enough already, but that we'd need to read between the lines. *shrugs* Josh, who'll worry about posting about those 2 questions after more time to think about it. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 15 18:36:07 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 18:36:07 -0000 Subject: James & Snape: Related? - or Snape & Sirius? In-Reply-To: <20040815145915.38976.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110121 Magda Grantwich wrote: > If Snape has to be related to anyone (something I'm not convinced > about but for the sake of speculation...), then there are good (or at > least not-bad) indications that he might be related to Sirius. How > about as an illegitimate half-brother? > > Why do Sirius and Snape have such a personal hatred going on between > them? JKR has said that the two loathed each other by the time of the > Prank, which was a result of this hatred. We've all speculated that > while we can understand why Snape might hate Sirius, we're not sure > why Sirius reciprocated. So here's my theory. Alla: Hi, Magda! I also speculated earlier that either James or Sirius are related to Snape. Since I also consider Prank to be the consequence of long and mutual hatred, not the REASON of such hatred, I have been trying to find the reasons for it. Your theory is convincing enough. We all know Sirius infamous: "Snape knew more curses when he arrived at school than half the kids in seventh year, and he was part of a gang of Slytherins who nearly all turned out to be death Eaters" (GoF, p.531, paperback) I think one of the possible readings of this quote suggests that Sirius knew Snape before he came to Hogwarts. How would Sirius knew about Snape extensive knowledege of Dark Arts otherwise? I like your speculation about Sirius obsessing with Snape physical appearance, because it reminded him of his father. I guess no warm and fuzzy feelings between Sirius and his dad too. From aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com Sun Aug 15 18:54:05 2004 From: aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com (aboutthe1910s) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 18:54:05 -0000 Subject: revelations from the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110122 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Josh Warren" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Diane Klopp" > wrote: > > At the Edinburgh Festival, JKRowling has reveled the following: > > > > * Aberforth Dumbledore is the barman in the Hog's Head > > * Dumbledore's patronus is a phoenix > > Ha! So much for some of those questions. ;-) > > > * Grawp will be more controllable in the sixth book > > * We will see a bit more of Rita Skeeter > > * There will be a new character called McLagan > > * Harry does NOT have a godmother > > > > Also, Petunia is NOT a squib, she is definately muggle-born. > > That's not all... she gave further hints identifying that Petunia is > indeed the late-bloomer. > > > She gave two questions for us to think about: > > Oh, let's see... there was also another incident about not giving > away any shippy clues as there are quite enough already, but that > we'd need to read between the lines. > > *shrugs* > > Josh, who'll worry about posting about those 2 questions after more > time to think about it. At The Leaky Cauldron (specifically, here: http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/MTarchives/004979.html) this is said: "On the matter of Petunia: I haven't written it down exactly but both my sister and I agree she did NOT say Petunia is muggle-born. She said she is a MUGGLE, but implied there is more to Petunia. She didn't put a lot of emphasis on it, but there was definitely something she didn't want to reveal." Just to clarify, as the phrase "muggle-born" implies a wizard from non-magical parents rather than a non-magical person. aboutthe1910s From romulus at hermionegranger.us Sun Aug 15 19:35:53 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 19:35:53 -0000 Subject: focus on Hermione In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110123 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "scoutmom21113" wrote: Ravenclaw Bookworm: > Unfortunately, I found the arguments to be illogical. RMM: Well then, let me help you understand them. :-) Ravenclaw Bookworm: > It is only natural to expect the next question to be about > Hermione's birthday ? JKR just anticipated that and answered > it. RMM: Only natural? Really? Maybe, maybe not. You can't logically assume that. You're guessing. Fact is though, Jo did volunteer the birthday of Hermione Granger. And that is what I stated in the article. Ravenclaw Bookworm: If an author has to use interviews or a website to add > important clues to what is written in the books, he/she has failed. > The books must stand on their own. RMM: Well, the books will stand on their own. As books 6 and 7 have yet to come out, we are all SPECULATING about what will happen. I am anticipating that Hermione Granger is the subject of the prophecy and I believe Jo Rowling will show us exactly that when she finishes the books. Are you begrudging Jo the opportunity to give us hints and such to what is going on and what is to happen? Ravenclaw Bookworm: > > << [Quoted from JKR's website] "In the dim and distant past > Hermione's surname was 'Puckle', but it didn't suit her at all and > was quickly changed for something a little bit less frivolous.">> > > Notice the phrase "less frivolous", not "more > symbolic". RMM: :-) I'm sorry but I have to laugh at this one. Fact is, her surname is not Puckle but - Granger. Again, you won't let Jo change her mind and develop the story the way she would like? Ravenclaw Bookworm: > The relationship of quicksilver/mercury to the > discussion of whether she was born in 1979 or 1980 doesn't matter > if the initials HG aren't important. RMM: Yes, but to dentists who use MERCURY AMALGAM every day for teeth fillings, HG is darned important! :-) Ravenclaw Bookworm: > > << In the Q&A at the National Press Club, October 20, 1999, Jo > Rowling stated, in regard to Hermione's name, that it came from a > character in Shakespeare's play A Winter's Tale, although Jo says > that the characters are not at all similar. Jo thought it made sense > for a couple of professional dentists to name their only daughter > something like that to show how clever they were.>> > > Clever, as in pretentious, as in `look how well-read we are'. RMM: Now Hermione's parents are "pretentious"? I pity you folks out there who have no clue about the characters in Jo's books. Hermione's parents are nothing of the sort. Ravenclaw Bookworm: > This is partially correct. The Roman calendar was a lunar calendar. > But your logic doesn't hold up. > > First, the Roman calendar started on the vernal equinox, not March > 1st. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_calendar.) RMM: Incorrect, see here: http://www.clubs.psu.edu/up/aegsa/rome/romecal.html and here for the description for March 1: http://www.clubs.psu.edu/up/aegsa/rome/mar01.htm#mar01 also here: http://home.earthlink.net/~walterk1/Patr/Misc/TheCalendar.html Sorry, you're logic doesn't add up. Ravenclaw Bookworm: > Are you > counting from the full moon, new moon, or the phase of the moon that > occurred on the equinox? > To say that the moon is > "historically" waning on September 19th is inaccurate. RMM: Well the IDES of September were historically on the 13th. And the IDES of any month were associated with the FULL MOON. See here: http://www.12x30.net/calends.html Again, your information is faulty. :-) As a side note, and I forgot to put it in my article, but did you know that September is known as the MAGICAL MONTH? RMM www.hermionegranger.us From catlady at wicca.net Sun Aug 15 20:25:37 2004 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 20:25:37 -0000 Subject: Orphan TMR (was AlwaysMonday/book date/orphan TMR/Salicylic/HouseElves/Names In-Reply-To: <002001c482ae$7b810570$63c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110124 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110101 : Catlady wrote: << I like to think that baby Tom Marvie lived with his maternal grandparents long enough to remember all they told him about their wonderful ancestry and his father's bad behavior. I also like to think that they, um, *exaggerated* how married his parents were... They must have died for him to end up in an orphanage. >> DuffyPoo replied: <> Oh, pronoun problem! When I said "they" must have died, I was referring to the maternal grandparents rather than to the parents. Either little Tommy went straight into the orphanage when he was born or he lived with someone for some time before the orphanaage. I prefer the latter because it explains how he got all that info about being descended from Salazar Slytherin and the reason his father left his mother was that he discovered that she was a witch. Info which it is not likely that a Muggle orphanage would tell him. If he lived with someone at first, why was he in an orphanage by the time he started Hogwarts? Presumably because the 'someone' had died. If he got his info from his foster parents, why did he tell Dippet that "they told me at the orphanage that my mother had died when I was born" instead of sayinsg his foster parents told him? Easy! TMR has no objection to lying in order to make people feel sorry for him so he can get his own way. Besides, it probably isn't literally a LIE. From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Sun Aug 15 20:29:39 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 20:29:39 -0000 Subject: Petunia/Full script up on JKR's site (was Edinburgh Festival..) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110125 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "aboutthe1910s" wrote: > At The Leaky Cauldron (specifically, here: > http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/MTarchives/004979.html) this is said: > "On the matter of Petunia: I haven't written it down exactly but both > my sister and I agree she did NOT say Petunia is muggle-born. She said > she is a MUGGLE, but implied there is more to Petunia. She didn't put > a lot of emphasis on it, but there was definitely something she didn't > want to reveal." > > Just to clarify, as the phrase "muggle-born" implies a wizard from > non-magical parents rather than a non-magical person. > > aboutthe1910s Carolyn: You might like to go direct to JKR's site - the full script is already up, and differs in some details from the hints already posted here. On Petunia, it says: Q: Is Aunt Petunia a Squib? A: Good question. No she is not, but - (laughter). No, she is not a squib. She is a muggle, but - (laughter). You will have to read the other books. You might have got the impression that there is a little bit more to Aunt Petunia than meets the eye, and you will find out what it is. She is not a squib, although that is a very good guess. Oh, I am giving a lot away here. I am being shockingly indiscreet. On Dudders, however, she is much more definite: Q: Is there more to Dudley than meets the eye? A: No. (Laughter). What you see is what you get. I am happy to say that he is definitely a character without much back story. He is just Dudley. Its quite a long transcript, with much to ponder on! Carolyn From yahoogroups at catbirdco.us Sun Aug 15 20:33:16 2004 From: yahoogroups at catbirdco.us (Michal) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 13:33:16 -0700 Subject: spells not cast, wands not used Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040815133300.03448920@mail.catbirdco.us> No: HPFGUIDX 110126 At 01:08 AM 8/2/04, you wrote: >DuffyPoo: > >As an aside, which I probably shouldn't do, if LV went after James first, >which he apparently did (or so the books say), why on earth didn't James >AK LV? Michal: If this has been discussed, please forgive/ignore (but send me a post number ). I've noticed that in several tight spots, HP could solve a current problem by using one of the spells he already knows, but for some reason he doesn't. Could the reason be the story and it's need for certain things to happen? For example: When HP is stuck in the trick step with his egg, wand, map, cloak, and bubble bath aura, why didn't he just Accio the egg and the map? Is HP thick? Nope. Crouch!Moody needed the map. In a few other places, HP and others have cast spells without their wands (Lumos in the alley with the dementors, for example, and Lupin's hand-held fire just before the dementor comes into the train compartment). Surely the concept of wandless magic would have caught at least Hermione's attention and triggered some experimentation? Especially in DA meetings? Wouldn't such skills be valuable? From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 15 21:23:25 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 21:23:25 -0000 Subject: Sirius - New Tie to Christianity Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110127 We have discussed many time the extent to which Christianity plays a role in the Wizard world. I don't mean so much underlying Christian themes and philosophy, but as an active part of daily life. For those who haven't read JKR Edinburgh transcript- http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/news_view.cfm?id=80 ...here is a quote from it. - - - Edinburgh Book Festival Q & A - - - Q: Does Harry have a godmother? If so, will she make an appearance in future books? A: No, he doesn't. I have thought this through. ... When Harry was born, it was at the very height of Voldemort fever last time so his **christening** was a very hurried, quiet affair with just Sirius, just the best friend. At that point it looked as if the Potters would have to go into hiding so obviously they could not do the big christening thing and invite lots of people. Sirius is the only one, unfortunately. I have got to be careful what I say there, haven't I? - - - - End Quote - - - - The appointing of Godparent and/or potential guardians does not have to be part of a religious cerimony, and indeed, many times it is not. People simply ask specific friends or family if they will agree to take on the role in the event of the parents' death. In the Lutheran tradition, babies are baptised as soon as possible after they are born, and it is at that time that Godparents are named. Other Christian traditions, like Baptists - I think, don't baptise members until they are adults or near adults. In that tradition, I'm not sure how or when Godparents come into play. True, we don't see a lot of emphasis on the Church and Religion in the books, but I don't think that's that far off from real life. My childhood home town has a population of about 400, and I can assure you that, nice and modern as it is, our small church can't hold that many people, and it is rarely full. So, in most typical communities, a majority of people don't go to church regularly. Many of those only make it to church for weddings and funerals. In the Potter-world, I don't see any incompatability between religion and the wizard world. In this fictional world, magic is a form of technology; in a sense, just a branch of Physics that Muggles haven't discovered yet, or a form of God-gifted genius much like musical, artistic, or intellectual genius. I will temper that by saying that a great deal, if not a vast majority, of persecution of wizards has been instigated by the Church, so it is no wonder that witches and wizards don't take an more active role in the more routine aspect of religion. So, much like the many many muggle who routinely DON'T go to church, wizards probably have a firm belief and faith in a heavenly God, but don't place faith or trust in the earthly church. Just a thought. Steve/asian_lovr2 - soon to be b_boymn From dontask2much at yahoo.com Sun Aug 15 21:59:28 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 17:59:28 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: focus on Hermione References: Message-ID: <003c01c48313$2396f710$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 110128 "From: "romulusmmcdougal" RMM: Well, the books will stand on their own. As books 6 and 7 have yet to come out, we are all SPECULATING about what will happen. I am anticipating that Hermione Granger is the subject of the prophecy and I believe Jo Rowling will show us exactly that when she finishes the books. Are you begrudging Jo the opportunity to give us hints and such to what is going on and what is to happen?" charme: RMM, I like reading your posts; I have a pretty open mind and even considered that you might be right about Hermoine. After reading the JKR transcript today, I'm less inclined to think that Hermoine is the "who" in the prophecy simply because of this: "Who was the first character that you invented? Harry. He really is the whole story. The whole plot is contained in Harry Potter; his past, present and future-that is the story. Harry came to me first and everything radiated out from him. I gave him his parents, then his past, then Hogwarts, and the wizarding world got bigger and bigger. He was the starting point." Harry "really" is the whole story - so I think that makes your theory, while still feasible, less likely to happen. charme, who wishes someone would get a ladder for me because climbing back and forth over this Hermoine fence is hell on my knees :) From mongo62aa at yahoo.ca Sun Aug 15 22:21:05 2004 From: mongo62aa at yahoo.ca (mongo62aa) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 22:21:05 -0000 Subject: JKR web update In-Reply-To: <55.5eba9a19.2e50d9f6@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110129 MadameSSnape: That's a YEAR and eleven days, actually - Ginny is a year behind Harry & Ron. And two Leos together? :::shuddering::: Me: I do not think that JKR gives much (if any) thought to the meanings of the astrological Sun signs of her characters. On the other hind, it is probably significant that both Harry and Ginny share the sign of Leo the lion. Lion and lioness... Bill From mail at chartfield.net Sun Aug 15 18:33:11 2004 From: mail at chartfield.net (queen_astrofiammante) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 18:33:11 -0000 Subject: revelations from the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110130 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Diane Klopp" wrote: [snip] > 2. Why didn't Dumbledore try to kill Voldemort in that scene at the > end of book five? Dumbledore gave a kind of reason to Voldemort but > it's not the real answer, and Dumbledore knows something more. I must admit I assumed that we should look to the prophecy for the answer to this one: "...and either must die at the hand of the other, for neither can live while the other survives..." I imagine Dumbledore doesn't kill Voldemort because Voldemort will not be truly vanquished unless he is killed by Harry, something that for narrative reasons (he's still not powerful enough with two more books outstanding) and practical reasons (he's just been through a dreadful ordeal at the hands of the Death Eaters) Harry is not currently capable of doing. I supposed Dumbledore's strategy was to protect Harry until he was strong enough to tackle Voldemort himself. As to the 'kind of reason', here is the passage in question. OOP p. 718 (UK Bloomsbury hardback edition): "You do not seek to kill me, Dumbledore?" called Voldemort, his scarlet eyes narrowed over the top of the shield. "Above such brutality, are you?" "We both know that there are other ways of destroying a man, Tom" Dumbledore said calmly, continuing to walk towards Voldemort as though nothing had happened to interrupt his stroll up the hall. "Merely taking your life would not satisfy me, I admit..." "There is nothing worse than death, Dumbledore" snarled Voldemort. "You are quite wrong," said Dumbledore, still closing in on Voldemort and speaking as lightly as if they were discussing the matter over drinks... [snip] Indeed, your failure to understand that there are much worse things than death has always been your greatest weakness..." [snip to p. 720] "Kill me now, Dumbledore..." Blinded and dying, every part of him screaming for release, Harry felt the creature use him again... "If death is nothing, Dumbledore, kill the boy..." Let the pain stop, thought Harry... let him kill us... end it Dumbledore... death is nothing compared to this... And I'll see Sirius again... And as Harry's heart filled with emotion, the creature's coils loosened, the pain was gone. I assume that Dumbledore's comment "merely taking your life would not satisfy me" is the "kind of reason". If not, and coupled with the words "your failure to understand that there are much worse things than death has always been your greatest weakness" suggests that Dumbledore does indeed have some sort of master plan for Harry and Voldemort that we have so far failed to appreciate. My current problem with this question is that it seems too easily answered from what we know - Dumbledore can't kill Voldemort because Harry has to kill Voldemort. Obviously there is some level of meaning I haven't worked out. Any thoughts? "queen_astrofiammante" From inkling108 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 15 18:34:13 2004 From: inkling108 at yahoo.com (inkling108) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 18:34:13 -0000 Subject: Voldemort: Between Life and Death? (Long) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110131 The two key questions JKR spoke of today in Edinburg both concern the nature of Voldemort's "life." Why didn't he die when the curse rebounded, and why didn't Dumbledore try to kill him when he had the chance? These questions also touch on the most enigmatic line in the Prophecy: "neither can live while the other survives." On the face of it this makes no sense, unless one of the two is not truly alive. Before I go further, let me apologize if I'm repeating some ideas,as I'm sure I must be! I'm fairly new on the block and can scarcely keep up with current posts, let alone the archives. I also should state that I believe that canon clearly indicates that the One in the prophecy is Harry and only Harry, so my speculations reflect that belief. Okay, here goes: It's striking that in GoF and OotP, the returned Voldemort is never referred to as alive. Instead, everyone says "he's returned," "he's back," or "he got his body back." No one says "he lives" (not even the Death Eaters) or "he's alive again." True, he calls the ceremony that brings him back a "rebirthing." Question is, what exactly was reborn and in what fashion? The ritual, he says, is an old bit of magic. In fact it reads like a kind of perverse alchemy, which would mean it was old indeed, from the Renaissance or Middle Ages. Rebirth from the waters is an alchemical process, but the goal in alchemy was to produce a body of light within the physical body, the "body of living silver." To this end an alchemical retort was always sealed, to keep the spirit from escaping during the boiling of the waters. In Voldy's case, however, not only is the cauldron (retort) open (no spirit left to escape? Changeling Hypothesis?) but the elements thrown into it are taken by intimidation (flesh) assault (blood) and murder (bone). This debased ritual then produces a body that resembles nothing so much as a skeleton. In alchemical terms, this represents domination by the lowest element, the hard, dry, stony earth, with just enough water (blood) to hold it all together. And even that little bit of blood is stolen from you know who. Alchemically speaking, a human body consists not only of flesh, blood and bone (water and earth), but air and fire (spiritual elements). As there is no mention of these, alchemically speaking, the reconstituted Voldemort may be incomplete, not truly human. Not only is there no mention of spirit, but there is no indication that reconstituted Voldy eats, sleeps, sweats, or eliminates. In fact it's very hard to picture him doing any of these things -- in other words, being a full human being. If Dumbledore were aware that Voldemort is not properly alive, he would know that he could not kill him. This would explain why he did not try at the end of Book 5. What if Voldemort, having passed into a state somewhere between life and death, can only be vanquished by the person who has the ability to enter the realm between life and death and meet and destroy him? What if the only person who can do this is our boy? Why Harry? Because whatever happened at Godric's Hollow created a reaction (possibly alchemical?) that bonded the two together in a circle no one else can enter? How will Harry pass between life and death? Here's an intriguing question. It may have to do with his parents, already beyond the veil, and what happened when Sirius passed through the veil. I think the mirror(s) (Sirius's and Erised) will come into play as well. Voldemort also says during his rebirthing speech that he decided to settle, in the short run, for reinhabiting his old body. We do not know for certain that the body born from the cauldron is identical to the body Voldemort had before he was blasted by the rebounded curse, or even what happened to that original body. However, based on what Voldy says and the fact that the DE's all seem to recognize him, and that Harry himself recognizes that face that had haunted his dreams, we can be surmise that it is at the very least a close copy of the original body. (Could it possibly be the very same body, and where has it been in the interim?) If it is virtually or literally the same body, that could mean that Voldemort had ceased to be fully human even before the curse that failed (Remember what Hagrid said in PS/SS about Voldy not being human enough to die). Which could mean that he lost his soul or spirit even before encountering Harry, which is problematic for the Changeling Hypothesis. Or maybe he didn't lose his soul, but exchanged it, like Faust, for superhuman power? Whatever he did to prevent himself from dying a human death clearly came at a cost, a cost that was revealed (or activated?)when he encountered Harry and was blasted by his own spell. And now "neither can live while the other survives." His rebirthing ceremony could only take him so far -- not far enough to be truly alive, and not far enough to override whatever happened at Godric's Hollow. I could go on and on, but this is already pretty long. If you have read this far, thanks for your patience. Lots of questions, what are the answers??!! Ideas, anyone? Out of breath, Inkling From terpnurse at qwest.net Sun Aug 15 19:09:17 2004 From: terpnurse at qwest.net (Steven Spencer) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 12:09:17 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Oh Darn! I mistranslated ehwaz! In-Reply-To: <411F9A85.7010005@tds.net> References: <411F9A85.7010005@tds.net> Message-ID: <9AB8EDD4-EEEE-11D8-B420-0003930C168E@qwest.net> No: HPFGUIDX 110132 Jem wrote: > OOTP (UK hardcover page 631) OWLS chapter > > After leaving her O.W.L.S. test, Hermione is kicking herself for mixing > up 2 runes:. > Eihwaz--defense against danger > Ehwaz--rune of trust > > Entropy is correct--Eihwaz is lightning boltish. Furthermore, Eihwaz (also known as Yr), represents the Yew tree (Voldemort's wand was made of Yew) and beyond *that*, the Yew tree was regarded as a symbol of resurrection, and was often planted in graveyards. I had a "forehead-slapping" moment earlier and, like Hermione, rushed to my library to look for books on runes. However, Eihwaz doesn't look quite as much like a lightning bolt as Sowelu (or Sigel), which represents the Sun, and Light's defeat over Darkness. That's also a strong protection symbol. Great connections here!!! Terpnurse From mail at chartfield.net Sun Aug 15 19:22:33 2004 From: mail at chartfield.net (queen_astrofiammante) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 19:22:33 -0000 Subject: James & Snape: Related? - or Snape & Sirius? In-Reply-To: <20040815145915.38976.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110133 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > If Snape has to be related to anyone (something I'm not convinced > about but for the sake of speculation...), then there are good (or > at least not-bad) indications that he might be related to Sirius. > How about as an illegitimate half-brother? Congratulations on a wonderful theory - I really enjoyed reading it, and it does read very convincingly, especially as an explanation of the visceral hatred between Snape and Sirius. They are undoubtedly described with physical characteristics in common - height (I think Snape is initially described as 'a tall man') and hair colour. Also, we have the interesting question of Snape's blood status, information which we have never yet been made privy to. We think that he must be pureblood or at least a very well-connected half-blood to be in Slytherin. Being an offshoot of a family like the Blacks would serve very well. Added to which, it does explain Snape's early interest in the Dark Arts and his membership of the Death Eaters and the reason why an admittedly nasty incident of bullying gets classified as "Snape's worst memory". But inevitably, here are a couple of things that came to mind in the other direction. Firstly, I had always thought James and Sirius were the two that were related, and that the mysteriously absent Pureblood Potters were perhaps an offshoot of the Black family. Remember that quote from Prisoner of Azkaban (UK Bloomsbury paperback p. 152): "You'd have thought Black and Potter were brothers," chimed in Professor Flitwick. "Inseparable!" That line has always stuck out like a sore thumb to me, just as much as James saying "It's more the fact he existed..." - over which I do admit your argument is very satisfying. I thought James and Sirius might be cousins based on a Black sister who married a Mr Potter - or possibly a relationship through Sirius' mother. Add to this the supreme arrogance of the young James Potter and his own undoubted knowledge of hexes, jinxes and curses that he likes to let off in the school corridors. Secondly, and I hate to go over old ground here, but I have tremendous trouble seeing how the Perseus Evans anagram can possibly be an accident, even after the Mark Evans fiasco. A red herring, possibly, but not accidental. Here, with extreme brevity, are my reasons: 1. It's too elegant - there are very nearly internal anagrams in the two words. You need to swap just one letter - the V from Severus and the P from Snape - to make it work. 2. The resulting name is totally consistent in style with many others in the book - a mythological or astronomical first name married with a very ordinary surname. Sirius Black, Hestia Jones, Arabella Figg, Alastor Moody, Mundungus Fletcher, Minerva McGonagall, I could go on and on. 3. The resulting name just happens to include the surname of one of the book's most important characters (yes, I do realise why this isn't nearly as convincing an argument as it might once have been...) 4. Where there is a Perseus, wouldn't you expect to find an Andromeda? And, lo and behold, one appears. If Snape has a blood connection to the Blacks, this has superb potential for melodrama. So, if Snape is related to anyone, isn't it likely in the light of this to be Lily Evans? And wouldn't that explain the equally visceral hatred he displays to her: "I don't need help from filthy little Mudbloods like her". True, we know she's muggle-born but then again we also know there's something about the Evans family that doesn't quite fit the rules - see the current debates on Dudley and Petunia. As for Petunia being Harry's 'only living relative', I invite sceptics to consider the suitability of Severus Snape as the sole guardian of James Potter's orphaned son. Incidentally, I think the reason for Lily's intervention in the Pensieve scene is, apart from the opportunity to make James look small, evidence that she might have been the female Gryffindor prefect in her year. My personal favourite candidate for the Half-blood Prince, excluding Godric Gryffindor himself, is Perseus Evans - whoever he turns out to be. My thanks for providing some marvellous food for thought. "queen_astrofiammante" From l_zinkiewicz at yahoo.com Sun Aug 15 19:39:57 2004 From: l_zinkiewicz at yahoo.com (Lucy Zinkiewicz) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 19:39:57 -0000 Subject: JKR's Edinburgh Festival Q&A is on her website now (under news) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110134 Well worth reading, for it clarifies a few things currently being discussed - for a start, JKR says Petunia "is a muggle", as opposed to being Muggle-born. And the spelling of the new character is "McClaggan". And it's not absolutely confirmed that the Hogs Head barman is Abelforth, though it seems likely. And I'm sure the wording of the two questions will keep people arguing for eons... Lucy From terpnurse at qwest.net Sun Aug 15 20:32:56 2004 From: terpnurse at qwest.net (Steven Spencer) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 13:32:56 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Godric's Sword and Voldemort's Defeat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4A63D2E3-EEFA-11D8-B420-0003930C168E@qwest.net> No: HPFGUIDX 110135 Forgive me if this has been discussed before, but my friend and I have been talking about the eventual Final Showdown. We're both convinced that V. and Harry cannot fight each other magically. They're both too strongly protected against each other, so the final battle will have to involve something either more mundane, or spiritual. My friend's thinking is that Harry will end up using Godric's sword against Voldemort. My thinking is more along the lines of the emotional - that Harry will use (ugh!) Love to vanquish Voldemort. I'm not fond of that, but to me it seems the way it's going to go down. Any thoughts? Terpnurse From mietoesarepink at comcast.net Sun Aug 15 21:34:25 2004 From: mietoesarepink at comcast.net (Maren Gest) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 15:34:25 -0600 Subject: Triwizard Tournament -- fourth school? (Re: Dumbledore and Socks, Magical Contracts, and Bertie Botts Beans) References: Message-ID: <000801c4830f$a3476610$6501a8c0@C3P0> No: HPFGUIDX 110136 I wonder what school the Fake Moody put Harry's name under? We know it wasn't Hogwarts, because Cedric was from Hogwarts. "Maren Gest" From dontask2much at yahoo.com Sun Aug 15 22:44:37 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 18:44:37 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Voldemort: Between Life and Death? (Long) References: Message-ID: <001201c48319$737b7bb0$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 110138 ----- Original Message ----- From: "inkling108" > > The two key questions JKR spoke of today in Edinburg both concern > the nature of Voldemort's "life." Why didn't he die when the curse > rebounded, and why didn't Dumbledore try to kill him when he had the > chance? > > > It's striking that in GoF and OotP, the returned Voldemort is never > referred to as alive. Instead, everyone says "he's returned," "he's > back," or "he got his body back." No one says "he lives" (not even > the Death Eaters) or "he's alive again." True, he calls the > ceremony that brings him back a "rebirthing." Question is, what > exactly was reborn and in what fashion? charme: The more I keep reading these theories, the more I focus on how much like someone who has had his soul "sucked out" by a Dementor that Voldemort really is. I mean, the similiarities are astonishing according to Lupin's description in PoA: "Dementors are among the foulest creatures that walk this earth. They infest the darkest, filthiest places, they glory in decay and despair, they drain peace, hope,and happiness out of the air around them. Even Muggles feel their presence, though they can't see them. Get too near a dementor and every good feeling, every happy memory will be sucked out of you. 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." How interesting that to my way of thinking, the last 2 sentences seem to describe LV perfectly, IMO. charme From juli17 at aol.com Sun Aug 15 22:46:36 2004 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17ptf) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 22:46:36 -0000 Subject: JKR's Edinburgh Festival Q&A is on her website now (under news) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110139 Here are the two answers I found most intriguing, and why: 1. Q: Apart from Harry, Snape is my favourite character because he is so complex and I just love him. Can he see the Thestrals, and if so, why? Also, is he a pure blood wizard? JKR: Snape's ancestry is hinted at. He was a Death Eater, so clearly he is no Muggle born, because Muggle borns are not allowed to be Death Eaters, except in rare circumstances. You have some information about his ancestry there. He can see Thestrals, but in my imagination most of the older people at Hogwarts would be able to see them because, obviously, as you go through life you do lose people and understand what death is. But you must not forget that Snape was a Death Eater. He will have seen things that Why do you love him? Why do people love Snape? I do not understand this. Again, it's bad boy syndrome, isn't it? It's very depressing. [Laughter]. One of my best friends watched the film and she said, "You know who's really attractive?" I said, "Who?" She said, "Lucius Malfoy!" Julie comments: Notice how JKR didn't actually answer the question about whether Snape is pure blood? She says he isn't Muggle born, and that his ancestry has been hinted at (at least by the fact that he is a Death Eater). But she doesn't tell us that he is pure blood. From this non-answer, can we assume Snape is a half blood like Voldemort and Harry? 2. Q: Has Voldemort or Tom Riddle ever cared for or loved anyone? JKR: Now, that's a cracking question to end with?very good. No, never. [Laughter.] If he had, he couldn't possibly be what he is. You will find out a lot more about that. It is a good question, because it leads us rather neatly to Half Blood Prince, although I repeat for the millionth time that Voldemort is not the half blood prince, which is what a lot of people thought. He is definitely, definitely not. Julie comments: The question of whether V/TR has ever loved anyone leads us rather neatly to the Half Blood Prince, sez JKR. But does this mean the half blood prince is in some way directly connected to V/TR, or does this mean the half blood prince, like V/TR, has never loved anyone (or, likely, been loved by anyone)? If it's the former than perhaps the HBP is a member of the Riddle family. If it is the latter, then the HBP may be one we know has experienced little if any love for others--Snape. Or, could it be, that it is BOTH? Severus Snape, the unloved and unlovable, is related to the Riddle family! Among other things would explain why Voldemort has been inexplicably trusting of and lenient with Snape, as well as the lack of any concrete information about Snape's family/ancestry. Thoughts on this theory? Has it been advanced before? Julie From gopotter2004 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 15 23:00:32 2004 From: gopotter2004 at yahoo.com (gopotter2004) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 23:00:32 -0000 Subject: Godric's Sword and Voldemort's Defeat In-Reply-To: <4A63D2E3-EEFA-11D8-B420-0003930C168E@qwest.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110140 Terpnurse said: My thinking is more along the lines of the emotional - that > Harry will use (ugh!) Love to vanquish Voldemort. I'm not fond of that, but to me it seems the way it's going to go down. Now Me: I tend to agree that Love (no ugh!, so long as she keeps her normal not too sappy style for us) will be a major theme in the final showdown. As I was rereading the prophecy, I noticed that the word "a" was missing: He will have (NO a) power the Dark Lord knows not. Because of this, I fully agree that there will not be (succesful) duelling between the two of them-- rather, as we have seen Love help him so many times before (fawkes' appearances representing dumbledore's love, lily's sacrifice, the love for sirius repelling voldemort, even Neville's loyalty to Harry buying the order time to get to the department of mysteries), it will come into play in the final moments, with either a surge of everyone's love for Harry saving him or spurring him into his final sacrifice of himself for them. Becky, who hates that she's so sure Harry will die and knows she'll be angry for months. From Zarleycat at aol.com Sun Aug 15 23:03:04 2004 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 23:03:04 -0000 Subject: James & Snape: Related? - or Snape & Sirius? In-Reply-To: <20040815145915.38976.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110141 Magda Grantwich wrote: > If Snape has to be related to anyone (something I'm not convinced > about but for the sake of speculation...), then there are good (or at > least not-bad) indications that he might be related to Sirius. How > about as an illegitimate half-brother? > > There's no doubt that there's something very personal in the > Snape-Sirius hatefest. Most assume it's because of the Prank but the > Prank was the result of the hatred, not the cause of it. In the > Pensieve Scene, it was James who initiated the confrontation and > fought with Snape while Sirius was the back-up but there was > something very creepy about the way that Sirius worked to disarm > Snape and keep his temper roiling with his interventions. James was > being, as someone on another site put it, a teenage-alpha-male-jerk > but it was pretty straightforward. > > Sirius's constant stream of put-downs are much more vicious (JKR's > term) and he does display an interesting obsession with Snape's > physical appearance - looks like his dad, perhaps? Is Snape an > acceptable substitute for Sirius' growing antipathy to his/their > father? It's easy for Sirius as a grown-man in his 30's to say that > he hated his parents and everything they stood for but would a > teenager still coming to grips with his heritage and personal > identify really not have found his growing distance from his parents > to be more troublesome? Would he not focus a lot of that developing > revulsion against an external target? > > And if Mr. Black told Sirius about Snape's existence before he went > to Hogwarts (one of those man-to-man-father-son chats) and forbade > him to fight with Snape, wouldn't it be perfect teen logic to think > that as long as he was just backing James up, then it wasn't the same > as fighting with Snape? Marianne: Yes, the antipathy between Snape and Sirius seems so much hotter and on a deeper gut-level than whatever we've been shown or told about the relationship between Snape and James. Even though the implication, or at least what Harry has been led to believe, is that the greater enmity was between James and Severus, perhaps that is not really the case. I wonder, though, assuming your theory to be correct, if Sirius was told what the blood relationship was between them. I could see this theory as playing out with neither of Sirius' parents telling him that Snape is his half-brother. They might not have said anything because they'd assume that their son would be sorted, like all good Blacks, into Slytherin, and that Snape, as a half-Black would naturally be there, too. And, thus, the boys would be, if not exactly allies, at least tolerant of each other as Housemates. So, Sirius goes to Hogwarts and gets himself sorted into Gryffindor. He sees this Snape kid and wonders what the story is, especially if he notices a resemblence to dear, old Dad. At the same time, Snape knew full well what his own parentage was, and saw Sirius as embodying all that had been withheld from him. He had his own resentment because he felt he was as fully deserving of being recognized as a member of the Black family, which is exactly what Sirius threw away. If Snape was sorted into Slytherin, would not Bellatrix and Narcissa also note the resemblence to their uncle? Would they have encouraged Snape in his loathing of blood-traitor Sirius while they were still at school? Could they have played on his resentment at how he'd been treated later on to show him the shining path to glory that awaited him if he pledged allegiance to Voldemort? And, yes, I agree that the Willow incident was the culmination of the bad relationship. My feeling is that something acted as the trigger to this incident. And the fall-out from this included both Sirius leaving his family for good and implications for Snape's future which have yet to be revealed. Marianne From juli17 at aol.com Sun Aug 15 23:22:55 2004 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 19:22:55 EDT Subject: GOF: Ron's a real twit (git) Message-ID: <1c5.1c81ef4b.2e514a4f@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110142 I'm rereading GOF, and I've come to the conclusion that Ron is a real twit (read: git) in this book. I've also come to the conclusion that Harry doesn't recognize his *real* best friend for who that is: Hermoine. And, thirdly, so far in GOF, Ron isn't good enough (or at least, not mature enough) for Hermoine. He's so self-involved and thoughtless--which I do know is the definition of your average fourteen year old! Still, I'd like to smack him upside the head (gently). (In GOF, I'm just getting to the third task) So why is Ron considered Harry's best friend, including by Harry himself? Because Ron's family has taken Harry in several times, or because Ron is a boy? I think it's probably the latter, since best friends are usually of the same sex--despite the fact that Hermoine's two best friends are Harry and Ron. Though it's understandable that Harry sees Ron as his best friend, I'd love to see him acknowledge at some point that the one person who has stood next to him through *everything,* and has proven to be his truest friend of all, isn't Ron, it's Hermoine. In the meantime, I have a hard time seeing what Hermoine sees in Ron, especially after Molly sent Hermoine that tiny Easter egg. Hermoine asks if Ron's mother reads the Daily Prophet, and Ron says "Yep" while stuffing his mouth full of his toffee egg. It's Harry who actually notices Hermoine's sad expression and quickly brings up another subject to take her mind off it. These two reactions have been repetitive throughout the books. Ron usually ignores or dismisses Hermoine's feelings, while Harry is the one who often notices and sometimes tries to alleviate her fears or sadness. I don't have strong 'ship preferences for either R/H or H/H, but I have yet to see any reason Hermoine should go for Ron. (Take Harry, you fool, take Harry!). Maybe when I finish my second read-through of OoTP, the book where it's Harry who acts like a twit, my perception will change! Julie (who does like Ron, but thinks Hermoine deserves more recognition than she's gotten so far) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From romulus at hermionegranger.us Sun Aug 15 23:34:20 2004 From: romulus at hermionegranger.us (romulusmmcdougal) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 23:34:20 -0000 Subject: focus on Hermione In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110143 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Nora Renka" wrote: > >> Ravenclaw Bookworm: > >> The relationship of quicksilver/mercury to the > >> discussion of whether she was born in 1979 or 1980 doesn't matter > >> if the initials HG aren't important. > > > > RMM: Yes, but to dentists who use MERCURY AMALGAM every day for > > teeth fillings, HG is darned important! :-) > Nora: > That's also venturing into the kind of 'logic' that's at the base of > Freudian word association, which has been completely and utterly > destroyed as having any validity. (If interested, the best book is > Sebastiano Timpanaro, _The Freudian Slip_). Using that kind > of 'logic', we hop from one free association to the other, with the > slimmest of causal chains anchoring us, in a world where everything > is deeply significant but can be read to be such in about, oh, fifty > different ways. RMM: Well Nora, let me help you with the logic of it then. For a couple of dentists who have a daughter born to them on Wednesday, September 19, 1979, Wednesday being the day of Mercury (Hg) , also the day of HERMES (Greek for Mercury), it is of a little more significance then that since the child was a girl -- Hermione, instead of Hermes, would be more appropriate for a name. I'm sorry, but where I see great cleverness in the naming of their child you skeptics see nothing but pretension. I dare say, if someone comes up with a 3 syllable word, you must think that person is not just a genius, but a pretensious genius. > >> Ravenclaw Bookworm: > >> > >> << In the Q&A at the National Press Club, October 20, 1999, Jo > >> Rowling stated, in regard to Hermione's name, that it came from a > >> character in Shakespeare's play A Winter's Tale, although Jo says > >> that the characters are not at all similar. Jo thought it made > >> sense for a couple of professional dentists to name their only > >> daughter something like that to show how clever they were.>> > >> > >> Clever, as in pretentious, as in `look how well-read we are'. > > > > RMM: > > Now Hermione's parents are "pretentious"? > > I pity you folks out there who have no clue about the characters > > in Jo's books. Hermione's parents are nothing of the sort. > Nora: > Fresh off the presses: > > > > Does Hermione have any brothers or sisters? > > No, she doesn't. When I first made up Hermione I gave her a younger > sister, but she was very hard to work in. The younger sister was not > supposed to go to Hogwarts. She was supposed to remain a Muggle. It > was a sideline that didn't work very well and it did not have a big > place in the story. I have deliberately kept Hermione's family in > the background. You see so much of Ron's family so I thought that I > would keep Hermione's family, by contrast, quite ordinary. They are > dentists, as you know. They are a bit bemused by their odd daughter > but quite proud of her all the same. > > \ > > Everyone can read for himself, but that seems to line up a lil' more > with the "We named our daughter after an obscure literary figure > because we wanted to be a little more intellectual than the > neighbors". RMM: Okay Nora, are you saying "quite ordinary" equals "pretentious"? Oh now I get it.....in your mind, an ordinary set of folks are typically one-upping the neighbors in everything including the naming of their children!! Hmmmmmmmmm........interesting concept of life there..... RMM www.hermionegranger.us From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 00:13:57 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 00:13:57 -0000 Subject: Petunia's pact (long) In-Reply-To: <56D58EE2-EEDD-11D8-B917-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110144 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, caesian wrote: snips Caesian excellent post. > I would suggest, given Ms. Rowlings statements in interviews, that she > has something planned for Aunt Petunia - something Petunia deeply > wants, but the rest of us will find somehow sad or just in a karmic > sense. Therefore, I believe that what Petunia is getting from this > pact is a secret. Alla: Hi, Caesian! I've snipped your excellent post leaving only this small paragraph, because I want to speculate on something in it based on today's JKR appearance. It is pretty clear after today that there will be surprises in store associate with Petunia, right? JKR commented that Petunia is not a squib, but that was a good guess. what if what Petunia wanted from Dumbledore as a reward for taking Harry in is to bind her magic. Maybe she indeed once manifested an uncontrolled magic and being scared of all things magical was very upset with it. Maybe she hurt somebody unwillingly. Could she ask Dumbledore to do it? Is such thing as "binding somebody's magic" even possible in "Potterverse"? I definitely consider such request to be very sad, but maybe that is what Petunia wanted? Do you think it is very "outlandish"? From navarro198 at hotmail.com Mon Aug 16 00:15:43 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 00:15:43 -0000 Subject: Orphan TMR (was AlwaysMonday/book date/orphan TMR/Salicylic/HouseElves/Names In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110145 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: If he got his info from his foster parents, why did he tell Dippet that "they told me at the orphanage that my mother had died when I was born" instead of sayinsg his foster parents told him? Easy! TMR has no objection to lying in order to make people feel sorry for him so he can get his own way. Besides, it probably isn't literally a LIE. Bookworm: I would have thought that having two "parents" (mother and foster mother) die before he was sent to the orphanage would make people feel even sorrier for him. My mental image was more of a homeless shelter/orphanage where his mother went when she had no place else to go. Ravenclaw Bookworm From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk Mon Aug 16 00:28:05 2004 From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 00:28:05 -0000 Subject: Voldemort: Between Life and Death? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110146 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "inkling108" wrote: > Why Harry? Because whatever happened at Godric's Hollow created a > reaction (possibly alchemical?) that bonded the two together in a > circle no one else can enter? How will Harry pass between life and > death? Here's an intriguing question. It may have to do with his > parents, already beyond the veil, and what happened when Sirius > passed through the veil. I think the mirror(s) (Sirius's and > Erised) will come into play as well. > Alshain: Just adding a thought: What kind of powers did Voldemort transfer to Harry, besides the ability to speak Parseltongue? My thoughts went in the direction of the folklore, when I read your pot about mirrors. Don't people say that there are nasty consequences of the soul-losing variety if you get between two mirrors -- for example, the pair of mirrors Sirius and James used, or one of them plus the Mirror of Erised? Is that what is going to make Harry Voldemort's equal or is there some other way he can do it while preserving his humanity? *shudders and snips some more* Inkling: > > If it is virtually or literally the same body, that could mean that > Voldemort had ceased to be fully human even before the curse that > failed (Remember what Hagrid said in PS/SS about Voldy not being > human enough to die). Which could mean that he lost his soul or > spirit even before encountering Harry, which is problematic for the > Changeling Hypothesis. > > Or maybe he didn't lose his soul, but exchanged it, like Faust, for > superhuman power? Whatever he did to prevent himself from dying a > human death clearly came at a cost, a cost that was revealed (or > activated?)when he encountered Harry and was blasted by his own > spell. And now "neither can live while the other survives." His > rebirthing ceremony could only take him so far -- not far enough to > be truly alive, and not far enough to override whatever happened at > Godric's Hollow. > Alshain: I like both your theories. When I read the transcript of the Edinburgh session I started musing about the unicorn blood from PS, and I wouldn't be surprised if Voldemort has taken it before. Or do phoenixes come into it somehow? Going off on a tangent: Whatever Ancient Magic that Voldemort used to become what he became, I fervently hope it's different in kind from the life debts and Dumbledore's and Lily's Ancient Magic that was used for Harry's protection -- I've always found it irritating to see all of those things lumped together. The former is about using magic for selfish purposes to enhance yourself with extra powers -- trying to set yourself apart from the rest of humanity. The latter is about the things that instead make you *more* human (and which Voldemort would detest because he sees humanity as weakness) -- love, self- sacrifice, mercy etc. More valuable and fundamental, but at the same time more unpredictable and non-quantifiable than disciplines like Charms and Transfiguration, and not something you can study in class or find in books. Huh, I'm waxing philosophical. Better stop. Alshain, hoping that Harry becomes an Unspeakable if he doesn't get an O in Potions From juli17 at aol.com Mon Aug 16 00:30:43 2004 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17ptf) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 00:30:43 -0000 Subject: JKR's Edinburgh Festival Q&A is on her website now (under news) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110147 > > Among other things would explain why Voldemort has been inexplicably > trusting of and lenient with Snape, as well as the lack of any > concrete information about Snape's family/ancestry. > > Thoughts on this theory? Has it been advanced before? > > Julie Oops. Correcting myself, I really meant that Snape would be related to TR's mother's family. The Riddles were Muggles. We don't know the family name of TR's mother, as I recall. Could it have been Snape? Julie From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 01:32:59 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 01:32:59 -0000 Subject: Voldemort: Between Life and Death? (Long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110148 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "inkling108" wrote: huge snip > If Dumbledore were aware that Voldemort is not properly alive, he > would know that he could not kill him. This would explain why he > did not try at the end of Book 5. What if Voldemort, having passed > into a state somewhere between life and death, can only be > vanquished by the person who has the ability to enter the realm > between life and death and meet and destroy him? What if the only > person who can do this is our boy? Alla: You know, your post is very intriguing and one of the those which I think will make me reevaluate the meaning of Dumbledore's 'Indeed, your failure to understand that there are things much worse than death has always been your greates weakness..." OoP, p.814, paperback. I used to think these words refer to the punishment worse than death, which Tom will receive for his sins in the future.(yes, hopefully from Harry) It is quite possible that Voldie is already in the state worse than death, he just is not aware of it yet. Thank you! From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Mon Aug 16 01:43:51 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 01:43:51 -0000 Subject: Petunia's pact (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110149 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > what if what Petunia wanted from Dumbledore as a reward for taking > Harry in is to bind her magic. > Do you think it is very "outlandish"? Well, as an 11 year old, Petunia would have, if she were originally fully magical like Lily, been told that the best way to reduce accidental magic is to learn to use it in a directed manner, etc. In other words, go to Hogwarts. Her parents would have been supportive, as evidenced with Lily, but if she'd refused, she would have had much bigger problems long before Harry turned up on her doorstep (post marriage, post-pregnancy!!!!!). No, no... Vernon would have turned into a toad middelivery of Duddikins. Also, keep in mind the related hinting elsewhere of a late-bloomer... the only person we'll see (and very rare in JKR's world) who will develop magic after the age of 11. I think we all agree that it is Petunia. This would seem to mean that it still hasn't happened yet, and based on other things, won't until book 7. We don't know what hold Dumbledore has over her, but yeah, based on the hints thus far and what not, I don't see a binding making sense. :-) Josh From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 01:49:58 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 01:49:58 -0000 Subject: Petunia's pact (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110150 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Josh Warren" Also, keep in mind the related hinting elsewhere of a late- bloomer... > the only person we'll see (and very rare in JKR's world) who will > develop magic after the age of 11. I think we all agree that it is > Petunia. This would seem to mean that it still hasn't happened yet, > and based on other things, won't until book 7. > > We don't know what hold Dumbledore has over her, but yeah, based on > the hints thus far and what not, I don't see a binding making > sense. :-) > Alla: I realised that I did not finish my post. Thanks! I also agree that Petunia is likely to be the late bloomer, but what if her magic will wake up again after it was binded? As I said, I know that it is pretty out there. :o) From gsanderson at cfl.rr.com Mon Aug 16 02:21:43 2004 From: gsanderson at cfl.rr.com (gsanderson at cfl.rr.com) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 02:21:43 -0000 Subject: JKR's Edinburgh Festival Q&A is on her website now (under news) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110151 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "juli17ptf" wrote: > Oops. Correcting myself, I really meant that Snape would be related > to TR's mother's family. The Riddles were Muggles. We don't know the > family name of TR's mother, as I recall. Could it have been Snape? > > Julie I'm not sure this would fly, since that would make Snape a decendent of Salazar Slytherin, and Dumbledore already said that Riddle was the last. Kristen From lyyved at earthlink.net Sun Aug 15 19:07:10 2004 From: lyyved at earthlink.net (Lynn Eddy) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 15:07:10 -0400 Subject: Off Topic Message-ID: <4EFBB552-EEEE-11D8-9EFB-000393BC2348@earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 110152 I ran across this contest and thought HP fans would be interested. Wouldn't the people at Powell's be surprised to receive hundreds or even thousands of essays about the Harry Potter novels? And I thought the donation for each essay to Reading is Fundamental is very worthwhile and in keeping with other charity drives by JKR, The Leaky Cauldron, etc. Laura Peregrine > > A DECADE OF READING CONTEST > > "What was your most memorable reading experience of the last ten > years?" > > TinL Marketplace sponsor Powell's Books is offering a prize of > $1,000 in books for the best essay response to this question. And > they're donating one dollar for each submission to Reading is > Fundamental, a non-profit children's literacy organization. > > For details and contest rules, please visit: > > https://www.powells.com/10years_essay.html > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nrenka at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 02:47:42 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (Nora Renka) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 02:47:42 -0000 Subject: focus on Hermione In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110153 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romulusmmcdougal" wrote: > RMM: > Well Nora, let me help you with the logic of it then. > For a couple of dentists who have a daughter born to them on > Wednesday, September 19, 1979, Wednesday being the day of Mercury > (Hg), also the day of HERMES (Greek for Mercury), it is of a > little more significance then that since the child was a girl -- > Hermione, instead of Hermes, would be more appropriate for a name. The best word for this is...Baroque. We've already gone over the dates thing and reached a disagreement on the outcome, but I always recall for myself the interview where we get something like 'JKR: Ooh, maths.' (I won't go into the mess that's inevitably made about any character's age...I won't...because someone else inevitably will, again and again...) What's more interesting to argue here is whether there actually IS a subtext of Hermes/Hermione/Mercury, and whether that matters. Notwithstanding the whole complex of issues involving relating Greek divinities to Latin ones and then the complete warping/conflation/whatever you want to call it of that stuff into mediaeval alchemical theory (that I'm not sure really plays into the books EITHER), the whole idea hangs on a thin thread of word association. I think it's looking for Deep Meaning where there really isn't any. As this is not Baroque literature, not every detail fits into a perfectly mapped out canvas and is essential to figuring out the grand scheme of things--didn't Mark Evans learn us all that one? So when we get to this grand denoument in which we find out Hermione is the One, are we going to get a speech like: "Oh, Harry, if you count September as the seventh month and go by a realignment of the calendar using the Julian dates, it all works out so obviously..."? > I'm sorry, but where I see great cleverness in the naming of their > child you skeptics see nothing but pretension. It's a cute name. I believe JKR when she said she got it from 'A Winter's Tale'. I hear the name and think of Euripides/Racine/Rossini's Hermione/Ermione instead, but I'm not going to try for some argument of grand cosmic linkage between the two, because there isn't one. > I dare say, if someone comes up with a 3 syllable word, you must > think that person is not just a genius, but a pretensious genius. When someone plays with extremely loose 'logic' with little canonical relation to the defined universe of the books, this reader does tend to find it pretentious. > RMM: > Okay Nora, are you saying "quite ordinary" equals "pretentious"? > Oh now I get it.....in your mind, an ordinary set of folks are > typically one-upping the neighbors in everything including the > naming of their children!! > Hmmmmmmmmm........interesting concept of life there..... I think they're probably fairly ordinary folks in that they really have no role to play in the story. I think they name their daughter something obscure because they get at least a little bit of a kick out of it. I don't think that there's any Deep Significance to her name or her birthday, partially because... Harry. He really is the whole story. The whole plot is contained in Harry Potter; his past, present and future?that is the story. Harry came to me first and everything radiated out from him. I gave him his parents, then his past, then Hogwarts, and the wizarding world got bigger and bigger. He was the starting point. -Nora goes and drinks a bottle of Lillet with Faith; where are the clean glasses? From meltowne at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 02:55:15 2004 From: meltowne at yahoo.com (meltowne) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 02:55:15 -0000 Subject: Orphan TMR (was AlwaysMonday/book date/orphan TMR/Salicylic/HouseElves/Names In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110154 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: > If he lived with someone at first, why was he in an orphanage by the > time he started Hogwarts? Presumably because the 'someone' had died. > > If he got his info from his foster parents, why did he tell Dippet > that "they told me at the orphanage that my mother had died when I was > born" instead of sayinsg his foster parents told him? Easy! TMR has no > objection to lying in order to make people feel sorry for him so he > can get his own way. Besides, it probably isn't literally a LIE. I wouldn't put it beyond TMR to lie, but he has no particular reason to do so - nothing to gain by doing so. I think what's missing is the identity of his grandfather, Marvolo - I would think that perhaps he was a pwerful wizard at some time. Remember, there were many families willing to take Harry in when his parents dies, and I would assume that TMR could have been taken in by a wizarding family as well - but his mother had married a muggle, and was perhaps shunned by her family. If TMR is in fact the last remaining descendant of Slytherin, then he has no cousins, so perhaps his mother had no family to return to when her husband abandoned her. Otherwise, I would have expected her to return to her family and if she died, one of them would have rased him. This of course raises other questions - like what happened to the rest of Slytherin's line? Sirius Black was the last of the Black line, but not the last descendant from that family. TMR is, however, the LAST of his line. I think we have to take it at face value that his mother died at the orphanage, or at least in the company of muggles, and that's how TMR ended up raised by muggles. I would think he would have otherwise ended up fostered to a wizarding family. From musicofsilence at hotmail.com Mon Aug 16 03:05:25 2004 From: musicofsilence at hotmail.com (lifeavantgarde) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 03:05:25 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Pairing hints in EBD transcript Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110155 Stefanie: |Q:Will Ron and Hermione ever get together? | |A: Well?[Laughter.] What do you think? |[Audience member: I think they will]. |I'm not going to say. I can't say, |can I? I think that, by now, I've given |quite a lot of clues on the subject. That |is all I'm going to say. You will have to |read between the lines on that one. http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/news_view.cfm?id=80 Now, JKR certainly wasn't forthcoming with this answer, as I'm sure we all expect her to behave with questions like this...but the answer, nonetheless is quite interesting. "You will have to read between the lines on that one" Could this be a hint towards an H/HR leaning? It's often been touted that R/HR is "obvious," especially by R/HRers themselves, while H/HR supporters wave the banner of subtext. One certainly doesn't need to read between the lines to glean a R/HR leaning. Of course, there are other 'ships that one could "read between the lines" for. I'm sure supporters of many ships could use this quote as supporting evidence, but as the main questioning that JKR has dealt with concerns a "trio pairing," it's not an off assumption to keep it to that. Since the "read between the lines" quote came after her conclusive "that is all I'm going to say," does it even apply at all? So, canonically, what lines up with this quote? There's certainly H/HR between the lines, with Hermione constantly paying attention to Harry on a more personal level than others, their ability to read each other, and plenty of other things that I'm sure have been hashed and rehashed on the board. One can also say that Hermione's feelings for *anyone* require the reading between the lines, as she's certainly not obvious to the 3rd person-limited POV either way. No quote is going to be the be-all end-all to any 'shipping debate, but I can see a bit of a H/HR favoring in this. What do you all think? From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com Mon Aug 16 03:40:49 2004 From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 03:40:49 -0000 Subject: Sirius - New Tie to Christianity In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110157 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > We have discussed many time the extent to which Christianity plays a > role in the Wizard world. I don't mean so much underlying Christian > themes and philosophy, but as an active part of daily life. > > - Edinburgh Book Festival Q & A - - - > Q: Does Harry have a godmother? If so, will she make an appearance in > future books? > > A: No, he doesn't. I have thought this through. ... When Harry was > born, it was at the very height of Voldemort fever last time so his > **christening** was a very hurried, quiet affair with just Sirius, > just the best friend. For more information on what a British Christening involves, this link may be helpful: http://www.baptism.org.uk/christening.htm - CMC From cmurph18 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 03:47:29 2004 From: cmurph18 at yahoo.com (C M) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 03:47:29 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Pairing hints in EBD transcript In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110158 "What do you all think?" I think that when JKR said we'd have to "read between the lines" she was referring to the lines of her *answer*, not the lines of the books. In other words, we need to read between these lines: "I think that, by now, I've given quite a lot of clues on the subject." And, from my perspective, the clues she's given have all pointed to a Ron/Hermione pairing. Obviously, YMMV. From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Mon Aug 16 04:03:35 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 04:03:35 -0000 Subject: Orphan TMR (was AlwaysMonday/book date/orphan TMR/Salicylic/HouseElves/Names In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110159 Regarding TMR/LV's discovery of his Slytherin ancestory... one would assume that he, having been told his mother's maiden name by the orphanage at somepoint, managed to research the answer? Why would he do so? He would have discovered that he was a parselmouth at somepoint... that raises interesting questions, of course, and he seeks the source. He was a bright kid, don't forget. Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Mon Aug 16 04:13:40 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 04:13:40 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Pairing hints in EBD transcript In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110160 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lifeavantgarde" wrote: > Stefanie: > |Q:Will Ron and Hermione ever get together? > | > |A: ...read between the lines on that one. > What do you all think? As if we don't talk about all this enough over at the Great Debate? :) H/Hr is totally between the lines... more evidenced by people's assumptions and suspicions... even from Ron. Ron is a bit more obvious... at least on the Ron->Hermione side (perfume and jealousy in OotP) though Hr-> in GoF seemed to favor Harry in positives (a priority over Krum and the cheek kiss), and Ron in negatives (scowling about Fleur). Unfortunately, everything does point in both directions in some sense or another, or doesn't quite rule anything out at least... even the most "see! she confirmed it!" quotes leave wiggle room. Should be interesting reading... but thus far, the only point of discussing the H/Hr/R triangle is to keep alive the notion that multiple outcomes are still possible, and to incorportate any of the fighting that may/will occur as a result. Josh From meltowne at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 04:18:58 2004 From: meltowne at yahoo.com (meltowne) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 04:18:58 -0000 Subject: Petunia's pact (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110161 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > Alla: > > I realised that I did not finish my post. Thanks! I also agree that > Petunia is likely to be the late bloomer, but what if her magic will > wake up again after it was binded? What if it is not Petunia whose magic is binded, but Dudley's? We know Harry's name was down to attend Hogwarts from birth. What if Dumbledore knew that so was Dudley? He seemed to know enough about the Dursleys not to arrange a meeting to drop Harry off, but to leave him with a note. Perhaps she knew Petunia was afraid of Dudley being a wizard, and took care of that, in exchange for her raising Harry. Maybe Dumbledore's "last" was an agreement to supress Dudley's magic. Or maybe even more far fetched - Petunia had ability, but the family was in hiding and needed to keep a line of desendants hidden. Thus only one daughter could attend Hogwarts, while the other had to pretend to be a muggle. What better way to pretend to be a muggle than to pretend you hate wizards? Maybe she is a witch, and Dumbledore is her secret keeper. And maybe she gets to return from seclusion when LV is defeated. From musicofsilence at hotmail.com Mon Aug 16 04:19:33 2004 From: musicofsilence at hotmail.com (lifeavantgarde) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 04:19:33 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Pairing hints in EBD transcript In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110162 > Stefanie: Reposting of question for my own sanity :o) |Q: Will Ron and Hermione ever get together? | |A: Well?[Laughter.] What do you think? |[Audience member: I think they will]. |I'm not going to say. I can't say, |can I? I think that, by now, I've given |quite a lot of clues on the subject. That |is all I'm going to say. You will have |to read between the lines on that one. > "What do you all think?" > > C M: > I think that when JKR said we'd have to "read between the lines" she > was referring to the lines of her *answer*, not the lines of the > books. In other words, we need to read between these lines: "I think > that, by now, I've given quite a lot of clues on the subject." And, > from my perspective, the clues she's given have all pointed to a > Ron/Hermione pairing. Obviously, YMMV. Stefanie: Didn't think of looking at it that way; quite good observation, there. However, now that I have looked it over in that way, I'm thinking, if she meant it in regards to her answer, she may've leaned towards saying "That is all I'm going to say. You will have to read between the lines on *this* one." I took the pronouns to refer as "that" is the question "this" is the answer. And to say that *all* of the clues point to R/HR is hardly taking canon into account :o) Does anyone know if there's an audio version of this interview floating around somewhere? I'd love to hear JKR's inflections on some of these answers! (I'm a dork. Quite thoroughly. Talk nerdy to me.) Stefanie From aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 04:19:35 2004 From: aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com (aboutthe1910s) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 04:19:35 -0000 Subject: James & Snape: Related? - or Snape & Sirius? In-Reply-To: <20040815145915.38976.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110163 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > There are many references in OOTP to 12GP being Sirius' mother's > house - and one very pointed one from Snape. It might be simply that > Mr. Black died first so that it was her house alone after that. But > perhaps the house (and the money) belonged to Mrs. Black's family and > all Mr. Black brought to the marriage was his pureblooded heritage. But that would make it a bit odd to be the "Noble and Most Ancient House of Black" if it had only been the *Black* home for one generation, wouldn't it? However, while there is very little description of Mrs. Black, the *is* this: "...the yellowing skin of her face..." (at the end of OotP Ch.4). Now maybe it's just that she's old or something, but I am quite certain that we have heard Snape described as having yellowish skin (on the other hand, I don't remember who *else* we may have seen described as having yellowish skin...maybe it's more common in Jo's writting than I am thinking...) aboutthe1910s From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Mon Aug 16 04:34:06 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 04:34:06 -0000 Subject: Petunia's pact (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110164 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "meltowne" wrote: > What if it is not Petunia whose magic is binded, but Dudley's? Because the comments we referenced from the weekend's book reading specifically state that Dudley is what he appears... and he has no backstory. Josh, who has noticed that if he doesn't correct later posts that contradict truth, it ends up running forever down a fool's path. *sigh* From sweetface531 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 04:46:01 2004 From: sweetface531 at yahoo.com (Justine) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 04:46:01 -0000 Subject: ESE!Moody? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110165 No, I don't really think Moody is ever so evil (yet), but during one of my routine geeky knowledge-gathering sessions, I came across something most interesting. Alastor was one of the fallen angels of Satan's Court. He was known as "the executioner," the executor of decrees handed down by the court. Is this a hint for the future books? Or have we already seen this played out in the form of Fake! Moody? Theories? Apologies if this has been discussed already! Justine, a staunch defender of ESW!Lupin... I think Remus is ever so wonderful. :-) From sweetface531 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 05:06:23 2004 From: sweetface531 at yahoo.com (Justine) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 05:06:23 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Pairing hints in EBD transcript In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110166 > > Stefanie: > Reposting of question for my own sanity :o) > |Q: Will Ron and Hermione ever get together? > | > |A: Well?[Laughter.] What do you think? > |[Audience member: I think they will]. > |I'm not going to say. I can't say, > |can I? I think that, by now, I've given > |quite a lot of clues on the subject. That > |is all I'm going to say. You will have > |to read between the lines on that one. Justine: Am I the only one nerdy enough to have immediately made a connection between that and "'Reading between the lines, I'd say she thinks you're a bit conceited, mate,' said Sirius" (OotP, 649)? I know it's a huge stretch and over-analytical, but that's what we're here for, isn't it? ;-) Having said that, and pretending there's a connection when there probably isn't, does it imply the relationship between Hermione and potential beau is similar to the relationship between Lily and James? And does that imply R/Hr, because of the way Lily lists James faults for him rather loudly, as Hermione does to Ron? Truth be told, I'm completely neutral when it comes to 'shipping the trio, and can see both sides quite clearly. If my odd talent for remembering obscure dialogue and descriptions wasn't as finely tuned, her quote would certainly be leaning more in H/Hr direction for me. And while she may be saying that one must read between the lines of her answer, there really are no lines to read between... the lines she's referring to, I firmly believe, are strictly in the canon. Justine, who once freaked out when Hermione waved her hand impatiently because Remus did it *twice* in the Shack From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 05:20:39 2004 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 05:20:39 -0000 Subject: revelations from the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110167 Queen Astrofiammant: My current problem with this question is that it seems too easily > answered from what we know - Dumbledore can't kill Voldemort because > Harry has to kill Voldemort. Obviously there is some level of meaning > I haven't worked out. > > Any thoughts? > > > "queen_astrofiammante" Antosha: How about the fact that Dumbledore does not wish to kill Harry? And, perhaps, at this point, the two are so inextricably linked that neither one of them can die without taking the other with him? (The links we know about for certain include the scar from the failed AK and Harry's blood in LV's veins, but I wouldn't be surprised if there were more to it than that.) I keep thinking (Joseph Campbell fan that I am) that the way that Harry will bring LV down is to sacrifice himself willingly in order to save those he loves, and that in some way their love and his sacrifice will bring him through the other side of death. That we will see what's on the other side of that veil--maybe even get a quick glimpse of Lily, James, Sirius (and possibly, by that point, Remus, Peter and many others)--and then Harry will be summoned/pushed/pulled back through. Perhaps? Antosha, who is not hoping we don't get a Harry-arisen scene reminiscent of the Aslan- reborn scene in The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe From sweetface531 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 05:40:59 2004 From: sweetface531 at yahoo.com (Justine) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 05:40:59 -0000 Subject: some sirius hinting... yay puns! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110168 Couldn't resist... Anyway, I read the Edinburgh transcript several times over, and there was one thing that continued to jump out at me: "Does Harry have a godmother? If so, will she make an appearance in future books? No, he doesn't. I have thought this through. If Sirius had married Sirius was too busy being a big rebel to get married. When Harry was born, it was at the very height of Voldemort fever last time so his christening was a very hurried, quiet affair with just Sirius, just the best friend. At that point it looked as if the Potters would have to go into hiding so obviously they could not do the big christening thing and invite lots of people. Sirius is the only one, unfortunately. I have got to be careful what I say there, haven't I?" Firstly, there was no question about Sirius's marital status. As far as I know, godparents do not have to be married--my godparents barely know each other! Jo was the one who brought up marriage... why? Now, even bringing this up is to be blamed on fan fiction, of course, but this seems to be the first implication from Jo, herself, that Sirius fancies women; gay marriage is not recognized in England, if I'm not sorely mistaken, and unless his big rebellion was experimenting with homosexuality or just being gay, period, then this sounds like a "Sirius and Remus were not lovers" answer. It's more a "Sirius was too busy fighting the forces with whom his family agreed to get married" or "Sirius was too busy being a manslut to get married." I like them both. :-D Now that I have that out of the way, I can tell you why I was really floored. This, again if I'm not mistaken, is the very first time she's ever mentioned Sirius in conjunction with what is conceived to be (and should be) a romantic relationship. Before this, it's all been Sirius and James were like brothers, Sirius and Remus are old friends, Sirius is Harry's godfather, Sirius and Snape hate each other... now, it could be just like Snape's Worst Memory, in which he is completely oblivious of the girl pining for him during the DADA exam, but why, oh why, then, did she begin the sentence with "If Sirius had married..."? No reason to mention marriage plus an unfinished thought equals frustration and intrigue. I don't have a clue what I'm talking about here... so I'll move on. Why was James the only one of his group to settle down? Sirius was "too busy" and then spent twelve years in Azkaban. Peter obviously was spying, probably wasn't very appealing, and then spent twelve years as a rat. Remus has no excuse--except the obvious... and perhaps there's more, but it's been twelve years. He found no one? I'm hungry for information about those twelve years in lupine limbo! Also, we really know nothing about his private life now...and hasn't there been a mention of families of the faculty that we've never heard about? This is turning into late-night rambling, so I'll move on again. To the end. New transcripts always manage to make my head throb. Justine, who always manages to work her beloved Remus into her posts From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Mon Aug 16 06:07:55 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 06:07:55 -0000 Subject: some sirius hinting... yay puns! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110169 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Justine" wrote: > JKR quote re-godmother: > unfortunately. I have got to be careful what I say there, haven't I?" Actually, Justine... Remus and Peter seem to be VERY relevant to this answer... Sirius was the _only_ one, so where were the other two? Why does JKR have to be careful what she says??? She only says that when she's nearing a topic of the future plot/revelations. Josh From paul_terzis at yahoo.gr Mon Aug 16 06:07:58 2004 From: paul_terzis at yahoo.gr (paul_terzis) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 06:07:58 -0000 Subject: Harry's Use of Cruciatus curse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110170 > > Cory Wrote: > > After I posted my last response, I thought a little more about this > scene, and had a slightly less disturbing view of the situation. > > Remember what Bellatrix said after Harry's failed attempt at the > curse: "You have to mean it; you have to want to cause pain and > enjoy it." (I'm paraphrasing; sorry...don't have my book with me.) > > I wonder if it's possible that Harry, no matter how angry he was at > the moment, is not *capable* of having that type of hatred? I agree > with you about Love vs. Hate being a central theme in the story, and > perhaps the real message of the scene is that deep down, Harry is a > loving person, and thus cannot use Cruciatus, no matter how badly a > part of him might have thought he wanted to at the time. > > Thoughts? > > Maybe yes Cory. Mayby not. In the MoM Harry was in shock when he faced Bella. He was angered but he wasn't feeling hatred against Bella. But hatred like love can grow in time. It's a very strong emotion and it can consume the person that feels it. FMPOV unless someone helps HP emotionally, he will eventually succumb to the dark path of revenge and rage. And one thing is sure then. Crucietus and every dark curse will work perfectly and "efficiently". Let's hope that will not be the case. Cheers, Paul From chrissilein at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 06:58:49 2004 From: chrissilein at yahoo.com (Lady Of The Pensieve) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 06:58:49 -0000 Subject: He WAS a Deatheater (Christening) Harry protected by the Holy Water? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110171 Hello, even I?m a huge Snape fan I never saw him as a "nice guy". When I was reading about the Christening (Harrys baptizm) thing I got a hazardous idea. We know already there is a redemptive pattern about Snape. He isn?t a good person, but we now definetly since yesterday that he WAS a Deatheater (past tense, not present tense). We know he told DD his story and DD believes it. So what had Snape told him to convince DD? Which story could have been so strong? Back to Christening thing. Maybe Snape went to a church of the Muggles and beg for forgiveness? Maybe he got baptized, maybe he got through a very old Muggle magic, the baptizm? Honestly now! Wouldn?t that convince DD that he really had changed? Please don?t kill me now. But I guess the Baptizm is "Old Magic". The Holy Water on the forehead symbolizes dying into Christ dead and and the resurrection with Christ. It means a the beginning of a New Life. Maybe this protected Harry when the Avadra Kedavra came in form of the deadly green flashlight on his forehead. There had been the Holy Water before, Lily followed a very old Muggle tradition. Okay, these are my crazy thoughts. Sorry my English isn?t perfect. From paul_terzis at yahoo.gr Mon Aug 16 07:04:21 2004 From: paul_terzis at yahoo.gr (paul_terzis) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 07:04:21 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Pairing hints in EBD transcript In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110172 > wrote: > Stefanie: > |Q:Will Ron and Hermione ever get together? > | > |A: Well?[Laughter.] What do you think? > |[Audience member: I think they will]. > |I'm not going to say. I can't say, > |can I? I think that, by now, I've given > |quite a lot of clues on the subject. That > |is all I'm going to say. You will have to > |read between the lines on that one. > http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/news_view.cfm?id=80 > > Now, JKR certainly wasn't forthcoming with this answer, as I'm sure > we all expect her to behave with questions like this...but the > answer, nonetheless is quite interesting. > > "You will have to read between the lines on that one" > Could this be a hint towards an H/HR leaning? It's often been touted > that R/HR is "obvious," especially by R/HRers themselves, while H/HR > supporters wave the banner of subtext. One certainly doesn't need to > read between the lines to glean a R/HR leaning. > > Of course, there are other 'ships that one could "read between the > lines" for. I'm sure supporters of many ships could use this quote > as supporting evidence, but as the main questioning that JKR has > dealt with concerns a "trio pairing," it's not an off assumption to > keep it to that. > > Since the "read between the lines" quote came after her > conclusive "that is all I'm going to say," does it even apply at all? > > So, canonically, what lines up with this quote? There's certainly > H/HR between the lines, with Hermione constantly paying attention to > Harry on a more personal level than others, their ability to read > each other, and plenty of other things that I'm sure have been > hashed and rehashed on the board. One can also say that Hermione's > feelings for *anyone* require the reading between the lines, as > she's certainly not obvious to the 3rd person-limited POV either > way. No quote is going to be the be-all end-all to any 'shipping > debate, but I can see a bit of a H/HR favoring in this. What do you > all think? HURRAH! Ship Wars Episode XVI: The return of the Trio! OK, enough joking. I couldn't help it. To business now. JKR reminds me the Oracle of Delphi. Everything she says about future events is vague: JKR hypothetical quote: Ron and Hermione will fall in love not separate. Possible meanings: 1) Ron and Hermione will fall in love, not separate Or 2) Ron and Hermione will fall in love not, separate. You see how simple is to confuse someone. We can debate for an eternity where the comma goes but the truth is that only JKR knows. Cheers, Paul PS 1: I know. Not a proper English sentence the above quote. I purposefully make it like that in order to prove my point. PS 2: I put my bet to the second meaning. After all I am a H/Hr shipper. From omphale at onetel.com Mon Aug 16 07:05:10 2004 From: omphale at onetel.com (saraquel_omphale) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 07:05:10 -0000 Subject: Voldemort: Between Life and Death? (Long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110173 > wrote: > > If Dumbledore were aware that Voldemort is not properly alive, he > > would know that he could not kill him. This would explain why he > > did not try at the end of Book 5. What if Voldemort, having passed > > into a state somewhere between life and death, can only be > > vanquished by the person who has the ability to enter the realm > > between life and death and meet and destroy him? What if the only > > person who can do this is our boy? Thanks Inkinling for your superb post. I liked this thought that LV is somehow suspended between life and death and that Harry must go there to meet him. Perhaps that would mean, that in that state harry is both alone with LV, but has some sort of connection with both sides - therefore with parents and Sirius on one side and DD,ootP on the other. I have always wondered why Sirius had to die and feel that the reason is crucial to the plot, or JKR would never have done it. Does Harry somehow get help to go to this purgatorial place from both sides? Do his parents and Sirius, aid him to get there? If we take on board the assumption that LV is somehow between life and death, the fact that LV is currently residing firmly on earth, implies that it would be possible for Harry to go to this place and yet still be 'alive' in this world. I also don't think that JKR has planned Harry's death - I don't think it's her style and I don't think she could bring herself to write it!! (yes I admit, that's just my opinion, sorry JKR, I know I don't really know you at all!) The fact that she will not comit herself to saying whether Harry survives at the end or not, could well imply, that his state at the end of the book is somehow qualitatively different from ordinary life. (Or it could be just her winding us up.) Examples of being betwixt life and death/immortality yet still on eath abound in the religious context. The Buddhist Bodisatva, Christ etc. However, I can't see JKR making Harry into some almost god-like figure (small g deliberately, I have no wish to offend here) she is much too down to earth, and Harry, deliberately made ordinary. I'm not sure I have furthered the arguments anywhere, but these are just my early morning musings. Saraquel. From omphale at onetel.com Mon Aug 16 07:10:43 2004 From: omphale at onetel.com (saraquel_omphale) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 07:10:43 -0000 Subject: Muggles borns can be DEs! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110174 Having read the transcript from Edinburgh, apart from the obvious two questions which JKR poses for us, there was something else which caught my eye. In the question about Snape being a pure-blood (near the end) she says: 'Muggle-borns are not allowed to be DEs EXCEPT IN RARE CIRCUMSTANCES.' (my capitals) Hmmm, so who is the muggle-born DE??? Saraquel - who will ponder that one at work if she has a minute, because she doesn't have time now if she's to get there on time. From musicofsilence at hotmail.com Mon Aug 16 07:11:01 2004 From: musicofsilence at hotmail.com (lifeavantgarde) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 07:11:01 -0000 Subject: some sirius hinting... yay puns! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110175 >>>>JKR (as quoted by Justine): No, he doesn't. I have thought this through. If Sirius had married... Sirius was too busy being a big rebel to get married. When Harry was born, it was at the very height of Voldemort fever last time so his christening was a very hurried, quiet affair with just Sirius, just the best friend. "<<<< >>>Justine: Firstly, there was no question about Sirius's marital status. As far as I know, godparents do not have to be married--my godparents barely know each other!<<< Stefanie: Just to back this point up...I found an absolutely fantastic answer of sorts comparing many many christening traditions: http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=339724 Throughout the links provided, there doesn't seem to be any reference anywhere that godparents must be married. In fact, in several traditions, it's imperative that they're not. There was really no need to mention Sirius's marital status *at all.* (Unless, of course, Wizarding families just do it differently altogether, but point me towards canon evidence of that.) >>>Justine: Jo was the one who brought up marriage... why? unless his big rebellion was experimenting with homosexuality or just being gay, period, then this sounds like a "Sirius and Remus were not lovers" answer. It's more a "Sirius was too busy fighting the forces with whom his family agreed to get married" or "Sirius was too busy being a manslut to get married." I like them both. :-D<<< Stefanie: ...or Sirius was rebelling against an arranged marriage? With his family...it doesn't seem terribly out of line with such pureblood mania as has been shown. However, by 6th year, he's been burned off the tapestry; at the point of Harry's christening it seems like he wouldn't be bound by a family decision anyway. (Now why can't people ask questions about Wizarding traditions like that instead of QUESTIONS THAT ARE ASKED ALREADY ON JKR'S WEBSITE ) Heh. Manslut Sirius. Heheh. >>>Justine: but why, oh why, then, did she begin the sentence with "If Sirius had married..."? No reason to mention marriage plus an unfinished thought equals frustration and intrigue. Peter obviously was spying, probably wasn't very appealing, and then spent twelve years as a rat. Remus has no excuse--except the obvious... and perhaps there's more, but it's been twelve years. He found no one?<<< Stefanie: Now that you have me really thinking about all this, why is Peter the only marauder we know anything about during the years between MWPP/L/S graduation and 10/31/81? Remus, Sirius, and James are complete mysteries during that period, and, as you mentioned Remus is after. JKR also hinted in another answer that we'd know everything we needed to know about MWPP by the end of the series, I do hope there's some "lupine limbo" information in that promise! Stefanie Who refuses to believe that there are so many Wizarding bachelors out there: "The world must be peopled!" (Benedick, Much Ado About Nothing) From submarimon15 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 07:14:08 2004 From: submarimon15 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 07:14:08 -0000 Subject: ESE!Moody? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110176 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Justine" wrote: > No, I don't really think Moody is ever so evil (yet), but during one > of my routine geeky knowledge-gathering sessions, I came across > something most interesting. Alastor was one of the fallen angels of > Satan's Court. He was known as "the executioner," the executor of > decrees handed down by the court. Is this a hint for the future > books? Or have we already seen this played out in the form of Fake! > Moody? Theories? Mike: I don't research names first off, but this is kind of interesting (my favorite is King Arthur vs Emperor Lucius, however). I don't think the 'real' Moody is evil as he's been seen in the GoF Pensieves as the one responcible for catching most DE's and the like. He's had his eye, leg and nose(?) reworked due to tangles with them, so I really don't believe he could ever be evil. Actually, that part of the Executioner, Satan's Court PERFECTLY describes Fake!Moody. Think about it :) He's secretly Crouch Jr. (Satan's Court) and he's also the 'executioner' of Voldemorts orders, in which he does many things to help Harry through the tournament, and eventually gets him to Voldemort at the end, obviously under the latter's orders. He's the one out there actually doing what he's been told to do. Just the way I see it, though. Mike From submarimon15 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 07:18:31 2004 From: submarimon15 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 07:18:31 -0000 Subject: Muggles borns can be DEs! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110177 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "saraquel_omphale" wrote: > Having read the transcript from Edinburgh, apart from the obvious two > questions which JKR poses for us, there was something else which > caught my eye. > > In the question about Snape being a pure-blood (near the end) she > says: 'Muggle-borns are not allowed to be DEs EXCEPT IN RARE > CIRCUMSTANCES.' (my capitals) Hmmm, so who is the muggle-born DE??? Mike: Peter Pettigrew maybe? We don't know anything about his family (that I can recall), but he did hand Voldemort the key to the Potters and their son, which we have learned that Voldemort did consider a threat. Maybe, maybe not, but he did do something quite helpful (despite it actually being Voldemort's first downfall in disguise). I also find it rather amusing to think that Voldemort's most loyal supporter being a muggleborn. Yes, Bellatrix might give Peter a run for his money, but after the Graveyard scene.... Anyways that quote also caught my eye and I'm waiting to find out who it really is, and why he/she was allowed it :) Mike From submarimon15 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 07:25:51 2004 From: submarimon15 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 07:25:51 -0000 Subject: some sirius hinting... yay puns! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110178 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Josh Warren" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Justine" > wrote: > > JKR quote re-godmother: > > unfortunately. I have got to be careful what I say there, Why > does JKR have to be careful what she says??? She only says that when > she's nearing a topic of the future plot/revelations. > > Josh I believe she was saying that she had to be careful with what she was saying because she didn't want to give away the fact that Sirius had died. She says that she doesn't want to ruin the end of OotP for those people who hadn't finished it yet. When it does in fact get a large hint in one of the questions that she answers later, she makes a comment about it being spoiled now. You're right, she was nearing a topic of plot/revelations, but only for those who hadn't read OotP yet. Mike From patientx3 at aol.com Mon Aug 16 09:00:35 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 09:00:35 -0000 Subject: some sirius hinting... yay puns! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110179 >>>Justine: Jo was the one who brought up marriage... why? unless his big rebellion was experimenting with homosexuality or just being gay, period, then this sounds like a "Sirius and Remus were not lovers" answer. It's more a "Sirius was too busy fighting the forces with whom his family agreed to get married" or "Sirius was too busy being a manslut to get married." I like them both. :-D<<< Stefanie: >>...or Sirius was rebelling against an arranged marriage? With his family...it doesn't seem terribly out of line with such pureblood mania as has been shown. However, by 6th year, he's been burned off the tapestry; at the point of Harry's christening it seems like he wouldn't be bound by a family decision anyway. (Now why can't people ask questions about Wizarding traditions like that instead of QUESTIONS THAT ARE ASKED ALREADY ON JKR'S WEBSITE ) Heh. Manslut Sirius. Heheh.<< HunterGreen (also giggling at 'manslut Sirius'): I like the idea that pureblood familes have arranged marriages, especially in cases like the Blacks or the Malfoys where marrying an obscure pureblood is VERY important (makes me wonder about Draco, perhaps him and Pansey Parkinson...). However, there's nothing in the books to support that, and since he was no longer considered a member of the Black clan by then, I doubt thats what he was rebelling against. Sirius was pretty young at that point, only early 20's, he may have just been 'playing the field' (however, I do like the idea of a Remus/Sirius ship, it seems to fit, although I don't know why, and I usually never agree with suggestions like that). He may not have had time to date at all, as JKR hints at. James already knew who he wanted, and was going after her in school, I think Sirius and Remus never had that serious of a relationship, and Peter, well, we can all guess what the girls thought of him. Stefanie wrote: >>why is Peter the only marauder we know anything about during the years between MWPP/L/S graduation and 10/31/81? Remus, Sirius, and James are complete mysteries during that period, and, as you mentioned Remus is after. JKR also hinted in another answer that we'd know everything we needed to know about MWPP by the end of the series, I do hope there's some "lupine limbo" information in that promise!<< HunterGreen: I doubt the info she gives in the next two books will be anywhere close to the amount of backstory some fans (myself included) want. I think what she meant was that we'd have the amount we'd need *for the story*, so it probably means necessary information only. The dating habits of Sirius and Lupin may not be included in that. Between their graduation, and Voldemort's fall, Lupin, Sirius and James were probably all joining the order and working for Dumbledore. I guess that would be enough to fill their time, although I wonder what James and Lily did for money. Sirius had inheritence, Lupin probably was living with his parents or with either James or Sirius (or perhaps he managed to find work more easily then), James had to get all that money from somewhere. I wonder if he had inheritence too? What I am quite a bit curious about, is what Lupin was up to between Voldemort's fall and PoA, and again what he's doing during GoF. He's absent. He doesn't even come forward to meet Harry before he's hired as a professor (I know *I* would be curious to see what my late best friend's son looked like). >>Stefanie Who refuses to believe that there are so many Wizarding bachelors out there: "The world must be peopled!" (Benedick, Much Ado About Nothing)<< Not to mention the number of families with only one child. Perhaps its just because its simplier to write, but the only siblings that we know of are the Weasleys, the Creeveys, the Blacks, the Evans' the Dumbledores and the Patils (who only sort of count because the girls are twins). This leaves us with many, many, only children. With wizarding families being so far apart, you'd expect less people to have only one child because their kid would have no one to play with (unless you want to bother with playdates with floo powder and all that). If you factor in the pureblood mania it makes even less sense. Why did Lucius and Narcissa only have one child? Why did Sirius' parents only have two? I'd imagine with each generation purebloods become a little rarer, so that's all the more reason for a pureblood union to have at *least* two kids. I'm sure there's some sort of "magical birth control", which results in fewer 'accidents', but those sort of things have been around in the muggle world for several generations now, and there are still plenty of people who choose to have more than one child. Its just a little strange to me. From hpfgu_elves at yahoo.co.uk Mon Aug 16 11:00:23 2004 From: hpfgu_elves at yahoo.co.uk (hpfgu_elves) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 11:00:23 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: JKR Website discussion Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110181 Greetings from Hexquarters! We note that JKR has taken the "Do not disturb" notice off her door again. May we just take this opportunity to remind everyone that the place to discuss features of JKR's website itself (as opposed to any potential canon in might contain) is OTChatter, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter Many thanks, The List Elves From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Sun Aug 15 23:36:45 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 19:36:45 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Snape & Sirius: Related? (Re: James & Snape: Related? - or Snape & Sirius?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040815233645.89440.qmail@web52010.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110182 kiricat2001 wrote:Magda Grantwich wrote: > If Snape has to be related to anyone (something I'm not convinced > about but for the sake of speculation...), then there are good (or > at least not-bad) indications that he might be related to Sirius. > How about as an illegitimate half-brother? Luckdragon writes: The idea of Sirius and Severus being half brothers is interesting and certainly resolves the enmity issue between them. It does, however, bring two thoughts to mind. 1) Snape would then possibly (legally) be entitled to the Black family fortune and home. 2) Phineas Nigelus when told of Sirius's death say's "the last of the Blacks is dead"? Any thoughts... From snapesangel2002 at yahoo.co.uk Mon Aug 16 00:17:45 2004 From: snapesangel2002 at yahoo.co.uk (laura) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 00:17:45 -0000 Subject: JKR's Edinburgh Festival Q&A is on her website now (under news) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110183 Julie wrote: > 1. Q: Apart from Harry, Snape is my favourite character because he > is so complex and I just love him. Can he see the Thestrals, and if > so, why? Also, is he a pure blood wizard? > > JKR: Snape's ancestry is hinted at. He was a Death Eater, so clearly > he is no Muggle born, because Muggle borns are not allowed to be > Death Eaters, except in rare circumstances. You have some information > about his ancestry there. He can see Thestrals, but in my imagination > most of the older people at Hogwarts would be able to see them > because, obviously, as you go through life you do lose people and > understand what death is. But you must not forget that Snape was a > Death Eater. He will have seen things that > > Julie comments: Notice how JKR didn't actually answer the question > about whether Snape is pure blood? She says he isn't Muggle born, > and that his ancestry has been hinted at (at least by the fact that > he is a Death Eater). But she doesn't tell us that he is pure blood. > From this non-answer, can we assume Snape is a half blood like > Voldemort and Harry? I've just got back from the Edinburgh Book Festival, and I can't believe the transcript is up and people are talking about it already! I asked Jo if Snape can see the thestrals and if so why, and also if he was a pure-blood wizard (glad to see the person typing up the transcript edited my question slightly to hide the nervous stuttering and mumble that 'I love Snape' ;) I noticed straight away that she didn't confirm whether Snape is a half-blood or not. If I hadn't already given the microphone back I would have asked "But Harry makes no mention of Snape when he sees the Black family tapestry, and Sirius mentions that all pure-blood families are inter-related somehow, does this mean that Snape is a half-blood?" It's not that far-fetched is it, for the head of Slytherin to not be a pure-blood. Look at Voldemort himself. I was very interested when she said that Muggleborns are only allowed to be DE's in very exceptional circumstances. What does everyone make of that? As for the thestral answer, I did suspect that Snape can see thestrals. I am a bit confused now though, as to what makes you see a thestral. Is it when you've *seen* someone die or *known* someone close die? I'm 90% sure you have to see someone die in order to see the thestrals after reading the chapter in Hagrids' class (OotP). That tantalising bit when Jo mentions briefly that "Snape was a DE, he's seen things that..." makes me almost sure that whatever Snape has "seen" as a DE has enabled him to see the thestrals. Thoughts, anyone? Laura* (who's been up for over 24 hours now and is *still* too hyper to sleep!) From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Mon Aug 16 00:49:33 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 20:49:33 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Petunia's pact (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040816004933.92262.qmail@web52009.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110184 Alla: > JKR commented that Petunia is not a squib, but that was a good > guess. what if what Petunia wanted from Dumbledore as a reward > for taking Harry in is to bind her magic. Luckdragon: I've wondered the same thing about Petunia. If binding of magic is possible it could solve the Voldy issue. "There are things worse than death". Yes! A once all powerful dark wizard becoming a common muggle. From marmys at bellsouth.net Mon Aug 16 01:44:45 2004 From: marmys at bellsouth.net (Marleen) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 21:44:45 -0400 Subject: Voldemort: Between Life and Death? (Long) References: Message-ID: <000b01c48332$9bcca4e0$0100a8c0@marmyscomputer> No: HPFGUIDX 110185 Inkling wrote: huge snip > If Dumbledore were aware that Voldemort is not properly alive, he > would know that he could not kill him. What if Voldemort, having > passed into a state somewhere between life and death, can only be > vanquished by the person who has the ability to enter the realm > between life and death and meet and destroy him? Alla: > It is quite possible that Voldie is already in the state worse than > death, he just is not aware of it yet. That is a very interesting thought. Do you think this not alive, not dead situation have something to do with Voldemort's soul? Almost "selling your soul to the devil'? But in the wizard world could it be something different, similar yet different, but having the same outcome...immortality. "Marleen" From msturbo209 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 04:00:01 2004 From: msturbo209 at yahoo.com (stellablue571) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 04:00:01 -0000 Subject: The chess game in SS/PS, quidditch, and Snape's potion puzzle... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110186 - In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "koinonia02" <> >"Don't talk to me for a moment," said Ron when Harry sat down next > to > >him, "I need to concern--" He caught sight of Harry's face. "What's > >the matter with you? You look terrible." > > >"Speaking quietly so that no one else could hear, Harry told the > >other two about Snape's sudden, sinister desire to be a Quidditch > >referee. > > >"Don't play," said Hermione at once. > >"Say you're ill," said Ron. > >"Pretend to break your leg," Hermione suggested. > >"Really break your leg," said Ron. Stella says: These game parallels are so intriguing...Let's finish that scene above, shall we? "Really break your leg," said Ron. "I can't," said Harry. "There isn't a reserve Seeker. If I back out, Gryffindor can't play at all." At that moment Neville toppled into the common room.(SS, ch.13) Now I never would have thought anything of this if I hadn't just read the game theories, but this really does seem to fit in with that whole wordplay, doesn't it? I was doing my very first re-read, and this just jumped off the page at me. If Neville is really going to play any sort of major part in Voldemort's destruction, this could be some very clever foreshadowing. Or maybe I've been reading too many posts! :D Stella From kellikat36318 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 03:47:00 2004 From: kellikat36318 at yahoo.com (Kelli Nichols) Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 20:47:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: SHIP: Pairing hints in EBD transcript In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040816034700.98011.qmail@web21005.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110187 Stefanie wrote: |Q:Will Ron and Hermione ever get together? | |A: Well?[Laughter.] What do you think? |[Audience member: I think they will]. |I'm not going to say. I can't say, |can I? I think that, by now, I've given |quite a lot of clues on the subject. That |is all I'm going to say. You will have to |read between the lines on that one. http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/news_view.cfm?id=? > "You will have to read between the lines on that one" > Could this be a hint towards an H/HR leaning? It's often been touted > that R/HR is "obvious," especially by R/HRers themselves, while H/HR > supporters wave the banner of subtext. One certainly doesn't need to > read between the lines to glean a R/HR leaning. > No quote is going to be the be-all end-all to any 'shipping > debate, but I can see a bit of a H/HR favoring in this. I think that it's just JKR wanting to make us wait in suspense for longer. There are strong points to almost every ship. The only relationship that really matters in the story is who Harry ulimately ends up with. I personally ship R/Hr and H/G but can see the merits of H/Hr (the one thing thay bothers me about that ship's support is all to often the mention of the voice in Harry's mind that sounds like Herm-- aka, the sensible voice. Most of the time that's a parent's voice and to me that gives me the impression that he thinks of her in more of a motherly/sisterly way than he would other girls. This is all my opinion though). We'll just have to wait to see who gets together. "Kelli Nichols" From mz_annethrope at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 04:14:44 2004 From: mz_annethrope at yahoo.com (mz_annethrope) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 04:14:44 -0000 Subject: Why didn't Voldemort die? (long) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110188 Why didn't Voldemort die when he tried to kill Harry, this was the first of the two important questions that JKR thought her fans might like to ponder. I've been pondering something like this ever since Carol sent post #105925 on the mind/body connection in HP. Here are some ideas. I suspect the biggest clue is Fawkes, who has given a feather both to Voldemort and Harry. We have seen Fawkes die twice: once naturally and once when he swallowed the avada kedavra curse aimed at DD. Both times he burst into flames and reappeared as an ugly, baby bird. But when we see him soon after his first death he is a beautiful red phoenix. We don't know long it takes a phoenix to mature, but if he is like other birds he should be fully fledged and ready to fly four to six weeks after his rebirth. My suspicion is that Voldemort bears some relation to a phoenix. He doesn't go on living for ever--that would require the philosopher's stone--but he can rebound, phoenix-like, albeit with quite a bit of help. We don't know what happened to Voldemort when the curse he aimed at Harry bounced back at him, whether he was vaporized or whether he became a corpse. I've always preferred vaporization, for there is no mention in the books about a corpse (though why anyone thinks he's dead, as Carol asks, is anyone's guess if he's vaporized). Here's my husband's suggestion: if the curse simply bounced back on a regular human, he'd be a corpse, but if it bounced back on Voldemort, he might be reduced to ashes, phoenix-like. The ashes would indicate that he was "dead." Unlike a phoenix, post mortem Voldemort doesn't immediately have a body, but he seems to have some sort of molecular existence. He says of himself on p. 293 of the 1st Book (American Ed.): "See what I have become?" the face said. "Mere shadows and vapor...I have form only when I can share another's body..." At this point he has the face of Voldemort (whether reconstituted from actual molecules of Voldemort I don't know) sticking out of the back of Quirrell's head. After Quirrell's death, Voldemort returns in Book IV, but now he has an actual, if not very useful body. He has been drinking Nagini venom (he probably already had some sort of form in order to drink). And Nagini, whether this is related or not, has already eaten at least one person--milk indeed! In the beginning of the graveyard scene of GF, Voldemort looks something like a baby; after being dropped into a vat of a particularly nasty potion he has the body which everyone recognizes as Voldemort's (at least Fudge does in OP). Whether this body is substantively drawn from his old body, we don't know; what we do know is that he is transformed from the infantile figure into himself. Like a phoenix. My hypothesis is that Voldemort's protection against death was somehow related to how a phoenix is reborn, only his protection was incomplete and though he was not fully dead (and perhaps not fully alive even before then)he was unable to reanimate himself completely without a lot of help. In this way he is unlike a phoenix, which is self generating. But then his protection was incomplete. I have some related ideas regarding the use of time in the HP books as related to Voldemort's regeneration; also some thoughts about a phoenix (and perhaps Voldemort) being its own parents. But this is already too long, so they will wait. Here's a final speculation, partly courtesy of my husband. What if Snape, being an expert at potions, had helped Voldemort become immortal, or at least knew the steps Voldemort had taken to protect himself from death? What if his telling DD about what Voldemort had done was the reason why DD trusts him? And finally, what if DD told Lily about this and her knowledge might have factored into her protection of Harry? In other words, if I may connect JKR's second question (why Dumbledore didn't kill Voldemort): if you kill a phoenix, it will rise again. If DD kills Voldemort, he will rise again. Harry does not seem to have the unique ability to kill Voldemort, rather, according to the prophecy, he has the power to vanquish him (i.e., destroy him for good). Could Voldemort have fullfilled part of the prophecy by marking Harry as his equal, while Lily fulfilled another part of the prophecy by conferring on Harry the power to vanquish Voldemort? mz_annethrope From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 16 11:41:26 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 07:41:26 -0400 Subject: Lord Voldemort's Death Message-ID: <001001c48385$fad07130$09c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 110189 I'm just formulating this so please bear with me. Snape is a Potions Master and he was a Death Eater. He knows at least one potion that will "stopper death." (PS) I think it quite possible that as a DE he brewed potions which LV used on his path to immortality, one or more of which may have worked. LV only knows that "I was less than a spirit, less than the meanest ghost ... but still, I was alive. *What I was, even I do not know* ......it appeared that one or more of my experiments had worked, for I had not been killed." LV has said, "There is nothing worse than death." He doesn't want to die, perhaps is afraid to die, or he wouldn't be working on immortality. (Yes, he wants to be powerful forever, and rule the WW forever, but that in turn still makes him want to stay alive, or not die.) Would he have become a ghost when he AK'd HP, if he hadn't taken steps to ward off death? I think it quite likely. Perhaps the step that worked, a potion maybe or a spell, made him 'nearly' a ghost. Just one step away from being a ghost. Ghosts can't eat or drink, but LV was able to a drink potion, a potion made from unicorn blood and snake venom. "Unicorn blood will keep you alive, even if you are an inch from death, but at a terrible price. You have slain something pure and defenceless to save yourself and you will have *but a half life,* a cursed life, from the moment the blood touches your lips." [Firenze] "But if you're going to be cursed for ever, death's better, isn't it?" [Harry] "It is, unless all you need is to stay alive long enough to drink something else -- something that will bring you back to full strength and power -- something that will mean you can never die." [Firenze] (PS) But, LV never got *that thing* and I am not convinced that the rebirthing potion did it, either. It may explain the "gleam" in DD eye; he knows the body LV created for himself did not make him mortal again, but is only a shell for his ghost-like self to dwell in and use. Nick said, "Wizards can leave an imprint of themselves upon the earth, to walk palely where their living selves once trod. But very few wizards chose that path." He later said, "I was afraid of death, I chose to remain behind, I sometimes wonder whether I oughtn't to have ... well, that is neither here no there ... in fact, I am neither here nor there...I know nothing of the secrets of death, Harry, for I chose a feeble imitation of life instead." (OotP) It appears to me, from this, that Nick was quite melancholy about his dicison. Could he feel that being a ghost is, to him, something worse than death? Dumbledore told Harry, "Not being truly alive he [LV] cannot be killed." (PS) What if that still holds true? LV underestimates so much of the old magic, what if the potion he used 'only' gave him a body to house the 'near ghost'? It didn't actually make him 'mortal' again, he just has a physical flesh house around his nearly ghost soul. He can hold a wand and perform magic, because he still knows the spells (his memories were not erased), and has a body to hold the wand. It may explain the "gleam" in DD eye (GoF); he knows the body LV created for himself did not make him mortal again, did not return him to "full strength and power" but is only a shell for his ghost-like self to dwell in and use. DD didn't attempt to kill LV because he believes only the one referred to in the prophecy has the 'power' to do so. DD attempting to kill him, as I said once before, would leave him as Vapormort and we would be back at the beginning. Harry needs to find the antidote to the potion (which utilizes the power the Dark Lord knows not) , or the counter curse, to remove the 'bit' of LV that keeping him from being a ghost. He doesn't even have to get rid of the new body, as the Ghost!LV wouldn't inhabit it anyway (as Nick, Myrtle, etc are no longer in their physical bodies). DD said to LV, "Indeed, your failure to understand that there are things much worse than death has always been your greatest weakness." (OotP) LV as a ghost, only an imprint of himself, a feeble imitation of life, powerless and wandless, unable to ingest a potion to ever make him anything more or less, trapped between here and there, laughable to some degree; would that be worse than death to LV? Thoughts? DuffyPoo [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From p_implies_q at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 04:19:39 2004 From: p_implies_q at yahoo.com (p_implies_q) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 04:19:39 -0000 Subject: Fudge's regime (a question) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110190 All right, I did a search and couldn't find a nice, specific reference, so I was wondering if anyone here has perhaps done a tricky bit of figuring from the clues we have and come up with . . . . . . the date Fudge came to office? I haven't any theories to put forth, but there are lots of theoretical questions in my mind -- mostly about what happened in the currents of power after Voldemort's disappearance -- that hinge on this. If anyone has any ideas, or could point me to a post number if this really has been discussed, I'd be grateful to hear it. Cheers, Alice From astratrf at aol.com Mon Aug 16 04:28:09 2004 From: astratrf at aol.com (astratrf) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 04:28:09 -0000 Subject: Astra's Hubby Has a Theory (3rd 'missing' DE) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110191 Hiya, Folks! My wife, Astra, posts here occasionally and she's letting me post my theory here. In Goblet of Fire, Voldemort makes reference to the three missing and still-living death-eaters. One of them is obviously Crouch, who's still at Hogwarts; one is PROBABLY Snape, (( the one who's left forever and will supposedly die for it; and then there's a third, one who "failed" Voldemort and will eventually get a rude comeuppance. I haven't seen anybody anywhere speculate on who that third person is (because I don't normally read too many newsgroups), but I have an idea; maybe you've thought about this, too: It's Uncle Vernon. Stay with me here. Think about it. This third Deatheater failed Voldemort seriously. Maybe Vernon's job was to keep Harry from ever getting to Hogwarts. Goodness knows he does everything in his power to keep Hagrid from picking him up. He shuts him up in a closet, he tries to keep people from finding out he's there, he puts bars on the windows, etc. But being the spineless cretin he is, he's eventually defeated in every attempt to keep Harry from going to Hogwarts. Eventually he just gives up. So now, Harry is at a school where he can learn the skills he needs to defeat Mr. V. Which would make Voldemort plenty ticked at Vernon. Zip ahead to book 5. Harry says the word "Voldemort" near the beginning and Vernon calls him "Voldy-thing." He can't say the name. Come on. The guy is playing too innocent. He can hear perfectly well. Throughout the books, he purposely makes gobbledygook out of every magic terminology he hears, as if he's trying to slough it off. I think he's trying too hard to play dumb. Plus: if you knew the most threatening presence in the universe was after your head, what would you try to do? Blend in and play stupid. How he's kept this from Petunia, or whether she suspects something, has yet to be revealed, but I tell ya, Vernon's in on this. Big time. Comments? Astra and her wacky husband From mayeaux45 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 04:31:54 2004 From: mayeaux45 at yahoo.com (mayeaux45) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 04:31:54 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Pairing hints in EBD transcript In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110192 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "C M" wrote: > "What do you all think?" > > I think that when JKR said we'd have to "read between the lines" she > was referring to the lines of her *answer*, not the lines of the > books. In other words, we need to read between these lines: "I think > that, by now, I've given quite a lot of clues on the subject." And, > from my perspective, the clues she's given have all pointed to a > Ron/Hermione pairing. Obviously, YMMV. Mayeaux45: It's funny really... JKR answers the R/Hr question along the same lines as the H/Hr one she answered in earlier in March. She's essentially given away VERY little. It could go either way. The arguments from both camps (R/Hr,H/Hr) are valid in that respect. I don't think there is a point in asking her anymore. Besides, Jo is very good at jerking us one way and revealing the true answer to be something completely different. Personally, I think it's wonderful that we are NO closer to knowing FOR SURE the relationship between R/HR and H/HR. From lilyp at superig.com.br Mon Aug 16 05:07:50 2004 From: lilyp at superig.com.br (lilypo2007) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 05:07:50 -0000 Subject: JKR's Edinburgh Festival Q&A is on her website now (under news) (HBP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110193 Julie wrote: > The question of whether V/TR has ever loved anyone > leads us rather neatly to the Half Blood Prince, sez JKR. But does > this mean the half blood prince is in some way directly connected to > V/TR, or does this mean the half blood prince, like V/TR, has never > loved anyone (or, likely, been loved by anyone)? I had a different interpretation of what JKR was meaning with the words Half Blood Prince. I think she was not meaning the character, but simply book six, the plot of book six. Probably we'll know more about Voldemort and his lack of love in book six. "lilypo2007" From lilyp at superig.com.br Mon Aug 16 05:33:38 2004 From: lilyp at superig.com.br (lilypo2007) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 05:33:38 -0000 Subject: Voldemort: Between Life and Death? (Long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110194 Inklin wrote: > The two key questions JKR spoke of today in Edinburg both concern > the nature of Voldemort's "life." Why didn't he die when the curse > rebounded, and why didn't Dumbledore try to kill him when he had the > chance? I'd like to make some considerations about these questions, although not try to answer the first. 1. Why Voldemort didn't die? I think we cannot really guess what he had made. JKR herself says so. But I think it's important to think about its consequences. Crouch Jr., pretending to be Moody, taught his students that Harry was the only one to survive the AK curse. But this was as false as himself. Voldemort had survived it too. And will survive again if nothing is made to eliminate those protections he got to himself. I think that we should be wondering about this question. I think that it could mean that Harry won't have to kill LV (I think he can't kill anyone. Reread the Shrieking Shack scene - he couldn't kill his godfather when he still thought Sirius had betrayed his parents and afterwords he couldn't let Wormtail be killed.) If he can undo Voldemort's protections and someone else kills LV (perhaps even LV himself, trying to kill Harry again and having his curse rebounded), the prophecy would be fulfilled, because Voldemort would have died at Harry's hand. (I remember a very old interview when JKR said that she couldn't tell us about the uses of dragon's blood, because they would be important later on. Should it have any connection with this protection or its undoing?) 2. Why DD didn't try to kill Voldemort? I would say firstly that Dumbledore is not the murderer kind of people, the same as Harry. Secondly, I think he knows what Lily had done to protect Harry and knows that the curse rebounded. That means he is aware that it is not possible to kill Voldemort unless his protection against death is eliminated. "lilypo2007" From lilyp at superig.com.br Mon Aug 16 05:51:27 2004 From: lilyp at superig.com.br (lilypo2007) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 05:51:27 -0000 Subject: some sirius hinting... yay puns! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110195 Justine: > Why, oh why, then, did she begin the sentence with "If Sirius > had married..."? No reason to mention marriage plus an > unfinished thought equals frustration and intrigue. Lilyp: I don't know about the Marauders' love life. But I think that The marital status of Sirius was mentioned because someone wiil have to inherit Grimmauld Place. Now we know for sure there isn't any wife or child. Who's his heir? Lilyp From romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 08:07:29 2004 From: romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com (romuluslupin1) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 08:07:29 -0000 Subject: The Dumbledore Connection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110196 "Jo Raggett" wrote: > Someone also mentioned about Ludo Bagman being a wasp, as he played > for the Wasps. If it wasn't for the fact that it would mean yet > *another* unregistered animagi then I would prefer this theory! > > It would account for his whereabouts in OotP AND he could be using > his wasp form as a way of spying on Harry for LV. . .couldn't it > Kneasy!! I'm *convinced* (to the point of working on a Ludo essay) > that he WILL be back! Could Ludo be over 100 years old? Could he > have registered in the 19th century? Could Hermione have read his > name but just not mentioned it? This is the only problem I have, I > *really* don't want another unregistered animagi!! Sorry if this has already been answered (had a power problem over the week-end and couldn't access my PC), but Ludo Bagman *could* be one of the 7 registered animagi Hermione refers to. Hermione looked up McGonagall at the beginning of POA (I think. She tells the boys she looked her up after McGonagall's lesson, which was during her first transfiguration class of the year, right after Trelawney's first prediction of Harry's death). If he *is* one of them (I sincerely doubt it because animagism is supposed to be difficult and he doesn't strike me as the brightest bulb, but you never know), his name is not going to register with Hermione. She's never heard of him before at the time. She only meets him for the first time some time later (even as long as 10-11 months later), depending on how soon after McGonagall's lesson she went to the library. Wanna bet ;-) Anyway, even if she remembered the name (unlikely) there was no reason to mention it to the boys, as they didn't know Ludo Bagman all that well. Anyway, just my 2 cents. Romulus Lupin, who is sure Severus Sanpe and Sybil Trelawney are the married couple at Hogwarts. After all, Alan Rickman and Emma Thompson play a married couple in Love Actually and the both play in the adaptation-to-another-media-that-mustn't-be-named ;-) From katiebug1233 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 09:29:02 2004 From: katiebug1233 at yahoo.com (Kate) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 09:29:02 -0000 Subject: Muggles borns can be DEs! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110197 Saraquel: > > (JKR) says: 'Muggle-borns are not allowed to be DEs EXCEPT IN > > RARE CIRCUMSTANCES.' (my capitals) Hmmm, so who is the muggle- > > born DE??? Mike: > Peter Pettigrew maybe? We don't know anything about his family > (that I can recall), but he did hand Voldemort the key to the > Potters and their son, which we have learned that Voldemort did > consider a threat. This would really support a reason why Peter was made Secret Keeper for the Potters. Who would ever suspect a Muggle Born to have ANY ties to Voldemort? Can you imagine being so power hungry that you would team up with the person that is trying to kill and destroy everything that you are. I think that if he is the Muggle Born DE, that makes Peter ever worse than I initially thought.... I didn't think that was possible. It would be like a Jewish man teaming up with Hitler. -Katie, whose dog's name is Hagrid ;) From upulwan80 at yahoo.com.au Mon Aug 16 11:25:44 2004 From: upulwan80 at yahoo.com.au (upulwan80) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 11:25:44 -0000 Subject: Oh Darn! I mistranslated ehwaz! In-Reply-To: <411F9A85.7010005@tds.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110198 On the Portkey.org's Symbolic Flight site there's an essay by Nia which goes on to interpret the eihwaz/ehwaz issue at great length. You might find it worth reading. Although, Nia's point of departure is shipping matters, so depending on what your inclinations are, BEWARE :) To be fair, though, it was quite a clever interpretation, and while you may not see much to ship there, she's done pretty thorough research into the two runes in question. "upulwan80" From mail at chartfield.net Mon Aug 16 12:00:20 2004 From: mail at chartfield.net (queen_astrofiammante) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 12:00:20 -0000 Subject: focus on Hermione In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110199 JJPandy wrote: > If you haven't read the theories about Hermione at > http://www.hermionegranger.us/pages/hermepower.htm > then you MUST read then now! Besides making a great argument for > proving Hermione's age, there is a very interesting theory that > Hermione is the one mentioned in the prophecy! This shows great ingenuity and erudition - applying the Roman calendar, using the male pronoun as the default and the links with Mercury. But, as with everything else that we come up with, there is one question that ought to be asked first and foremost. How *likely* is it that Hermione Granger is the subject of the prophecy? Answer: Not actually all that likely at all. Really quite unlikely, in fact, since we are engaged in reading a series called "Harry Potter and..." This is exactly how the Mark Evans mess happened. It could be demonstrated with highly-developed arguments how Harry and the ill- fated ten-year-old might have shared a wizarding ancestor six generations back, but the question "Is this too far-fetched?" was not asked often enough. "queen_astrofiammante" From drliss at comcast.net Mon Aug 16 12:32:59 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (drliss at comcast.net) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 12:32:59 +0000 Subject: some sirius hinting... yay puns! Message-ID: <081620041232.27869.4120A97A0005146F00006CDD22007481849C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 110200 Lissa: Okay, serious Remus/Sirius shipper here, so be warned!!!!!! Justine: Firstly, there was no question about Sirius's marital status. As far as I know, godparents do not have to be married--my godparents barely know each other! Jo was the one who brought up marriage... why? Now, even bringing this up is to be blamed on fan fiction, of course, but this seems to be the first implication from Jo, herself, that Sirius fancies women; gay marriage is not recognized in England, if I'm not sorely mistaken, and unless his big rebellion was experimenting with homosexuality or just being gay, period, then this sounds like a "Sirius and Remus were not lovers" answer. It's more a "Sirius was too busy fighting the forces with whom his family agreed to get married" or "Sirius was too busy being a manslut to get married." I like them both. :-D Lissa: I admit, I've been thinking this too. However, I wonder if the rest of the sentence of "If Sirius had married...." would have been, "If Sirius had married, then Harry might have had a godmother." Godparents don't have to be married, but since it appears that the godparents are also the guardians, then if Sirius WAS married then the wife WOULD be a guardian as well. Justine: Why was James the only one of his group to settle down? Sirius was "too busy" and then spent twelve years in Azkaban. Peter obviously was spying, probably wasn't very appealing, and then spent twelve years as a rat. Remus has no excuse--except the obvious... and perhaps there's more, but it's been twelve years. He found no one? I'm hungry for information about those twelve years in lupine limbo! Also, we really know nothing about his private life now...and hasn't there been a mention of families of the faculty that we've never heard about? This is turning into late-night rambling, so I'll move on again. To the end. Lissa: Well, they WERE 21 when Voldie fell. I actually thought James and Lily were awfully young to get married, and have wondered if they "had" to get married at times. There's a couple things that always annoy me about R/S fanfiction. Why does everyone assume that James knew they were together, if they were? Why does everyone always assume they were committed and acknowledged they were in love? It's VERY possible that they were fooling around and not telling everyone because, frankly, it was private. I mean, no offense to the wonderful men on our list at all, but most guys do NOT jump into commitments as early as James did! I've also wondered if they weren't together before Azkaban, but got together in the time afterwards. (There's also always the possibility that they were bi.) My theory is that JKR never really had any major thoughts on romance for those two. Their love lives don't really fit into the plot, as much as I'd love to see it be worked in. But Sirius was a rebel, not willing to settle down yet, and then tossed into Azkaban. I can completely see Lupin being 100% unwilling to make a commitment of any sort. Given the way the Wizarding World treats him, I can't really see Lupin being willing to tie a lover to himself and let the world treat him/her that way as well. My impression of Lupin is that he's intensely alone. He accepted at a young age that romance was simply not in the cards for him, and he's lived that way ever since. However, JKR's admitted to reading the slash that's been on the web, and if memory serves, she admitted that before OotP was released. Now, there are things in there that, as far as I know, did not have to be in there in OotP. Lupin living with Sirius? (Did she HAVE to point that out? We have no idea where the rest of the Order lives.) The joint Christmas present? (That little Firebolt model couldn't have cost Tonks THAT much.) The way they interact... I wonder if she never plans on giving any details about their love lives, but put those little clues in there to amuse the slashers. After all, Lupin and Sirius are without a doubt the most plausible of any of the slash couples. I mean, you can write a good story for Draco/Harry, or Snape/Sirius, or whoever else, but Lupin and Sirius actually could work in canon. And it's possible we're reading too much into this- she only gives us two sentences about Sirius, really. As to where Lupin was during the christening... I had a new thought. Dumbledore has mentioned spies before. I'm guessing Severus Snape was not the only one. Wouldn't Lupin- technically a Dark Creature and someone who (although a half blood) would have something to gain from Voldemort- be an excellent spy for the Order? Especially since he's so good at hiding his true feelings? Given that she says she'd love to actually meet Lupin, and he's a wonderful person, I'd guess that ESE!Lupin isn't an option. But maybe Pippin's got something close... Lupin's trying to give the DEs the impression he's ESE? And maybe that's why he couldn't be at the christening, because he was spying on the DEs, or the creatures allied to the death eaters? (which seems a little more plausible, or he might have a better idea about Peter.) Determined to go down with the Ship... Lissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Aug 16 12:41:47 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 12:41:47 -0000 Subject: Marauders and Voldemort In-Reply-To: <001f01c47c90$6fef5ff0$0cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110201 DuffyPoo: snip If Snape really knew who stole them, he wouldn't be saying this to HP, as HP never took any of it. He's trying to make HP angry enough to confess or spill the beans. He later threatens HP with Veritaserum, "And then, Potter .. then we'll find out whether you've been in my office or not,." (because I don't know yet, but I suspect it was you, and I'd really like to have proof of this so DD would have to expell you!) Harry doesn't like the sound of this because he knows him spilling the truth would land "a whole lot of people in trouble -- Hermione and Dobby, for a start --" > Potioncat: I hope it isn't too late to rejoin this thread. But, at the point that Snape is trying to find out "If you've been in my office" he isn't thinking of the episode in CoS. He's wondering who is stealing the ingredients now in GoF. (Crouch!Moody) although both Harry and the reader thinks Snape is referring to the CoS incident. I've argued that both polyjuice potion and the map may indeed be Dark Magic. I'm less sure of the map, if only because it's come up again in the book without any character questioning it. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Mon Aug 16 12:42:16 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 12:42:16 -0000 Subject: Why didn't Voldemort die? (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110202 wrote: > What if Snape, being an expert at potions, had helped Voldemort become immortal, or at least knew the steps Voldemort had taken to protect himself from death? What if his telling DD about what Voldemort had done was the reason why DD trusts him? And finally, what if DD told Lily about this and her knowledge might have factored into her protection of Harry? Valky: Bloody Brilliant Anne! I have been quietly reading and wondering about this thread lately as to why Dd trusts Snape and I have a very strong feeling that this is the better of all theories on the matter. Anne wrote: > Here's my husband's suggestion: if the curse simply > bounced back on a regular human, he'd be a corpse, but if it bounced back on Voldemort, he might be reduced to ashes, phoenix- like. The ashes would indicate that he was "dead." > Valky: Notwithstanding my "me too"..(sorry list elves) this is the part of your post that most intrigues me. JKR has encouraged us to enliven this discussion so I had better do my part here. (Aberforth is the HogsHead Bartender!) Where did that come from..? hmm hmm ok. First and foremost the phoenix analogy is *much* canon supported. After all the House at Godrics Hollow 'blew up'! I ask you does anyone recall an 'Avada Kedavra' blowing stuff up in canon? Uh uh.... It *doesn't* happen. Some type of explosive fire producing *thing* went off. And that thing was LV's phoenix emulating creature form. Reduced to ashes just as Anne has postulated. We have looked at how the Avada Kedavra rebounded off Harry, by a sacrifice. It seems akin, to me, in so many ways to the same magic invoked by a wizard debt, but I digress. After the curse rebounded, the flames of LV's _death_ devoured a house and its contents but left a tiny baby entirely unharmed. We know this happened _after_a _transfer_ of LV's powers to Harry. So the answer is given there, LV *did* pass an immortal or invincible enchantment over to Harry when he proffered up his being to rebirth. Now maybe this is where the 'power the Dark Lord knows not' comes in. Perhaps that is the price LV pays for his rebirth, he passed something ancient and hardwon, that he treasured and never guessed would seep punitively into one of his intended victims. Now Harry, too, has it. But in Harry its in its opposition to its state in LV. I might be rambling so I'll add here that what I think will uncover finally _the Power that the Dark Lord knows not_ is a line in OOtP which I think is the crucial clue. "......and he knew he was Dead." That line is loaded with implication. Harry *knew* he was dead? Why? Did he die when Voldemort entered him and then come back to life? Was he already dead all series and just suddenly realised it? Clearly LV *is* as dead as Harry can concieve of, but Harry knew that *he* himself was dead. This moves the target for me, I don't see this applying to a transferred cognition from Voldemort, it applied to Harry in some way shape or form, so why is Harry DEaD when LV is inside him? Why is Harry *dead* when he should be alive? This, I think, is why Voldemort is alive when he should be dead. From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Mon Aug 16 12:47:45 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 12:47:45 -0000 Subject: some sirius hinting... yay puns! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110203 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" wrote: > I wonder what James > and Lily did for money. Sirius had inheritence, Lupin probably was > living with his parents or with either James or Sirius (or perhaps he > managed to find work more easily then), James had to get all that > money from somewhere. I wonder if he had inheritence too? I do believe James' inheritance has already been mentioned in a chat/interview. It's just hard to always find this stuff! :) Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Mon Aug 16 13:16:56 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:16:56 -0000 Subject: Why didn't Voldemort die? (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110204 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > I ask you does anyone recall an 'Avada Kedavra' blowing stuff up in > canon? Uh uh.... It *doesn't* happen. "Another jet of green light flew from behind the silver shield. This time it was the one-armed centaur, galloping in front of Dumbledore, that took the blast and shattered into a hundred pieces." :-) Josh From gregory_lynn at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 13:25:24 2004 From: gregory_lynn at yahoo.com (gregory_lynn) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:25:24 -0000 Subject: Voldemort: Between Life and Death? (Long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110205 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "inkling108" wrote: > The two key questions JKR spoke of today in Edinburg both concern > the nature of Voldemort's "life." Why didn't he die when the curse > rebounded, and why didn't Dumbledore try to kill him when he had the > chance? > > These questions also touch on the most enigmatic line in the > Prophecy: "neither can live while the other survives." On the face > of it this makes no sense, unless one of the two is not truly alive. > > Inkling I concur. Every living thing dies, even Nicholas and Perenelle once their Stone was destroyed. If you don't die, then you weren't alive. You mention that Voldie's body is the body without the spiritual elements. We also know that Harry possesses a power that can destroy Voldemort that Voldie "knows not." I think most of us assume this is love or caring or something along those lines. I want to bring in another bit from that interview if I may. When asked about the first character she invented, Rowling responded in part "The whole plot is contained in Harry Potter; his past, present and future?that is the story." What jumped out at me when I read this is that we have heard the phrase "past, present, and future" before. In Chamber of Secrets, Riddle says that Voldemort is his past, present, and future. And we are told about all the similarities between the two, Harry and Riddle, in that novel. I think on a metaphorical level, if not on a story level (though I wouldn't rule that out), that Harry is Voldemort. And Dumbledore. Voldemort is the past, non caring Harry. Harry is the current Harry. Dumbledore is the future Harry, who has learned what is really important in life. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 16 13:36:07 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:36:07 -0000 Subject: Godric's Sword and Voldemort's Defeat In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110206 Terpnurse said: > > My thinking is more along the lines of the emotional - that > > Harry will use (ugh!) Love to vanquish Voldemort. I'm not fond of > that, but to me it seems the way it's going to go down. Becky: > I tend to agree that Love (no ugh!, so long as she keeps her normal > not too sappy style for us) will be a major theme in the final > showdown. As I was rereading the prophecy, I noticed that the > word "a" ...as we have seen Love help him so many times > before (fawkes' appearances representing dumbledore's love, lily's > sacrifice, the love for sirius repelling voldemort, even Neville's > loyalty to Harry buying the order time to get to the department of > mysteries), it will come into play in the final moments, with > either a surge of everyone's love for Harry saving > him or spurring him into his final sacrifice of himself for them. SSSusan: Thanks, Becky, for pointing out that we have seen JKR bring up the Love Stuff before and that she HAS managed to keep from being too sappy while doing so. On the other hand, my personal thought is that the power is *Sacrificial* Love, not just Love. Almost everyone is capable of Love, which obviously makes it not very unique. NOT everyone is capable of or willing to use Sacrificial Love, though Harry, I would argue, clearly is. I think THIS is the power Voldy knows not and which will be his undoing. Your reference to "a surge of everyone's love for Harry saving him or spurring him into his final sacrifice" also fits quite nicely with this. [If anyone has read After the End, they'll recognize this as how it plays out there.] Siriusly Snapey Susan From humantupperware1 at yahoo.com.au Mon Aug 16 13:07:56 2004 From: humantupperware1 at yahoo.com.au (humantupperware1) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:07:56 -0000 Subject: McGonagall's Age In-Reply-To: <8o54v7+2320@eGroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110207 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Rita Winston" wrote: > Our old Yahoo club said: > > with her hair drawn into a tight bun, and as "a tall black-haired > witch". I guess that mention of black hair makes us think she must be > quite young, but my theory is that Minerva makes liberal use of the > wizarding equivalent of 'Lady Grecian 2000' to create the illusion of > youth. I wouldn't be surprised if to find that she was a contemporary > of Albus Dumbledore and, in fact, about 60.> > > Dummbledore is older than 60: ........ Hello...Leah here...I'm new, but I read in an interview the other day with JKR (can't remember where, but i think it was one of the links from here) That Dumbledore is 150 and Minerva is a "sprightly seventy" she also goes on to say that wizards live longer than muggles, and that harry hasn't discovered this yet....... cheers, HumanTupperware From humantupperware1 at yahoo.com.au Mon Aug 16 13:34:21 2004 From: humantupperware1 at yahoo.com.au (humantupperware1) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:34:21 -0000 Subject: Why didn't Voldemort die? (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110208 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > wrote: > > What if Snape, being an expert at potions, had helped Voldemort > become immortal, or at least knew the steps Voldemort had taken to > protect himself from death? What if his telling DD about what > Voldemort had done was the reason why DD trusts him? And finally, > what if DD told Lily about this and her knowledge might have > factored into her protection of Harry? > > >snip...... > So the answer is given there, LV *did* pass an immortal or > invincible enchantment over to Harry when he proffered up his being > to rebirth. > HumanTupperware: >hey there.... I've been thinking about this since I read the Edin. Fest. Transcript....and I just wanted to point out something about the prophesy. I have a sneaking suspicion that the prophesy had already been fullfilled.... The one with the power approaches.... Harry Born to those who have trice defied him.......Lily and James born as the seventh month dies.......31st July (sorry, don't buy the roman calendar stuff) The dark lord will mark him as his equal....the AK curse but he will have power the dark lord knows not....lily's love/protection...the rebounding of the curse "and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives..........Voldy does "die" at this point, in the sense that he cannot live while the other (harry) survives...........the only reason he doesn't die completely is that he has taken precautions to cheat death......we know he is afraid of death so has taken on some magic to prevent this..... I'm not sure where this theory leaves the story to come, or even if it is at all valid, but I thought it may be another way of looking at it. If the prophecy has already been filled, then Harry doesn't have to deal with Voldy alone, which though a relief, would also be a total letdown. hmmmmm? any thoughts? Human Tupperware From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Aug 16 14:13:27 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 14:13:27 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Pairing hints in EBD transcript In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110209 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lifeavantgarde" wrote: > Stefanie: > |Q:Will Ron and Hermione ever get together? > | > |A: Well?[Laughter.] What do you think? > |[Audience member: I think they will]. > |I'm not going to say. I can't say, > |can I? I think that, by now, I've given > |quite a lot of clues on the subject. That > |is all I'm going to say. You will have to > |read between the lines on that one. > http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/news_view.cfm?id=80 > > Now, JKR certainly wasn't forthcoming with this answer, as I'm sure we all expect her to behave with questions like this...but the answer, nonetheless is quite interesting. > > "You will have to read between the lines on that one" Could this be a hint towards an H/HR leaning? It's often been touted that R/HR is "obvious," especially by R/HRers themselves, while H/HR supporters wave the banner of subtext. One certainly doesn't need to read between the lines to glean a R/HR leaning. > Pippin: Erm, one does have to read between the lines to get what Hermione is feeling toward either Ron or Harry. However, there isn't, even in the subtext, any hint that Harry currently has romantic feelings toward Hermione, at least I can't recall that even the most ardent H/H'ers make that claim.At most they have suggested that Harry could develop such feelings in the future. But if we have all the clues we need, isn't that ruled out? Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Aug 16 14:41:55 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 14:41:55 -0000 Subject: Voldemort, the Prophecy and the HBP Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110210 My guess is that the Half Blood Prince isn't a real person. He's a legend, like the Heir of Slytherin was before Riddle decided that the Heir of Slytherin was him. Perhaps the HBP is the promised savior of the WW or something like that, and it is because Voldemort *thought* that Harry might be the HBP that LV went after Harry rather than Neville. I think Harry might be tempted to assume the title of HBP as Tom was tempted to become the Heir of Slytherin. Now on to the prophecy, the only way it makes sense to me, and then, like most riddles, it becomes absurdly simple, is if the "other" is a third party. Suppose the Other is a demon possessor of Riddle. As we know, Tom has done something to himself so that he can't die. People have been assuming that the possession is the reason, but that can't be right, because possession is usually fatal. Rather, I think Tom was possessed first, after he entered the chamber (thus the red glint in the eyes of Riddle) and he isn't dead because one of those dangerous transformations he went through prevents him from dying. Then we can read the prophecy this way: Either [Tom or Harry] must die at the hand of the other [demon] for neither [Tom nor Harry] can live if the other[demon] survives. My guess is, Harry has to render Voldemort killable, so that Voldemort, like Quirrell, will die when his possessor abandons him. But Harry must not kill Voldemort himself. Rather he must find a way to destroy or banish the demon. Pippin From cincimaelder at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 15:06:15 2004 From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (Darby) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 15:06:15 -0000 Subject: Why didn't Voldemort die? (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110211 HumanTupperware: > > >hey there.... I've been thinking about this since I read the Edin. Fest. > Transcript....and I just wanted to point out something about the prophesy. > > I have a sneaking suspicion that the prophesy had already been fullfilled.... > > The one with the power approaches.... Harry > Born to those who have trice defied him.......Lily and James > born as the seventh month dies.......31st July (sorry, don't buy the roman > calendar stuff) > > The dark lord will mark him as his equal....the AK curse > > but he will have power the dark lord knows not....lily's love/protection...the > rebounding of the curse > > "and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the > other survives..........Voldy does "die" at this point, in the sense that he cannot > live while the other (harry) survives...........the only reason he doesn't die > completely is that he has taken precautions to cheat death......we know he is > afraid of death so has taken on some magic to prevent this..... > > > I'm not sure where this theory leaves the story to come, or even if it is at all > valid, but I thought it may be another way of looking at it. If the prophecy has > already been filled, then Harry doesn't have to deal with Voldy alone, which > though a relief, would also be a total letdown. > > hmmmmm? any thoughts? I kind of like the track you're on here, but one thing about your last statement(about Harry not dealing with VM alone) is; When JK was asked "If you could be one of the characters for a day, who would it be?" She said "Definitely not Harry, because I would not want to go through it all. I know what is coming for him so there is no way that I would want to be him." Sounds like he is going to have a rougher time than the others and there must be something that only he can do. Darby From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Aug 16 15:34:16 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 15:34:16 -0000 Subject: Meeting Lupin was Re: some sirius hinting... yay puns! In-Reply-To: <081620041232.27869.4120A97A0005146F00006CDD22007481849C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110212 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, drliss at c... wrote: > Lissa: > > As to where Lupin was during the christening... I had a new thought. Dumbledore has mentioned spies before. I'm guessing Severus Snape was not the only one. Wouldn't Lupin- technically a Dark Creature and someone who (although a half blood) would have something to gain from Voldemort- be an excellent spy for the Order? Especially since he's so good at hiding his true feelings? > > Given that she says she'd love to actually meet Lupin, and he's a wonderful person, I'd guess that ESE!Lupin isn't an option. But maybe Pippin's got something close... Lupin's trying to give the DEs the impression he's ESE? And maybe that's why he couldn't be at the christening, because he was spying on the DEs, or the creatures allied to the death eaters? (which seems a little more plausible, or he might have a better idea about Peter.)< Or maybe he was sent to spy on the creatures allied to the Death Eaters, and found himself feeling more at home among them than among his old friends? JKR says some nice things about Lupin, I know, but she's never said he was a good person. I know she said he was wonderful and she'd like to meet him (maybe she thinks she could talk some courage into him) but the thing is, if evil were only done by horrible people, then the DE's and their real world models would be right. All we'd have to do to make the world a better place is figure out who the horrible people are and get rid of them. Unfortunately it's not that simple. I'd go so far as to say that Lupin, under ordinary circumstances, like the classroom or the dinner table, would be a good person. Unfortunately his circumstances aren't ordinary. He's being oppressed, and like everyone in his world, he's subject to manipulation by Voldemort. We've seen, in Kreacher and Dobby, that people who are desperate to escape oppression can overcome their deepest inhibitions. Just like a drowning person will sometimes push a would be rescuer under in a desperate attempt to reach the air,so the oppressed sometimes do terrible things in their desperate desire for freedom. And Voldemort is ready to take advantage of that. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 15:47:14 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 15:47:14 -0000 Subject: Meeting Lupin was Re: some sirius hinting... yay puns! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110213 Pippin: > Or maybe he was sent to spy on the creatures allied to the Death > Eaters, and found himself feeling more at home among them > than among his old friends? JKR says some nice things about > Lupin, I know, but she's never said he was a good person. Alla: Hey, Pippin. Never give up, do you? Well, more power to you.:o) I will always consider your theory one of the very best argued ones, among those I am strongly opposed to. After yesterday's appearance though, I am almost ready to bet against you. If she were to pick a character she wants to meet, she would choose Lupin? She said that she really likes him (she did not even say as character, so I would say as a person) As far as I know she never expressed the desire to meet Voldie or Lucius Malfoy, or Peter Peddigrew? Nah, I would say that something very important is in store for Remus and hopefully being ESE! is not it. I would say being a HBP, but what do I know? :o) From jmmears at comcast.net Mon Aug 16 16:00:15 2004 From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 16:00:15 -0000 Subject: GOF: Ron's a real twit (git) In-Reply-To: <1c5.1c81ef4b.2e514a4f@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110214 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, juli17 at a... wrote: > So why is Ron considered Harry's best friend, including by Harry > himself? Because Ron's family has taken Harry in several times, or > because Ron is a boy? I think it's probably the latter, since best friends > are usually of the same sex--despite the fact that Hermoine's two best > friends are Harry and Ron. Though it's understandable that Harry sees > Ron as his best friend, I'd love to see him acknowledge at some point > that the one person who has stood next to him through *everything,* and > has proven to be his truest friend of all, isn't Ron, it's Hermoine. Here's why. "That's chess!' snapped Ron. "You've got to make some sacrifices! I take one step forward and she'll take me - that leaves you free to checkmate the king, Harry!' PS, Chapter 16 'Stop gibbering,' said Ron, 'we've come to take you home with us.' CoS, Chapter 3 Right on cue, Ron came bursting into the office. He was completely out of breath, and stopped just shor of Snape's desk, clutching the stitch in his chest and trying to speak. "I - gave - Harry - that - stuff." he choked. "Bought - it...in Zonko's...ages - ago..." PoA, Chapter 14 "If you want to kill Harry, you'll have to kill us too!" he said fiercely, though the effort of standing upright was draining him of still more color, and he swayed slightly as he spoke. PoA, Chapter 17 "We're coming for you whether the Muggles like it or not, you can't miss the World Cup, only Mum and Dad reckon it's better if we pretend to ask their permission first. If they say yes, send Pig back with your answer pronto, and we'll come and get you at five o;clock on Sunday. If they say no, send Pig back pronto and we'll come and get you at five o'clock on Sunday anyway." GoF, Chapter 3 "Come and have a game of Quidditch in the orchard, Harry,'... "Ron," said Hermione, in an I-don't-think-your're-being-very- sensitive sort of voice, "Harry doesn't want to play Quidditch right now..." "Yeah, I want to play Quidditch," said Harry suddenly... GoF, Chapter 10 "She's taken points off Gryffindor because I'm having my hand slice open every nigh! How is that fair, how?" "I know, mate," said Ron sympthetically, tipping bacon onto Harry's plate, "she's bang out of order." OoP, Chapter 15 Sorry to bombard the list with canon quotes, but there seems to be a persistant sort of amnesia that overcomes many readers who can't understand why Ron is the one Harry would miss the most. It's debatable as to whether Hermione has stood next to him through *everything* but it's not debatable that Harry is always happiest in Ron's presence. It's not because he's a boy, it's because he's the one who really *gets* Harry, and he's the one who has provided refuge from the Dursleys, whenever he possibly can. If you look at things from Harry's POV, it makes perfect sense for him to value the friend whose company he actually enjoys most. Julie writes: > In the meantime, I have a hard time seeing what Hermoine sees in Ron, > especially after Molly sent Hermoine that tiny Easter egg. Hermoine > asks if Ron's mother reads the Daily Prophet, and Ron says "Yep" while > stuffing his mouth full of his toffee egg. It's Harry who actually notices > Hermoine's sad expression and quickly brings up another subject to > take her mind off it. But who takes on Malfoy when he insults her (and ends up coughing slugs, for his trouble)? Who stands up to Snape when he insults her (and gets detention for doing it)? Who notices that she's taking more classes than she can possibly have time for? Who cares whether or not she's eating? Who notices that her teeth have changed? Who cares who her date to the Yule Ball is? Hermione is no fool. She knows which boy actually pays attention to her well-being on a day to day basis. Julie continues: > These two reactions have been repetitive throughout the books. Ron > usually ignores or dismisses Hermoine's feelings, while Harry is the > one who often notices and sometimes tries to alleviate her fears or > sadness. Funnily enough, it's been my impression that Harry rarely takes time to notice Hermione's "feelings" at all. I really can't recall him trying to alleviate her fears or sadness, either (the Easter egg example has more to do with setting Mrs. Weasley straight about himself, than Hermione). Ron, on the other hand... ;-) Julie concludes: I don't have strong 'ship preferences for either R/H or H/H, but > I have yet to see any reason Hermoine should go for Ron. (Take Harry, > you fool, take Harry!). Why do you think that Harry is available for Hermione to "take"? Jo S., charter member of C.R.A.B. From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Mon Aug 16 16:01:15 2004 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 16:01:15 -0000 Subject: James & Snape: Related? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110215 --- "Wendi Williams" wrote: > [Discussing theory that Narcissa is Lily's sister] > The only three adult females in the books named after > flowers are Lily, Petunia, and Narcissa .... I think there are at least a few more. The most obvious is Fleur, although maybe you didn't consider her an adult. Catlady (in #110094) has pointed out Madame Pomfrey has a flower name (Poppy). Andromeda is also a flower, although also a constellation (and a mythic princess). What with Lavender and Pansy and Moaning Myrtle, not to mention Lupin, perhaps it could be said that Rowling simply likes flower names. -- Matt PS: Isn't the flower "Narcissus," like the Greek hero? --M From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 16:56:23 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 09:56:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] SHIP: Pairing hints in EBD transcript In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040816165623.87976.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110216 --- lifeavantgarde wrote: > |Q:Will Ron and Hermione ever get together? > > "You will have to read between the lines on that one" > Could this be a hint towards an H/HR leaning? It's often been > touted that R/HR is "obvious," especially by R/HRers themselves, > while H/HR supporters wave the banner of subtext. One certainly > doesn't need to read between the lines to glean a R/HR leaning. We have to remember that JKR has the average reader in mind when she asks questions, not the members of lists like this one who've hashed out every possible topic and wrung every drop of meaning from each line in the books down to the copyright line on the title page. And I think she's talking about R/Hr. Most of the hints are obscure and I can imagine a lot of younger pre-dating readers missing them completely. The fact that we see them doesn't mean other non-list readers do. Sort of like literary thestrals, in a way. Magda (who's pulling for Krum because she thinks Ron isn't good enough for Hermione, especially when she'd have Molly for a mother-in-law) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From meriaugust at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 17:08:21 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 17:08:21 -0000 Subject: GOF: Ron's a real twit (git) In-Reply-To: <1c5.1c81ef4b.2e514a4f@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110217 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, juli17 at a... wrote: > I'm rereading GOF, and I've come to the conclusion that Ron is a real > twit (read: git) in this book. I've also come to the conclusion that Harry > doesn't recognize his *real* best friend for who that is: Hermoine. And, > thirdly, so far in GOF, Ron isn't good enough (or at least, not mature > enough) for Hermoine. He's so self-involved and thoughtless--which I do > know is the definition of your average fourteen year old! Still, I'd like to > smack him upside the head (gently). (In GOF, I'm just getting to the > third task) Meri: Well, if your best friend is someone with whom you can never ever argue with, then how many among us actually have a best friend in that definition? I mean, if you can't fight with them what are they good for? Besides, sometimes fighting and making up makes the friendship stronger. After their arguement, Harry and Ron are closer than ever, and Ron is most definately there for Harry in Order, when he needs it the most. And remember, it was both Ron and Harry who were being stupid about their arguement, Ron for letting his jealousy get away with him, and Harry for being to proud to admit how much he missed Ron. > So why is Ron considered Harry's best friend, including by Harry > himself? Because Ron's family has taken Harry in several times, or > because Ron is a boy? I think it's probably the latter, since best friends > are usually of the same sex--despite the fact that Hermoine's two best > friends are Harry and Ron. Meri: Actually, I think that Hermione's best friend would probably be Ginny. Who knows who Hermione's going to the Yule Ball with? Ginny. Who shares a tent with Hermy at the QWC? Ginny. And who does Ginny tell things that even her brothers don't know about her? Hermione. So, Harry and Ron are probably two of her best friends in the world, but I think that Ginny is being undervalued in the BF sense. Though it's understandable that Harry sees > Ron as his best friend, I'd love to see him acknowledge at some point > that the one person who has stood next to him through *everything,* and > has proven to be his truest friend of all, isn't Ron, it's Hermoine. Meri: I think he acknowledge's Hermione and Ron equally, and, like I said above, just because you fight or argue with someone doesn't mean you should devalue their worth as a friend. And Harry's had his tiffs with Hermione, too. In PoA, when she turned in his brand new Firebolt broomstick to McGonagal without even discussing it with him. That was pretty underhanded, no matter how good her intentions were. > In the meantime, I have a hard time seeing what Hermoine sees in Ron, > especially after Molly sent Hermoine that tiny Easter egg. Hermoine > asks if Ron's mother reads the Daily Prophet, and Ron says "Yep" while > stuffing his mouth full of his toffee egg. It's Harry who actually notices > Hermoine's sad expression and quickly brings up another subject to > take her mind off it. Meri: Well, let's think. Ron's tall, good looking (in my imagination, anyway), has a good sense of humor, is fun to be around, is loyal, sweet (he gave her perfume for Christmas) and a good stand up guy in general. So, what's not to like? I mean, yes, he's a bit immature, but girls grow up faster than boys, after all. And why should Hermione judge Ron's worth as a boyfriend because of something his mother does? Not that I think that Mrs. Weasley wouldn't be a good mother in law (and she better be, with seven kids), but that seems like a silly reason to not have a relationship with a guy, because his mom doesn't like you. And remember, Mrs. Weasley does like Hermione, she was just clouded by the Daily Prophet smear campaign, and I'm not getting into another debate over Molly here. > These two reactions have been repetitive throughout the books. Ron > usually ignores or dismisses Hermoine's feelings, while Harry is the > one who often notices and sometimes tries to alleviate her fears or > sadness. I don't have strong 'ship preferences for either R/H or H/H, but > I have yet to see any reason Hermoine should go for Ron. (Take Harry, > you fool, take Harry!). Meri: Again, maybe this is just me, but I am a confirmed H/R shipper, for a couple reasons. First of all, that is just the dynamic that works in these types of stories. You get ther hero (Harry), the hero's best male friend (Ron) and the hero's best female friend who ends up with the sidekick (Hermy). Secondly, I just don't think that Harry and Hermione make a good match. There are times when she simply doesn't understand him, and I think that someone who has had more similar experiences (like loss of a parent (Luna) or a brush with LV (Ginny)) would be better suited for our boy hero. And then there's the fact that Harry looks at Hermy as his friend, and just his friend. That could change, but I don't see it happening. This isn't Dawson's Creek, and JKR has better things to write about than love triangles (Harry trying to steal Hermione from Ron is a sublot that I can live without). Anyway, just my two cents. Meri From cincimaelder at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 17:09:18 2004 From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (Darby) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 17:09:18 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Pairing hints in EBD transcript In-Reply-To: <20040816165623.87976.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110218 > Magda (who's pulling for Krum because she thinks Ron isn't good > enough for Hermione, especially when she'd have Molly for a mother-in-law) > Do you really dislike Molly that much? I would love to have her for a mother-in-law (compared to what I have). I love Ron too, he's just a goofy teenager, he will mature and grow, and deep down he's a wonderful person. Darby From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Mon Aug 16 17:33:06 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 17:33:06 -0000 Subject: some sirius hinting... yay puns! In-Reply-To: <081620041232.27869.4120A97A0005146F00006CDD22007481849C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110219 >>> Justine: > > Firstly, there was no question about Sirius's marital status. As > far as I know, godparents do not have to be married--my godparents > barely know each other! Jo was the one who brought up marriage... > why? Now, even bringing this up is to be blamed on fan fiction, of course, but this seems to be the first implication from Jo, herself, > that Sirius fancies women; gay marriage is not recognized in > England, if I'm not sorely mistaken, and unless his big rebellion was experimenting with homosexuality or just being gay, period, then > this sounds like a "Sirius and Remus were not lovers" answer. It's more a "Sirius was too busy fighting the forces with whom his family > agreed to get married" or "Sirius was too busy being a manslut to > get married." I like them both. :-D <<< Brenda now: YEP, MY THOUGHTS EXACTLY. CAN'T AGREE WITH YOU MORE!! [Sorry, Cap wasn't on, was me going hyper] Thank you so much Justine (and Stephanie and HunterGreen) for bringing that up. Actually, I was talking to Valky last night and we briefly noted this quote. IMO there are 2 possibilities here: 1) JKR simply did not put much thought into Sirius' sexual orientation, she just assumed he fancies women. 2) She had heard many Sirius-Remus shippers and wanted to give out subtle clues. Either way Sirius is JKR's creation and if she hadn't thought about it then neither did he. I thought her comment on "too busy being a rebel" meant that he was too busy with the war and the Order. Not that fighting in a war is a rebellious thing to do, hehe, but I just figured dating wasn't really on his mind. Picking up women OTOH is a different story ;) Absolutely loving manslut womanizer Sirius!!! Imagine covered-in- leather rich manslut on a hot motocycle!!! *drools* >>> Lissa wrote: > I admit, I've been thinking this too. However, I wonder if the rest of the sentence of "If Sirius had married...." would have been, "If Sirius had married, then Harry might have had a godmother." Godparents don't have to be married, but since it appears that the godparents are also the guardians, then if Sirius WAS married then the wife WOULD be a guardian as well. <<< Brenda: Well... I don't know how godparents are appointed, but the fact that Sirius was married would not necessarily hint that his wife is Harry's godmother. Wouldn't it be Lily's turn to choose her baby's godmother? >>> Lilyp wrote: The marital status of Sirius was mentioned because someone wiil have to inherit Grimmauld Place. Now we know for sure there isn't any wife or child. Who's his heir? <<< Brenda: You have brought up a valid point, although everyone pretty much assumed that Sirius wasn't married. I don't know if anyone had asked her whether Sirius got married? I am personally rooting for the Weasleys to inherit Sirius' gold, though highly unlikely. They really deserve it! >>> Lissa: > Well, they WERE 21 when Voldie fell. I actually thought James and Lily were awfully young to get married, and have wondered if they "had" to get married at times. <<< I second. I third. I fourth. >>> Lissa: I've also wondered if they weren't together before Azkaban, but got together in the time afterwards. <<< Brenda: Well, I think if R-S pairing is indeed true *cries me a river* then it happened after Azkaban. If Sirius was gay then I believe his interest would have been James more like than Remus. I think James had him wrapped around in his snitchy-little fingers, with his brilliance and hatred for Dark ARts and arrogance. We see Sirius teasing Remus in OoP and making some thoughtless comment, but he is always there for James. Although I believe if he did have feelings for James then the obvious rejection will make him despise James, IMO. Besides, he will never hide it, being the obnoxious arrogant berk he is. And after Hogwarts... Remus was suspected to be the spy so no relationship there, not even friendly one. >>> (There's also always the possibility that they were bi.) Oh my, don't even want to think about that. >>> Lissa: Given that she says she'd love to actually meet Lupin, and he's a wonderful person, I'd guess that ESE!Lupin isn't an option. But maybe Pippin's got something close... Lupin's trying to give the DEs the impression he's ESE? And maybe that's why he couldn't be at the christening, because he was spying on the DEs, or the creatures allied to the death eaters? <<< Brenda: I think Lupin wasn absent from the christening (or the wedding) as they already suspected him to be the spy. Had a fall-out. If Lupin was spying on DEs from DD's order, why on earth would he keep it from the Mauraders?! Assuming that Lupin was once a spy for the Order - why hasn't he resumed his old position NOW? We only see Snape giving reports. What did Lupin do that made him untrustworthy in Voldy's eyes? AND he gets away with it? [no mention of Lupin or likewise from Voldy anywhere, no grudges, no plans to kill, nothing] No, I think ESE!Lupin works better with the story. Only Voldemort knows this. Oops, left out Pippin there ;). Which reminds me, how is your ESE!Lupin report going? You KNOW we are dying to overanalyze it ;P Brenda From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 16 18:12:06 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:12:06 -0000 Subject: Why didn't Voldemort die? (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110221 humantupperware: > > If the prophecy has already been filled, then Harry doesn't have > > to deal with Voldy alone, which though a relief, would also be a > > total letdown. Darby: > I kind of like the track you're on here, but one thing about your > last statement(about Harry not dealing with VM alone) is; > When JK was asked "If you could be one of the characters for a day, > who would it be?" She said "Definitely not Harry, because I would > not want to go through it all. I know what is coming for him so > there is no way that I would want to be him." Sounds like he is > going to have a rougher time than the others and there must be > something that only he can do. SSSusan: I will agree, Darby, that what JKR may have meant is that Harry is facing something he alone can do. I'll grant that that's likely, even. But I would take her comment to mean perhaps more than "just" this one task he alone can do. I think she knows that almost EVERYTHING until The End is going to be difficult for Harry. He has burdens to carry, he has decisions he must make, he has fear and anger and grief he must endure. He also has a lot he must still learn. I think JKR may be alluding to all of these things in combination. To have to be The One to perform The Task is bad enough, but throwing all the other things ahead of him--and all that's come before which is painful and confusing--means that his future 'til the ultimate showdown will be difficult, indeed. Let's hope Fred & George are still around to lighten the mood now & then! (And maybe Ginny to provide some comfort. :-)) Siriusly Snapey Susan From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Mon Aug 16 18:32:48 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:32:48 -0000 Subject: 3rd 'Missing' DE (Re: Astra's Hubby Has a Theory) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110222 >>> Astra and her wacky husband wrote: > In Goblet of Fire, Voldemort makes reference to the three > missing and still-living death-eaters. One of them is obviously > Crouch, who's still at Hogwarts; one is PROBABLY Snape, (( the > one who's left forever and will supposedly die for it; and then > there's a third, one who "failed" Voldemort and will eventually get > a rude comeuppance. Brenda: Hiya Astra and her wacky husband!! ;) I thought "the one too cowardly to return" was Karkaroff and "the one who has left me forever" was Fudge. Snape appears to be an active Death Eater to me. In fact, I believe he was present at the rebirth ceremony (between Lucius and where Lestranges should have been, 'a man' stood there). I was immediately sold after reading the Northtower Column #15 from Mugglenet.com - check it out, it is a very thorough analysis) There was a poster who shared his/her speculation that whatever Snape went to do after GoF (Dumbledore's request and 'good luck' comment) was to time-travel, go to the Riddle graveyard and reclaim his loyalty. Snape is indeed very intent on whom Harry names as being present. Something else that really bugs me is this: there are only 6 missing DEs out of 200+?? I am not too certain just WHO is marked as Death Eater and who is not but I did some counting from the books just to amuse myself. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Death Eaters from Graveyard: 16+ -- Wormtail, Avery, Lucius, Lestranges (2), "the next man", Macnair, Crabbe, Goyle, Nott, `6 missing lads VM talks about' -- "Some of the Death Easters he passed in silence, but he paused before others, and spoke to them" (GoF, 564-565. UK) And of course there are more revealed in OoP (I think) but haven't counted them in yet. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. The Order of Phoenix: 22+ -- Moody, Dumbledore, Delalus Diggle, Marlene McKinnon, Frank & Alice Longbottom, Emmeline Vance, Remus Lupin, Benjy Fenwick, Edgar Bones, Sturgis Podmore, Caradoc Dearborn, Hagrid, Elphias Doge, Gideon & Fabian Prewett, Aberforth, Dorcas Meadowes, Sirius, James, Lily, Peter -- But Lupin says later on, when comforting Molly after her encounter with Boggarts, "Last time we were outnumbered twenty to one by Death Eaters and they were picking us off one by one " (OoP, 161. UK) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Following this logic, even if we assume the Order only had 22 members in it, this leads to the conclusion that there were more than 200 Death Eaters working for Voldemort. If there were more Order members and Moody stopped after James appeared on the picture - this only means there were that many more DE's strutting around, eating, well, deaths. One may argue that it is only Lupin's words - but I am inclined to take his words at face value here, I mean why not? He is very smart, thus wouldn't have too much of hard time estimating the situation. We just don't know how many silent former Death Eaters there are in WW. It is supported by my interpretation of canon, that there are bound to be many more Death Eaters than we expect, so brace yourself for more true-color-revealing in the next books. I can't bring myself to believe there are only "6 missing Death Eaters". ONLY 6 out of 200+?! >>> It's Uncle Vernon. > > This third Deatheater failed > Voldemort seriously. Maybe Vernon's job was to keep Harry from > ever getting to Hogwarts. Goodness knows he does everything > in his power to keep Hagrid from picking him up. <<< Brenda: Do you really think keeping Harry away from Hogwarts was that easy? Or that Voldemort thought it would be that easy? Then why didn't VM leave Vernon to eliminate Harry as soon as possible? Why let him live in the first place? > Zip ahead to book 5. Harry says the word "Voldemort" near the > beginning and Vernon calls him "Voldy-thing." He can't say the > name. Come on. The guy is playing too innocent. <<< Brenda: Well, 'Voldemort' is a pretty rare and unique name, and if you are opposed to anything uncommon it will sound funny. Did Harry get it right the first time? > Throughout the books, he purposely makes > gobbledygook out of every magic terminology he hears, as if he's > trying to slough it off. I think he's trying too hard to play dumb. Or that he IS actually that dumb. Or you mean like Jessica Simpson? *eyeroll* Brenda From aphrodeia at gmail.com Mon Aug 16 18:35:47 2004 From: aphrodeia at gmail.com (Lisa) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:35:47 -0000 Subject: The clue behind the door Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110223 As the elves pointed out this morning, the Do Not Disturb sign has come down off the door at JKR's website, and there's an interesting clue inside. I won't post the clue here, as I'm sure some would like to check it all out themselves. Could this be a hint to the identity of the Half Blood Prince himself? There's someone in canon who bears an uncanny resemblance in my mind's eye to the note here..... Lisa, ever pondersome From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Mon Aug 16 19:31:13 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 19:31:13 -0000 Subject: DD - maybe. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110224 Don't think that anyone has picked up on this yet, if they have I apologise. The EBD Q&A - DDs patronus is a phoenix - "very representative of DD" says herself. I find this interesting, particularly as I've hypothesised previously on just what DD is or might be. Patronuses (patroni?) are supposed to be representitive of personality. Just what sort of personality is a phoenix representative of? Is DD much, much older than 150? Is he resurrected, renewed, reborn, revived, refurbished, renovated, restuffed and repolished at intervals down the centuries? I've always felt that it's significant that DD "worked on Alchemy" with old Nick according to the Chocolate Frog card; a card which is not new - it's one of the commonest around. He's obviously been associated with Flamel for years. What are Alchemists always working on? The Stone. But Flamel must have made the Stone centuries before DD was around (if he's only 150). So why would Flamel need help with his Alchemy? He's already done the difficult bit. Is DD a ringer? Is DD telling the *whole* truth? Could it be that he's 150 in *this* incarnation? So, possibilities:- 1. DD is Flamel. 2. DD is using Flamels Stone to keep going through the centuries. In which case DD could be a Merlin figure - roused from sleep when great danger threatens. 3. DD is the enemy of whatever it is (Salazar?) that's animating or motivating Voldy. And they've fought before - often. The Potterverse is just the latest battleground in a war that goes waaaaay back, perhaps to the founding of Hogwarts or even further. Kneasy From gwennie357 at msn.com Mon Aug 16 14:50:39 2004 From: gwennie357 at msn.com (Wendi Williams) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 10:50:39 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: some sirius hinting... yay puns! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110225 Lissa: My theory is that JKR never really had any major thoughts on romance for those two. Their love lives don't really fit into the plot, as much as I'd love to see it be worked in. But Sirius was a rebel, not willing to settle down yet, and then tossed into Azkaban. I can completely see Lupin being 100% unwilling to make a commitment of any sort. Given the way the Wizarding World treats him, I can't really see Lupin being willing to tie a lover to himself and let the world treat him/her that way as well. My impression of Lupin is that he's intensely alone. He accepted at a young age that romance was simply not in the cards for him, and he's lived that way ever since. gwennie357: okay, I'm a major R/S shipper too, and I still felt hope after Jo's quotation. I do dispute the fact that she probably didn't have their love lives fleshed out for the plot. I'm writing a book right now, and I know that personally I have every detail of every character's life charted out -- their first love, their sexual preference, their dental records (not really, but you get the point). I would say that Jo is much more anal than even I am, and I'm positive she knows (even if it's not relevant to the plot and she'll never give us a direct answer) every detail of Remus's and Sirius's love life (together or separate). I too believe that Lupin shuns love, because of what he is. I can see Sirius being there simply for release while their younger. But I'm also a fan of the post-Azkaban relationship. Whatever the case, I love them, and in my mind, they're together. Until Jo says, "Sirius and Remus were never, nor will they ever be, lovers," I'm clinging to this ship! _________________________________________________________________ Get ready for school! Find articles, homework help and more in the Back to School Guide! http://special.msn.com/network/04backtoschool.armx [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From vidarfe at start.no Mon Aug 16 16:08:30 2004 From: vidarfe at start.no (vidar_fe) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 16:08:30 -0000 Subject: Astra's Hubby Has a Theory (3rd 'missing' DE) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110226 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "astratrf" wrote: > Hiya, Folks! > > My wife, Astra, posts here occasionally and she's letting me post > my theory here. > > In Goblet of Fire, Voldemort makes reference to the three > missing and still-living death-eaters. One of them is obviously > Crouch, who's still at Hogwarts; one is PROBABLY Snape, (( the > one who's left forever and will supposedly die for it; and then > there's a third, one who "failed" Voldemort and will eventually get > a rude comeuppance. > > I haven't seen anybody anywhere speculate on who that third > person is (because I don't normally read too many newsgroups), > but I have an idea; maybe you've thought about this, too: > > It's Uncle Vernon. The first chapter of PS happens the very day Voldemort disappears. That day Vernon is shocked by seing a lot of celebrating people in cloaks. He thinks they are weirdos (remember, unnormal people is the worst thing he knows), and doesn`t recognise them as wizards. This indicates that he has never had any dealings with the wizarding world. Don`t forget KLarkaroff. We know he was a Death Eater. I don`t have the books right now, and my memory is sometimes buggy, but a think he betrayed some of the other DEs. From inkling108 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 16:19:58 2004 From: inkling108 at yahoo.com (inkling108) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 16:19:58 -0000 Subject: What is worse than death? (was Voldemort: Between Life and Death? (Long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110227 Alla wrote: > > You know, your post is very intriguing and one of the those which I > think will make me reevaluate the meaning of Dumbledore's 'Indeed, > your failure to understand that there are things much worse than > death has always been your greates weakness..." OoP, p.814, paperback. > > I used to think these words refer to the punishment worse than death, > which Tom will receive for his sins in the future.(yes, hopefully > from Harry) > > It is quite possible that Voldie is already in the state worse than > death, he just is not aware of it yet. > >Thank you! You're very welcome, Alla! Yes, I do believe that Voldy, in his zeal to conquer death (Vol de Mort = flight from death) has brought something worse upon himself. Does he understand what has happened to him? It seems not. In GoF, he says (referring to his identity after the curse failed) "what I was even I do not know...I, who have gone further than anybody on the path to immortality." Interestingly enough, just before the dialogue you cite, Dumbledore says "*We both know* (emphasis mine)that there are other ways of destroying a man, Tom." (other ways than killing, that is). To what knowledge is he referring? Voldy immediately snarls that nothing is worse than death. This angry reaction may be masking a fear that Dumbledore is right. There is something crucial here that both Dumbledore and Voldy know, but Voldy is refusing to acknowledge it, either out of fear or arrogance. I think that this same knowledge will eventually be used by Harry to destroy Voldemort. It is also interesting that Dumbledore, who is an alchemist, tries and fails to imprison Voldy using first fire, than water. And what is this mysterious spell that makes Voldemort's shield reverberate with an "oddly chilling" sound like a gong? Inkling From musicofsilence at hotmail.com Mon Aug 16 19:59:08 2004 From: musicofsilence at hotmail.com (lifeavantgarde) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 19:59:08 -0000 Subject: The clue behind the door - SPOILERS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110228 >>>Lisa: As the elves pointed out this morning, the Do Not Disturb sign has come down off the door at JKR's website, and there's an interesting clue inside. I won't post the clue here, as I'm sure some would like to check it all out themselves. Could this be a hint to the identity of the Half Blood Prince himself? There's someone in canon who bears an uncanny resemblance in my mind's eye to the note here... <<< Stefanie: Spoiler space for speculation... J K R I S T E H A W E S O M E Yes...anywho. I'm positively giddy about speculating about this. Imagine how it's going to be actually reading this bit and discovering who it *really* is! The first thought that sprung to my mind, when reading the scrap, was "LUPIN" or some variation thereof (Lupin the elder?). The bits of grey in tawny hair, is really all I have to go on that. But then, with the obvious connection to the appearance of a lion, could a TT! Godric Gryffindor be our mystery man? For introducing a character this late in the series, I have doubts as to whether he would be the "heir of Gryffindor." Perhaps this is our next DADA teacher. I'm intrigued by the yellowish eyes. Perhaps going too much into it, but do you think she's referring to the color of his iris, or to a jaundiced appearance? All preliminary guesses...any others? Stefanie Who is a terrible Darts player :o) From rhinobabies at hotmail.com Mon Aug 16 16:35:38 2004 From: rhinobabies at hotmail.com (coderaspberry77) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 16:35:38 -0000 Subject: Astra's Hubby Has a Theory (3rd 'missing' DE) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110229 > I haven't seen anybody anywhere speculate on who that third > person is (because I don't normally read too many newsgroups), > but I have an idea; maybe you've thought about this, too: > > It's Uncle Vernon. > How he's kept this from Petunia, or whether she > suspects something, has yet to be revealed, but I tell ya, > Vernon's in on this. Big time. > > Comments? Um, I just can't subscribe to this. First off, it's fairly obvious, I think (though admittedly, no one can know for certain), that it's Karkaroff who is the third DE mentioned here. All through GoF, we are shown that he is a DE, and what LV says (don't have the book in front of me, sorry) matches up with what we know about him. As for Uncle Vernon - if he was a DE, why not just kill Harry and make it look like an accident sometime in the 10 years before Hogwarts? It's not like Petunia or Dudley, or any of the neighbors, for that matter, would miss him, and really, what could the WW do to Vernon, since he lives in the Muggle world? Maybe he was just afraid of repercussions from vengeful wizards, or maybe that whole "blood protection" thing kept him from acting, but surely he would've tried something other than stammering about, acting the fool and making pathetic attempts to keep Harry from attending Hogwarts. An interesting theory, but I really think Vernon is just the dim-witted, pompous fool he's painted as. If I'm wrong, I will gladly eat my words, because it will mean JKR has hoodwinked me thoroughly. From griffinclaw at comcast.net Mon Aug 16 16:46:51 2004 From: griffinclaw at comcast.net (mantoinettewood) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 16:46:51 -0000 Subject: James & Snape: Related? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110230 Matt wrote <<"I think there are at least a few more. The most obvious is Fleur, > although maybe you didn't consider her an adult. Catlady (in #110094) > has pointed out Madame Pomfrey has a flower name (Poppy). Andromeda > is also a flower, although also a constellation (and a mythic princess). > > What with Lavender and Pansy and Moaning Myrtle, not to mention Lupin, > perhaps it could be said that Rowling simply likes flower names.">> Perhaps, Matt. But, actually, we get the term "narcissistic" from the ancient Greek mythology of the man who saw his reflection in the lake and became obsessed with it. And then alas, he drowned from his ardent fascination with his face. I believe there was a flower by the lake that was further called "narcissia" or "narcissa"? Morgana Wood From inkling108 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 17:00:17 2004 From: inkling108 at yahoo.com (inkling108) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 17:00:17 -0000 Subject: Voldemort: Between Life and Death? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110231 > Alshain wrote: \My thoughts went in the direction of the folklore, when I read your > pot about mirrors. Don't people say that there are nasty consequences > of the soul-losing variety if you get between two mirrors -- for > example, the pair of mirrors Sirius and James used, or one of them > plus the Mirror of Erised? Is that what is going to make Harry > Voldemort's equal or is there some other way he can do it while > preserving his humanity? Inkling now: I was thinking more along the lines of a mirror as a doorway, for example, Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Carroll. A mirror that is magically linked to someone on the other side, like Sirius' mirror, might provide such a doorway. Also, remember the scene in POA in which Sirius' face appears in the crystal -- this may have been one of the foreshadowings JKR mentioned. I think Harry is already Voldy's equal -- and is his only equal in the WW. But he must find a way to use this equality to bring about Voldy's final defeat. This will involve entering deeply into the mystery of life and death, because Voldy is caught between the two. Alshain again: I started musing about the unicorn blood from PS, > and I wouldn't be surprised if Voldemort has taken it before.> It gives the drinker a cursed life, a half life -- more indication that Voldy is not truly alive! > Whatever Ancient Magic that Voldemort used to > become what he became, I fervently hope it's different in kind from > the life debts and Dumbledore's and Lily's Ancient Magic that was > used for Harry's protection -- I've always found it irritating to see > all of those things lumped together. The former is about using magic > for selfish purposes to enhance yourself with extra powers -- trying > to set yourself apart from the rest of humanity. The latter is about > the things that instead make you *more* human (and which Voldemort > would detest because he sees humanity as weakness) Yes, and I fully expect that the magic of being deeply human will trump the so-called superhuman magic in the end. (Or I'll be really mad at JKR!) One (hopefully) prophetic event: Harry was able to throw off Voldy's possesion by recalling his love for Sirius. Inkling From inkling108 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 17:46:46 2004 From: inkling108 at yahoo.com (inkling108) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 17:46:46 -0000 Subject: Harry's Ultimate Journey (was Voldemort: Between Life and Death? (Long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110232 Saraquel wrote: > If we take on board the assumption that LV is somehow between life > and death, the fact that LV is currently residing firmly on earth, > implies that it would be possible for Harry to go to this place and > yet still be 'alive' in this world. (snip) The fact that she (JKR)will not comit herself to saying whether Harry survives > at the end or not, could well imply, that his state at the end of the > book is somehow qualitatively different from ordinary life. (Or it > could be just her winding us up.) Examples of being betwixt life and > death/immortality yet still on eath abound in the religious context. > The Buddhist Bodisatva, Christ etc. However, I can't see JKR making > Harry into some almost god-like figure (small g deliberately, I have > no wish to offend here) she is much too down to earth, and Harry, > deliberately made ordinary. > Inkling now: There is no offense to be taken, there are many Christian parallels in the series. While he is not a deity, or even a saint, Harry is a kind of savior within the wizarding world, because he is the only One who can vanquish Voldemort. It's not sacrilege to observe that Harry must imitate certain virtues and strengths of Christ to fulfill his task. Not least of these would be the courage to enter between life and death. Just speculating, though, I think that his journey to defeat Voldemort may follow more along the lines of Classical mythology, in which humans can cross between worlds as long as they have certain protections and follow strict rules. (For example, Orpheus rescuing Euridyce.) A little while ago there were a lot of excellent posts about the archetypal journey to the underworld. I'm guessing Harry's ultimate journey may fall along those lines. A very dangerous undertaking where one misstep can mean failure. His loved ones, living and dead, will help, but in the end he must confront his enemy, and his destiny, alone. Inkling From vidarfe at start.no Mon Aug 16 17:39:01 2004 From: vidarfe at start.no (vidar_fe) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 17:39:01 -0000 Subject: Silent magic? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110233 Already in the first book we were told how important it is to pronounce the spells in the exactly right way (everybody remembers Win-GAR-dium Levi-O-sa? :-)). But then, if you look in Fantastic Beasts, in the description of Lethifolds, there is a description of a lethifold attack. In this description the unlucky victim uses three different spells, the Stupefying Charm, the Impediment Hex and the Patronus Charm, without uttering one singel word. We know for sure that he didn`t speak because the Lethifold covered his mouth, trying to suffocate him. How is this possible? Sorry if this already has been throughoutly discussed. I`m new on this list, and don`t quite have the time to look through all prprevious postings. :-) By the way: English is not my native language, so please bear with any misspellings. From phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk Mon Aug 16 17:54:54 2004 From: phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk (Kate Harding) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:54:54 +0100 Subject: GOF: Ron's a real twit (git) In-Reply-To: References: <1c5.1c81ef4b.2e514a4f@aol.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040816181943.01c8f0b0@pop3.demon.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 110234 T--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, juli17 at a... wrote: > So why is Ron considered Harry's best friend, including by Harry > himself? Because Ron's family has taken Harry in several times, or > because Ron is a boy? > Though it's understandable that Harry sees Ron as his best friend, I'd > love to see him acknowledge at some point that the one person who has > stood next to him through *everything,* and has proven to be his truest > friend of all, isn't Ron, it's Hermoine. > These two reactions have been repetitive throughout the books. Ron > usually ignores or dismisses Hermoine's feelings, while Harry is the > one who often notices and sometimes tries to alleviate her fears or > sadness. I think it's true that Ron can be astonishingly insensitive - qv easter egg incident - but so can Harry - qv his complete inability to understand Cho's feelings in GoF. I get the impression that Jo sees this not so much as a function of their personalities, but of their age and gender. Teenage boys are not renowned for their sensitivity (with apologies to anyone who's ever been one!). I have faith they will grow up to be perfectly considerate young men. I do think that Hermione is a steadier friend than Ron. She never falls out with Harry, even though he sometimes falls out with her. It's not that I think that Ron cares less for Harry than Hermione does, simply that he is more impulsive. For example, the conclusions he leapt to over Harry's entry into the Tri-Wizard Tournament and resulting falling out. We've never seen Hermione act like that. But despite this, it's clear that Harry and Ron have a special bond, and to me it seems to be simply that they understand each other. They both seem to regard Hermione as a slightly alien incomprehensible creature - they may love and admire her, but they don't understand how she works. But they *do* understand each others' minds, because they are very much the same in many ways. Perhaps this is partly because they are both boys, but I think it goes deeper than that. Julie concludes: > I don't have strong 'ship preferences for either R/H or H/H, but > I have yet to see any reason Hermoine should go for Ron. To my mind Ron shows plenty of admirable qualities, such as courage, loyalty, a passionate caring for those he's close to, and a willingness to sacrifice himself for other. While I feel that Harry, by the end of OotP, is going through a particularly unlikeable patch - understandable, but still unpleasant. But I think our liking/dislike for them is pretty irrelevant, because the fact is that nobody chooses who they fall for! And it seems clear to me from the text that Hermione and Ron have begun to fall for each other. psyche ---------- --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.726 / Virus Database: 481 - Release Date: 22/07/2004 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From HPGroup at colinogilvie.co.uk Mon Aug 16 18:19:17 2004 From: HPGroup at colinogilvie.co.uk (Colin O) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 19:19:17 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Book 7 info In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4120FAA5.2080404@colinogilvie.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 110235 Tim wrote: >Harry Potter Will Survive Seventh Book > >Mon Aug 16, 8:06 AM ET > > >EDINBURGH, Scotland - "Harry Potter" novelist J.K. Rowling says her >young hero will survive to the seventh book in her series about the >young wizard, but refused to say whether he would reach adulthood. > > > That reads to me as he will survive *to* the seventh book, but may or may not surive past it. That is he doesn't get killed in HBP. -- Regards, Colin From ExSlytherin at aol.com Mon Aug 16 20:11:21 2004 From: ExSlytherin at aol.com (Mandy) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 20:11:21 -0000 Subject: Voldemort, the Prophecy and the HBP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110236 > Pippin wrote: > Now on to the prophecy, the only way it makes sense to me, and > then, like most riddles, it becomes absurdly simple, is if the > "other" is a third party. > Suppose the Other is a demon possessor of Riddle. As we > know, Tom has done something to himself so that he can't die. > People have been assuming that the possession is the reason, > but that can't be right, because possession is usually fatal. > > Rather, I think Tom was possessed first, after he entered the > chamber (thus the red glint in the eyes of Riddle) and he isn't > dead because one of those dangerous transformations he went > through prevents him from dying. Then we can read the prophecy > this way: > > Either [Tom or Harry] must die at the hand of the other [demon] > for neither [Tom nor Harry] can live if the other[demon] survives. > > My guess is, Harry has to render Voldemort killable, so that > Voldemort, like Quirrell, will die when his possessor abandons > him. But Harry must not kill Voldemort himself. Rather he must > find a way to destroy or banish the demon. Now me: Very interesting. I'm confused over your statement that possession is usually fatal. Could you give examples, because I don't think it has to be? Is it not possible for the possessor to choose to keep the host alive? Or perhaps if the host, in this case Tom Riddle, dies the possessor will die too? We have seen that LV kept Quirrell alive because he needed a living body to inhabit; perhaps your possessor does the same? Also, I had always assumed that Tom went through his dangerous transformations after he left Hogwarts and disappeared into the wilds of Romania. Perhaps the daemon possessor, and I agree with Kneasy's theory that the possessor is Salazar Slytherin, entered and possessed Tom as he opened the Chamber, kept him alive and encouraged Tom's decent deeper into the Dark side of magic? The combination of Tom and Salazar Slytherin creating Lord Voldemort. Cheers Mandy From mail at chartfield.net Mon Aug 16 18:27:43 2004 From: mail at chartfield.net (queen_astrofiammante) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:27:43 -0000 Subject: revelations from the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110237 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "antoshachekhonte" wrote: How about the fact that Dumbledore does not wish to kill Harry? And, perhaps, at this > point, the two are so inextricably linked that neither one of them can die without taking > the other with him? (The links we know about for certain include the scar from the failed > AK and Harry's blood in LV's veins, but I wouldn't be surprised if there were more to it than > that.) Yes - very good point. But wouldn't you say that this was well and truly on the radar already as a possibility? Remember, JKR flagged this up as a question that had not come up before - "why aren't you asking this..." Both the possibilities of Harry having to kill Voldemort and of Harry having to die in order to take out Voldemort have been around since OOP was published and we knew about the prophecy. This is what I mean about the feeling there is something to this question I am not quite seeing. QA From jeterluver2 at aol.com Mon Aug 16 19:03:47 2004 From: jeterluver2 at aol.com (Marissa) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 19:03:47 -0000 Subject: JKR's Edinburgh Festival Q&A is on her website now (under news) (HBP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110238 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lilypo2007" wrote: > Julie wrote: > > The question of whether V/TR has ever loved anyone > > leads us rather neatly to the Half Blood Prince, sez JKR. But does > > this mean the half blood prince is in some way directly connected to > > V/TR, or does this mean the half blood prince, like V/TR, has never > > loved anyone (or, likely, been loved by anyone)? > > > I had a different interpretation of what JKR was meaning with the > words Half Blood Prince. I think she was not meaning the character, > but simply book six, the plot of book six. Probably we'll know more > about Voldemort and his lack of love in book six. > > "lilypo2007" Hmmm... could the half blood prince be Voldemort's son? One he doesn't love? From phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk Mon Aug 16 19:06:14 2004 From: phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk (Kate Harding) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 20:06:14 +0100 Subject: 3rd 'Missing' DE In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040816200136.01cb3a30@pop3.demon.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 110239 Brenda wrote: > I thought "the one too cowardly to return" was Karkaroff and "the one > who has left me forever" was Fudge. Snape appears to be an active > Death Eater to me. In fact, I believe he was present at the rebirth > ceremony (between Lucius and where Lestranges should have been, 'a > man' stood there). I was immediately sold after reading the > Northtower Column #15 from Mugglenet.com - check it out, it is a very > thorough analysis) Personally, I think Maline (from the North Tower) is wrong about this one. I think Snape was the ?One, who I believe has left me for ever... he will be killed, of course...?, Karkaroff was the ?One, too cowardly to return?, and Crouch Jr was the ?one, who remains my faithful servant. I believe we have clear evidence that Snape was not at the gathering ? evidence from Dumbledore. The passage I?m referring to is this, from the end of GoF: 'Severus,' said Dumbledore, turning to Snape, 'you know what I must ask you to do. If you are ready... if you are prepared...' 'I am,' said Snape. He looked slightly paler than usual, and his cold, black eyes glittered strangely. 'Then, good luck,' said Dumbledore, and he watched, with a trace of apprehension on his face, as Snape swept wordlessly after Sirius. It was several minutes before Dumbledore spoke again. I?ve never seen Dumbledore show this degree of concern over anything before. Whatever?s going on, however much danger is around, he?s always calm and collected. No, this ?trace of apprehension? is an extraordinary thing for Dumbledore, who usually has all the answers. So what might Snape be doing to elicit such worry even from Dumbledore? I can only think of one possibility ? he is ?returning? to Voldemort?s service. He is taking up the role of mole among the Death Eaters. This is a genuinely dangerous act for both Snape and the Order. If his famed Occlumency fails him, he will most likely be tortured and/or force-fed veritaserum until he reveals most of the Order?s most vital secrets. And I think this is confirmed in Dumbledore?s other words. He says, 'you know what I must ask you to do. If you are ready... if you are prepared...' The repetition of the idea of being ?ready? and ?prepared?, and perhaps his unfinished sentence (often an indicator with JRK) tell us that this is an important question. It?s not a polite enquiry or a starter?s mark (?Ready? Go!?). He?s asking whether Snape has prepared himself *magically* ? if he has in place all the protection an Occlumens can muster. Again, what could require such thorough preparation but an excursion into enemy territory? Most importantly, however, the *weight* of these words suggest to me that this is *the first time* Snape will be seeing his former colleagues in his new capacity as a spy, the first time since he left and betrayed them. Consider the emphasis on preparation. The call which went out to the Death Eaters through their Dark Marks was unexpected. None of them knew his return was imminent except Crouch Jr and Wormtail. Therefore, if Snape had indeed answered the call and attended the gathering, then he would have had no time to make such preparations. He would have had to appear in the middle of a circle of Death Eaters and in front of Voldemort with no mental shield in place, nothing to protect him from Voldemort?s Legilimency. Not sensible at all, and while a man who is prepared to spy on Voldemort can?t be accused of lacking courage, Snape has always seemed careful ? he couldn?t be a potions expert without care and patience. I think Snape *can?t* just turn up to meet the Death Eaters, without any preparation, without even having time to discuss it with Dumbledore. And his absence from the gathering confirms Voldemort?s belief that he has left his service, eliciting the comment ?he will be killed, of course ? So why isn?t he dead? Well, aside from the fact that just because Voldemort intends to kill someone, doesn?t mean they die (qv Harry), in this case I believe Voldemort was persuaded to change his mind. By whom? Well Imagine you are Snape. 15 years ago you betrayed the Dark Lord, fleeing his service and handing over one of his servants (Karkaroff) to the Aurors. Now you want to spy on him. Are you just going to show up at his side when the Dark Mark appears? Not if you have any sense. You'll be lucky not to be killed on the spot, or worse. No, the only sensible thing to do is find a go-between, someone who can persuade Voldemort to forgive you, which means someone who is close to Voldemort, but with whom you already have a connection. Problem is, most of your old gang are dead or in Azkaban. Your best chance now is Lucius. And that is what I believe happened. Following the conversation with Dumbledore, I don?t believe Snape goes straight off to see Voldemort. I believe he goes to see Lucius. He tells him that he wasn?t able to come when their master called ? he couldn?t get away, Dumbledore would notice, you can?t disapparate in the school grounds. But he wants to return to the fold. And think how useful he could be, inside Hogwarts, so close to Dumbledore so close to Harry In other words, I believe Snape?s contact with the Death Eaters is Lucius. He has too much sense to want to spend a lot of time in Voldemort?s presence, Occlumens or no, and he has always shown a regard for the Malfoys which suggests the possibility of an old connection from their Death Eater days. Lucius is high enough in Voldemort?s service to know almost all his plans, but doesn?t have his master?s worrying skill with Legilimency, as far as we know. As a final piece of support for the plausibility of such a relationship, consider Snape?s response when Harry is speaking to Fudge at the end of GoF: ?I saw the Death Eaters! I can give you their names! Lucius Malfoy -? Snape made a sudden movement, but as Harry looked at him, Snape?s eyes flew back to Fudge. Why should Snape be dismayed by Harry outing Lucius? Perhaps because Snape and Dumbledore had long had him pegged as their best chance of infiltrating the Death Eaters again. psyche ---------- --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.726 / Virus Database: 481 - Release Date: 22/07/2004 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From khinterberg at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 19:14:56 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 19:14:56 -0000 Subject: The clue behind the door In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110240 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lisa" wrote: > As the elves pointed out this morning, the Do Not Disturb sign has > come down off the door at JKR's website, and there's an interesting > clue inside. > > I won't post the clue here, as I'm sure some would like to check it > all out themselves. Could this be a hint to the identity of the Half > Blood Prince himself? There's someone in canon who bears an uncanny > resemblance in my mind's eye to the note here..... > > Lisa, ever pondersome Does anyone else connect this clue with Godric Gryffindor and the symbol of Gryffindor House? khinterberg, a lupin lover From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Mon Aug 16 20:18:33 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 20:18:33 -0000 Subject: Secret Text Behind the Door - SPOILERS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110241 > Spoiler space for speculation... > J > K > R > I > S > T > E > H > A > W > E > S > O > M > E -------------------------------------------------------------------- SECRET TEXT: (He) looked rather like an old lion. There were streaks of grey in his mane of tawny hair and his bushy eyebrows; he had keen yellowish eyes behind a pair of wire-rimmed spectacles and a certain rangy, loping grace even though he walked with a slight limp. -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> Stephanie: > The first thought that sprung to my mind, when reading the scrap, > was "LUPIN" or some variation thereof (Lupin the elder?). The bits of grey in tawny hair, is really all I have to go on that. But then, > with the obvious connection to the appearance of a lion, could a TT! > Godric Gryffindor be our mystery man? For introducing a character > this late in the series, I have doubts as to whether he would be > the "heir of Gryffindor." > Perhaps this is our next DADA teacher. I'm intrigued by the > yellowish eyes. Perhaps going too much into it, but do you think > she's referring to the color of his iris, or to a jaundiced > appearance? <<< Brenda now: YES, exactly! I first thought Lupin, then young (or old, however ancient) Godric Gryffindor. I even thought of Hagrid. This definitely describes a person, so I think Trevor as HBP is out the window (although I did like the theory). As for yellowish eyes... [references borrowed from the oh-so-great Harry Potter Lexicon] *Madam Rolanda Hooch (SS9, CS, PA13&15) - hair: gray, cut short - eyes: yellow, hawk-like - expertise: Quidditch coach and referee, flying teacher *Basilisk: the King of Serpents (CS) - A wizard-bred Dark creature of enormous power - extremely poisonous giant serpent (up to 50 feet in length) - brilliant green in color with long thin saber-like fangs - bulbous yellow eyes Hope this leads somewhere! Brenda From ms-tamany at rcn.com Mon Aug 16 20:21:10 2004 From: ms-tamany at rcn.com (Tammy Rizzo) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 16:21:10 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Silent magic? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41211736.6080501@rcn.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110242 vidar_fe wrote: >Already in the first book we were told how important it is to >pronounce the spells in the exactly right way (everybody remembers >Win-GAR-dium Levi-O-sa? :-)). But then, if you look in Fantastic >Beasts, in the description of Lethifolds, there is a description of a >lethifold attack. In this description the unlucky victim uses three >different spells, the Stupefying Charm, the Impediment Hex and the >Patronus Charm, without uttering one singel word. We know for sure >that he didn`t speak because the Lethifold covered his mouth, trying >to suffocate him. How is this possible? > >Sorry if this already has been throughoutly discussed. I`m new on >this list, and don`t quite have the time to look through all >prprevious postings. :-) > >By the way: English is not my native language, so please bear with >any misspellings. > > > My take on this is that, while the student wizard is learning the spells and charms and what-not, he must use every single step in sequence, including the absolute correct pronunciation. This is to help train the wizard's magic to respond properly to a series of cues. Once he has mastered the basics of any particular spell, then, over time, as he grows stronger and more confident, he can start to take 'shortcuts' with certain spells, dropping steps here and there, as long as his mental state is such that the cues he gives triggers the proper magic. I see it much like when you're starting maths like algebra, when you are docked points for not showing every single step along the way to the solution on your school papers, even though, as you get older, your mind can breeze through certain steps or take shortcuts, and still arrive at the correct answer. Dumbledore is notorious for not using what we'd call 'spells'. He just waves his wand and there's a chair, or a dining hall full of sleeping bags, or what ever. There aren't many wizards around as old and accomplished and skilled as he is, though -- most other wizards or witches would need to use the full spell and special wand movement, to accomplish what he does with hardly a flick. It all boils down to practice and exprience, I feel. -- *** Tammy Rizzo ms-tamany at rcn.com From lightwriterandpaws at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 19:24:58 2004 From: lightwriterandpaws at yahoo.com (lightwriterandpaws) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 19:24:58 -0000 Subject: new clue from room Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110243 Could this be the new DADA teacher, the HBP, or maybe the McClaggan character mentioned yesterday?? lightwriterandpaws From drliss at comcast.net Mon Aug 16 20:33:51 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (drliss at comcast.net) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 20:33:51 +0000 Subject: Some sirius hinting... yay puns! Message-ID: <081620042033.22554.41211A2E000DE98F0000581A22007621949C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 110244 Lissa: Ah. An ESE!Lupin-er. Back! Back I say! I will defend my werewolf! He's NOT evil. ::pouts:: Ahem. Anyway. Brenda: I think Lupin wasn absent from the christening (or the wedding) as they already suspected him to be the spy. Had a fall-out. If Lupin was spying on DEs from DD's order, why on earth would he keep it from the Mauraders?! Lissa: I don't think there was such a huge fall-out though. Harry was, what, 15 months when Voldie fell? (Am I right on that?) That's a LONG fall-out. And why am I skeptical of that? In PoA, Peter asks Sirius and Lupin why Lupin didn't know about the SK switch, and -Lupin has to confirm that Sirius thought he was the spy.- I don't think that there WAS a huge fall out or blow out. If there was, Lupin would have no need to confirm, Peter would know that Lupin had been suspected, and frankly, Peter probably would have framed Lupin, not Sirius. After all, a Dark Creature, already suspected of being the spy... Lupin probably would have gotten Kissed immediately, as opposed to Sirius who "just" got thrown into Azkaban. I mean, which really would be easier to accomplish? Brenda: Assuming that Lupin was once a spy for the Order - why hasn't he resumed his old position NOW? We only see Snape giving reports. What did Lupin do that made him untrustworthy in Voldy's eyes? AND he gets away with it? [no mention of Lupin or likewise from Voldy anywhere, no grudges, no plans to kill, nothing] Lissa: How do we know he hasn't resumed his old position? Now, granted, this is all thought and speculation on my part, and not a theory I'm particularly wedded to. But you hit the key word there- WE haven't heard any reports. (From anyone, really.) We have absolutely no clue as to what Lupin's doing, so he could easily have been a spy. Brenda: 1) JKR simply did not put much thought into Sirius' sexual orientation, she just assumed he fancies women. 2) She had heard many Sirius-Remus shippers and wanted to give out subtle clues. Lissa: But the same argument goes towards OotP. She'd heard about the R/S shippers by the time she was writing it, and put in subtle clues there too. I mean, she HAD to have known how some of those things were going to be interpreted by the shippers. Gwennie: Whatever the case, I love them, and in my mind, they're together. Until Jo says, "Sirius and Remus were never, nor will they ever be, lovers," I'm clinging to this ship! Lissa: Whoohoo! Company! :) Although there are days I wonder if JKR is secretly posting to this list, telling me the plot, and then laughing in my email's face as I insist on arguing with her. ::sigh:: Liss [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Mon Aug 16 20:58:12 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 20:58:12 -0000 Subject: JKR's Edinburgh Festival Q&A is on her website now (under news) (HBP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110245 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Marissa" wrote: > Hmmm... could the half blood prince be Voldemort's son? One he > doesn't love? No... JKR has said that Voldemort has no children (and then remarks on how yucky the concept is). Josh, ever the debunker From cincimaelder at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 21:07:32 2004 From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (Darby) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 21:07:32 -0000 Subject: Voldemort, the Prophecy and the HBP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110246 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Mandy" > Also, I had always assumed that Tom went through his dangerous > transformations after he left Hogwarts and disappeared into the wilds > of Romania. Perhaps the daemon possessor, and I agree with Kneasy's > theory that the possessor is Salazar Slytherin, entered and possessed > Tom as he opened the Chamber, kept him alive and encouraged Tom's > decent deeper into the Dark side of magic? The combination of Tom > and Salazar Slytherin creating Lord Voldemort. > > Cheers Mandy Perhaps Tom chose to be possessed to gain immortality (selling you're soul to the devil). It's our choices who make us who we are. Maybe the thing that is worse than death is being possessed by evil. Or, maybe the thing that's worse than death is if the daemon is removed, perhaps VM will lose his powers and become useless or ineffective, like Saruman in LotR. From aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 21:25:01 2004 From: aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com (aboutthe1910s) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 21:25:01 -0000 Subject: GOF: Ron's a real twit (git) In-Reply-To: <1c5.1c81ef4b.2e514a4f@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110247 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, juli17 at a... wrote: > I'm rereading GOF, and I've come to the conclusion that Ron is a real > twit (read: git) in this book. I've also come to the conclusion that Harry > doesn't recognize his *real* best friend for who that is: Hermoine. And, > thirdly, so far in GOF, Ron isn't good enough (or at least, not mature > enough) for Hermoine. He's so self-involved and thoughtless--which I do > know is the definition of your average fourteen year old! Still, I'd like to > smack him upside the head (gently). (In GOF, I'm just getting to the > third task) First of all, I've been rereading GoF myself recently, and something really stuck out to me: (in Ch. 19) "Harry liked Hermione very much but she just wasn't the same as Ron. There was much less laughter and a lot more hanging around in the library when Hermione was your best friend." It seems to me that to be "more than friends" with someone you would have to like hanging out with them at least *as much* as you like hanging around with your best friend, if not a little more. And I'm not saying that Harry doesn't love Hermione in a strictly friends sense, or that he doesn't enjoy hanging out with her at all--just that chemistry between them is absolutely lacking. Anyway, what I was going to say is that I don't think Harry underappreciates his relationship with Hermione, I simply think that he is correct in recognizing that Ron is his *best* friend. I really believe that the relationship between Harry and Ron is more emotionally fullfilling for Harry than the relationship between himself and Hermione--and I just realized that that may sound like I'm trying to *ship* Ron and Harry, so, to clarify, I'd like to say that I am *NOT* at all. And now I lost my train of thought... That seems to be all I really wanted to say anyways. aboutthe1910s From catlady at wicca.net Mon Aug 16 21:24:15 2004 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 21:24:15 -0000 Subject: Alastor, and James' money, and godmother/marriage, and Snape as half-brother Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110248 Justine wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110165 : << No, I don't really think Moody is ever so evil (yet), but during one of my routine geeky knowledge-gathering sessions, I came across something most interesting. Alastor was one of the fallen angels of Satan's Court. He was known as "the executioner," the executor of decrees handed down by the court. Is this a hint for the future books? Or have we already seen this played out in the form of Fake! Moody? Theories? >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alastor says: "In Greek mythology, Alastor ("avenger") was the personification of familial feuds. He was also associated with sins that pass down from parent to child. As a genius, or spirit of the household in Roman mythology, he incited people to murder and other sins. He was originally a mortal, son of Neleus, King of Pylos. He was later downgraded to a minor demon after he and his brothers were killed by Heracles." Apparently there is now a band named Alastor filling up all the pages of hits on Ask Jeeves, but back when when I looked up "Alastor" right after GoF, I found lovely pages and pages of commentary on Greek Mythology and the Shelly poem, which at that time said that "Alastor was the Greek god of revenge, sort of a male Nemesis" and that the Romantic poets evolved Alastor from a spirit of revenge to the personification of any inherited curse. "A male Nemesis" is a very wonderful name for Real!Moody the Auror. << who think Remus is Ever So Wonderful :) >> Me, too. Justine wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110168 : << Firstly, there was no question about Sirius's marital status. As far as I know, godparents do not have to be married--my godparents barely know each other! Jo was the one who brought up marriage... why? >> I *think* she meant that, if Sirius had been married, his wife would have been with him so they could have rushed over *together* to the Potters, so there would have been a woman (Mrs. Sirius) present when they did this emergency 'christening', so she could have been godmother. Stefanie wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110175 : << Who refuses to believe that there are so many Wizarding bachelors out there: "The world must be peopled!" (Benedick, Much Ado About Nothing) >> Remember these wizards and witches are 18 years old when they get out of Hogwarts (maybe 19 if they were held back a year). And they were no more than 25 when their story ended (James and Lily dead, Sirius in prison, Peter in hiding) -- IIRC the Lexicon timeline has them merely *21* at that time. It's no big surprise that many Muggles are still unmarried at age 21, or even 25, and the wizarding folk have those longer lifespans, so they could probably wait to have their first child at age 40 and their second at age 60. Rebecca huntergreen wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110179 : << James had to get all that money from somewhere. I wonder if he had inheritence too? >> The Goat Pad is still useful, even tho' it hasn't been updated for a year: http://www.angelfire.com/magic/aberforthsgoat/index.html It found: http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2000/1000-livechat-aol.html : JKR: "But James inherited plenty of money, so he didn't need a well-paid profession." Q: "Where did James get his Invisibility Cloak?" JKR: "That was inherited from his own father -- a family heirloom!" Luckdragon wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110182 : << The idea of Sirius and Severus being half brothers is interesting and certainly resolves the enmity issue between them. It does, however, bring two thoughts to mind. 1) Snape would then possibly (legally) be entitled to the Black family fortune and home. 2) Phineas Nigelus when told of Sirius's death say's "the last of the Blacks is dead"? >> As an OUT-OF-WEDLOCK child, Snape would not be entitled to any inheritance from his father and his father's family, and would not be entitled to use his father's surname. Thus Phineas Nigellus would not consider him a Black. Laura wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110183 : << I've just got back from the Edinburgh Book Festival, and I can't believe the transcript is up and people are talking about it already! I asked Jo if Snape can see the thestrals and if so why, and also if he was a pure-blood wizard (glad to see the person typing up the transcript edited my question slightly to hide the nervous stuttering and mumble that 'I love Snape' ;) >> Congratulations on being there and being able to ask your question! Thanks for asking such a good question. The 'I love Snape' appears in the transcript: "Apart from Harry, Snape is my favourite character because he is so complex and *I just love him*. Can he see the Thestrals, and if so, why? Also, is he a pure blood wizard?" JKR indicates her disapproval of loving Snape here and in another answer: "JKR: But you must not forget that Snape was a Death Eater. He will have seen things that... Why do you love him? Why do people love Snape? I do not understand this. Again, it's bad boy syndrome, isn't it? It's very depressing. [Laughter]. One of my best friends watched the film and she said, "You know who's really attractive?" I said, "Who?" She said, "Lucius Malfoy!" (Catlady: but he IS! I just want to keep a safe distance away while I ogle him.) "Q: Also, will we see more of Snape? JKR: You always see a lot of Snape, because he is a gift of a character. I hesitate to say that I love him. [Audience member: I do]. You do? This is a very worrying thing. Are you thinking about Alan Rickman or about Snape? [Laughter]. Isn't this life, though? I make this hero -- Harry, obviously -- and there he is on the screen, the perfect Harry, because Dan is very much as I imagine Harry, but who does every girl under the age of 15 fall in love with? Tom Felton as Draco Malfoy. Girls, stop going for the bad guy. Go for a nice man in the first place. It took me 35 years to learn that, but I am giving you that nugget free, right now, at the beginning of your love lives." From aphrodeia at gmail.com Mon Aug 16 21:29:00 2004 From: aphrodeia at gmail.com (aphrodeia) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 17:29:00 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Secret Text Behind the Door - SPOILERS In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110250 From: Brenda M. > Spoiler space for speculation... > J > K > R > I > S > T > E > H > A > W > E > S > O > M > E -------------------------------------------------------------------- SECRET TEXT: (He) looked rather like an old lion. There were streaks of grey in his mane of tawny hair and his bushy eyebrows; he had keen yellowish eyes behind a pair of wire-rimmed spectacles and a certain rangy, loping grace even though he walked with a slight limp. -------------------------------------------------------------------- My thoughts: I agree with those who speculate Lupin. It absolutely leapt out at me.... which typically means it's entirely incorrect ;o) Per Lexicon, he also happens to be a half blood. It's got me wondering.... Lisa, stretching! From pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 16 21:36:57 2004 From: pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net (pcaehill2) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 21:36:57 -0000 Subject: The clue behind the door - SPOILERS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110251 lifeavantgarde wrote: [snip] > Could this be a hint to the identity of the Half > Blood Prince himself? There's someone in canon who > bears an uncanny resemblance in my mind's eye to the > note here... and Brenda quoted: [SPOILER!! snip] > SECRET TEXT: > (He) looked rather like an old lion. There were streaks > of grey in his mane of tawny hair and his bushy eyebrows; > he had keen yellowish eyes behind a pair of wire-rimmed > spectacles and a certain rangy, loping grace even though > he walked with a slight limp. Pam ponders: Hmmm...could this be Aberforth (who, I believe, was positively ID'd by JKR as the Hog's Head barman)? Order of the Phoenix, In the Hog's Head: "??? The barman sidled towards them out of a back room. He was a grumpy-looking old man with a great deal of long grey hair and beard. He was tall and thin and looked vaguely familiar." I know, I know, grey does not equal tawny--but this was only Harry's first impression of Abby, who may not have washed in awhile (the goat's smell, remember?). And rangy *may* equal thin. The wire-rimmed spectacles and "keen...eyes" are, to my mind, reminiscent of Dumbledore... Pam, who is not married to this theory, but thinks it holds *some* water... From catlady at wicca.net Mon Aug 16 21:42:33 2004 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 21:42:33 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Sirius/Remus Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110252 Justine wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110168 : << but this seems to be the first implication from Jo, herself, that Sirius fancies women; (snip), then this sounds like a "Sirius and Remus were not lovers" answer. It's more a "Sirius was too busy fighting the forces with whom his family agreed to get married" or "Sirius was too busy being a manslut to get married." I like them both. :-D >> That is not what it says to me, but I've always thought that Sirius was quite the ladykiller (manslut, I guess, in your words) while he and Remus were lovers in the good old days of Voldemort Reign of Terror I. Lissa wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110200 : << There's a couple things that always annoy me about R/S fanfiction. Why does everyone assume that James knew they were together, if they were? Why does everyone always assume they were committed and acknowledged they were in love? It's VERY possible that they were fooling around and not telling everyone because, frankly, it was private. I mean, no offense to the wonderful men on our list at all, but most guys do NOT jump into commitments as early as James did! >> I agree with just about everything in your post -- I already posted my repetition of your much better statement that it is not implausible that so many wizards are bachelors when they're 21 -- and I very much agree that Sirius and Remus would have kept their 'extra' relationship secret. It was for all practical purposes still the 1970s, even for us advanced Muggles! I imagine that Remus was living with Sirius, in what everyone else thought was a 'roommate' situation, because Sirius had a place of his own and Remus had very little money and very little paid work. I even kind of wonder if 'Lupin's place' (as in 'lie low at Lupin's' at the end of GoF) was originally Sirius's place of his own, and he willed it to Remus's even before Harry was born, as who else did he have whom to bequeath? As for the relationship ... dogs are promiscuous, but wolves mate for life. I imagine that, in those days, Sirius viewed it as 'fooling around' with a friend, and Remus viewed it as True Love, but Remus would never have been the first to say so: too much fear of being rebuffed. I imagine a very angsty period late in the search for "who is LV's spy?", when Sirius has somehow got a notion that it might be Remus, but tries very hard (and rather unsuccessfully) to act normal to avoid letting Remus know he suspects him, and Remus worries about why Sirius is acting so strange. After the All Saints' Eve/Day events, Remus would have looked back and figured that Sirius had been being secretive of his plan to betray the Potters. From lavaluvn at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 21:45:14 2004 From: lavaluvn at yahoo.com (lavaluvn) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 21:45:14 -0000 Subject: Secret Text Behind the Door - SPOILERS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110253 > From: Brenda M. > > Spoiler space for speculation... > > J > > K > > R > > I > > S > > T > > E > > H > > A > > W > > E > > S > > O > > M > > E > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- - > SECRET TEXT: > (He) looked rather like an old lion. There were streaks of grey in > his mane of tawny hair and his bushy eyebrows; he had keen yellowish > eyes behind a pair of wire-rimmed spectacles and a certain rangy, > loping grace even though he walked with a slight limp. > ------------------------------------------------------------------- - > > My thoughts: > I agree with those who speculate Lupin. It absolutely leapt out at > me.... which typically means it's entirely incorrect ;o) Per Lexicon, > he also happens to be a half blood. It's got me wondering.... > > Lisa, stretching! Andromeda: I would have to say it doesn't sound like Lupin at all. Tawny hair (goldenish, right?), bushy eyebrows, yellowish eyes, spectacles... no way it is Lupin. Probably not his dad either, but you never know. Jo seems to keep her descriptions of people pretty consistent (thus the 101 uses of DD's "long crooked nose" and Snape's hooked nose and greasy hair). I love the Godric Gyffindor idea, with all the lion references, except for the wire-rimmed spectacles. Maybe one of his descendents comes to teach at Hogwarts. I know, he's McCLaggan, heir of Gyffindor, HBP, AND DADA teacher! Or maybe he's Madam Hooch's brother. Seems unlikely to be a basilisk in disguise. :) From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Aug 16 22:11:06 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 22:11:06 -0000 Subject: Godric's Sword and Voldemort's Defeat In-Reply-To: <4A63D2E3-EEFA-11D8-B420-0003930C168E@qwest.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110254 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steven Spencer" wrote: > Forgive me if this has been discussed before, but my friend and I have > been talking about the eventual Final Showdown. We're both convinced > that V. and Harry cannot fight each other magically. They're both too > strongly protected against each other, so the final battle will have to > involve something either more mundane, or spiritual. My friend's > thinking is that Harry will end up using Godric's sword against > Voldemort. My thinking is more along the lines of the emotional - that > Harry will use (ugh!) Love to vanquish Voldemort. I'm not fond of that, > but to me it seems the way it's going to go down. Geoff: Why the "ugh!"? Or are you interpreting love in the words of a sentimental song? Love is the greatest force in the world. As a Christian, I believe that it was sheer love that took Jesus to the cross and beyond and it wasn't "ugh!", "icky" love. It was deep, sacrificial, strong and enduring. Harry isn't Christ. But Christians are enjoined to follow the example of Christ and, more than that, know the indwelling of his Spirit. So Harry, who is an everyman similar to any Christian on a journey of faith, discovery and love seeking to overcome evil, has every reason to seek to be filled with love of that kind in order to finally overcome Voldemort. From sweetface531 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 22:11:13 2004 From: sweetface531 at yahoo.com (Justine) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 22:11:13 -0000 Subject: some sirius hinting... yay puns! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110255 I'm going to reply to a few posts here: Josh: Actually, Justine... Remus and Peter seem to be VERY relevant to this answer... Sirius was the _only_ one, so where were the other two? Why does JKR have to be careful what she says??? She only says that when she's nearing a topic of the future plot/revelations. Justine: Oops, that was one of my huge points which, due to the extremely early hour and hurrying to post, I completely forgot to mention! Exactly! I suppose it could be said that since Sirius was the best friend and the christening was rushed (much like my original post), that their absence wasn't a big deal... but they were James's two other closest friends! Where on earth were they? On business for the Order (or, in Peter's case, Voldemort)? It *does* seem, from her statement on being careful, this has some importance. Lissa: Well, they WERE 21 when Voldie fell. I actually thought James and Lily were awfully young to get married, and have wondered if they "had" to get married at times... ::snip:: My theory is that JKR never really had any major thoughts on romance for those two. Their love lives don't really fit into the plot, as much as I'd love to see it be worked in. But Sirius was a rebel, not willing to settle down yet, and then tossed into Azkaban. I can completely see Lupin being 100% unwilling to make a commitment of any sort. Given the way the Wizarding World treats him, I can't really see Lupin being willing to tie a lover to himself and let the world treat him/her that way as well. My impression of Lupin is that he's intensely alone. He accepted at a young age that romance was simply not in the cards for him, and he's lived that way ever since. Justine: Lissa, before I respond, I just want you to know that you do what I am usually too timid to do: defend Lupin to the death. You are fabulous! Now, I didn't mean that they should have all settled down with a family before Harry turned one... indeed, James and Lily were very, very young when they married. While my impression of Lupin is actually exactly the same as yours, I was like to speculate... my dad calls me "the diplomat" because I always see and consider every side, and although I see Remus, poor dear, as the confirmed bachelor for those reasons you mentioned, I also think that if he *doesn't* condemn himself to a life without romantic love (::sigh::, he does, oh he does!) then I'm astonished he hasn't settled down with a wife... and probably no kids. It's been more than a decade. Heck, *I* fell in love with him, I'd marry him in a second! But I only discuss the love lives of MWPP because I live in a fantasy world, and in all probability, it has no relevance to the plot... it was just JKR's seemingly unprovoked mention of Sirius and marriage. Lissa: Lupin living with Sirius? (Did she HAVE to point that out? We have no idea where the rest of the Order lives.) The joint Christmas present? (That little Firebolt model couldn't have cost Tonks THAT much.) The way they interact... I wonder if she never plans on giving any details about their love lives, but put those little clues in there to amuse the slashers. After all, Lupin and Sirius are without a doubt the most plausible of any of the slash couples. I mean, you can write a good story for Draco/Harry, or Snape/Sirius, or whoever else, but Lupin and Sirius actually could work in canon. Justine: Yes. Actually, while I don't wholeheartedly support this 'ship, I wholeheartedly agree it's plausible. But while, Lupin *was* living at Grimmauld Place, he was out doing "mysterious work for the Order" much of the time. Grimmauld Place is probably a more appropriate home base if he's not going to be home most of the time, since it's headquarters. Also, Remus really doesn't have money. Sirius does, but has no way to go out shopping. I doubt Remus would ask Sirius to lend him money for Christmas presents... so, joint gift. In conlusion, I like manslut!Sirius, Peter can sod off and is not invited to the christening for some important reason apparently, and I want to marry Remus, who is also not there for some important reason. Justine, who can't deny that she is a shameless fangirl when it comes to the wolf From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Mon Aug 16 22:17:02 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 22:17:02 -0000 Subject: Secret Text Behind the Door - SPOILERS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110256 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lavaluvn" wrote: > Tawny hair (goldenish, right?) light brown (i looked it up) Josh From sweetface531 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 22:20:47 2004 From: sweetface531 at yahoo.com (Justine) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 22:20:47 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Sirius/Remus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110257 Catlady: ...dogs are promiscuous, but wolves mate for life. Justine: I see this in so many fan fictions... while it is true that wolves mate for life, males generally mate for life more than once. They're like Mormons. :-) (No offense meant to Mormons, of course!) Justine From ms-tamany at rcn.com Mon Aug 16 22:34:37 2004 From: ms-tamany at rcn.com (Tammy Rizzo) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:34:37 -0400 Subject: Clarification (was: SHIP: Sirius/Remus) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4121367D.6080604@rcn.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110258 Justine wrote: >Catlady: >...dogs are promiscuous, but wolves mate for life. > >Justine: >I see this in so many fan fictions... while it is true that wolves >mate for life, males generally mate for life more than once. >They're like Mormons. :-) (No offense meant to Mormons, of course!) > >Justine > > Speaking as a Mormon, none taken. ;-) Although, for the sake of clarity, you should know that the OFFICIAL church organization (the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints) has neither recognized nor condoned plural marriages for many generations now, though several offshoot groups who still use the same (or very similar) name do still maintain the practice. In fact, I have a distant cousin who used to live nearby, related some generations back through a plural marriage (surprise, surprise), whose father was part of such an offshoot group and had three or four families at once. To bring this back towards a more on-topic topic . . . umm . . . *blink blink* . . . how DOES one bring plural marriage back on-topic to Harry Potter?! Oh dear! I am sorry, listelves, but I just HAD to clarify this common misconception. I'm ready to go slam my hands in the oven door now. -- *** Tammy Rizzo ms-tamany at rcn.com From amycrn4230 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 22:58:51 2004 From: amycrn4230 at yahoo.com (amycrn4230) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 22:58:51 -0000 Subject: DD - maybe. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110259 Kneasy: *SNIP* > The EBD Q&A - DDs patronus is a phoenix - "very representative > of DD" says herself. I find this interesting, particularly as I've > hypothesised previously on just what DD is or might be. > > Patronuses (patroni?) are supposed to be representitive of > personality. Just what sort of personality is a phoenix > representative of? > > Is DD much, much older than 150? Is he resurrected, renewed, > reborn, revived, refurbished, renovated, restuffed and repolished > at intervals down the centuries? I've always felt that it's significant > that DD "worked on Alchemy" with old Nick according to the > Chocolate Frog card; a card which is not new - it's one of the > commonest around. He's obviously been associated with Flamel > for years. > > What are Alchemists always working on? The Stone. But Flamel > must have made the Stone centuries before DD was around (if he's > only 150). So why would Flamel need help with his Alchemy? He's > already done the difficult bit. > > Is DD a ringer? Is DD telling the *whole* truth? > Could it be that he's 150 in *this* incarnation? > > So, possibilities:- > 1. DD is Flamel. > 2. DD is using Flamels Stone to keep going through the centuries. > In which case DD could be a Merlin figure - roused from sleep when > great danger threatens. > 3. DD is the enemy of whatever it is (Salazar?) that's animating or > motivating Voldy. And they've fought before - often. The Potterverse > is just the latest battleground in a war that goes waaaaay back, perhaps to the founding of Hogwarts or even further. I agree with # 3, and wonder, now that you have stated the above so eloquently, whether or not Dumbledore has had a lot of "great adventures"... Didn't he say that death, to the organized mind is just the next great adventure.? I have always had the feeling that Dumbledore is just one of those entities that never leaves Harry. Not getting closer to death, maybe closer to a burning day...but not death. Amy From naama_gat at hotmail.com Mon Aug 16 23:09:52 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 23:09:52 -0000 Subject: Why didn't Voldemort die? (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110260 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mz_annethrope" wrote: > I suspect the biggest clue is Fawkes, who has given a feather both > to Voldemort and Harry. > My suspicion is that Voldemort bears some relation to a phoenix. He > doesn't go on living for ever--that would require the philosopher's > stone--but he can rebound, phoenix-like, albeit with quite a bit of > help. > > In the beginning of the graveyard scene of GF, Voldemort looks > something like a baby; after being dropped into a vat of a > particularly nasty potion he has the body which everyone recognizes > as Voldemort's (at least Fudge does in OP). Whether this body is > substantively drawn from his old body, we don't know; what we do > know is that he is transformed from the infantile figure into > himself. Like a phoenix. > > My hypothesis is that Voldemort's protection against death was > somehow related to how a phoenix is reborn, only his protection was > incomplete and though he was not fully dead (and perhaps not fully > alive even before then)he was unable to reanimate himself completely > without a lot of help. In this way he is unlike a phoenix, which is > self generating. But then his protection was incomplete. This suggestion ties in a way with my own pet theory, that has been revolving around in my head for quite a while. I agree that Voldemort has rising-from-the-dead qualities. However, I suggest that this is related (symbolically and practically) not to the phoenix but to the snake. Snakes are symbols of immortality, due to their ability to shed their skins. The skin that is left behind looks like the snake itself (remember the Basilisk skin that Harry encounters in CoS?), but is only a shell, a fake. The snake thereby "cheats" death by leaving behind something that looks like it, but escapes with his essential being (body) intact. The phoenix, on the other hand, truly dies. His body turns to ashes ("ashes to ashes, dust to dust" ...). When the phoenix is born again, this is therefore true resurrection. Indeed, the phoenix is one of the symbols of Christ: true death, true resurrection. So, compared to the phoenix, the snake would symbolise immortality achieved through fake dying or cheating death . (vol-de-mort - can be translated as thief of death.). This is exactly what happened to Voldemort in Godric's Hollow: he lost an external aspect of himself (his body), but retained his essential being (some kind of spirit, vapor.. etc.). He didn't die, something that JKR actually hammers into our heads quite a bit - Voldemort taunts Harry about it ("I wouldn't know, I've never died"), and Hagrid, right at the beginning said something about Voldemort not having enough human in him to die. Obviously, Voldemort is inatimately linked to snakes, on various levels: He is a pareseltongue, he looks like a snake (eyes, shape of the face), his ugly!baby self was created by and fed on snake venom, he has a pet snake, and possibly the most significant of all: When Harry feels Voldemort rise in him (in OoP), he feels him as a snake; when he has the vision of the snake attacking Arthur, this is through his connection to Voldemort - and he is seeing the world through the snake's eyes! This is kind of a preliminary sketch - I thought I would throw out a few ideas (I have some more, but they would make the post longer). I would love to hear new ideas from other people regarding this. If I'm correct, Voldemort's snake like features are closely related to his immortality - does this mean that in order to vanquish him (for good), these features must be reversed or eliminated? Naama From Zarleycat at aol.com Mon Aug 16 23:14:48 2004 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 23:14:48 -0000 Subject: Snape & Sirius: Related? (Re: James & Snape: Related? - or Snape & Sirius?) In-Reply-To: <20040815233645.89440.qmail@web52010.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110261 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bee Chase > > The idea of Sirius and Severus being half brothers is interesting and certainly resolves the enmity issue between them. It does, however, bring two thoughts to mind. > > 1) Snape would then possibly (legally) be entitled to the Black family fortune and home. > > 2) Phineas Nigelus when told of Sirius's death say's "the last of the Blacks is dead"? > > Any thoughts... Marianne: Yes, that could throw the inheritance into a twist, unless there is also some rule that bastard children could not inherit. As far as Phineas is concerned, would he necessarily know Snape's parentage? Or, even if he knew, perhaps he wouldn't consider Snape to be a true member of the family as he was not born in wedlock to a member of the clan. Marianne From djrfdh at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 23:20:47 2004 From: djrfdh at yahoo.com (djrfdh) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 23:20:47 -0000 Subject: Why didn't Voldemort die? (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110262 Perhaps, if Harry could have replaced Nagini's milk with polyjuice potion, and gotten a few hairs from Filch, it would have been quite an easy task to take out Voltemort....but, alas, that wasn't to be...JKR wouldn't have ended all this drama in such a ridiculous way, but hey, it's a thought! djrfdh....on the hunt! From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Aug 16 23:24:40 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 23:24:40 -0000 Subject: Voldemort, the Prophecy and the HBP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110263 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Mandy" wrote:. > > Now me: > Very interesting. I'm confused over your statement that possession is usually fatal. Could you give examples, because I don't think it has to be? Is it not possible for the possessor to choose to keep the host alive? Or perhaps if the host, in this case Tom Riddle, dies the possessor will die too? We have seen that LV kept Quirrell alive because he needed a living body to inhabit; perhaps your possessor does the same? < Pippin: "I sometimes inhabited animals -- snakes, of course, being my preference -- but I was little better off inside them than as pure spirit, for their bodies were ill-adapted to perform magic ... and my possession of them shortened their lives; none of them lasted long...." --Voldemort, GoF ch 33 Considering what happened to Quirrell , what almost happened to Ginny (who was looking pale and sickly even before Riddle drained the life from her in the Chamber) and the way Harry felt when Voldemort was possessing him in OOP, it seems that possession inevitably shortens the life of the host. The only way around it is doses of unicorn blood, but that weakens the host as well. Mandy: > Also, I had always assumed that Tom went through his dangerous transformations after he left Hogwarts and disappeared into the wilds of Romania. Perhaps the daemon possessor, and I agree with Kneasy's theory that the possessor is Salazar Slytherin, entered and possessed Tom as he opened the Chamber, kept him alive and encouraged Tom's decent deeper into the Dark side of magic? The combination of Tom and Salazar Slytherin creating Lord Voldemort. < Pippin: Hmmm... I agree about the timing of the transformations. However, Salazar wasn't like Voldemort to begin with. Riddle, according to the latest from Edinburgh, never cared about anybody, and couldn't have become what he is if he had. But Salazar was a great friend of Godric Gryffindor. Possibly Salazar summoned the daemon and was possessed for a while, but fought off the possession and trapped the daemon in the the basilisk and the basilisk in the chamber. He then fled the school so that the other Founders wouldn't find out what he had done. The basilisk's life would have been shortened thereby, but since basilisks live a very long time (FBAWTFT), it managed to survive until Riddle arrived. Riddle was then possessed by the daemon, and he knew that his life would be short unless he could magically transform himself into an immortal being. Just IMO, that is. Pippin From Malady579 at hotmail.com Mon Aug 16 23:26:55 2004 From: Malady579 at hotmail.com (Melody) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 23:26:55 -0000 Subject: Why he is still alive? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110264 Yes, I know. *Everyone* is talking about JKR's two questions we *should* be asking. We *have* been asking them JKR, but you have not ever acknowledged them. But I am not bitter...really I am not. ::grin:: So I was thinking about why Dumbledore has not killed Voldie yet. I mean he *can* do it. But why not kill him. I am wondering if it is not that he can't kill him, but that he does not want to yet. A good general of war knows when to extinguish his enemy. If you can save twenty lives by killing two, then a general has to choose the two. And that is why his job sucks. But I digress. Ok follow me here. I think Dumbledore has not killed Voldie because it would accomplish nothing really...yet. Much like Dumbledore had to have the Minister of Magic physically see Voldemort and be forced to admit he exists in OoP, Dumbledore realizes that if the WW does not recognize that Voldemort is back as a bigger, badder, and more pissed off Voldie, then just killing him accomplishes *nothing*. They need to get over the fear or the name, which would still be around even after his death. If Dumbledore can extinguish the fear of the name by proving the person carrying the name is not the worst thing ever, then Voldie is completely eradicated from the WW. He truly will die. Right now, Voldie will live forever because he is the worst thing ever. If Dumbledore does not eradicate him publicly, obvious to all the wizards and witches, then the fear of Voldie still resurrecting survives, and even if Voldie were in fact gone forever, he would never have left. Have I talked myself into a circle? I pray this makes sense. Melody From djrfdh at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 23:28:03 2004 From: djrfdh at yahoo.com (djrfdh) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 23:28:03 -0000 Subject: Questions! Questions! Questions! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110265 Why didn't Voltemort die when he attacked Harry? And why didn't Dumbledore kill, or at least try to kill Voltemort in the Ministry of Magic , (OOTP) I haven't completely worked-out the theory on the first question, but as to the second, I suspect he couldn't kill Voltemort without also killing Harry, for I rather think they are one in the same person...in fact, I think, in the end, we will find that this is the story of a very demented child; one who has suffered untold abuse and has found solice in becoming numerous personalities in order to preserve what little sanity he has left! I think all the characters will, somehow, be parts of Harry's family that he "envisions" in other ways. But, that's just my own "demented" mind talking! djrfdh what??? From jeterluver2 at aol.com Mon Aug 16 18:21:10 2004 From: jeterluver2 at aol.com (Marissa) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:21:10 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Pairing hints in EBD transcript In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110266 > Mayeaux45: > JKR answers the R/Hr question along the same lines as the H/Hr one > she answered in earlier in March. She's essentially given away > VERY little. It could go either way. The arguments from both > camps (R/Hr,H/Hr) are valid in that respect. Jo is very > good at jerking us one way and revealing the true answer to be > something completely different. She keeps saying it's obvious and we should know who's going to be the couple. Ron and Hermione are obviously jealous when the other likes someone, and are fighting all the time like a married couple. They like each other! I mean you never know what could happen later, but Ron and Hermione are (well if they ever manage to admit it) going to at least try a relationship. "Marissa" From drliss at comcast.net Mon Aug 16 23:34:41 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (Lissa Hess) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 19:34:41 -0400 Subject: some sirius hinting... yay puns! In-Reply-To: <1092697163.31299.65711.m22@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.2.20040816190935.0173c9d0@mail.comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 110267 At 10:59 PM 8/16/2004 +0000, you wrote: >Justine: >Yes. Actually, while I don't wholeheartedly support this 'ship, I >wholeheartedly agree it's plausible. But while, Lupin *was* living >at Grimmauld Place, he was out doing "mysterious work for the Order" >much of the time. Grimmauld Place is probably a more appropriate >home base if he's not going to be home most of the time, since it's >headquarters. Also, Remus really doesn't have money. Sirius does, >but has no way to go out shopping. I doubt Remus would ask Sirius >to lend him money for Christmas presents... so, joint gift. > >In conlusion, I like manslut!Sirius, Peter can sod off and is not >invited to the christening for some important reason apparently, and >I want to marry Remus, who is also not there for some important >reason. > >Justine, >who can't deny that she is a shameless fangirl when it comes to the >wolf > Lissa: Who is also a total shameless fangirl when it comes to the wolf. It's just that she's married (to someone not all THAT different from Lupin, minus the lycanthropy, of course), and so she's got to come up with other options for him rather than having him for herself. The thing about Lupin living at Grimmauld Place is that we know he has a place of his own. At the end of GoF, DD tells Sirius to lie low at Lupin's for a while. He's got SOMETHING. And as humble as it probably is, given how much Sirius despises his ancestral home I can't see him trying to convince Lupin to move in with him unless he specifically wants Lupin to be living there. Given how easy apparation is (um, assuming Lupin can apparate, anyway, which I'll freely admit I've seen no evidence for one way or the other!), I don't know if it matters if he lives in London or halfway across the world. Distance doesn't seem to be a big deal when you're a wizard. That's why I take Lupin living at #12 Grimmauld Place to be more than a matter of convenience. I will admit that it might just be that he and Sirius are so lonely that they appreciate the company of old friends, but I like my more romantic view on the subject ;) As for the Christmas gift, what perks my ears up is that Lupin couldn't even send Harry a Christmas card the year before, and now he's going in on an expensive set of books? It is one of those ambiguous hints because both arguments work. Completely. Since we're talking about it anyway, aside from the living together, the big red flashing neon light for me is how Sirius will actually obey Lupin . That's not something he grants to anyone else- not even Harry or Dumbledore. I read them as simply written as a couple, in the same way that Molly and Arthur are written as a couple. The dynamic between them is very, well, for lack of a better word, couplish. But again, I don't think they were parading it around for everyone to see, but rather keeping it private. Not necessarily out of shame or anything, but simply because it was between the two of them and that's how they wanted it to stay. It's not a very detailed argument, but that's what got me into that particular Ship. (Just for the record, Sirius and Remus are the only male/male couple I ship, although I'll entertain the amusing notion that Snape is in love with Remus as opposed to Lily. I don't think either's really true, but I can really make the pieces fit for that one. I mention it because my junior high kids accused me of thinking everyone's gay. ::Sigh:: ) I DO like your concept of manslut!Sirius while Lupin's heading for more monogamy, or my theory, which is eitehr a.) neither of them bothered to really look around for much else because so much else was going on, or b.) Remus wasn't necessarily sleeping around, but he wasn't exactly doing nothing either. I actually think Peter was the one kissing Florence. At the time that DD calls up that memory, Peter is the confirmed DE on the loose that's supporting Voldie. Makes sense that DD would call up a memory that connects Bertha Jorkins and Peter Pettigrew. But yeah, I couldn't really care less what Peter was doing in his love life ;) Okay. I've rambled long enough. Point: I think there's ambiguous evidence that can be taken either way, and I think fanfic's very, erm... optimistic (deluded at times!) about the way that two 21-year old guys have relationships (in general). While I'm still happily sailing, I'm also still maintaining that marriage, china patterns, adopting Harry, Lily and James matchmaking, double weddings, sugary-sweet nicknames, and anything that involves over-emoting or crying gets tossed overboard! Liss From djrfdh at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 23:51:22 2004 From: djrfdh at yahoo.com (djrfdh) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 23:51:22 -0000 Subject: some sirius hinting... yay puns! In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.2.20040816190935.0173c9d0@mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110268 You DO remember the line in Prisoner of Azkaban when Snape accuses Lupin and Sirius of "sounding like an old married couple"???? djrfdh From lightwriterandpaws at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 20:45:08 2004 From: lightwriterandpaws at yahoo.com (lightwriterandpaws) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 20:45:08 -0000 Subject: Secret Text Behind the Door - SPOILERS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110269 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Brenda M." wrote: > > Spoiler space for speculation... > > J > > K > > R > > I > > S > > T > > E > > H > > A > > W > > E > > S > > O > > M > > E > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > SECRET TEXT: > (He) looked rather like an old lion. There were streaks of grey in > his mane of tawny hair and his bushy eyebrows; he had keen > yellowish eyes behind a pair of wire-rimmed spectacles and a certain > rangy, loping grace even though he walked with a slight limp. > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >>> Stephanie: > > I'm intrigued by the yellowish eyes. Perhaps going too much into it, > > but do you think she's referring to the color of his iris, or to a > > jaundiced appearance? <<< > > > Brenda now: > As for yellowish eyes... [references borrowed from the oh-so-great > Harry Potter Lexicon] > > *Madam Rolanda Hooch (SS9, CS, PA13&15) > - eyes: yellow, hawk-like > > *Basilisk: the King of Serpents (CS) > - bulbous yellow eyes lightwriterandpaws: Cats and wolves have yellow eyes. The limp is also interesting. LW&P From djrfdh at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 23:56:49 2004 From: djrfdh at yahoo.com (djrfdh) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 23:56:49 -0000 Subject: Secret Text Behind the Door - SPOILERS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110270 I suspect the "yellow eyes" belong to Madame Hooch (aka Hedwig) From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 23:58:46 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 16:58:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Muggles borns can be DEs! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040816235846.82618.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110271 > Saraquel: > > > (JKR) says: 'Muggle-borns are not allowed to be DEs EXCEPT IN > > > RARE CIRCUMSTANCES.' (my capitals) Hmmm, so who is the muggle- > > > born DE??? VOLDEMORT, of course! Magda (giggling and running away) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From msturbo209 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 20:56:16 2004 From: msturbo209 at yahoo.com (stellablue571) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 20:56:16 -0000 Subject: Secret Text Behind the Door - SPOILERS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110272 > > Spoiler space for speculation... > > J > > K > > R > > I > > S > > T > > E > > H > > A > > W > > E > > S > > O > > M > > E > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > SECRET TEXT: > (He) looked rather like an old lion. There were streaks of grey in > his mane of tawny hair and his bushy eyebrows; he had keen > yellowish eyes behind a pair of wire-rimmed spectacles and a certain > rangy, loping grace even though he walked with a slight limp. > -------------------------------------------------------------------- Stephanie: > > Perhaps this is our next DADA teacher. I'm intrigued by the > > yellowish eyes. Perhaps going too much into it, but do you think > > she's referring to the color of his iris, or to a jaundiced > > appearance? <<< Stella says: Because of the reference to him looking like a lion, I'm going to have to say she's most likely referring to the color of his iris. Cat's eyes often have this golden tint. That's what I'm picturing anyway, and I also think it would be hard to look both "keen" and jaundiced at the same time, but that's just my opinion. As to who this mystery character may be...well, if the Godric Gryffindor connection is too obvious it very well may be this new McCraggan (was that the name?) character, since she's already mentioned him anyway. This would make sense because she's really not giving anything away except a physical description. However, the wording seems rather positive to me, so I think it's going to be someone on the "GOOD" side. Time will tell! Regards, Stella, who also loves Lupin and doesn't think it's him in the description From lavaluvn at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 00:04:19 2004 From: lavaluvn at yahoo.com (lavaluvn) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 00:04:19 -0000 Subject: Secret Text Behind the Door - SPOILERS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110273 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lavaluvn" > wrote: > > Tawny hair (goldenish, right?) > > light brown (i looked it up) > > Josh Couldn't resist, I looked it up, too. "Dull yellowish-brown". That was essentially what I meant: lion-colored. In keeping with the "looking like an old lion". A clue to his identity? Only time will tell... and that time is waaaayyyy too far away for my liking. Only half-way through. Argh! Andromeda From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 00:15:12 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 17:15:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why didn't Voldemort die? (long) - and Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040817001512.84664.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110274 wrote: > What if Snape, being an expert at potions, had helped Voldemort > become immortal, or at least knew the steps Voldemort had taken > to protect himself from death? What if his telling DD about what > Voldemort had done was the reason why DD trusts him? And finally, > what if DD told Lily about this and her knowledge might have > factored into her protection of Harry? I can believe this. I've had a hard time believing that Snape was a garden-variety muggle-torturer like the Crabbes and Goyles of the DE set. They're just thugs. Snape has a brain. What was Snape doing in the 3-5 years between graduation and returning to Hogwarts as teacher? JKR says that there are no wizarding colleges or universities so where did he learn enough potions to be able to teach? (And I don't think its because he took really, really good notes in 7th year.) So he was apprenticed to a senior potions specialist (who was a DE and Voldemort's personal chemist) and took part in the experiments that Voldemort pursued to become immortal. I can see Voldemort talking openly in front of the chemist who was probably someone he trusted and regarding Snape as just part of the furniture most of the time. Perfect place for spying, really. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From candlekicks at yahoo.ca Mon Aug 16 21:03:43 2004 From: candlekicks at yahoo.ca (candlekicks) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 21:03:43 -0000 Subject: Astra's Hubby Has a Theory (3rd 'missing' DE) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110275 "astratrf" wrote: > > > > I haven't seen anybody anywhere speculate on who that third > > person is (because I don't normally read too many newsgroups), > > but I have an idea; maybe you've thought about this, too: > > > > It's Uncle Vernon. > > "coderaspberry77" wrote: > .....that it's Karkaroff who is the third DE mentioned here. All > through GoF, we are shown that he is a DE, and what LV says (don't > have the book in front of me, sorry) matches up with what we know > about him. > > As for Uncle Vernon - if he was a DE, why not just kill Harry and > make it look like an accident sometime in the 10 years before > Hogwarts? It's not like Petunia or Dudley, or any of the neighbors, > for that matter, would miss him, and really, what could the WW do > to Vernon, since he lives in the Muggle world? Linda: There is a clue to this in OoP. I just reread it last night! Uncle Vernon and Aunt Petunia are not able to physically harm Harry (such as hitting him, starvation doesn't seem to apply!), with any severity, while on the property. My basis for that statement is in the first chapter of OoP. It occurs when Uncle Vernon is strangling Harry... "'Get - off - me!' Harry gasped. For a few seconds they struggled, Harry pulling at his uncle's sausage-like fingers with his left hand, his right maintaining a firm grip on his raised wand; then, as the pain in the top of Harry's head gave a particularly nasty throb, Uncle Vernon yelped and released Harry as though he had received an electric shock. *Some invisible force seemed to have surged through his nephew, making him impossible to hold.* (emphasis mine) It seems IMO that no one can harm Harry at number four, not just Voldemort. The conversation with DD at the end of the book where they discuss the bond of blood is the only other reference that I can find to this subject, DD only mentions that this protection is from Voldemort, by name. Any thoughts? Linda From dudemom_2000 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 00:24:05 2004 From: dudemom_2000 at yahoo.com (dudemom_2000) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 00:24:05 -0000 Subject: Secret Text Behind the Door - SPOILERS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110276 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lavaluvn" wrote: > > From: Brenda M. > > > Spoiler space for speculation... > > > J > > > K > > > R > > > I > > > S > > > T > > > E > > > H > > > A > > > W > > > E > > > S > > > O > > > M > > > E > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- -- > - > > SECRET TEXT: > > (He) looked rather like an old lion. There were streaks of grey in > > his mane of tawny hair and his bushy eyebrows; he had keen > yellowish > > eyes behind a pair of wire-rimmed spectacles and a certain rangy, > > loping grace even though he walked with a slight limp. > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- -- > - > > > > My thoughts: > > I agree with those who speculate Lupin. >Snip > Lisa, stretching! > > Andromeda: > I would have to say it doesn't sound like Lupin at all. Tawny hair (goldenish, right?), bushy eyebrows, yellowish eyes, spectacles... no way it is Lupin. Probably not his dad either, but you never know. >Snip< I love the Godric Gyffindor idea, with all the lion references, except for the wire-rimmed spectacles. Maybe one of his descendents comes to teach at Hogwarts. I know, he's McCLaggan, heir of Gyffindor, HBP, AND DADA teacher! > Snip *****\(@@)/***** While McClaggan is a possibility, I am convinced we are seeing the first real description of Alberforth, Dumbledore's brother....(about time too!)And I bet he is a Gryffindor! By the way, has anyone else notice the changes to the bulletin board? A note about the Book festival is there as well as a reminder to pick a new fan site and to the right sort of hidden by the radio, it appears she is going on vacation in October - Jo, I will be on Marco Island, Florida then! Please come visit! Dudemom_2000 *****\(@@)/***** Just my two knuts.... Dudemom_2000 *****\(@@)/***** From candlekicks at yahoo.ca Mon Aug 16 21:22:46 2004 From: candlekicks at yahoo.ca (candlekicks) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 21:22:46 -0000 Subject: Voldemort, the Prophecy and the HBP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110277 Pippin wrote: > > > Now on to the prophecy, the only way it makes sense to me, and > > then, like most riddles, it becomes absurdly simple, is if the > > "other" is a third party. > > > > > Either [Tom or Harry] must die at the hand of the other [demon] > > for neither [Tom nor Harry] can live if the other[demon] survives. Mandy wrote: > Very interesting. I'm confused over your statement that possession > is usually fatal. Could you give examples, because I don't think it > has to be? > > > Perhaps the daemon possessor, and I agree with Kneasy's theory that > the possessor is Salazar Slytherin, entered and possessed Tom as he > opened the Chamber, kept him alive and encouraged Tom's decent deeper > into the Dark side of magic? The combination of Tom and Salazar > Slytherin creating Lord Voldemort. Linda: I don't know that I buy into a possession theory (Tom said that he found out he was the heir and then went searching for the Chamber, not that he found the Chamber and realized that he was the heir...), but we do have canon to refer to to talk about possession. Quirrell wasn't the only one that Voldemort possessed in the series. Ginny Weasley has also been possessed by LV. Assuming that your possession theories are correct, Tom would have already been possessed by the demon when he created the diary and yet we know that Ginny lived beyond her possession in CoS. Harry has also had Voldemort invade his mind, through his dreams and visions of the Department of Mysteries and also when he is egging DD on in the MoM. Again, he lived. :) Linda From msturbo209 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 21:29:27 2004 From: msturbo209 at yahoo.com (stellablue571) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 21:29:27 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Re: GOF: Ron's a real twit (git) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110278 > Meri: > Again, maybe this is just me, but I am a confirmed H/R > shipper, for a couple reasons. First of all, that is just the > dynamic that works in these types of stories. You get the hero > (Harry), the hero's best male friend (Ron) and the hero's best > female friend who ends up with the sidekick (Hermy). Secondly, I > just don't think that Harry and Hermione make a good match. There > are times when she simply doesn't understand him, and I think that > someone who has had more similar experiences (like loss of a parent > (Luna) or a brush with LV (Ginny)) would be better suited for our > boy hero. And then there's the fact that Harry looks at Hermy as > his friend, and just his friend. That could change, but I don't see > it happening. This isn't Dawson's Creek, and JKR has better things > to write about than love triangles (Harry trying to steal Hermione > from Ron is a sublot that I can live without). Stella says: I second that emotion! It's really obvious (to me anyway) that Ron and Hermione have more than "friendly" feelings for each other, and though I don't know if JKR is actually going to have them "get together" in the series, the underlying current is that there is a considerable amount of male/female tension between them that just doesn't exist between Hermione and Harry. (The way they are always "Having a go at each other", as per Harry.) If we had any doubts about their affection for each other, I think they were definitely cleared up by Ron's strong jealous reaction to Krum in GOF, as well as Hermione's jealousy of Fleur. Come on people, she SAID she has given us so many hints about it already! And since I can't see it really being that relevant to the outcome of the main story, why would she try so hard to throw us off? It just doesn't make sense. Meri's right, this is not some teenage soap drama, and I am most positive we will never see Harry and Hermione romantically involved in this series. Sorry H/HR shippers, but it's not gonna happen! Stella, who thinks Ron and Hermione should have a house full of red headed geniuses one day! From sarita.rosen at verizon.net Mon Aug 16 22:22:52 2004 From: sarita.rosen at verizon.net (Sarita Rosen) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 22:22:52 -0000 Subject: Behind the Door Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110279 I can't help but feel it is GG that is being described. I have thought all along the GG is the HBP. Perhaps she is describing him in some sort of flashback (like Riddle's Diary). "Sarita Rosen" From lziner at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 00:41:40 2004 From: lziner at yahoo.com (lziner) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 00:41:40 -0000 Subject: Behind the Door In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110280 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sarita Rosen" wrote: > I can't help but feel it is GG that is being described. I have thought > all along the GG is the HBP. Perhaps she is describing him in some sort > of flashback (like Riddle's Diary). > > "Sarita Rosen" Good thinking - after all Gryffindor's mascot is the lion. I thought it might be a description of the new DADA teacher -maybe the McClaggan character. Lynn - who wishes she was more than halfway done but doesn't want to rush genius :) From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Tue Aug 17 00:50:08 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 00:50:08 -0000 Subject: Both Snape & Fudge are DEs: 3rd 'Missing' DE (Long) In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040816200136.01cb3a30@pop3.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110281 >>> Me earlier: >> "the one too cowardly to return" = Karkaroff >> "the one who has left me forever" = Fudge. >> Snape appears to be an active Death Eater to me. In fact, I believe he was present at the rebirth ceremony (between Lucius and where Lestranges should have been, 'a man' stood there). <<< >>> Kate Harding responded: > I think Snape was the `One, who I believe has left me for ever... he will be killed, of course...', Karkaroff was the `One, too cowardly to return' <<< Brenda: That was my original thought before considering Fudge :o) But the more and more I think (and hear) about him, I think he has a lot of shady business going on his side. 1. His Ridiculous Denial of Voldemort's Return -- If Fudge had any bit of common sense (which is debatable), he should soon realize that Dumbledore would not lie about something as serious as this. His life is at stake now, more greatly than most others (everyone expects him to lead the fight), why would he joke about that? Also there is the Boy-Who-Lived who narrowly escaped Voldemort and witnessed the entire rebirthing ceremony. The boy the whole wizarding community hero-worships. Who would make a better fighting team than `the greatest wizard' and `the Boy Who Lived'? Why not join them and make yourself more popular? Why deny this? What does he gain from denying his return? Accepting or not, if Voldemort had returned then it's a done matter, Fudge's opinion will not change anything. True, it will mean a chaos, disarray and heck of work as the Minister of Magic. I completely understand his wish that it wasn't true, who would? (except for the Death Eaters) However, if he is power-hungry as he appears to be, then I think any shrewd keen politician will decide to team up with `the greatest wizard of modern time'. Even Dumbledore nudges this to Fudge: "I tell you now ? take the steps I have suggested, and you will be remembered, in office or out, as one of the bravest and greatest Ministers for Magic we have ever known. Fail to act ? and history will remember you as the man who stepped aside, and allowed Voldemort a second chance to destroy the world we have tried to rebuild!" (GoF, 615. UK) If Fudge was acting mad purely out of concern for his political standing then I think these words should have been registered in his mind pretty clearly. Also, the words he keeps repeating or being used to describe his reactions: "preposterous" (611, 614) "blustering" (610) "angrily" "shouted" (613). Somebody is really getting worked up here, isn't he. Why is it so hard for him to (logically) believe Voldemort could come back? The lad didn't die, just became vapour, I mean for heaven's sake the AK curse rebounded and he didn't die! Sure, not everyone was clear on what happened (`some say he died, some say he disappeared...') but he is the Minister, he should know more confidential information than anyone else. He also just witnessed Cedric's dead body clearly as a result of AK curse. The son of a high-ranking government official dead from a dark curse. It makes sense to pay some tribute to fellow politician if Fudge was solely worried about his power. If this was only his initial reaction (mixture of shock and denial) but came back to sense and collaborated with Dumbledore, then it is a different issue. No, his denial is more profound than this, almost very personal. The way he shakes head and acts nervous... it is as if the one thing he feared the most has happened. He sounds genuinely afraid. He is terrified. He knows it is his neck Voldemort will be hunting for. 2. Fudge appears awfully calm for someone who had just seen the Dark Mark for the first time. -- I actually asked HPfGU members when the Ministry found out about the Dark Mark (Post #100144). Most of the responses I received (thank you guys!) was that it becomes invisible after a while -? which implies that the Ministry probably still doesn't know about it. Even Sirius Black, the `notorious mass murderer' who had seen many Death Eaters in Azkaban, has no idea what it was: " `[Karkaroff] showed Snape something on his arm?' said Sirius, looking frankly bewildered. He ran his fingers distractedly through his filthy hair, then shrugged again. `Well, I've no idea what that's about...'" (GoF, 461. UK) Compare this to Fudge's reaction after Snape showed him his Dark Mark: "Fudge stepped back from Snape, too. He was shaking his head. He did not seem to have taken in a word Snape had said. He stared, apparently repelled, at the ugly mark on Snape's arm..." (GoF, 616. UK) "Apparently repelled"?? The Ministry had just acquired a new method for verifying Death Eaters. While its absence will not prove innocence, its presence will provide the positive case for association. If Fudge was concerned about his power and popularity here, isn't it natural for him to ask Snape more questions about the Dark Mark rather than actively repressing this bit of information? He does not seem surprised AT ALL. Contrast that to Sirius' reaction, he is genuinely taken aback. Sirius was the original member of the Order, perhaps one of the more important members. Best friend of "those who defied him three times", godfather of the prophecy baby. It is likely that he had his hands on more confidential intel than others. He also spent 12 years of his life watching Death Eaters in prison. If Sirius had no clue about the existence of the Dark Mark, it is safe to assume that it was a well-kept secret. And how does Fudge react to this great revelation? Nothing. No curiosity, no plan to check back on Azkaban inmates to clear some names. This would be the noble thing to do ?- true, who would associate `noble' with Fudge. However if all he cared about was his popularity then it would be a prudent move on his part. His irrational behaviour is not consistent with what power-hungry politicians would do. 3. Dementors' Attack on Harry -- I must resist taking credits from other great posters. Kneasy has thoughtfully pointed this out many times. It is my regret that I could not find the best one (Kneasy, if you can tip me off to better post that has more complete analysis on PoA it would be great!!) ------------------------------------[Kneasy in Post #109169] No, DD didn't manipulate Fudge. Fudge is a baddy, either that or weak enough to be leaned on by someone evil. Fudge makes two visits to Azkaban. In the first he 'just happens' to let Sirius get hold of a newspaper that 'just happens' to have a photograph of Peter in animagus form on the front page. He leaves Sirius to stew for a while. He drops in again at a later date "Just happened to be in the neighbourhood" and surprise, surprise, this 'just happens' to be the night Sirius escapes. "Oh dear. We've lost a prisoner. Good job we 'just happen' to have some Dementors to track him down." Dementors who strangely seem to be uninterested in Sirius and extremely interested in Harry -- in the train, on the Quidditch Pitch, after the Shrieking Shack. In the last two instances they *ignore* Sirius and 'just happen' to concentrate on Harry. Why? Because they've been told to. Springing Sirius provides a reason for events that will result in a tragic "accident' where an innocent boy is kissed. How sad. But good news for Voldy supporters. ------------------------------------[Post 109169] Fudge seems quite *fond* of Dementors. In the least, he doesn't seem to regard them as one of the most foul creatures. He uses them quite often: to Hogwarts, to Hogsmeade (yeah right, as if Black is actually thick enough to show up in Hogsmeade. Pfft). He is not even remotely interested in what Barty Crouch Jr has to confess, he just squash that chance right out of him ASAP. Snape goes on: " `[Fudge] insisted on summoning a Dementor to accompany him into the castle. He brought it up to the office where Barty Crouch -'" (GoF, 610. UK) What, Fudge ASKED a Dementor to accompany him? What is he, Dementor- proof? It does not affect HIM? So surely this means their attack on Harry must have been ordered by authority figures, namely Mr Fudge. The Ministry also sends a couple of Dementors to 4 Privet Drive in OoP ? nead I say more? >>> Kate wrote: I believe we have clear evidence that Snape was not at the gathering: " 'Severus,' said Dumbledore, turning to Snape, 'you know what I must ask you to do. If you are ready... if you are prepared...' 'I am,' said Snape. He looked slightly paler than usual, and his cold, black eyes glittered strangely. 'Then, good luck,' said Dumbledore, and he watched, with a trace of apprehension on his face, as Snape swept wordlessly after Sirius. " (GoF, 619. UK) Brenda: Well let me remind you again of the possible Time-Turning event here. Snape, after hearing the list of Death Eaters who showed up, realized that Harry did not recognize him. So Snape turns back time, Apparate (or create a Portkey) to the graveyard, and join Voldy in grotesque celebration... I know this is a speculation, but I believe it explains nicely how Snape can keep up with his role as a double agent. After all, we don't know what Snape did after he disappeared. Did anyone ask JKR about this? >>> If his famed Occlumency fails him, he will most likely be tortured and/or force-fed veritaserum until he reveals most of the Order's most vital secrets. <<< While his Occlumens skills are vital in his role, I believe Voldemort is skilled enough to sense anything funny going on with Snape's mind. He is, after all, a master at Legilimens. (`The Dark Lord, for instance, almost always knows when somebody is lying to him' OoP, 469. UK) Surely Snape is good at protecting his incriminating thoughts from Voldemort. But I believe he hasn't come under the most intense scrutinizing of his mind from Voldemort yet. He has not given him the reason to do so, and it is because Voldemort does not doubt Snape's loyalty (yet). We have witnessed Avery being Crucio-ed several times and he openly claimed his loyalty. Even Wormtail, who has been a great deal of help back to his power, had been tortured many times. Then why not Snape? Not that Snape is a kind of person who would divulge that kind of thing to Harry. But I believe Snape had not been caught under the radar so far, and it is because Snape acted every bit as a Death Eater. >>> Imagine you are Snape. 15 years ago you betrayed the Dark Lord, fleeing his service and handing over one of his servants (Karkaroff) to the Aurors. Now you want to spy on him. Are you just going to show up at his side when the Dark Mark appears? <<< It is a general knowledge amongst the Death Eaters that Karkaroff was their traitor. According to much beloved Padfoot in GoF, 291, UK: " `[Karkaroff] did a deal with the Ministry of Magic,' said Sirius bitterly. `He said he'd seen the error of his ways, and then he named names ... he put a load of other people into Azkaban in his place ... he's not very popular in there, I can tell you'" So everyone blames Karkaroff as the cowardly traitor. But who did he really betray? >From Karkaroff's trial in Dumbledore's Pensieve, GoF, 511-513, UK: - Antonin Dolohov: already apprehended shortly after Karkaroff - Evan Rosier: already dead - Travers: already captured - Mulciber: already captured - Augustus Rookwood* - Severus Snape: mysterious greasy git ;) Thus most Death Eaters he was willing to sacrifice had already been accounted for. If it wasn't for Rockwood, it was back to Azkaban for Karkaroff. Who do you think gave this intel in the first place? Our greasy lovely SSSnivellus comes to mind? ;P Very fortunately for Snape, Karkaroff wears the burden of betrayal that Snape had done. Death Eaters do not have reasons to suspect Snape: Malfoy speaks most highly of him. (OoP) I can go on and on for another 10 pages on how Fudge is evil and Snape is an active Death Eater, but I shall resist. This is too long already. Apologies! With HPness, Brenda From msturbo209 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 16 22:39:04 2004 From: msturbo209 at yahoo.com (stellablue571) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 22:39:04 -0000 Subject: Godparents and Half-Brothers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110282 Justine: << Firstly, there was no question about Sirius's marital status. > As far as I know, godparents do not have to be married ... >> Rita wrote: > I *think* she meant that, if Sirius had been married, his wife would > have been with him so they could have rushed over *together* to the > Potters, so there would have been a woman (Mrs. Sirius) present when > they did this emergency 'christening', so she could have been > godmother. Stella says: Yes, I think that's EXACTLY what she meant! > Luckdragon wrote in > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110182 : > > << The idea of Sirius and Severus being half brothers is interesting > and certainly resolves the enmity issue between them. It does, > however, bring two thoughts to mind. > 1) Snape would then possibly (legally) be entitled to the Black > family fortune and home. > 2) Phineas Nigelus when told of Sirius's death say's "the last of > the Blacks is dead"? >> Rita: > As an OUT-OF-WEDLOCK child, Snape would not be entitled to any > inheritance from his father and his father's family, and would not > be entitled to use his father's surname. Thus Phineas Nigellus would > not consider him a Black. Stella says: I'm surprised no one has ever referenced Snape's memory from Ootp. (or maybe they have? If so, sorry...) But the scene where Harry gets a glimpse of Snape's thoughts (not in the pensieve) describes Snape as a child, crying in the corner, while a "hook-nosed" man was screaming at a cowering woman. Now we can assume that these are Snape's parents, and obviously he has his father's nose. (And apparently his temperament, also?!) This exchange suggests that he knew his father from a young age, and the image I get is of an unhappy childhood with parents who were (unhappily) married to each other. I know this could also be interpreted other ways, because we are given so little actual information in that particular memory. Perhaps it was Mr. Black paying a visit to threaten Ms. Snape to keep her mouth shut about little Severus's true paternity, but I don't think so. I really think that Snape wouldn't be so vocal about bloodlines if he were actually illegitimate, and there is nothing in canon to suggest any resemblance between Snape and Sirius other than the dark coloring. In real genetics, facial structures of even half- siblings have similarities. I see nothing in the ever-so-good- looking Sirius that suggests he would be the brother of the ever-not- so-good-looking Snape! Even if he was lucky enough t get his mother's nose, Sirius would still, surely bear SOME resemblance to his brother? Sorry, but while it's not impossible, I find it highly unlikely that these two are brothers. If there is really more to the hatred than we've learned, it remains to be seen. Regards, Stella From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 00:57:27 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 00:57:27 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110283 When asked : "Has Voldemort or Tom Riddle ever cared for or loved anyone?" JKR answered : "Now, that's a cracking question to end with?very good. No, never. [Laughter.] If he had, he couldn't possibly be what he is. You will find out a lot more about that. It is a good question, because it leads us rather neatly to Half Blood Prince, " That answer mildly shocked me : how can someone have *never* loved ?! I know Tom was an orphan so obviously he had no family to love, but he could still have loved other people : a friend, a caretaker, a pet, or even an imaginary memory of his mom, anything. Harry found people to love as soon as he entered the WW, no matter how deprived of love he was during his childhood. But Tom never loved anyone. I find that hard to imagine, especially since JKR said some time ago that in her books nobody was ever born evil. So Tom was born normal, but he never cared for anyone ? Weird. As an aside : can one truly *choose* hate and evil if they've never experienced love and goodness ? And : wouldn't the fact that Tom never cared for anyone indicate a major mental disease (not unexpected considering the circumstances) ? And what's that business about the fact that Tom/LV never loved anyone leading neatly to HBP ??? Del From ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 01:00:04 2004 From: ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com (A.J.) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 01:00:04 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Pairing hints in EBD transcript In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110284 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Marissa" wrote:> > She keeps saying it's obvious and we should know who's going to be > the couple. Ron and Hermione are obviously jealous when the other > likes someone, and are fighting all the time like a married couple. I'll point it out again... a) alchemy. In _The Hidden Key to Harry Potter_, author John Granger explained how in the alchemical tradition, MERCURY (is this obvious enough?) and SULFUR were known as 'the quarreling couple.' I was reminded recently, b) Note JKR 20 October 1999, although old, "do Harry and Hermione have a date? [laughter] No. They are ? they're very platonic friends. But I won't answer for anyone else, nudge, nudge, wink, wink. " I will actually leave out my own feelings that I got immediately upon reading GOF first in the series (then the rest, which I felt led that way as well), as to R/Hr... (generally, the Ron likes Hermione canon from GOF that we note). A.J. From ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 01:09:01 2004 From: ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com (A.J.) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 01:09:01 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110285 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > When asked : > "Has Voldemort or Tom Riddle ever cared for or loved anyone?" > > JKR answered : > "Now, that's a cracking question to end with?very good. No, never. > [Laughter.] If he had, he couldn't possibly be what he is. You will > find out a lot more about that. It is a good question, because it > leads us rather neatly to Half Blood Prince, " > > That answer mildly shocked me : how can someone have *never* loved ?! > > And what's that business about the fact that Tom/LV never loved anyone > leading neatly to HBP ??? For some reason, each time I read that quote from JKR, I remember the interview where a little boy asked whether Snape would ever fall in love, and she answered that she was Shocked, shocked at the question, and we would find out why in Book Seven. Maybe this has something to do with his potential redemption, as opposed to LV's lack of it? Similarly, Harry's compassion, special power, etc. seem to tie in. So perhaps somehow this theme does lead into HBP, Book 6... ? A.J. From sixsunflowers at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 00:44:57 2004 From: sixsunflowers at yahoo.com (Bill and Diana Sowers) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 00:44:57 -0000 Subject: McLagan Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110286 JKR probably just chose this name because she liked the sound of it but... just for some added interest since names sometimes are important in Harry Potter. McLagan.... Mc/Mac are Gaelic prefixes to surnames equivalent to "son" in English and other Germanic languages (i.e. Johnson = "Son of John -- MacDonald = "Son of Donald") Lagan comes from an old Scottish word meaning "Hollow." I'm not sure if hollow here means a valley or something empty inside. There is also a river in Northern Ireland called Lagan. Probably useless information but it does keep me thumbing through books and/or the Internet... good exercises for the brain. Bill From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Aug 17 01:14:12 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 01:14:12 -0000 Subject: Why didn't Voldemort die? (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110287 > Valky wrote: > > I ask you does anyone recall an 'Avada Kedavra' blowing stuff up in canon? Uh uh.... It *doesn't* happen. > > "Another jet of green light flew from behind the silver shield. This time it was the one-armed centaur, galloping in front of Dumbledore, that took the blast and shattered into a hundred pieces." > > :-) > > Josh Valky: Oh you incorrugible Devils Advocate Josh! Now I have to answer you! The Magical Brethren statue blew up, yes, but my point was where in canon does the Avada Kedavra blow stuff up _when it actually kills someone_. Unless you're suggesting that Harry survived because LV..... ? missed ? ;P From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Tue Aug 17 01:19:56 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 01:19:56 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110288 Welcome back, Del! >>> Del wrote: > > When asked : > "Has Voldemort or Tom Riddle ever cared for or loved anyone?" > > JKR answered : > "Now, that's a cracking question to end with?very good. No, never. > [Laughter.] If he had, he couldn't possibly be what he is. You will > find out a lot more about that. It is a good question, because it > leads us rather neatly to Half Blood Prince, " > That answer mildly shocked me: how can someone have *never* loved?! I know Tom was an orphan so obviously he had no family to love, but he could still have loved other people: a friend, a caretaker, a pet, or even an imaginary memory of his mom, anything. Harry found people to love as soon as he entered the WW, no matter how deprived of love he was during his childhood. But Tom never loved anyone. I find that hard to imagine, especially since JKR said some time ago that in her books nobody was ever born evil. So Tom was born normal, but he never cared for anyone ? Weird. <<< Brenda: I pretty much agree with everything you wrote. It caught my eyes too. I thought the reason he hated his Muggle father so much was because he loved his mother? Even as a concept? ('I never really knew my mother but she died taking care of me'). Or what about his very close friends who he shared the name Lord Voldemort with? Are they in his service now? Are they Death Eaters? What about Death Eaters? ('Ah, here comes my true family...') What about Barty Crouch Jr who thought he could be like father and son with Voldemort? Even his most faithful servant meant nothing to him? What about romantic interest? He was a very good-looking, exemporary, brilliant, Head Boy at Hogwarts. Didn't any girl show interest? I know I would have. Sorry to go off tangent here, but basically I didn't think it was possible for anyone to not love at all, even ever-so-slightly. Brenda From marmys at bellsouth.net Tue Aug 17 01:01:08 2004 From: marmys at bellsouth.net (Marleen) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 21:01:08 -0400 Subject: Why didn't Voldemort die? (long) - and Snape References: <20040817001512.84664.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <003101c483f5$b00377e0$0100a8c0@marmyscomputer> No: HPFGUIDX 110290 wrote: > What if Snape, being an expert at potions, had helped Voldemort > become immortal, or at least knew the steps Voldemort had taken > to protect himself from death? Magda: > I've had a hard time believing that Snape was a garden-variety > muggle-torturer like the Crabbes and Goyles of the DE set. > They're just thugs. Snape has a brain. That is a great thought. I really think you have something here. Snape is smart. I can't see him being a DE who really enjoyed hurting anyone. He may play it tough with Harry, but he has never really hurt him. He has actually helped him on many an occassion. I think if he was a true follower of Voldemort he would have eliminated Harry by now. "Marleen" From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 01:28:38 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 01:28:38 -0000 Subject: Godparents and Half-Brothers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110291 Stella wrote : > there is nothing in > canon to suggest any resemblance between Snape and Sirius other than > the dark coloring. In real genetics, facial structures of even half- > siblings have similarities. I see nothing in the ever-so-good- > looking Sirius that suggests he would be the brother of the ever-not- > so-good-looking Snape! Even if he was lucky enough t get his > mother's nose, Sirius would still, surely bear SOME resemblance to > his brother? Del replies : I don't have any opinion yet concerning the "Snape and Sirius are half-brothers", but I do have 2 things to say : 1. Half- and even full-siblings don't necessarily look like each other at all. My half-sister and I look completely dissimilar. Even more interesting, we each look like a different sister of our mother's : they are fully sisters, and yet they look very different. 2. We're not sure whether the narrator is being impartial when describing Snape and Sirius, or whether he's telling us how *Harry* sees them. Harry hates Snape and after the end of PoA he loves Sirius : he would never willingly acknowledge any similiarities between the two. But interestingly enough, the descriptions of Sirius we get at the beginning of PoA, when Harry does *not* like Sirius yet, are quite reminiscent of his descriptions of Snape. Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 01:29:55 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 01:29:55 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110292 wrote: > > That answer mildly shocked me : how can someone have *never* loved ?! > I know Tom was an orphan so obviously he had no family to love, but he > could still have loved other people : a friend, a caretaker, a pet, or > even an imaginary memory of his mom, anything. Harry found people to > love as soon as he entered the WW, no matter how deprived of love he > was during his childhood. But Tom never loved anyone. I find that hard > to imagine, especially since JKR said some time ago that in her books > nobody was ever born evil. So Tom was born normal, but he never cared > for anyone ? Weird. snip. Alla: Hi, Del! Welcome back. I know that you never give up on the most evil characters in "Potterverse", but don't you think especially after that answer that Voldie is a lost cause. To tell you the truth, even though I hope that Voldie will die slow and painful death, I was a bit surprised by that answer too. Tom Riddle as a little boy, must have loved someone. At least one person? I think possible mental illness sounds about right or maybe Tom was cursed right after he was born with inability to love? But who would do such a thing? Alla From marmys at bellsouth.net Tue Aug 17 01:05:34 2004 From: marmys at bellsouth.net (Marleen) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 21:05:34 -0400 Subject: Why he is still alive? References: Message-ID: <003601c483f6$4cecb030$0100a8c0@marmyscomputer> No: HPFGUIDX 110293 Melody: >> I think Dumbledore has not killed Voldie because it would accomplish nothing really...yet. Much like Dumbledore had to have the Minister of Magic physically see Voldemort and be forced to admit he exists in OoP, Dumbledore realizes that if the WW does not recognize that Voldemort is back as a bigger, badder, and more pissed off Voldie, then just killing him accomplishes *nothing*. They need to get over the fear or the name, which would still be around even after his death. << I think it makes sense. The WW hasn't even acknowledged that Voldemort has returned. If DD had killed Voldemort when he had the chance, then Fudge, as you said, would not have realized Voldemort was back. The MoM would still think DD and Harry were making the whole thing up. The timimg just wasn't right and JKR has more writing to do. We're not letting her get off that easy!!! LOL "Marleen" From terpnurse at qwest.net Tue Aug 17 01:22:23 2004 From: terpnurse at qwest.net (Steven Spencer) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:22:23 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: McLagan In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110294 Bill Sowers wrote: > JKR probably just chose this name because she liked the sound of it > but... just for some added interest since names sometimes are > important in Harry Potter. > > McLagan.... Terpnurse: Great job with the research, but I suspect that McLagan likely won't be a major character. To me it sounds as though she heard the name, liked it, and decided to write in a minor character or perhaps just a random name (maybe a new 1st year during the Sorting Ceremony?). I really don't think there's any significance to that name in terms of the storyline at all. I wouldn't put it past her though to change the name of an, as yet, unknown major character if McLagan fits better than the previous name. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 01:40:34 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 01:40:34 -0000 Subject: What is worse than death? (was Voldemort: Between Life and Death? (Long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110295 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "inkling108" wrote: snip. > Interestingly enough, just before the dialogue you cite, Dumbledore > says "*We both know* (emphasis mine)that there are other ways of > destroying a man, Tom." (other ways than killing, that is). To > what knowledge is he referring? Voldy immediately snarls that > nothing is worse than death. This angry reaction may be masking a > fear that Dumbledore is right. There is something crucial here that > both Dumbledore and Voldy know, but Voldy is refusing to acknowledge > it, either out of fear or arrogance. I think that this same > knowledge will eventually be used by Harry to destroy Voldemort. Alla: If Voldie indeed knows what Dumbledore is talking about and it is very possible, I think that he refuses to acknowledge it due to arrogance. He is after all a very smart man (Can he even be called a man or is he something else?). In the graveyard(GOF) he talks about ancient magic, which Dumbledore invoked to protect Harry, BUT he still thinks that he is stronger than any powerful ancient magic. Could it be that Voldie hopes to overcome his halflife-half whatever situation eventually or is it good enough for him? Inkling: > It is also interesting that Dumbledore, who is an alchemist, tries > and fails to imprison Voldy using first fire, than water. And what > is this mysterious spell that makes Voldemort's shield reverberate > with an "oddly chilling" sound like a gong? > Alla: I wish I knew what kind of spell it was. Especially due to the fact that Dumbledore tries it prior to involking fire and water, so it must be a stronger element or is it a mixture of elements? From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 01:43:54 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 01:43:54 -0000 Subject: DD - maybe. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110296 Kneasy wrote: Is DD much, much older than 150? Is he resurrected, renewed, reborn, revived, refurbished, renovated, restuffed and repolished at intervals down the centuries? I've always felt that it's significant that DD "worked on Alchemy" with old Nick according to the Chocolate Frog card; a card which is not new - it's one of the commonest around. He's obviously been associated with Flamel for years. Is DD a ringer? Is DD telling the *whole* truth? Could it be that he's 150 in *this* incarnation? So, possibilities:- 1. DD is Flamel. 2. DD is using Flamels Stone to keep going through the centuries. In which case DD could be a Merlin figure - roused from sleep when great danger threatens. 3. DD is the enemy of whatever it is (Salazar?) that's animating or motivating Voldy. And they've fought before - often. The Potterverse is just the latest battleground in a war that goes waaaaay back, perhaps to the founding of Hogwarts or even further. vmonte responds: Yes, I've mentioned all of these things before. Also, and including, that Ron is Dumbledore and that the reason we have not seen his patronus is because it's obviously the same one. JKR quotes: What form does Dumbledore's Patronus take? "Good question. Can anyone guess? You have had a clue. There was a little whisper there. It is a phoenix, which is very representative of Dumbledore for reasons that I am sure you can guess." How did Dumbledore get his scar in [of] the London Underground? "You may find out one day. I am very fond of that scar." I would get a kick if... Ron got blasted into the past during a fight/encounter with Bellatrix. (Perhaps there will be another fight at the DoM and Ron will get blasted into the curtain, but just as he flies through it Hagrid tosses him a portkey.) People will assume he is dead but he really is not. Ron is transported back 132 years. He realizes that he is stuck in the past and goes to Hogwarts to finish his 7th year. As a joke he registers himself at school as Albus Dumbledore (not realizing that he will really be known as this person). Kind of like when Harry jumped on the Knight Bus and introduced himself as Neville, and we later find out the prophecy could have been about him. The last line of the book clues the readers to the fact that Ron is actually DD because we see a close-up of the scar on Ron's leg that looks like the london underground. HAHAHA vivian From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 01:54:29 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 01:54:29 -0000 Subject: Lupin at Privet Drive (Was Re: Astra's Hubby Has a Theory (3rd 'missing' DE)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110297 --- > "coderaspberry77" wrote: >> > > > As for Uncle Vernon - if he was a DE, why not just kill Harry and make it look like an accident sometime in the 10 years before Hogwarts? snip snip> > Linda wrote: > There is a clue to this in OoP. I just reread it last night! Uncle > Vernon and Aunt Petunia are not able to physically harm Harry (such > as hitting him, starvation doesn't seem to apply!), with any > severity, while on the property. My basis for that statement is in > the first chapter of OoP. > > It occurs when Uncle Vernon is strangling Harry... "'Get - off - me!' Harry gasped. For a few seconds they struggled, Harry pulling at his uncle's sausage-like fingers with his left hand, his right maintaining a firm grip on his raised wand; then, as the pain in the top of Harry's head gave a particularly nasty throb, Uncle Vernon yelped and released Harry as though he had received an electric shock. *Some invisible force seemed to have surged through his nephew, making him impossible to hold.* (emphasis mine) > > It seems IMO that no one can harm Harry at number four, not just > Voldemort. The conversation with DD at the end of the book where > they discuss the bond of blood is the only other reference that I > can find to this subject, DD only mentions that this protection is > from Voldemort, by name. > > Any thoughts? mhbobbin: I do think Privet Drive protects Harry from anyone. Linda's comments about Privet Drive reminded me that subsequent to an earlier post I made about Lupin ***shaking hands all round*** (in the Is James Lupin blah blah blah last week) but apparently not shaking hands with Harry, I discovered that Lupin does actually shake hands with Harry***at Privet Drive*** when he shows up as part of The Guard to take Harry away. Other than the MoM scene where he holds Harry back, it's the only physical contact he has with Harry-- except for the rare clap on the shoulder. It wouldn't be odd except JKR keeps, IMO, drawing a line under it. Twice in OotP, Lupin shakes hands "all round" but apparently not with Harry--first after delivering Harry to the train station where he shakes hands all round but claps Harry on the shoulder and second, after the Knight Bus, where he delivers the kids to school after Christmas. At that time, he shakes hands all round but speaks to Harry. I could ignore it if it weren't for Lupin's final remark to Harry to be sure to ****Keep in touch*****. I was surprised on rereading OotP to discover that Lupin does shake hands with Harry because it seemed inconsistent, until Linda brought up the seemingly broad protections there. Lupin shaking Harry's hand at Privet Drive may be the exception that proves the rule. These handshaking episodes are, of course, in addition to the PoA incidents that initially appeared related to Lupin's emotional state. (shiver). Where this is going, I've no clue. But I did want to mention it here because it may be reinforcing the broad Privet Drive protections. Protection against what with Lupin is beyond me still. (I don't accept the ESE Lupin theory yet). Also, I think that Uncle Vernon, like Dudley, is **what you see is what you get***(I still suspect Lugo Bagman as 3rd DE). mhbobbin (Confession: I also supported the Mark Evans was somebody theories but I still see that as JKR's mistake. Hey maybe Mark Evans will still turn out to be the 3rd DE!!!!) From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 01:57:13 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 01:57:13 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110298 Hi Alla ! I *was* expecting an answer from you on that one :-) Alla wrote : "I know that you never give up on the most evil characters in "Potterverse", but don't you think especially after that answer that Voldie is a lost cause." Del replies : I never really had *hope* concerning LV. I was just trying to figure him out. But I'm afraid this last piece of information only confused me further. I agree with what you said later : "I think possible mental illness sounds about right or maybe Tom was cursed right after he was born with inability to love?" But that would make me defend him even more ! If Tom was either sick or cursed, then he did *not* freely choose to become evil. If he is *unable* to love, then he can't be blamed for hating. And most of all : if he needed help and didn't get it, then he's not the only one responsible for the existence of LV (could DD be reluctant to kill *Tom* out of *guilt* ?). But that would go against everything the HP books have taught us so far : that we are all responsible for our choices, and that LV is truly evil because he chose to be. I really hate to criticise JKR, but I think she's failed to explain and describe LV adequately, at least to me. I mean, he's supposed to be : a) a typical overly-evil arch-villain b) a poor orphan kid with a tragic family history *and* c) an anomaly of Nature, in that he never cared for anyone, which is pretty much impossible. That's too much for one single character, especially one that gets so little screen time and towards whom my emotions are supposed to be clear-cut and simple. I can't make sense of him, and so I can't hate him and be angry at him as I'm supposed to. Del From gsanderson at cfl.rr.com Tue Aug 17 02:04:16 2004 From: gsanderson at cfl.rr.com (gsanderson at cfl.rr.com) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 02:04:16 -0000 Subject: DD - maybe. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110299 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > > Don't think that anyone has picked up on this yet, if > they have I apologise. > > The EBD Q&A - DDs patronus is a phoenix - "very representative > of DD" says herself. I find this interesting, particularly as I've > hypothesised previously on just what DD is or might be. > > Patronuses (patroni?) are supposed to be representitive of > personality. Just what sort of personality is a phoenix > representative of? > > Is DD much, much older than 150? Is he resurrected, renewed, > reborn, revived, refurbished, renovated, restuffed and repolished > at intervals down the centuries? I've always felt that it's significant > that DD "worked on Alchemy" with old Nick according to the > Chocolate Frog card; a card which is not new - it's one of the > commonest around. He's obviously been associated with Flamel > for years. > > What are Alchemists always working on? The Stone. But Flamel > must have made the Stone centuries before DD was around (if he's > only 150). So why would Flamel need help with his Alchemy? He's > already done the difficult bit. > > Is DD a ringer? Is DD telling the *whole* truth? > Could it be that he's 150 in *this* incarnation? > > So, possibilities:- > 1. DD is Flamel. > 2. DD is using Flamels Stone to keep going through the centuries. > In which case DD could be a Merlin figure - roused from sleep when > great danger threatens. > 3. DD is the enemy of whatever it is (Salazar?) that's animating or > motivating Voldy. And they've fought before - often. The Potterverse > is just the latest battleground in a war that goes waaaaay back, perhaps > to the founding of Hogwarts or even further. > > Kneasy Good point on the stone and the alchemy work with Flamel - I never noticed that. However, on your theory, I would point out 2 things that need further explanation...If he is indeed reincarnated, where did Aberforth come from? Is he also reincarnated? Also, if he is "roused from sleep" at the time of trouble, how would you explain him being tested on his NEWTs by Professor Tofty (or was it Marchbanks)? Unless there is another more important Order than the Order of the Phoenix that sticks around eternally and DD, Tofty and DD's brother are part of that order, I'm not sure how to explain those things away. Knowing you, you'll have an excellent explanation though! Kristen From jeterluver2 at aol.com Tue Aug 17 01:55:26 2004 From: jeterluver2 at aol.com (Marissa) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 01:55:26 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110300 Del wrote: > When asked : > "Has Voldemort or Tom Riddle ever cared for or loved anyone?" > > JKR answered : > "Now, that's a cracking question to end with?very good. No, never. > [Laughter.] If he had, he couldn't possibly be what he is. You will > find out a lot more about that. It is a good question, because it > leads us rather neatly to Half Blood Prince, " > > That answer mildly shocked me : how can someone have *never* > loved ?! > I find that hard to imagine, especially since JKR said some time > ago that in her books nobody was ever born evil. So Tom was born > normal, but he never cared for anyone ? Weird. Maybe never being loved, led him to never loving anyone. He could've been born normally, and under other circumstances such as having a loving family he would've been a different person. That would mean it wasn't his birth that made him evil but the circumstances of his life. Yes, Harry learned to love but Harry and Voldemort are complete opposites. Voldemort went one way to not love anyone, and Harry cares about people much easier. "Marissa" From tinainfay at msn.com Tue Aug 17 02:02:09 2004 From: tinainfay at msn.com (mrs_sonofgib) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 02:02:09 -0000 Subject: Behind the Door In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110301 Sarita wrote: > I can't help but feel it is GG that is being described. I have > thought all along the GG is the HBP. Perhaps she is describing > him in some sort of flashback (like Riddle's Diary). My first thought was also GG but then I noticed the bit about spectacles and wondered how long have spectacles been around? I found this online: "The first mention of actual glasses is found in a 1289 manuscript when a member of the Popozo family wrote: "I am so debilitated by age that without the glasses known as spectacles, I would no longer be able to read or write." In 1306, a monk of Pisa mentioned in a sermon: "It is not yet 20 years since the art of making spectacles, one of the most useful arts on earth, was discovered." But nobody mentioned the inventor... except those who claimed to have invented it, putting the time to around 1285 (although some sources claim the date to be 1269)." (www.didyouknow.cd/spectacles.htm) So unless this is a case of time turning (let's hope not), I'm not quite sure. The Founders were 1000 years ago from 1992 (or thereabouts). Just thought I'd muddy the water, tina From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Tue Aug 17 02:43:56 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 02:43:56 -0000 Subject: Why didn't Voldemort die? (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110302 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > Valky: > Oh you incorrugible Devils Advocate Josh! > Now I have to answer you! > The Magical Brethren statue blew up, yes, but my point was where in > canon does the Avada Kedavra blow stuff up _when it actually kills > someone_. Unless you're suggesting that Harry survived because > LV..... ? missed ? ;P :-) Of course he didn't miss... Harry's scar shows us where it landed... but who knows what the effect is of an AK _failing_. Irresistable force against an immovable object... yeah. However, keep in mind that LV's wand _was_ retreived. I can explain everything else, including the knowledge of LV's (partial) demise by fading of Dark Marks, but Wormie got that wand somehow. Josh From misty_december at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 02:12:27 2004 From: misty_december at yahoo.com (Misty) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 02:12:27 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110303 Del wrote: > When asked : > "Has Voldemort or Tom Riddle ever cared for or loved anyone?" > > JKR answered : > "Now, that's a cracking question to end with?very good. No, > never. [Laughter.] If he had, he couldn't possibly be what he is. > You will find out a lot more about that. It is a good question, > because it leads us rather neatly to Half Blood Prince, " > > That answer mildly shocked me : how can someone have *never* > loved ?! I know Tom was an orphan so obviously he had no family to > love, but he could still have loved other people : a friend, a > caretaker, a pet, or even an imaginary memory of his mom, anything. > Harry found people to love as soon as he entered the WW, no matter > how deprived of love he was during his childhood. But Tom never > loved anyone. I find that hard to imagine, especially since JKR > said some time ago that in her books nobody was ever born evil. So > Tom was born normal, but he never cared for anyone ? Weird. ********************************************************* Hi I am new here, as well as being new to the Harry Potter series. I only read the books a few weeks ago after being thoroughly frustrated by the movie, POA. I did not understand what was happening - even after my kids tried to explain it to me! However, now, after reading the books, I have become a HP fan. :-) I think the books are really great. I would like to respond to this comment because it is a thought that had occurred to me while reading the books - not only about Tom Riddle, but about Harry. Both grew up without love. Tom hated the orphanage he was in, so I doubt he received much affection there; and orphanages in the 1930's/1940's were sometimes abusive. I am not a psychologist, but I know that there are cases where certain children, not bonding at an early age, lose that ability, and as a result never really learn to love others. Sometimes, these kids can even become psychotic or have major personality disorders where they have no empathy toward others and even despise others. I wondered why Harry wasn't like that, but I think it might have to do with the personality type as it is not a universal thing. Anyway, that is my thought. I hope I followed all the rules of posting. I am not too experienced at this. C. From catlady at wicca.net Tue Aug 17 02:47:37 2004 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 02:47:37 -0000 Subject: yellow eyes // Muggleborn DE // Snake Immortality // Beloved TMR Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110304 Andromeda wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110253 : << Seems unlikely to be a basilisk in disguise. :) >> LOL. Magda wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110271 : << Saraquel wrote: <<< (JKR) says: 'Muggle-borns are not allowed to be DEs EXCEPT IN RARE CIRCUMSTANCES.' (my capitals) Hmmm, so who is the muggle-born DE??? >>> VOLDEMORT, of course! >> Do you mean that TMR's mother wasn't a witch, so he isn't a half-blood? Or she was a Muggle-born witch? How old Salazar would have rolled over in his grave (if he had one) to learn that his last descendents were Muggles! Naama wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110260 : << So, compared to the phoenix, the snake would symbolise immortality achieved through fake dying or cheating death >> It is very clever and relevant how you distinguish between snake immortality and phoenix immortality. There wasn't a clear distinction until you drew one. Snakes sometimes symbolise immortality by not dying, by instead getting young again after being old. Snakes other times symbolize re-incarnation, which involves just as much real dying as the phoenix does. << Voldemort's snake like features are closely related to his immortality >> I've always assumed that Voldemort's snake-like appearance (scaly, hairless, eyelidless, etc) resulted from one of his attempts (a successful or unsuccessful attempt) to magic himself immortal, possibly because that spell included snake vemon and/or sacrificed snakes because of the famous symbolism of snakes for immortality. (I've also always assumed that his snake-man body has no sexual organs and no sexual desire.) However, I've also always assumed that Parselmouth was something he was born with. How does that work? Only people born with Parselmouth can achieve fake immortality by magic? People who are born with Parselmouth really ARE inherently evil, as wizarding stereotypes assume, dispite all the talk about 'choices'? Brenda M wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110288 : << What about romantic interest? [Tom Marvolo Riddle was a very good-looking, exemporary, brilliant, Head Boy at Hogwarts. Didn't any girl show interest? I know I would have. >> Probably lots of girls were interested in him. He could have returned the interest by just using them without feeling any affection for them, without feeling anything for them but the usual scorn he felt for just about everyone. "Using" usually understood in this context as using them for his own physical pleasure, but I can think of much worse usages, as such if he took money from them, he tried out dangerous spells on them, he framed them for his own crimes ... I agree with those who wrote that anyone who *never* loved *anyone* was born with a serious mental illness. I suppose we'll find out how JKR views it. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 02:48:45 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 02:48:45 -0000 Subject: revelations from the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110305 entrop wrote: 1)Lily used Ancient Magic to protect Harry (I believe the scar on > > Harry's head is actually a protective rune, rather than a lightning bolt) > Josh noted: > JKR has specifically said that the shape of the scar is not what is > significant. Elsewhere, she remarked that she chose a lightening bolt because it is easily recognizable (i.e. to make Harry stand out in a crowd). > > Carol responds: IIRC she said (it may have been in the World Book Day chat) that the shape of the scar was not the *most* significant thing about it, not that the shape was wholly insignificant. So it's still possible that the lightning-like shape of the scar resembles eihwaz (or some other rune symbolizing defense or protection), but that this shape is less important than the scar's other properties, both those Lily did not intend (communication with Voldemort) and those she did intend (protection against AK and/or Voldemort in general). Carol, who agrees with entropy that the scar is an eihwaz rune resulting from the collision of Voldemort's AK with a protective charm that Lily placed on him and activated by her self-sacrifice From catlady at wicca.net Tue Aug 17 02:51:57 2004 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 02:51:57 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110306 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Misty" wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110303 : > Both grew up without love. Tom hated the orphanage he was in, so I > doubt he received much affection there; and orphanages in > the 1930's/1940's were sometimes abusive. I am not a psychologist, > but I know that there are cases where certain children, not bonding > at an early age, lose that ability, and as a result never really > learn to love others. Sometimes, these kids can even become > psychotic or have major personality disorders where they have no > empathy toward others and even despise others. I wondered why Harry > wasn't like that, but I think it might have to do with the > personality type as it is not a universal thing. Yes. My theory is I think Lily was able, with her magic, to put an image of herself in her baby's mind, that would be like an 'imaginary mum' (by analogy with 'imaginary friend') who would cuddle Harry and tell him that he's a good kid who doesn't deserve Dursley abuse and tell him about how decent people behave, thus being that one caring adult said to be necessary to even a 'resilient' child's survival of serious abuse... I kind of think Lily used her last magic to put this image in his head intentionally, instead of using her last magic in one last attempt to escape Voldemort. That is the heroic self-sacrifce that canon credits her, accepting her own death because it was more important to her to give this protection (from abusive Dursleys) of her love. I don't know why she would do that if she really believed that he would be dead seconds after she was, so I am left sympathetic to the theories that Harry survived AK because of some magic that had been done on him (presumably by Lily) or that he had been born with. When Harry resisted the Imperius Curse, the Curse's Moody-voice in his head told him to jump up on the desk, and "another voice had awoken in the back of his brain. Stupid to do, really, said the voice." I believe that that other voice is what's left of the image-Lily after all these years; she doesn't appear often, she appears as Harry's voice instead of her own, but she still is caring for Harry -- and still has free will. In addition, so far we've always seen Harry wondering and trying to find out about his father, and not about his mother. Some say that's a plot device because JKR is saving some big surprise about Lily, and some say it's normal because Harry is 11 to 14 so far, puberty and adolescence, and much more concerned about a male image to identify with. But *I* say that he doesn't search so much for Lily because, unknown to himself, he already has her with him. From juli17 at aol.com Tue Aug 17 02:53:32 2004 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 22:53:32 EDT Subject: GOF: Ron's a real twit (git) Message-ID: <8e.126b1fa4.2e52cd2c@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110307 JoS writes: > Sorry to bombard the list with canon quotes, but there seems to be a > persistant sort of amnesia that overcomes many readers who can't > understand why Ron is the one Harry would miss the most. It's > debatable as to whether Hermione has stood next to him through > *everything* but it's not debatable that Harry is always happiest in > Ron's presence. It's not because he's a boy, it's because he's the > one who really *gets* Harry, and he's the one who has provided > refuge from the Dursleys, whenever he possibly can. If you look at > things from Harry's POV, it makes perfect sense for him to value the > friend whose company he actually enjoys most. Julie sez: You make a good point about Harry being happy in Ron's presence. With Ron, Harry often has fun, something he's experienced in very short supply during his life. I don't know that I agree Ron is the one who *gets* Harry, because Hermoine often has her insights into Harry also. But I can see that Harry would value Ron as the one with whom he can just be a boy. Admittedly, with her strong sense of responsibility, Hermoine doesn't appreciate the importance of Harry being able to act like a typical boy ;-) JoS also writes: But who takes on Malfoy when he insults her (and ends up coughing slugs, for his trouble)? Who stands up to Snape when he insults her (and gets detention for doing it)?? Who notices that she's taking more classes than she can possibly have time for?? Who cares whether or not she's eating?? Who notices that her teeth have changed?? Who cares who her date to the Yule Ball is? Hermione is no fool.? She knows which boy actually pays attention to her well-being on a day to day basis. Julie sez: I agree in GoF it is Ron who acts out of sorts over her date, and shows signs of being romantically interested her. I do think Harry also pays attention to Hermoine's well-being, though it is sort of a rotating thing with Ron and Harry. They tend to take turns being insensitive, not unusual for teenage boys. JoS writes: Funnily enough, it's been my impression that Harry rarely takes time to notice Hermione's "feelings" at all.? I really can't recall him trying to alleviate her fears or sadness, either (the Easter egg example has more to do with setting Mrs. Weasley straight about himself, than Hermione).? Ron, on the other hand... ;-) Julie sez: Like I noted above, they seem to take turns. I just noticed as I reread GoF that the "attraction" between Ron and Hermoine seemed to suddenly pop up with the Yule Ball business. I never sensed any changing feelings between them. (Not that I've ever noticed any changing feelings between Hermoine and Harry either). Julie previously wrote: I don't have strong 'ship preferences for either R/H or H/H, but > I have yet to see any reason Hermoine should go for Ron. (Take Harry, > you fool, take Harry!). JoS responded: Why do you think that Harry is available for Hermione to "take"? Julie sez: I don't. It was just a figure of speech. At that moment in GoF I just felt Hermoine would be better off making a play for Harry, should she be interested, and should he be interested. This is from GoF, mind you, which is not Ron's best showing. I'm getting to my second read of OoTP soon, which I recall is not Harry's best, when it comes to attitude and sensitivity ;-) Also Meri writes: Well, if your best friend is someone with whom you can never ever argue with, then how many among us actually have a best friend in that definition? I mean, if you can't fight with them what are they good for? Besides, sometimes fighting and making up makes the friendship stronger. After their arguement, Harry and Ron are closer than ever, and Ron is most definately there for Harry in Order, when he needs it the most. And remember, it was both Ron and Harry who were being stupid about their arguement, Ron for letting his jealousy get away with him, and Harry for being to proud to admit how much he missed Ron. Julie sez: I certainly am not arguing that a best friend is someone you never fight with. Harry and Hermoine have had falling outs too. I just felt in GoF that Ron acted like a twit. OoTP is Harry's turn ;-) Meri also wrote: Actually, I think that Hermione's best friend would probably be Ginny. Who knows who Hermione's going to the Yule Ball with? Ginny. Who shares a tent with Hermy at the QWC? Ginny. And who does Ginny tell things that even her brothers don't know about her? Hermione. So, Harry and Ron are probably two of her best friends in the world, but I think that Ginny is being undervalued in the BF sense. Julie sez: I don't think she's being undervalued through GoF. Hermoine spends almost all of her free time with Ron and Harry, from PS/SS through GoF. While Ginny is her closest female friend in GoF, and may well be on her way to being Hermoine's best friend, she isn't there yet I don't think. (Though certainly there will be things girls will discuss with other girls, and boys with other boys, I don't think that this truth negates the ability for a boy and a girl to be best friends.) Meri also adds: Well, let's think. Ron's tall, good looking (in my imagination, anyway), has a good sense of humor, is fun to be around, is loyal, sweet (he gave her perfume for Christmas) and a good stand up guy in general. So, what's not to like? I mean, yes, he's a bit immature, but girls grow up faster than boys, after all. And why should Hermione judge Ron's worth as a boyfriend because of something his mother does? Not that I think that Mrs. Weasley wouldn't be a good mother in law (and she better be, with seven kids), but that seems like a silly reason to not have a relationship with a guy, because his mom doesn't like you. And remember, Mrs. Weasley does like Hermione, she was just clouded by the Daily Prophet smear campaign, and I'm not getting into another debate over Molly here. Julie sez: Er, where did I state any opinion on Mrs. Weasley, or imply that I thought she would/should be an impediment to a R/H relationship? My focus was on Ron's reaction. At that point, given Ron is attracted to Hermoine and cares for her, I was a bit annoyed that he didn't notice Hermoine's hurt feelings, or wasn't a bit annoyed with his mother over the tiny egg. Not to mention he's stuffing his enormous egg in his mouth without offering her any. It just didn't seem like something a guy who's looking to be a girl's boyfriend would do. But Ron is only fourteen, so he's got some maturing to do. Meri finished: Again, maybe this is just me, but I am a confirmed H/R shipper, for a couple reasons. First of all, that is just the dynamic that works in these types of stories. You get ther hero (Harry), the hero's best male friend (Ron) and the hero's best female friend who ends up with the sidekick (Hermy). Secondly, I just don't think that Harry and Hermione make a good match. There are times when she simply doesn't understand him, and I think that someone who has had more similar experiences (like loss of a parent (Luna) or a brush with LV (Ginny)) would be better suited for our boy hero. And then there's the fact that Harry looks at Hermy as his friend, and just his friend. That could change, but I don't see it happening. This isn't Dawson's Creek, and JKR has better things to write about than love triangles (Harry trying to steal Hermione from Ron is a sublot that I can live without). Julie sez: I agree, no love triangles! Any romantic relationships should be sidelines to the main story. These are teenagers after all, and it's hardly likely they're picking out their life mates at the moment. I can actually see reasons for R/H or H/H, as well as H/G and others. But then, it's not only two people who make a relationship, it's often the circumstances. And until we see how the story concludes, and how each person is affected by the events leading to that end, I don't know that we can accurately predict who might discover signifcantly altered feelings for whom. Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From marmys at bellsouth.net Tue Aug 17 01:59:49 2004 From: marmys at bellsouth.net (Marleen) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 21:59:49 -0400 Subject: LV never loved anyone References: Message-ID: <000e01c483fd$e27d6610$0100a8c0@marmyscomputer> No: HPFGUIDX 110308 Del wrote: >> That answer mildly shocked me : how can someone have *never* loved ?! I know Tom was an orphan so obviously he had no family to love, but he could still have loved other people . But Tom never loved anyone. I find that hard to imagine, especially since JKR said some time ago that in her books nobody was ever born evil. So Tom was born normal, but he never cared for anyone ? Weird. << There is a difference between "caring" for someone and truly loving them. To truly love, you have to want to sacrifice of your self for that person. Their happiness is more important than your own happiness. I think Voldemort only "loves" himself. How else could he kill, or have others kill, so easily. I think that is the power that Harry has that Voldemort doesn't grasp. "Marleen" From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 03:09:55 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 03:09:55 -0000 Subject: Orphan TMR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110309 Josh wrote: > Regarding TMR/LV's discovery of his Slytherin ancestory... one would > assume that he, having been told his mother's maiden name by the > orphanage at somepoint, managed to research the answer? Why would he > do so? He would have discovered that he was a parselmouth at > somepoint... that raises interesting questions, of course, and he > seeks the source. He was a bright kid, don't forget. Carol adds: Also the orphanage had told him that his middle name, Marvolo, was that of his maternal grandfather. If Marvolo was the grandfather's first name, Tom could combine that name with his mother's maiden name and see if his grandfather was in any of the books on famous twentieth- (or nineteenth-) century wizards. He could also, as I've suggested previously, have asked the head of Slytherin House about his family history. He may have learned that way that Grandfather Marvolo was a descendant of Salazar Slytherin. Once he knew that, and put it together with his own unusual gift of Parseltongue, I wouldn't be surprised if he used his charm and intellect to talk his head of house into allowing him to use the restricted portion of the library. From there he could have found everything he needed to know to discover the Chamber of Secrets. Carol From marmys at bellsouth.net Tue Aug 17 02:03:38 2004 From: marmys at bellsouth.net (Marleen) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 22:03:38 -0400 Subject: Harry safe at Privet Drive (Vernon as 3rd DE) (was Re: Lupin at Privet Drive) References: Message-ID: <001301c483fe$69638c40$0100a8c0@marmyscomputer> No: HPFGUIDX 110310 Linda wrote: > It seems IMO that no one can harm Harry at number four, not just > Voldemort. mhbobbin: > I do think Privet Drive protects Harry from anyone. I think Harry protects Harry. I think it is a simple as that. It might also be the reason Voldemort's spell bounced off Harry. "Marleen" From marmys at bellsouth.net Tue Aug 17 02:36:11 2004 From: marmys at bellsouth.net (cybermarmy) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 02:36:11 -0000 Subject: McLagan In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110311 Bill wrote: > JKR probably just chose this name because she liked the sound of > it but... just for some added interest since names sometimes are > important in Harry Potter. > > McLagan.... > > Mc/Mac are Gaelic prefixes to surnames equivalent to "son" in > English and other Germanic languages (i.e. Johnson = "Son of John -- > MacDonald = "Son of Donald") > > Lagan comes from an old Scottish word meaning "Hollow." I'm not > sure if hollow here means a valley or something empty inside. JKR has shown us before that the meaning of names is very significant to understanding a character. Like the meaning of Voldemort (flight from death) etc. McLagan is not a very common name (I think) like Evans turned out to be. i.e. Mark Evans. The information you found out is very interesting. The "Hollow" part can't just be a coincidence (Godric's Hollow). JKR doesn't do things that way. She's always giving us hint of some kind. Maybe, just maybe, this McLagan has something to do with the HBP. Just a hunch. "cybermarmy" From msturbo209 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 03:09:16 2004 From: msturbo209 at yahoo.com (stellablue571) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 03:09:16 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110312 Marissa wrote- > Maybe never being loved, led him to never loving anyone. He > could've been born normally, and under other circumstances > such as having a loving family he would've been a different > person. That would mean it wasn't his birth that made him > evil but the circumstances of his life. Yes, Harry learned to > love but Harry and Voldemort are complete opposites. Voldemort > went one way to not love anyone, and Harry cares about people > much easier. Stella says: I think Marissa is onto something here. In the similarities between the two histories(TR and HP) JKR provides us with a very clear picture of two boys who were orphaned and raised without love. They both get their chance at Hogwarts. One makes the CHOICE to be bitter and hateful about the whole thing, while the other chooses to try and find love and good in the world instead. He finds it, while the other grows more hateful, eventually turning into the embodiment of the hatred inside him. And in the end, we will presumably see the ultimate results of those choices that they have both had to make. Regards, Stella, who doesn't want anyone going soft on Voldy! From hexicon at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 03:51:41 2004 From: hexicon at yahoo.com (Kristen) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 03:51:41 -0000 Subject: Where was Remus was some sirius hinting... yay puns! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110313 Justine wrote: > > In conlusion, I like manslut!Sirius, Peter can sod off and is not > invited to the christening for some important reason apparently, and > I want to marry Remus, who is also not there for some important > reason. > Or, it could be pretty simple--"that time of the month" for Mr. Lupin. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Aug 17 03:57:21 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 03:57:21 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110314 Misty > I am not a psychologist, > > but I know that there are cases where certain children, not bonding at an early age, lose that ability, and as a result never really learn to love others. I wondered why Harry wasn't like that, but I think it might have to do with the personality type as it is not a universal thing. > Valky: I have heard of this phenomenon too. I was under an impression however that it more specifically applied to children who had no bonding experience in frailest infancy during the first year of their lives and ones who were openly or directly rejected by one or both of their blood parents. Clearly this does not apply to Harry. as he was in a loving home for 15 months prioir to his parents death. Of course LV's mother may also have provided a loving home for his first year of life and equally Harry's personality and strength of character surely plays a part. Therefore I am not saying I disagree, Its all good... :D From garybec101 at comcast.net Tue Aug 17 04:55:19 2004 From: garybec101 at comcast.net (garybec101 at comcast.net) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 04:55:19 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: LV never loved anyone Message-ID: <081720040455.8295.41218FB6000DEA63000020672200751150CECFCE0C0A0D979D0E09@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 110315 Becki just wants to add a couple of points; * * As far as HP and TR having "loveless" childhoods, I would have to dissagre. I am sure TR's was, but even though the Dursley's were not loving, he still had the fact that his parents died, they did not abanden him, which would lead him to assume that his parents were loving. You might want to say that TR's mom died too, but with his father abandening him, he might blame his mother for that too. * I size TR up like this. He has severe abandenment issues. He doesn't let himself love anyone because he is afraid they will leave him too. With the horrible circumstances (I am assuming the orphanage was not very loving or pleasant) in which he was force to grow up in. He feels that he is not worthy of being loved, therefore, he gets his affirmation from the fear he instows in everyone. * Becki, who is oh so frustrated that Jo is only half-way. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Aug 17 05:08:15 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 05:08:15 -0000 Subject: some sirius hinting... yay puns! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110316 >Josh wrote: > > JKR quote re-godmother: unfortunately. I have got to be careful what I say there, haven't I?" > Remus and Peter seem to be VERY relevant to this > answer... Sirius was the _only_ one, so where were the other two? Why does JKR have to be careful what she says??? She only says that when she's nearing a topic of the future plot/revelations. > > Josh Valky: Can't argue, (Though perhaps I would love to for the sake of it lol ;D ) Remus and Peter's whereabouts are a new 'mystery of the day'. We can't simplify this into ESE theories either, I am afraid, because we have to remember that James and Lily apparently had *no idea* who was the traitor friend. At which point it gets complicated to reiterate the whole story, so suffice to say that *they were all still on the same side at this point and probably still friends*. Now without assuming any canon against the above point, because the canon of Moodys photograph in particular, for me, conjures an image of J&L being vey fond of Peter around about the time of Harry's christening, it seems that we are as far as you can get from a fallout between Prongs and Wormie. So, at least, even if Remus was a suspect for treachery at this time, which I also doubt, Peter wasn't. So saying I rule out spy preposition as the cause for Sirius being the only one. Leaving a wide open space for speculation as to where they were at the time. There must be a catalyst soemwhere in canon for this circumstance. I would like to speculate what that is. Could it be the prophecy? The birth of the boys? or is it something to do with Godrics Hollow? or the secret keeping? or finally were they just pressed for time? From mayeaux45 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 03:46:58 2004 From: mayeaux45 at yahoo.com (mayeaux45) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 03:46:58 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Pairing hints in EBD transcript In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110317 "Marissa" wrote: > She keeps saying it's obvious and we should know who's going to be > the couple. Ron and Hermione are obviously jealous when the other > likes someone, and are fighting all the time like a married couple. > They like each other! I mean you never know what could happen later, > but Ron and Hermione are (well if they ever manage to admit it) > going to at least try a relationship. Mayeaux45: And that's exactly my point! At the very least I believe Ron and Hermione are going to acknowledge the fact that there is *something* going on between them. Whether it will go any further than an experimental kiss...Well, that remains to be seen. I don't know about anyone else but MY main focus has always been on a concrete coupling. The main question being 'Who will END up TOGETHER?' And my statement still remains WE DON'T KNOW! It could still go either way. I just want them all to be happy and more importantly ALIVE at the end of the series. But like JKR said "What's life without a little romance" (*in response to the question about Harry's upcoming 6th and 7th years at Hogwarts*) (hint, hint) ;)! From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Aug 17 05:17:19 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 05:17:19 -0000 Subject: McLagan In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110318 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cybermarmy" wrote: > Bill wrote: > > McLagan.... > > > > Mc/Mac are Gaelic prefixes to surnames equivalent to "son" in > > English and other Germanic languages > > > > Lagan comes from an old Scottish word meaning "Hollow." > > cybermarmy: > The "Hollow" part can't just be a coincidence (Godric's Hollow). > She's always giving us hint of some kind. Maybe, just > maybe, this McLagan has something to do with the HBP. Just a hunch. > Valky: I think more than a hunch cybermarmy! Riotously, here is me doubting all morning the threads about the lionlike man being McClaggan, I will presently begin eating my hat......... Why is JkR being so generous though I need to wonder. Godrics kin spelled out in so many letters for us, it just smacks of something we are given too easily. From mayeaux45 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 04:44:26 2004 From: mayeaux45 at yahoo.com (mayeaux45) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 04:44:26 -0000 Subject: GOF: Ron's a real twit (git) In-Reply-To: <8e.126b1fa4.2e52cd2c@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110319 > Meri: > JKR has better things to write about than love triangles (Harry > trying to steal Hermione from Ron is a sublot that I can live > without). Mayeaux45: Assuming Hermione is someone to be stolen in the first place... Ron doesn't *have* her yet and neither does Harry for that matter. Hermione's a big girl. She's been through a lot more than an average 15 yr old girl. I'm sure she can make up her own mind. Don't you think? Besides, romance won't be that big of a factor in the HP series, but it will be a minor sub-plot. JKR has already stated in her response to a question about Harry and his love life "what's life without a little romance" ;)! > Julie: > I agree, no love triangles! Any romantic relationships should be > sidelines to the main story. These are teenagers after all, and > it's hardly likely they're picking out their life mates at the > moment. I can actually see reasons for R/H or H/H, as well as H/G > and others. But then, it's not only two people who make a relationship, > it's often the circumstances. And until we see how the story > concludes, and how each person is affected by the events leading > to that end, I don't know that we can accurately predict who might > discover signifcantly altered feelings for whom. Mayeaux45: I agree Julie. That pretty much sums up my feelings on the matter at this particular time. From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 05:01:37 2004 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 05:01:37 -0000 Subject: Why he is still alive? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110320 Melody wrote: > So I was thinking about why Dumbledore has not killed Voldie yet. > I mean he *can* do it. But why not kill him. I am wondering if > it is not that he can't kill him, but that he does not want to yet. > I think Dumbledore has not killed Voldie because it would accomplish > nothing really...yet. Much like Dumbledore had to have the Minister > of Magic physically see Voldemort and be forced to admit he exists > in OoP, Dumbledore realizes that if the WW does not recognize that > Voldemort is back as a bigger, badder, and more pissed off Voldie, > then just killing him accomplishes *nothing*. snip the end of the post that got me thinking... At the very least, DD does not KNOW the full meaning and implications of the prophecy..Harry asked the same questions we asked first. ("It might not be me...") And DD assures Harry that "he is the one with the POWER to Vanquish the dark lord" ... But DD gives no assurances as to who the "other" may or may not be and Harry is in no emotional condition to ask...Harry may be the other..but DD is not sure, hence this is WHY he did not kill Voldemort in the MOM! If you assume DD may have narrowed his prospects as to who the "other" may be...welll... perhaps it is Snape, and DD knowing Harry's greatest power (love/compassion) thinks that Occlumency may be well worth the harm (both of them getting glimpses of not so pleasant moments in each other's lives)...or it may be Wormtail (whom I do not believe DD thought of for a moment until he owed a life debt to Harry).. I think that DD has made the decisions he had because like Voldemort only UNDERSTANDS some of the prophecy---DD is only sure of SOME of the prophecy. Although I may like to think that Wormtail's life-debt will save Harry...If the prophecy speaks of three..thus far in the books I'd have to say that Snape would be the "other" referred to... Neither Snape nor Voldemort have ever experienced "love" according to JK (or probably any sort of compassion for that matter). I've never seen it hinted to yet that the power Harry has that Voldemort doesn't involves magic as taught in the classrooms at Hogwarts. (This is Snape's hang up IMHO). If the prophecy MAY refer to three (which if we have thought of it....DD did as well)...then perhaps this is why DD is thus far trusting Snape....also...it may be why asked/requested of Hermione to change the time line. Also given DD's response to Trelawney's "second prophecy" (must go back and look more closely), perhaps Peter's "escape" from Harry and others in POA/GOF gave DD more leeway in 1. another instance where Snape must depend on DD for any sort of credibility in the WW (note how so many of us think Snape was there in the DE circle that fateful night); and also 2. DD, to check his hypothesis, had Snape teach Harry Occlumency. Probably to remind him that Harry was not his father, and Harry was why he is not LV's DADA instructor... Oh and another remembered reason #3. Was this why DD allowed Ron a RAT as a pet in the first book (or for that matter allowed Percy a rat too)?!?? Could it be that Voldemort is still alive only because DD heard a prophecy that made DD hold back to ponder? What if Harry has the power already...if it's love/compassion he's had it all along...and within the WW he's had it for quite some time now..Will the understanding of a "life debt" become more complex and knowledgeable as Harry grows older, but it must be more than this according to Snape...Also if Snape may be the other: 1. He wouldn't want Voldemort to know. 2. He may be the "other" OR there may be a Snape prophecy "out there"...He may or may not realize this...my guess is that Snape may well have been the one in the Hog's Head the day Trelawney made her prophecy.. If Snape was "there" then perhaps he told VD what he heard..but could not tell anything else. (This makes a great deal of sense for DD to hire him...Snape doesn't need MOM protection, but the type of protection DD can give him.) Let's face it, Snape is a smart cookie or he wouldn't be potions teacher, he was a DE for more than a couple of days or weeks... However, smart or not...why does DD trust him? Why does DD assign Snape to teach Harry Occlumency when DD already knows it is simply not through Legilimency or Occlumency that Voldemort gets most of his information from... What if Snape was given these lessons for a last ditch effort to teach SNAPE something about dignity, compassion, love, friendship etc. etc....We know the lessons did nothing for Harry except open his mind even more...(and probably little for the reader other than sympathizing even more for Harry--he has enough sympathy from us...I certainly hope book six informs us more of "other than Harry's or other folk's intentions). doddie (who once hope to believe that HAND of the OTHER might mean Wormtail) From jonkc at att.net Tue Aug 17 05:11:34 2004 From: jonkc at att.net (johnkclark) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 05:11:34 -0000 Subject: Godric's Sword and Voldemort's Defeat In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110321 > Terpnurse said: > Harry will use (ugh!) Love to vanquish Voldemort. I agree that if this powerful thing that Harry has and Voldemort does not turned out to be noting but love it would be a bit insipid. Now love certainly has something to do with it but there must be more, courage and skill and sacrifice and "old magic" and something else that's hard to put a finger on; I guess you could say the room contains The Right Stuff (if Harry were a Muggle he'd be a test pilot). So why is the room locked? I don't think the wizards locked it and are in fact trying to unlock it but without success. I think in book 7 Harry will find a way to unlock it, something even Dumbledore couldn't do. He knows that opening the door is the only way to destroy Voldemort but Harry also knows that if he does so he will die too; remember that powerful "old magic" involves sacrifice. I predict that in the last chapter of book 7 entitled "The Man Who Died" he opens that door and Harry Potter is no more. "johnkclark" From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Aug 17 07:03:11 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 07:03:11 -0000 Subject: McLagan In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110322 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cybermarmy" > wrote: > > Bill wrote: > > > McLagan.... > > > > > > Mc/Mac are Gaelic prefixes to surnames equivalent to "son" in > > > English and other Germanic languages > > > > > Lagan comes from an old Scottish word meaning "Hollow." > > > > > cybermarmy: > > The "Hollow" part can't just be a coincidence (Godric's Hollow). > > She's always giving us hint of some kind. Maybe, just > > maybe, this McLagan has something to do with the HBP. Just a hunch. > > > > Valky: > I think more than a hunch cybermarmy! Riotously, here is me doubting > all morning the threads about the lionlike man being McClaggan, I > will presently begin eating my hat......... > > Why is JkR being so generous though I need to wonder. Godrics kin > spelled out in so many letters for us, it just smacks of something > we are given too easily. Valky bemusedly removing hat from mouth: Its not over yet. I sought the information that Bill is offering, personally, and came up with a different set of results. Probably because I researched the meaning of Claggan as opposed to Lagan a small discrepancy that has made much difference. Claggan, I have found in two sources, neither of which I am certain are entirely reliable, but nevertheless each claim to have some knowledge of the gaelic and scot meanings of the name. The first of the two claims that Claggan is a gaelic word for Bell. Dead ringer? Doppleganger anyone? (Jk is not an Aussie so its not the head of the shearing shed...) and BTW my sister thinks that the gracefully loping yet limping mystery fellow is a dead ringer for Crookshanks. The second source claims entirely to the contrary that Claggan has its origins in the word for skull and in place names is telling of a round hill. This one puts a new spin on Mr McClaggan, didn't LV's muggle relatives live on a round hill in Little Hangleton... Perhaps McClaggan is *not* one of the good guys. Mores the point, who here is particularly fluent in the old scot/gaelic tongue and can confirm or deny either of the meanings for me. From saraandra at saraandra.plus.com Tue Aug 17 07:42:47 2004 From: saraandra at saraandra.plus.com (amanitamuscaria1) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 07:42:47 -0000 Subject: LV, Harry, DD and the Power behind the door Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110323 Hi - I've had a brief look through all the posts since the Edinburgh addition of knowledge, but noone seems to have brought these threads together. Apologies in advance if I've missed it. LV never has loved anyone. He has gone through multiple transformations to become what he is, and is looking for immortality. DD didn't try to kill LV in the MM. Harry has large quantities of the power behind the locked door, power of which LV has none. The power seems to be love, or something similar. What if some of the transfigurations LV went through caused him to give up his heart? So he now has no way of loving anyone. The possession of Harry by LV causes Harry to think of joining Sirius, driving LV out - love, the emotion he can't experience. As for DD not killing LV, I waver between several theories. One, he can't be completely killed, because he has no heart; two, killing him would make him into a ghost or worse, a poltergeist like Peeves - yikes!; three, LV and Harry are linked, so someone else killing LV would cause Harry harm, allowing LV to possess Harry totally. I'm rather inclining to a combination of theories one and three. Cheers. AmanitaMuscaria From lavaluvn at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 07:46:48 2004 From: lavaluvn at yahoo.com (lavaluvn) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 07:46:48 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110324 > Misty > > I am not a psychologist, > > > but I know that there are cases where certain children, not > bonding at an early age, lose that ability, and as a result never > really learn to love others. > I wondered why Harry wasn't like that, but I think it might have to > do with the personality type as it is not a universal thing. > > > > Valky: > I have heard of this phenomenon too. I was under an impression > however that it more specifically applied to children who had no > bonding experience in frailest infancy during the first year of > their lives and ones who were openly or directly rejected by one or > both of their blood parents. Clearly this does not apply to Harry. > as he was in a loving home for 15 months prioir to his parents > death. Of course LV's mother may also have provided a loving home > for his first year of life and equally Harry's personality and > strength of character surely plays a part. > > Therefore I am not saying I disagree, Its all good... :D Now Andromeda: I think it is actually a pretty common phenomenon, to some extent, for young children (not just infants) in orphanages. I was just recently reading an article geared at people who have or want to adopt children from other countries, and one of the points was that many children from orphanages have a difficult time learning to love and bond, even when adopted by loving and supportive parents. They certainly can and do, but it takes much effort and patience. LV's mother lived "just long enough to name him" (right?) and then it was presumably off to the orphanage as an infant. The article said that even modern orphanages, clean and decent-looking places, cannot escape the fact that children are being raised by those who don't love them. Riddle's orphanage was undoubtedly not a very nice place. Unlike Riddle, Harry had 15 months of parental love before being taken away. Having a 14-month-old myself, I like to think that all the love poured in that short time will make a difference in her life! I don't necessarily agree with the idea that Lily directly somehow put some of herself into Harry (ie, the little voice), but I think her love for her baby may have helped shape him even after she was gone. BUt I do agree that ultimately, choice is the underlying reason for the difference between LV and HP. They were both raised in siuations where they were unloved, but Harry chose to give love a try and LV decided it was a weakness. After all, most people who grow up in orphanages don't end up being evil overlords, even if they may have some trouble with relationships. From hpfgu_elves at yahoo.co.uk Tue Aug 17 08:12:06 2004 From: hpfgu_elves at yahoo.co.uk (hpfgu_elves) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 08:12:06 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Behind the Door Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110325 Greetings from Hexquarters! Those of you who have solved JKR's latest puzzles are now in possession of New Canon. As it is likely that this information will enter the public domain in the near future, we are not going to ask for spoiler prefixes or space (although we appreciate very much that many of you are employing these) but we do ask, 1) that subject lines don't give away specific information to those who still wish to solve the puzzles for themselves. 2) that readers who do not know the hidden content and do not wish to have it revealed to them exercise caution. We repeat that the place to discuss features of JKR's website itself (as opposed to any canon in might contain) is OTChatter, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter As we have done in the past we will delete any messages requesting or giving help with navigation. These will be returned so that they may be reposted to OTC. Many thanks, The List Elves From phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk Tue Aug 17 06:51:46 2004 From: phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk (Kate Harding) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 07:51:46 +0100 Subject: some sirius hinting... yay puns! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040817074655.01ceb930@pop3.demon.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 110326 Josh: >> Actually, Justine... Remus and Peter seem to be VERY relevant to this answer... Sirius was the _only_ one, so where were the other two? Why does JKR have to be careful what she says??? She only says that when she's nearing a topic of the future plot/revelations. << When I read the transcript, I interpreted 'have to be careful what I say there, haven't I?' as being to do with Sirius' death. At the start of the interview she asks if there's anyone who hasn't finish OotP, and since there is she says that any spoiler questions must be left till later. Halfway through, someome starts to ask about Sirius' death and she cuts them off. So here, talking about Sirius, I think she's just commenting to those who've finished the book that she can't discuss Sirius completely openly for fear of giving away his death. The 'haven't I?' reinforces this for me - she's 'conspiring' with those who don't need spoilers to protect those who do. Which is not to say that the question of Sirius' marriage isn't a significant point. I just don't think we can infer that it's a crucial point. psyche From phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk Tue Aug 17 07:02:50 2004 From: phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk (Kate Harding) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 08:02:50 +0100 Subject: Questions! Questions! Questions! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040817075530.01cc1008@pop3.demon.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 110327 djrfdh: >> I suspect he couldn't kill Voltemort without also killing Harry, for I rather think they are one in the same person...in fact, I think, in the end, we will find that this is the story of a very demented child; one who has suffered untold abuse and has found solice in becoming numerous personalities in order to preserve what little sanity he has left! << While I can't agree with the second half of this, I do think you're right about Voldemort and Harry being in some sense the same person. Personally I think that in some way there is only enough life between them for one person. I don't know how the metaphysics would work, but this would explain why DD couldn't kill Voldemort - if one of them died the other would still only be half alive. It also makes sense to me in terms of the prophecy. It said 'Either must die at the hands of the other, for neither can live while the other survives'. So why can neither live? Perhaps it's meant literally - that while both survive, both are only half alive. And I think the use of 'Either' is very significant - why not say 'one must die at the hands of the other'? We've seen that some of Voldemort passed into Harry (parseltongue, memories), so it seems plausible that some of Harry passed into Voldemort. Perhaps this exchange was lifeforce, for want of a better word. psyche From phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk Tue Aug 17 07:45:02 2004 From: phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk (Kate Harding) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 08:45:02 +0100 Subject: Both Snape & Fudge are DEs: 3rd 'Missing' DE Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040817084435.01cd2528@pop3.demon.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 110328 Brenda: >> 1. His Ridiculous Denial of Voldemort's Return -- If Fudge had any bit of common sense (which is debatable), he should soon realize that Dumbledore would not lie about something as serious as this. << psyche/Kate: I agree this looks bad. But I think it can be explained as easily in other ways. Fudge strikes me as a man with very little strength of character. The idea of Voldemort returned at a time when he, as MfM, had ultimate responsibility for dealing with him might simply too terrifying for him to face. People do deny even the most obvious things out of fear - so many refused, and still refuse, to believe the holocaust, for example. Brenda: >> The Ministry also sends a couple of Dementors to 4 Privet Drive in OoP ? nead I say more? << psyche/Kate: This, we are later told, was Umbridge. But I agree - Fudge seems more keen on the dementors than we would like. But I still think this is just because he's so used to hiding behind others. He doesn't much care what methods they use as long as he can lean on their power. Brenda: >> Well let me remind you again of the possible Time-Turning event here. << psyche/Kate I agree this is possible, but it doesn't ring true for me. If Snape uses a timeturner, you might expect it to occur to him as an explanation for Sirius' escape. It also just seems too much of a leap to ring true - if that were the case, I would have thought Jo would leave some clue. Like Agatha Christie, 'there is no hiding of the vital facts' with Jo. Everything is pointed to, however subtly. Brenda: >> It is a general knowledge amongst the Death Eaters that Karkaroff was their traitor. So everyone blames Karkaroff as the cowardly traitor. << psyche/Kate: They blame him as *a* cowardly traitor. That doesn't mean they don't feel the same way about Snape. Brenda: >> Death Eaters do not have reasons to suspect Snape: Malfoy speaks most highly of him. (OoP) << psyche/Kate: Hmm. But by OotP, Snape has already returned to the Death Eater fold. However, I think you really have a point with those last two, and I'm reconsidering. Perhaps the Death Eaters *didn't* have Snape pegged as a traitor at any point. As you say, surely he would have been subjected to greater scrutiny if they had. But, what Voldemort said was that he had 'left his service for ever'. He didn't say 'one who is a horrible traitor'. So he could conceivably suspect that Snape had left him, without believing that Snape had actively betrayed him. Thinking about it, this seems more likely to me. So, you've convinced me that they didn't know Snape betrayed them. But I still think he was the one Voldemort was talking about. psyche/Kate ---------- From tonks_op at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 07:51:32 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 07:51:32 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110329 > Misty: > > I am not a psychologist, but I know that there are cases where > > certain children, not bonding at an early age, lose that ability, > > and as a result never really learn to love others. I wondered why > > Harry wasn't like that, but I think it might have to do with the > > personality type as it is not a universal thing. > Valky: > I have heard of this phenomenon too. I was under an impression > however that it more specifically applied to children who had no > bonding experience in frailest infancy during the first year of > their lives and ones who were openly or directly rejected by one > or both of their blood parents. Clearly this does not apply to > Harry, as he was in a loving home for 15 months prioir to his > parents' death. Hello: I am a mental health professional, and would like to address the issue of the childhood of both Harry and Voldemort. If a child like Voldemort is left in an orphanage at a very early age and he only gets food and clothing, but very little contact with another caring human being he will not have the ability to bond with others. There is a certain time when it has to happen. If he is placed in a loving home after a couple of years in a totally unloving and uncaring environment, he will never be able to bond with anyone no matter how loving his new parents may be. He will not have the capacity for empathy. It is our ability to bond that enables us to have empathy and our ability to have empathy that enables us to have compassion and mercy on others. The people capable of the most heinous crimes are often people like Voldemort. When they are still children they are given the diagnosis of Conduct Disorder. If they do not change their behavior by the time they are 18 the diagnosis is changed to Antisocial Personality Disorder. It used to be called Sociopath or Psychopath. As to Harry. He had a loving mother for the most important time of his life. Even if placed in a unloving home, he would have some emotional problems perhaps, but he would be able to bond and care for others. But there is a question that I too ask myself about Harry. How is it that he is so good? Now the Dursleys were not all that bad. He could have fared much worse. They must have done something right. But certainly the first year or so of his life made a big difference in how he would turn out later. That is why we have something called "infant mental health" now. Sounds weird, but it is very important to teach parents how to care for their children very early in life. Now to the question. Given the circumstances of his childhood is Voldemort responsible for his actions? Yes. Even if he feels no love or compassion for others he knows the difference between right and wrong and in that way is responsible. But to some extent so are we as a society. So is the family of his mother who did not take him in We are all in some way responsible for the evil in the world, even if we do not do it directly. "tonks_op" From tonks_op at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 08:12:51 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 08:12:51 -0000 Subject: LV, Harry, DD and the Power behind the door In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110330 AmanitaMuscaria wrote: > DD didn't try to kill LV in the MM. Harry has large quantities of > the power behind the locked door, power of which LV has none. The > power seems to be love, or something similar. As for DD not > killing LV, I waver between several theories. One, he can't be > completely killed, because he has no heart; two, killing him would > make him into a ghost or worse, a poltergeist like Peeves - yikes!; > three, LV and Harry are linked, so someone else killing LV would > cause Harry harm, allowing LV to possess Harry totally. Dumbledore does not kill Voldemort because of the prophecy. It is not his place to do that. That is for Harry. And Harry will die in the end. Because he will love others enough to be a sacrifice, just as his mother was. The power behind the door is Love. Sacrifical Love. "tonks_op" From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 17 08:56:01 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 04:56:01 -0400 Subject: Secret Text Behind the Door - SPOILERS Message-ID: <001c01c48438$061f0df0$a2c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 110331 Lisa "My thoughts: I agree with those who speculate Lupin. It absolutely leapt out at me.... which typically means it's entirely incorrect ;o) Per Lexicon, he also happens to be a half blood. It's got me wondering...." DuffyPoo: Lupin's hair was described, in PoA, as being sandy-brown with flecks of grey. This new person's hair is described as 'tawny'. I have a feeling this is someone we haven't met yet or there would be no need for such a detailed description. lavaluvn said: > Tawny hair (goldenish, right?) Josh "light brown (i looked it up)" DuffyPoo: And my dictionary says tawny is brownish orange. ;-) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From naama_gat at hotmail.com Tue Aug 17 09:09:23 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 09:09:23 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's Snake Immortality In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110332 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: > Naama wrote in > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110260 : > > << So, compared to the phoenix, the snake would symbolise immortality achieved through fake dying or cheating death >> > > It is very clever and relevant how you distinguish between snake > immortality and phoenix immortality. Thanks. >There wasn't a clear distinction until you drew one. Snakes >sometimes symbolise immortality by not > dying, by instead getting young again after being old. Snakes other > times symbolize re-incarnation, which involves just as much real >dying as the phoenix does. Yes. Well, in HP the phoenix and the snake are clearly two warring principles, so I went with the "cheating" death vs. real death here. (Just to make the "warring principles" more clear: Dumbledore who is the epitome of good (according to JKR!) has a phoenix for a pet. Also, as we now know, his patronus is a phoenix. Voldemort, who is pure evil, has a snake for a pet and also has many snaky features. Then there is the Order of Phoenix - the most dedicated fighters for good, with the snake (and skull) marking the Death Eaters. So - phoenix is DD, is good, is light, and snake is Voldemort, is evil, is dark.) > > > However, I've also always assumed that Parselmouth was something he > was born with. How does that work? Only people born with Parselmouth > can achieve fake immortality by magic? People who are born with > Parselmouth really ARE inherently evil, as wizarding stereotypes > assume, dispite all the talk about 'choices'? > It's a question I've thought about. It would be very unlike the main moral thrust of the books, so I'd say that no, being born a Parselmouth doesn't make you evil (or mark you as evil). BUT, and this is just a suggestion - what if being a Parselmouth (and/or, having a snake as your patronus/animagus animal) enables you to perform certain immortality-causing spells on yourself, that would otherwise not be available? I've started out by thinking, like you, that Voldemort's snakiness came from some spell where he used snake venom or such. But I'm coming around to thinking that it has to be deeper than that. We know that he has a deep connection to snakes - he is a Parselmouth and I assume that Tom Riddle's patronus/animagus form is snake. What if one of the "steps" that he took was some kind of partial merging or melding with his animagus form? Didn't Lupin say that animagus spells can go horribly wrong? That might mean (again, speculating here) that wizards may lose their humanity via the transformation. What if Voldemort, an extremely powerful wizard, did precisely that, but in a controled way, so that he replaced some human aspects with snake aspects, while keeping some human aspects intact (mainly his mind, intellect)? Harry felt Voldemort as a snake emotionally (wanting to bite) - maybe one of the human aspects that were replaced by snaky ones is the emotional aspect? Naama, delighted at the chance to discuss this From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Tue Aug 17 10:16:30 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 10:16:30 -0000 Subject: McLagan In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110334 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > Valky bemusedly removing hat from mouth: > Its not over yet. I sought the information that Bill is offering, > personally, and came up with a different set of results. > Probably because I researched the meaning of Claggan as opposed to > Lagan a small discrepancy that has made much difference. I'm not going to be putting much stock in surname meanings for this guy... JKR kinda hinted that it just sounded cool or something... "found the other day...too good...to waste" and some such. Sounds like this is going to be a name that just pops up somewhere that needed a name, and wasn't someone centric to the plot whose name she'd have known for a while. Josh (ever ruining Valky's day) From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Tue Aug 17 10:22:01 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 10:22:01 -0000 Subject: SPOILER Numbers behind the door [Re: McLagan] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110335 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > Valky: > Why is JkR being so generous though I need to wonder. Godrics kin > spelled out in so many letters for us, it just smacks of something > we are given too easily. This is spoiler space so people can ...figure out the puzzles for themselves.. since I'm reposting due to the message from Hexquarters (hope this is good enough to not get deleted!) ...so leave this space if you reply That wasn't the easiest 'puzzle' to get to the thing... 7 1 3 would be Harry's birthday in European format (31/7), backwards. What is 302723 about? I've already looked at phonepad stuff, but the 0 throws that off. The 0 also throws off the 32723 whatucallit same in both directions thing. And it's not an a=1, b=2, etc. thing. March 2 or 27 in '72 or '20? at 3 am? Not early enough for TMR, but closer for Hagrid. Josh (yes, very evil of me!) From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 10:36:04 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 10:36:04 -0000 Subject: Power vs Morality (was LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110336 "tonks_op" wrote: > Now to the question. Given the circumstances of his childhood is > Voldemort responsible for his actions? Yes. Even if he feels no > love or compassion for others he knows the difference between right > and wrong and in that way is responsible. Del replies : Thanks for all the background info about infant psychology. I am of the opinion that having been loved or not is THE major difference between Harry and LV. Love might indeed be the power LV has never known, but not because of any choice of his. Now I have another question to ask the psychologist in you : what makes people choose to be/do good or evil ? I ask you that because I'm very confused as to whether Tom had any real incentive to become a good person. I'm not sure he ever truly realised that being good could be a goal in itself. I don't think he saw his choices as being between good and evil. We know what he based his decisions on : power, not morality. We know he could *pretend* to be a good person while at Hogwarts : everyone (except DD) was impressed by him, he was made Prefect and Head Boy, he received an award, and so on. He seemed to have put up a good pretence to be a good boy, when in fact he despised that role. But I find this quite scary, because it means that by the age of 11 he was already so damaged that he could not enjoy the rewards that being a good boy can bring you : attention, favours, honours and so on. He seemed to have been past that already. It seems he was already thinking that the only thing that matters is *power*. This is something that his life at the orphanage undoubtedly taught him, but it seems to have been ingrained so deeply into him that even the discovery of a whole new world where he was offered a new clean start was not enough to change his mindset. So I'm asking you again : what makes people choose between right and wrong ? What could have make Tom change his priority from searching power to acting nice ? You say he was probably unable to bond and experience love and caring, so *why* should he have believed that being and doing good was more important than being powerful ? Del, who thinks that LV is a typical example of what happens when raw power is not being channelled into good works by constant care and attention, whether it be in people or in nuclear power plants. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Aug 17 10:38:08 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 10:38:08 -0000 Subject: Is JkR about to reveal? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110337 In her Edinborough interview, Jkr says perhaps *too* much about Petunia. When she is asked is Petunia a Squib her answer is: 'That's a good guess.' On her faq, I don't think OT, the question she *has* to answer is 'remember my last, Petunia'. Two and two together can make, I see in spite of my recent rants about this is not the right question to vote for, JkR backed into the corner on Mrs Dursley. If Petunia is a witch, will Jo be soon revealing it? I see her making /no/ effort to hide it anymore in her interview. 'That's a good guess...' hence leaving not much option but to call her "WITCH!" seems to me like a shrug from JkR saying 'the game is up.. I will have to tell you the truth about that soon.' Anyone (Of course not Josh Warren lol) but, anyone else think so? Best to All Valky From pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 17 10:45:07 2004 From: pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net (pcaehill2) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 10:45:07 -0000 Subject: DOOM and infant bonding--long [was Re: LV never loved anyone] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110338 Misty wrote: > > > I am not a psychologist, but I know that there are > > > cases where certain children, not bonding at an early > > > age, lose that ability, and as a result never really > > > learn to love others. > > Valky added: > > I have heard of this phenomenon too. I was under an impression > > however that it more specifically applied to children who had no > > bonding experience in frailest infancy during the first year of > > their lives and ones who were openly or directly rejected by one > > or both of their blood parents. Clearly this does not apply to > > Harry, as he was in a loving home for 15 months prioir to his > > parents' death. > > "tonks_op" responded: [snip] > If a child like Voldemort is left in an orphanage at a very early > age and he only gets food and clothing, but very little contact > with another caring human being he will not have the ability to > bond with others. There is a certain time when it has to happen. > If he is placed in a loving home after a couple of years in a > totally unloving and uncaring environment, he will never be able > to bond with anyone no matter how loving his new parents may be. Pam now: I am a psychologist, and tonks wrote a great summary of research re: bonding and the development of empathy --but stated it with a note of finality, even doom which does not completely represent current thought in this field. It is indeed far more difficult to develop a nurturing, emotionally close bond with an infant/child who has been deprived of physical touch and love/compassion during the first year of life, but it is not impossible. The term "object constancy" (not cognitive, but emotional) applies to the internalization of the caring parent, which gives one emotional stability and the all- important ability to self-soothe (witness any kindergarten, the kids who, after an argument, can go into a corner and read a book to calm down, versus the kids who have to involve everyone around in the situation, frantically trying to find attention/validation from others, not themselves). Sorry for all the "psychobabble", but I really don't believe in doom- -I've had clients who were severely neglected as infants, even tortured as very young children, who were able to recapitulate/reenact the dependency/mirroring experience of infancy within themselves (no, not wearing diapers etc., but emotionally depending on another/group of others) and who have been able to develop empathy and internalize self-calm. Such infants are not all doomed to become sociopaths. But it does take hard work and a belief that there is more to life than their own ego--the courage and imagination of the individuals with whom I work is so moving to me. Now to tie all this in to cannon, so to avoid rendering this post a boring OT psychological treatise: I agree with tonks, that LV probably experienced severe emotional neglect during not only his first year of life, but for several years thereafter. I also think he fits the profile of someone who (like Harry) was severely bullied--but without Harry's ability to self-soothe, or take responsibility for his own response to this. I think a common result of this, for kids, is a desire for "power over" others--never to be in the bullying situation again. LV falls for this, hook/line/sinker, but makes the big mistake of seeing *everyone* as the enemy--even the DE are not to be trusted, just used. His fear of death, of becoming nothing, is, I think, related to his experience that his own being/ego is his whole world-- nothing outside of himself has any validity or value (this ties in to no experience/development of empathy/compassion for self/others). Harry falls into the "power over" trap with Dudley in book 5--just before the dementors appear, he severely abuses his own wizarding power by threatening D with his wand--even if D is a total git who deserved it!! But (I know, this is from spidey, the movie): with great power comes great responsibility, and Harry has to face his own childhood need for power over others and draw upon his ability to empathize. His "saving people thing" also seems to be drawn from childhood powerlessness--he couldn't save his parents, but he damn well can save Sirius (*sigh*). Part of Harry's future task, I think, is to "accept the things he cannot change" (damn! there I go again), and comprehend the wise use of power: intelligent compassion. Pam, who thinks compassion is behind the closed door at the DOM P.S. One of the original orphanage studies was done post WWII, at clean, modern, facilities, where infants were given food/clothing/physical care, but nurses were told not to hold or hug the children, since it was believed at the time that this would interfere with the bonding between the prospective adoptive mother and infant. What actually happened was that these infants experienced "failure to thrive", and became listless and uninterested in outside stimuli, even food. Very very sad story, but true. From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 10:51:36 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 10:51:36 -0000 Subject: Is JkR about to reveal? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110339 Valky wrote: In her Edinborough interview, Jkr says perhaps *too* much about Petunia. If Petunia is a witch, will Jo be soon revealing it? I see her making /no/ effort to hide it anymore in her interview. 'That's a good guess...' hence leaving not much option but to call her "WITCH!" seems to me like a shrug from JkR saying 'the game is up.. I will have to tell you the truth about that soon.' vmonte responds: Petunia is definitely the witch who will get her powers late in life. I think JKR is implying/spilling the beans about this. Is Aunt Petunia a Squib? "Good question. No, she is not, but?[Laughter]. No, she is not a Squib. She is a Muggle, but?[Laughter]. You will have to read the other books. You might have got the impression that there is a little bit more to Aunt Petunia than meets the eye, and you will find out what it is. She is not a squib, although that is a very good guess. Oh, I am giving a lot away here. I am being shockingly indiscreet." Vivian From djrfdh at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 10:55:53 2004 From: djrfdh at yahoo.com (djrfdh) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 10:55:53 -0000 Subject: Questions! Questions! Questions! In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040817075530.01cc1008@pop3.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110340 > > We've seen that some of Voldemort passed into Harry (parseltongue, > memories), so it seems plausible that some of Harry passed into > Voldemort. Perhaps this exchange was lifeforce, for want of a better word. > > psyche Also, it could be as simple as: as long as one of them remains alive, the other will never know peace because they will forever be looking over their shoulder to see if the other is near. It could also mean that in order for Harry to come out of the nightmare he's in, it will be necessary to defeat the "Voltemort" within. djrfdh....no pun intended. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 11:00:56 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 11:00:56 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110341 Stella wrote: "In the similarities between the two histories(TR and HP) JKR provides us with a very clear picture of two boys who were orphaned and raised without love. They both get their chance at Hogwarts. One makes the CHOICE to be bitter and hateful about the whole thing, while the other chooses to try and find love and good in the world instead." Del replies : I don't think we have been shown that *either* boy made a *choice*. We don't know about Tom, but I am of the opinion that a *kid* cannot truly choose to be unredeemably bitter and hateful. He can *want* to be like that, he can force the good feelings he gets sometimes out of him, but he can *not* choose *never* to love. And yet JKR said that Tom never loved nor cared for anyone. I don't think that was of Tom's doing, I don't think he *chose* that. On the other hand, I don't think Harry chose to love either. When he met Ron and saw how bad Ron felt about being overshadowed by his 3 (no, 5) big brothers, his heart just went out to him. Same with the sandwiches : Harry noticed the sandwiches, Ron's disappointment and unease about them, and he felt compassion on him. This was not a choice of his, those feelings just came to him. And the more time he spends with his friends, the more he cares about them, through no conscious choice of his own. Tom had friends too. And yet he never cared about them. I don't think this was a *choice* of his. Stella signed : "Stella, who doesn't want anyone going soft on Voldy!" Del replies : On Voldy, no. But on Tom, yes. My own biological father left on discovering my mom was pregnant, and that abandonment has scarred me forever in ways I'm only beginning to understand (I'm 30). But at least I had my mom and her family, and my mom is a Lily, not a Petunia. But poor Tom had nobody, he received no love, and he never *felt* any love. What's worse than death ? Tom Riddle's life, IMO. A life devoid of love, given or received. Del From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Aug 17 11:17:30 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 11:17:30 -0000 Subject: LV, Harry, DD and the Power behind the door In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110342 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "amanitamuscaria1" wrote: As for DD not killing LV, I waver between several theories. two, killing him would make him into a ghost or worse, a poltergeist like Peeves -yikes!; Valky: You say this in jest amanita? But hey isn't a ghost someone who is afraid of death. Maybe Vapormort is an exaggerated form of a ghost. It makes sense really because LV is intensley afraid to die isn't he? From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 17 11:34:13 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 07:34:13 -0400 Subject: Questions! Questions! Questions! Message-ID: <001801c4844e$1f96d270$12c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 110343 psyche "We've seen that some of Voldemort passed into Harry (parseltongue, memories), so it seems plausible that some of Harry passed into Voldemort. Perhaps this exchange was lifeforce, for want of a better word." DuffyPoo: I guess I'm the only one who doesn't really believe HP got his Parseltongue abilites from LV. He may well have, but I'm not convinced he didn't come by it naturally. Just because "it's not a very common *gift*" doesn't mean he got it from LV. TR saying "Probably the only two Parselmouths to come to Hogwarts since the great Slytherin himself," means nothing; he doesn't know, he's only presuming (he's been out of school nearly 50 years, and I'm quite certain he didn't know everything about every student in the school for the previous 950 or so years). Since the magical community believe being able to converse with snakes is the mark of a Dark wizard, I'm not sure too many witches/wizards would make it widely known if they had that particular gift. When Ernie Macmillan is talking to fellow Hufflepuffs, about HP being a Parselmouth, he mentions Salazar Slytherin, but doens't mention Riddle/LV. Is he simiply overlooking him or does he not know? This same goes for Ron and Hermione...they mentioned Slytherin, not TR/LV. DD says, "Unless I'm much mistaken, he transferred some of his own powers to you" but I've yet to see any indication of any other 'power' that may or may not have been transferred. When questioned by HP about this, DD said, "it certainly seems so." That doesn't mean it is, just that, to DD, it appears to be what happened. As DD believes HP is the one referred to in the prophecy, he believes many things about him, all of which may not turn out to be true. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From saraandra at saraandra.plus.com Tue Aug 17 11:49:31 2004 From: saraandra at saraandra.plus.com (amanitamuscaria1) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 11:49:31 -0000 Subject: Power vs Morality (was LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110344 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > We know he could *pretend* to be a good person while at Hogwarts : > everyone (except DD) was impressed by him, he was made Prefect and > Head Boy, he received an award, and so on. He seemed to have put up a > good pretence to be a good boy, when in fact he despised that role. > But I find this quite scary, because it means that by the age of 11 he > was already so damaged that he could not enjoy the rewards that being > a good boy can bring you : attention, favours, honours and so on. He > seemed to have been past that already. It seems he was already > thinking that the only thing that matters is *power*. > Del, who thinks that LV is a typical example of what happens when raw > power is not being channelled into good works by constant care and > attention, whether it be in people or in nuclear power plants. Now AmanitaMuscaria : Hmmm - who else do we know of who doesn't even pretend to be good, and yet was made a prefect? Draco doesn't even have the excuse of being in an orphanage to excuse his spite. Admittedly, he's not shown himself to be particularly evil, as far as we know, just spiteful. Cheers. AmanitaMuscaria From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 17 11:57:10 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 07:57:10 -0400 Subject: Curse Scars Message-ID: <002c01c48451$54479010$12c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 110345 Snow: > The quote in question is in GOF The Parting of the Ways U.S > edition: > > "You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've never heard of a curse > scar acting as an alarm bell before..."<<< > > DuffyPoo replyed: > "Snow, does your book really say "but I've *never* heard of a curse > scar?" Both of mine, Canadian HB and PB published in 2000 say > "You'll forgive me, > Dumbledore, but I've [I have] heard of a curse scar acting as an > alarm bell before." > If there is a correction is a subsequent publication to what I have > then it all makes sense." > Magda said: "Raincoast is a separate Canadian publishing house that hit the jackpot when it got chosen to print the Potter books in Canada. It prints the UK version word for word. This dispute over the word "never" came up somewhere and JKR acknowledged that it was a mistake and that it should read "never heard of...". Now if you challenge me to say where she said it, I couldn't tell you. It was an interview I read and I don't read many of them. Sorry." DuffyPoo: Just to clear this up - NOT - I checked a new copy of GoF (published by Raincoast on 07/08/04 - to me that looks like Aug 7th but I'm sure I saw them that Chapters before that) and it still says "You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've [I have] heard of a curse scar acting as an alarm bell before." If there was a correction made (in the US version) I don't understand why it is not in the newest Canadian edition. I checked the Quotes at HP Lexicon and came up with nothing as to the error being corrected by JKR. (Not surprising, I seldom find what I'm looking for there.) I think I'm going to e-mail Raincoast books. I'm quite sure no one is going to read this with all the talk centering on JKR's newest revelations, but I thought I'd throw it out there for anyone who is interested. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From saraandra at saraandra.plus.com Tue Aug 17 11:58:09 2004 From: saraandra at saraandra.plus.com (amanitamuscaria1) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 11:58:09 -0000 Subject: LV, Harry, DD and the Power behind the door In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110346 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tonks_op" wrote: > > Dumbledore does not kill Voldemort because of the prophecy. It is > not his place to do that. That is for Harry. And Harry will die in > the end. Because he will love others enough to be a sacrifice, > just as his mother was. The power behind the door is Love. > Sacrifical Love. > > "tonks_op" Now AmanitaMuscaria : And you base this on ??? Why DD doesn't kill LV isn't stated. There does seem to be some understanding between them in the MM scene, which, as we believe LV still doesn't know the full prophecy, implies that both of them know something about the way LV has become semi-immortal. There has been quite a bit of discussion in the past on this board regarding what's behind the locked door; the general consensus is that it is some form of love, but until JKR tells us, we don't know. Unless ... are you JKR? Cheers. AmanitaMuscaria From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 17 12:43:15 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 08:43:15 -0400 Subject: Why didn't Voldemort die? Message-ID: <001d01c48457$c42c1120$12c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 110347 Naama said: "So, compared to the phoenix, the snake would symbolise immortality achieved through fake dying or cheating death . (vol-de-mort - can be translated as thief of death.). This is exactly what happened to Voldemort in Godric's Hollow: he lost an external aspect of himself (his body), but retained his essential being (some kind of spirit, vapor.. etc.) Obviously, Voldemort is inatimately linked to snakes, on various levels: He is a pareseltongue, he looks like a snake (eyes, shape of the face), his ugly!baby self was created by and fed on snake venom, he has a pet snake, and possibly the most significant of all: When Harry feels Voldemort rise in him (in OoP), he feels him as a snake; when he has the vision of the snake attacking Arthur, this is through his connection to Voldemort - and he is seeing the world through the snake's eyes!" DuffyPoo: This is the strangest thing! :-0 Last night I was watching a TV show called "The Crow, Stairway to Heaven." (Please bear with me, list-elves, I'm coming to the point!) Now, I'm not very good with these kind of shows but something in this one just jumped out at me. The main character is a young man named Draven, who was murdered, along with his girlfriend. The voice-over the credits of this series says this: "People once believed that when someone dies, A crow carries their soul to the land of the dead, but sometimes something so bad happens that a terrible sadness is carried with it and the soul can't rest. Then sometimes, just sometimes,The crow can bring the soul back and put the wrong things right." So this Draven fellow has come back to life, a year after his murder to avenge his and his girlfriend's (Shelly) deaths. Draven can't be killed by ordinary means (bullets, arrows, falls, etc) because he is neither alive nor dead (Neither here nor there as Nick would say.) In this particular show, there is another not-quite-dead guy named Mase Reyes (he arranged Draven and Shelly's murders), /who has a huge snake/ around him nearly all the time. (Know anybody else with a big pet snake?) In this snake appears to live part of this Mase Reyes guy, his evil nature, as, at the end of the show, Reyes' wife kills the snake with a silver coloured knife, which causes Reyes to begin to fade, and then Draven kills Reyes' body with another silver coloured knife. Now, this Reyes fellow is really dead and gone. Back to HP. Nagini and LV are all bound together as he used Nagin's venom in the potion - along with unicorn blood - to keep himself alive until he was re-birthed. Was he possessing Nagini when he attacked Arthur? I posted yesterday: "LV underestimates so much of the old magic, what if the potion he used 'only' gave him a body to house the 'near ghost'? It didn't actually make him 'mortal' again, he just has a physical flesh house around his nearly ghost soul. He can hold a wand and perform magic, because he still knows the spells (his memories were not erased), and has a body to hold the wand. It may explain the "gleam" in DD eye (GoF); he knows the body LV created for himself did not make him mortal again, did not return him to "full strength and power" but is only a shell for his ghost-like self to dwell in and use." Draven and Reyes' 'souls' lived on in a fleshly body. Would killing Nagini destroy that part of LV? Killing his physical body, with GG's sword, will leave nothing but the 'ghost' part that always feared death. I'm back to "LV as a ghost, only an imprint of himself, a feeble imitation of life, powerless and wandless, unable to ingest a potion to ever make him anything more or less, trapped between here and there, laughable to some degree; would that be worse than death to LV?" Now, I'm not saying for a second that JKR is basing her outcome on The Crow TV series. I'm just saying how odd it was that all of this tied together for me, particularly as I have probably only watched anything like The Crow, a half dozen times. DuffyPoo... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cincimaelder at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 13:25:56 2004 From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (Darby) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 13:25:56 -0000 Subject: Curse Scars In-Reply-To: <002c01c48451$54479010$12c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110348 > DuffyPoo: > Just to clear this up - NOT - I checked a new copy of GoF (published by Raincoast on 07/08/04 - to me that looks like Aug 7th but I'm sure I saw them that Chapters before that) and it still says "You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've [I have] heard of a curse scar acting as an alarm bell before." If there was a correction made (in the US version) I don't understand why it is not in the newest Canadian edition. > > I checked the Quotes at HP Lexicon and came up with nothing as to the error being corrected by JKR. (Not surprising, I seldom find what I'm looking for there.) I think I'm going to e-mail Raincoast books. > > I'm quite sure no one is going to read this with all the talk centering on JKR's newest revelations, but I thought I'd throw it out there for anyone who is interested. > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Darby, just my 2 cents: I have a US trade paperback version, Sept 2002 and my text has the work "never". Also, my dauther was just listening to the US version of Jim Dale's book on tapes and I noted that one also said "never". I don't know why they didn't correct it. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 13:49:06 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 13:49:06 -0000 Subject: Power vs Morality (was LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110349 I, Del, wrote : "We know Tm Riddle could *pretend* to be a good person while at Hogwarts : everyone (except DD) was impressed by him, he was made Prefect and Head Boy, he received an award, and so on." AmanitaMuscaria replied : "Hmmm - who else do we know of who doesn't even pretend to be good, and yet was made a prefect? Draco doesn't even have the excuse of being in an orphanage to excuse his spite. Admittedly, he's not shown himself to be particularly evil, as far as we know, just spiteful." Del replies : Draco is another interesting parallel to Tom. First, Draco *does* pretend to be good, just not all the time and definitely not to Harry. He's perfectly nice with Snape and Umbridge, for example. Right from PS/SS, he tells on Harry for being out of bed after hours, which in his mind is pretending to be good. Second, Draco didn't go to an orphanage, but we don't know what his situation was in his family. His father doesn't seem to be exactly loving. But I do think his mother must love him at least a little bit, since she didn't want him to go to Durmstrang because it was too far away, and she sends him all those sweets. But one could argue that maybe the Malfoys love Draco the way the Dursleys love Dudley : in a wrong way that sure doesn't teach about things like compassion. Third, as you've pointed out, Draco hasn't shown himself to be truly evil. He's spiteful and nasty, but not evil. Tom Riddle in CoS doesn't seem to be truly evil either, just very angry and resentful. Fourth, just like Tom, Draco is after *power*, and he fears those more powerful than he. He doesn't care about right and wrong, only about who is most powerful and how he himself can gain more power. There is one big difference between Draco and Tom though : greatness. Tom was presumably much more talented and intelligent than Draco. That greatness, coupled with his power and a lack of a strong morality, is what led him to become an evil overlord, when Draco would make a poor DE (one remarkably like Peter Pettigrew IMO). Del, who shudders to think of what could have happened if Harry had turned bitter and resentful too : so much greatness, used for selfish goals... From quigonginger at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 14:04:31 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 14:04:31 -0000 Subject: Another "Death by..." Theory Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110350 Yay! I returned from an 11-day vacation 12 days ago and am now caught up reading and can begin posting! Steve started a list of ways that LV can be killed. Someone else (sorry, I was reading really fast) was worried that LV may come back as a ghost were he to be killed. Many have worried that if HP kills LV, that it will in some way taint him, or scar him, in some way in that he will have committed murder. I don't believe that personally, but I can see the line of reasoning, and I think it is a valid concern from that perspective. Per the prophecy, we know that "one must die at the hand of the other" and we have (for the most part) assumed that this means that either Harry will kill LV or vice versa. Dumbledore confirms this. But what if the killing is accidental? Picture this: LV and Harry have somehow ended up alone as the rest of the cast is fighting elsewhere. LV has Harry's wand. LV has just killed Dumbledore and is gloating. Someone sends in a dementor (maybe a DE with connections, or maybe a panicking Fudge...). LV is so full of glee, and Harry is so miserable that the dementor heads for LV. (I chose DD to die as it would be the widest Happy!LV/Sad!Harry ratio I could think of.) LV drops the wand as the dementor heads in for the kiss. Harry uses wandless magic (like the lumos in the alley in OoP) and Accios his wand. He intends to save LV by conjuring a patronus, but coughs (like in CoS when he ended up in Knockturn Alley) and misspeaks. I'm sure JKR could find something better, but the best I could do (please bear with me) was "Expecto Pa*cough*tellum" whereupon a giant silvery kneecap bursts forth from his wand. It's too late. LV has already been kissed, so is soulless (hasn't got a ghost of a chance of haunting anyone), but not dead. The giant kneecap does him in, so he has died at that hand of Harry, but Harry hasn't committed murder. Of course, he could say "Expecto *cough* euphonium, in which case we have a different instrument of death, but the concept remains the same. So, we have no ghost, a fulfilled prophecy, and Harry isn't culpable. Nice and tidy, you think? As a FEATHERBOA, I hope Harry returns to the fray in time to see Neville perform a nice, gut-wrenching "Accio Entrails" on Bella. Serve her right. Ginger, who hopes to never be away from a computer for 11 days again until after the series is finished. From Lynx412 at AOL.com Tue Aug 17 14:24:58 2004 From: Lynx412 at AOL.com (Lynx412 at AOL.com) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 10:24:58 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Both Snape & Fudge are DEs: 3rd 'Missing' DE Message-ID: <64.427762e8.2e536f3a@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110351 In a message dated 8/17/2004 4:35:54 AM Eastern Standard Time, phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk writes: > But, what Voldemort said was that he had 'left his service for ever'. Well, maybe this was a reaction to the infamous "where your loyalties lie" line. Since LV must have heard it without Snape knowing it was him at the time, he would have had reason to believe that Snape had, in fact, left him forever. Since he would have had reason to be -very annoyed- at the failure of his plot to get the stone, Snape must have done a good bit of fast talking and legilimens to cover himself. The Other Cheryl [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ExSlytherin at aol.com Tue Aug 17 14:27:54 2004 From: ExSlytherin at aol.com (Mandy) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 14:27:54 -0000 Subject: Voldemort, the Prophecy and the HBP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110352 > Pippin wrote: > Hmmm... I agree about the timing of the transformations. > However, Salazar wasn't like Voldemort to begin with. Riddle, > according to the latest from Edinburgh, never cared about > anybody, and couldn't have become what he is if he had. But > Salazar was a great friend of Godric Gryffindor. Possibly Salazar > summoned the daemon and was possessed for a while, but > fought off the possession and trapped the daemon in the the > basilisk and the basilisk in the chamber. He then fled the > school so that the other Founders wouldn't find out what he had > done. The basilisk's life would have been shortened thereby, but > since basilisks live a very long time (FBAWTFT), it managed to > survive until Riddle arrived. > > Riddle was then possessed by the daemon, and he knew that > his life would be short unless he could magically transform > himself into an immortal being. Just IMO, that is. Mandy again: You know I hadn't thought about Salazar in that way before, and I have succumb to the 'He's a Slytherin and therefore must be evil' prejudice. Which is ironic considering it's the house I most identify with and am always defending! We don't have any reason to believe Salazar was 'evil', and one could argue he did care enough about children to want to educate them. OTOH, you could also argue he wanted to use the school as a boot camp for a pureblood army, but then why would he have gone to the trouble for forming a school with Gryffindor, Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw if he was indeed so completely against the education of non-purebloods? If he hated non-purebloods that much he wouldn't he have sort-out other partners more appreciative of his cause? It does appear that somewhere Salazar changed. Or, perhaps, I'm not crediting him with enough evil genius. Perhaps Salazar was a SEB (Supreme Evil Being) in disguise, and from the very beginning joined forces with the other three to create a seemingly harmless school, when in fact his intention all along was to create the evil Chamber of Secrets inside to reek havoc and destruction 1000 years later on all non-purebloods kids? I just don't know, but I am interested in your daemon possessor. Any ideas on who or what it is? Cheers Mandy From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Aug 17 14:30:38 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 14:30:38 -0000 Subject: Power vs Morality (was LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110353 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > Now I have another question to ask the psychologist in you : what > makes people choose to be/do good or evil ? > > I ask you that because I'm very confused as to whether Tom had any real incentive to become a good person. I'm not sure he ever truly realised that being good could be a goal in itself. I don't think he saw his choices as being between good and evil. We know what he based his decisions on : power, not morality. > I hope you don't mind my chucking my two knuts in here. I think this is where the choice between Gryffindor and Slytherin comes in. If Tom, seeking power, had chosen Gryffindor (and there is power in Gryffindor, make no mistake) then he might have learned morality, even if compassion remained beyond him. Similarly if Harry had chosen Slytherin seeking acceptance (and he was offered that ) he would have learned to stifle his compassionate feelings. But Houses aren't everything. Snape, a Slytherin, has apparently chosen the side of morality even though he has no compassion to speak of--I think that's because he likes things predictable and he would rather live in a world governed by laws than one governed by Voldemort's whims, even if Dumbledore's compassion makes him bend the rules in ways Snape doesn't "get". The Gryffindor Lupin is filled with compassion, and yet we have seen, in canon, all ESE! theories aside, that he has chosen repeatedly to do many things that he feels were morally wrong. So I think the answer to Del's question, at least in the Potterverse, is that there are a lot of influences, but nothing *makes* the wizard characters be good or evil--it's a choice. Pippin From Lynx412 at AOL.com Tue Aug 17 14:31:36 2004 From: Lynx412 at AOL.com (Lynx412 at AOL.com) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 10:31:36 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Where was Remus was some sirius hinting... yay puns! Message-ID: <15a.3c9ee22b.2e5370c8@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110354 In a message dated 8/16/2004 11:52:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, hexicon at yahoo.com writes: > Or, it could be pretty simple--"that time of the month" for Mr. Lupin. > [chuckle] That was my thought as well. Granted, James and Lily may well have wanted to have all their friends at the christening, but in times of war you take what you can get. This might well explain part of why Sirius was chosen as Harry's godfather. He was the only one who could make it. Also, a thought...given the other protective spells we know of, it's possible that being a wizard/witch's godfather includes some spell that makes it nearly impossible for one who means the child harm to accept the position, explaining the horror expressed at Sirius' apparent ability to do both. The Other Cheryl [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From karen at dacafe.com Tue Aug 17 14:45:54 2004 From: karen at dacafe.com (kmcbears1) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 14:45:54 -0000 Subject: Voldermort not LV Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110355 I just re-read PS/SS, CoS, and PoA this weekend and noticed something interesting. Harry never calls LV by his title - Lord. Many of you may have picked up on this before but by time I was finished book two. I don't know if I glossed onver this in previous readings (and there have been many) but it was as if the absense of the word Lord were neon underscores. Harry is the only one to use just "Voldermort" when refering to LV. I started scaning the books (all 5) looking for someone else refer to LV as Voldemort without the Lord and have only found one other person to use Voldemort instead of LV and that is Herminone at the end of chapter 15 in OotP. Dumbledore uses Lord Voldemort or Tom, Death eaters use Dark Lord, even Sirius and Lupin use the title. I wish I had the time to give this matter further scrutiny but alas Muggle life requires my attention. Karen From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 17 14:54:09 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 14:54:09 -0000 Subject: Why he is still alive? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110356 Melody wrote: > So I was thinking about why Dumbledore has not killed Voldie yet. I > mean he *can* do it. But why not kill him. I am wondering if it is > not that he can't kill him, but that he does not want to yet. A > good general of war knows when to extinguish his enemy. > > I think Dumbledore has not killed Voldie because it would accomplish > nothing really...yet. Much like Dumbledore had to have the Minister > of Magic physically see Voldemort and be forced to admit he exists > in OoP, Dumbledore realizes that if the WW does not recognize that > Voldemort is back as a bigger, badder, and more pissed off Voldie, > then just killing him accomplishes *nothing*. They need to get over > the fear or the name, which would still be around even after his > death. If Dumbledore can extinguish the fear of the name by proving > the person carrying the name is not the worst thing ever, then > Voldie is completely eradicated from the WW. He truly will die. > Right now, Voldie will live forever because he is the worst thing > ever. If Dumbledore does not eradicate him publicly, obvious to > all the wizards and witches, then the fear of Voldie still > resurrecting survives, and even if Voldie were in fact gone > forever, he would never have left. > > Have I talked myself into a circle? > I pray this makes sense. SSSusan: Melody, you haven't talked yourself into a circle at all; this is good stuff. My big question concerning this idea has to do with DD's willingness to hold off like this--to await the big opportunity for eradicating Voldy until a) the public is fully aware of his return as Big Baddy and b) the eradication will be big enough news. Do you think DD would hold off *if* it means several people will likely be attacked & killed by Voldy & his henchmen in the meantime? Or do you think the Order and others-against-Voldy will manage to show that he & the DEs are not such baddies after all? [I suppose we're back to the old question about the greater good: do a few suffer for the larger cause? (Unless you do think it's possible to show that Voldy's NOT so much to be feared?)] I don't have an answer to this question, myself. I just think it would have to be answered. Hoping *I've* made sense here, Siriusly Snapey Susan From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Tue Aug 17 15:03:28 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 15:03:28 -0000 Subject: DD - maybe. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110357 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, gsanderson at c... wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" > wrote: (...) > > Is DD much, much older than 150? Is he resurrected, renewed, > > reborn, revived, refurbished, renovated, restuffed and repolished > > at intervals down the centuries? (...) > > 3. DD is the enemy of whatever it is (Salazar?) that's animating or motivating Voldy. And they've fought before - often. The Potterverse is just the latest battleground in a war that goes waaaaay back, perhaps to the founding of Hogwarts or even further. > > > > Kneasy Kristen replied: >If he is indeed reincarnated, where did Aberforth come from? Is he also reincarnated? Also, if he is "roused from sleep" at the time of trouble, how would you explain him being tested on his NEWTs by Professor Tofty (or was it Marchbanks)? Carolyn: Here's my explanation. Professor Marchbank's actual comment was that if DD didn't want to be found, he wouldn't be, commenting: 'examined him personally in Transfiguration and Charms when he did NEWTS..did things with a wand I'd never seen before' (OOP, Chap 31). In post 108963 I speculated that the one thing that united the WW was its admiration for magical ability, even when it was wielded by Dark Wizards. Wizard children seem to be born with different degrees of latent power, which can then be enhanced and encouraged with the right training. I see no inconsistency with Albus being born with greater powers than Aberforth, and subsequently honing those skills at school and later as he studied deeper into subjects. Wizards with this level of ability seem extremely rare - Grindewald may have been one, Tom Riddle another, a third seems to be Harry. They seem to come around about every 50 years, if DD is indeed 150 years old. It is not difficult to imagine that each and every one of them eventually is tempted by the power that their abilities can bring them. The old saying - 'power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely'. DD, and (so far) Harry have 'just said no'. Riddle and Grindewald, on the other hand, have grabbed the opportunity to try and take over - 'its our choices, Harry..' etc etc. Those that are tempted become obsessed by the idea of having perpetual power, those that are not are able to see death 'as the next big adventure'. In this sense, DD is the 'reincarnation' of the original spirit of the founders of Hogwarts, who set out nurture magical ability wherever it was to be found, not to use it to divide and rule. JKR has given him not only a pet phoenix, but now told us that that is the form his patronus takes as well, to underline the immortality of the concept he represents. As Kneasy suggests, he could be one of a long line of wizards down the ages that have held firm, and wielded their power for good. However, as one of the Catch-22s of choosing to fight the good fight is that you drop dead in the end, you do need to identify your successor and try and nudge 'em in the right direction as early as possible. My thought is that DD has decided to use Fawkes' tail feathers rather like lightening indicators in the wands they are placed in - 'the wand chooses the wizard' - and Ollivander alerts him to the wizard as soon as it happens. I continue to maintain that Tom was one of DD's failures, a potential protege that went bad, and he blames himself for that. I might even go as far as saying DD had the second wand, the one that chose Harry, especially created in order to help him find someone else to kill Tom, because he either did not want to do so himself, or was not sure he could do so alone. It wasn't until he came to know Harry as a person, rather than a potential weapon, that he began to appreciate the true difficulty of the situation he was in. Carolyn From ExSlytherin at aol.com Tue Aug 17 15:18:51 2004 From: ExSlytherin at aol.com (Mandy) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 15:18:51 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110358 > Now Andromeda: > I think it is actually a pretty common phenomenon, to some >extent, for young children (not just infants) in orphanages. >The article said that even modern orphanages, clean and decent- >looking places, cannot escape the fact that children are being >raised by those who don't love them. Riddle's orphanage was >undoubtedly not a very nice place. Unlike Riddle, Harry had 15 >months of parental love before being taken away. Mandy here: I'd like to add to that that although the Dursley's hated Harry, treated him very badly and resented his intrusion on their lives they did adopt him. They took him in, they fed, clothed and schooled him. Reluctantly, yes, but the fact that a family unit took Harry in means an awful lot. It does send a message, a mixed one, but a message of belonging to a family and not just any family, their Harry's own family. No matter how Harry might dislike Petunia and she hates him, she is his mother's sister. Harry can look at her and know that deep inside Petunia his mother blood runs. Tom, on the other hand, was not. No one wanted him. No one. Until he turned 11 and went to Hogwarts, but by then it was far too late. If Tom was in a terrible orphanage he may not have ever been touch, except to be punished. Although you could argue the same of Harry, Harry could, and did witness love between the Dursleys everyday. I imagine Tom just witnessed anger and rage. Mandy From ExSlytherin at aol.com Tue Aug 17 15:32:19 2004 From: ExSlytherin at aol.com (Mandy) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 15:32:19 -0000 Subject: Power vs Morality (was LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110359 >Del wrote: > > Del, who shudders to think of what could have happened if Harry had > turned bitter and resentful too : so much greatness, used for >selfish goals... Mandy here: But he still might. ;-) We still have 2 books to go and the all- essential 'Temptation' plot line has still to surface. Not to mention Harry was exhibiting some powerful selfishness and resentment in OotP, so it wouldn't be a stretch to see Harry fall of the path of goodness for a while before climbing back on before the end of the saga. Mandy, gleefully rubbing her hands at the anticipation of seeing a bad Harry for a while. From naama_gat at hotmail.com Tue Aug 17 15:40:21 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 15:40:21 -0000 Subject: Why didn't Voldemort die? In-Reply-To: <001d01c48457$c42c1120$12c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110360 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: >Was he possessing Nagini when he attacked Arthur? I posted >yesterday: "LV underestimates so much of the old magic, what if the >potion he used 'only' gave him a body to house the 'near ghost'? It >didn't actually make him 'mortal' again, he just has a physical >flesh house around his nearly ghost soul. >It may explain the "gleam" in DD eye (GoF); he knows the body LV >created for himself did not make him mortal again, did not return >him to "full strength and power" but is only a shell for his ghost- >like self to dwell in and use." > Would killing Nagini destroy that part of LV? Killing his physical >body, with GG's sword, will leave nothing but the 'ghost' part that >always feared death. I'm back to "LV as a ghost, only an imprint of >himself, a feeble imitation of life, powerless and wandless, unable >to ingest a potion to ever make him anything more or less, trapped >between here and there, laughable to some degree; would that be >worse than death to LV?" > Naama: But vapor!Voldemort is unvanquishable, apparently. And there's always the chance that he would manage to resurrect himself - as he managed to do. When Voldemort was hit by his own AK, he did lose his body - yet remained alive/not-dead (in some essential form). I'm not sure what you mean by "what if the potion he used 'only' gave him a body to house the 'near ghost'? It didn't actually make him 'mortal' again, he just has a physical flesh house around his nearly ghost soul." What's the difference between a normal soul with a "physical flesh house" and Voldemort's current state of being? Also, I think that the evidence is that Voldemort has returned to himself, as far as "full strength and power" goes (with an additional secret ingredient - Harry's blood - which means something, only we don't know what). We see this in the graveyard and in his battle with DD. He has retained his ability to perform the Unforgivables, to possess, to duel efficiently, to apparate, etc. He has also regained the support of his followers - who, I'd think, would be the first to sense weakness in him (especially the likes of Malfoy). Naama, who quite liked the Crow From alina at distantplace.net Tue Aug 17 15:47:14 2004 From: alina at distantplace.net (Alina) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 11:47:14 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Questions! Questions! Questions! References: <6.1.2.0.0.20040817075530.01cc1008@pop3.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: <003101c48471$785f5120$6402a8c0@Pandemonium> No: HPFGUIDX 110361 On the general subject of The Important Question (that is: Why didn't DD kill Voldemort, or try to?) I always thought that the answer has to do with Dumbledore's words that there are things worse than death. I don't think killing Voldemort is what he has in mind, but rather those very things. As for the theories that Harry has to be the one to do it and whatnot... I don't think DD is all that thrilled at the thought of Harry turning into a murderer, regardless that it's Voldemort he gets to kill. I myself am sure there's more than a literal meaning to the prophecy and Harry won't have to commit murder in the end. I guess I just can't see Harry killing as resolution to the books. Alina. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 17 16:12:39 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 12:12:39 -0400 Subject: Voldermort not LV Message-ID: <000e01c48475$05373240$6cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 110362 Karen "Harry never calls LV by his title - Lord. Many of you may have picked up on this before but by time I was finished book two. I don't know if I glossed onver this in previous readings (and there have been many) but it was as if the absense of the word Lord were neon underscores. Harry is the only one to use just "Voldermort" when refering to LV." DuffyPoo: When Hagrid is telling Harry the story, Hagrid simply says, "Nah -- can't spell it. All right -- Voldemort." Then he switched over to calling him You-Know-Who. At the end of that book, PS, DD says, "Call him Voldemort, Harry. Always use the proper name for things." [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 16:14:05 2004 From: aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com (aboutthe1910s) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 16:14:05 -0000 Subject: Is JkR about to reveal? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110363 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > Valky wrote: > In her Edinborough interview, Jkr says perhaps *too* much about > Petunia. > > If Petunia is a witch, will Jo be soon revealing it? I see her > making /no/ effort to hide it anymore in her interview. 'That's a > good guess...' hence leaving not much option but to call > her "WITCH!" seems to me like a shrug from JkR saying 'the game is > up.. I will have to tell you the truth about that soon.' > > vmonte responds: > > Petunia is definitely the witch who will get her powers late in life. > I think JKR is implying/spilling the beans about this. > > Is Aunt Petunia a Squib? > > "Good question. No, she is not, but?[Laughter]. No, she is not a > Squib. She is a Muggle, but?[Laughter]. You will have to read the > other books. You might have got the impression that there is a little > bit more to Aunt Petunia than meets the eye, and you will find out > what it is. She is not a squib, although that is a very good guess. > Oh, I am giving a lot away here. I am being shockingly indiscreet." > > Vivian I somehow don't think it's going to be as straight foreward as this--I do think that Petunia will be the late bloomer we have heard about, and, obviously, ("She is a Muggle...") she doesn't have *any* powers *at this point*, but I really feel (and I don't see how I can be alone here) that there must already be something in Petunia's past that connects her to the wizarding world--aside from a sister that she couldn't stand and took no interest in. aboutthe1910s From s_karmol at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 16:35:29 2004 From: s_karmol at yahoo.com (Stephanie) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 16:35:29 -0000 Subject: Is JkR about to reveal? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110364 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "aboutthe1910s" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > > Valky wrote: > > In her Edinborough interview, Jkr says perhaps *too* much about > > Petunia. > > > > If Petunia is a witch, will Jo be soon revealing it? I see her > > making /no/ effort to hide it anymore in her interview. 'That's a > > good guess...' hence leaving not much option but to call > > her "WITCH!" seems to me like a shrug from JkR saying 'the game is > > up.. I will have to tell you the truth about that soon.' > > > > vmonte responds: > > > > Petunia is definitely the witch who will get her powers late in life. > > I think JKR is implying/spilling the beans about this. > > > > Is Aunt Petunia a Squib? > > > > "Good question. No, she is not, but?[Laughter]. No, she is not a > > Squib. She is a Muggle, but?[Laughter]. You will have to read the > > other books. You might have got the impression that there is a little > > bit more to Aunt Petunia than meets the eye, and you will find out > > what it is. She is not a squib, although that is a very good guess. > > Oh, I am giving a lot away here. I am being shockingly indiscreet." > > > > Vivian > > > > I somehow don't think it's going to be as straight foreward as this--I > do think that Petunia will be the late bloomer we have heard about, > and, obviously, ("She is a Muggle...") she doesn't have *any* powers > *at this point*, but I really feel (and I don't see how I can be alone > here) that there must already be something in Petunia's past that > connects her to the wizarding world--aside from a sister that she > couldn't stand and took no interest in. > > aboutthe1910s Steph here: Does anyone think it's strange that Rowling uses the phrase "more than meets the eye" in regards to Petunia? Lily's eyes are constantly mentioned, it's Lily's family that helps protect Harry, and I don't really know where I'm going with this, but that comment doesn't really sit right with me. Any thoughts?? From phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk Tue Aug 17 09:42:53 2004 From: phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk (Kate Harding) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 09:42:53 -0000 Subject: LV, Harry, DD and the Power behind the door In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110365 AmanitaMuscaria1: > What if some of the transfigurations LV went through caused him to > give up his heart? he can't be completely killed, because he > has no heart two I really like this theory. There are several fairy tales or legends where the bad guy can't be killed because he's locked his heart (or sometimes life) in a chest and thrown it into the sea, or similar, and you have to find it before you can kill him. Mythical. Jo likes the mythical. And it fits with the lack of love thing - he might have thought the heart a pointless organ, and so been perfectly happy to remove it and lock it up somewhere. Kate/psyche From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 13:27:10 2004 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 13:27:10 -0000 Subject: Questions! Questions! Questions! In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040817075530.01cc1008@pop3.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110366 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kate Harding wrote: > psyche: > Personally I think that in some way there is only enough life between them for one person. I don't know how the metaphysics would work, but this would explain why DD couldn't kill Voldemort - if one of them died the other would still only be half alive. It also makes sense to me in terms of the prophecy. It said 'Either must die at the hands of the other, for neither can live while the other survives'. So why can neither live? Perhaps it's meant literally that while both survive, both are only half alive. And I think the use of 'Either' is very significant - why not say 'one must die at the hands of the other'? > We've seen that some of Voldemort passed into Harry (parseltongue, memories), so it seems plausible that some of Harry passed into Voldemort. Perhaps this exchange was lifeforce, for want of a better word. > Marcela here: I have the same theory, that both of them are 'connected' in such a way that they are not 'individuals': ..." Nowadays, however, his scar hardly ever stopped prickling, and he often felt lurches of annoyance or cheerfulness that were unrelated to what was happening to him at the time, which were always accompanied by a particularly painful twinge from his scar. He had the horrible impression that he was slowly turning into a kind of aerial that was tuned in to tiny fluctuations in Voldemort's mood..."... OoTP, pages 553/4 hardback SE. As for LV's feelings, we get a glimpse of them when he couln't stand possessing Harry at the MoM, and to be honest, that was pretty much the only time that Harry felt his heart being overpowered by LOvE, there weren't many instances for LV to get feedback from Harry since he was 'reborn', as Harry had a terrible year... So, DD knows the prophecy, knows that both of them are 'connected' but in 'essence divided' -the smoky serpent coming out of one of his silvery gadgets (?), so that's why I think he didn't dare kill LV. DD knows that 'either' in the prophecy plainly says that *no one else* can kill LV and/or Harry, and that for that to happen it has to be done 'at the hand of the other'. I believe that the next two books will deal with finding a way to 'split' that connection... How? I don't know, but from hints in PS and GoF and JKR's answers in interviews, I think that 'blood alchemy' will play an important role, combined with Occlumency (for Harry's sanity) and Legilimency. Marcela Who desperately wants Harry to survive and not be the sacrificial son, that's not what Lily and James died for, after all. From phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk Tue Aug 17 12:13:37 2004 From: phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk (phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 13:13:37 +0100 Subject: Draco's nature (was Power vs Morality was LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110367 AmanitaMuscaria: Hmmm - who else do we know of who doesn't even pretend to be good, and yet was made a prefect? Draco doesn't even have the excuse of being in an orphanage to excuse his spite. psyche/Kate: I think Draco's excuses are just as good as LV's. He's had a neglectful, loveless, abusive upbringing by a Death Eater. It's clear that his father has left huge scars on him. I get the impression of a miserable, frightened, lonely boy who tries to make himself feel and look big by bullying. Even his loathing of Harry seems to me mostly rooted in wounded pride and jealously, maintained by the impulse to agree with his father rather than a simple rejection of Harry's personal qualities. AmanitaMuscaria: Admittedly, he's not shown himself to be particularly evil, as far as we know, just spiteful. psyche/Kate: An important distinction. What I find interesting about Draco, is that I don't think we've seen any signs of his *own* personality yet. Everything he is has been moulded by his upbringing. All his opinions are his father's (If he has any original thoughts, we haven't been shown them). His cruelty and disdain have been shaped by lack of authentic love combined with excessive material spoiling. It seems obvious that if he continues down his current path he will go on and sign up to be a Death Eater. But what we don't know is whether that will fit him. Will he revel in it, like his father? Or will he find that he's not as cut out for murder and torture as he thought, like Snape? Does he even *have* enough 'own' personality left for fit to be an issue, or has every part of him been subsumed by the nightmare experience that is growing up as a Malfoy? psyche/Kate From inkling108 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 14:38:35 2004 From: inkling108 at yahoo.com (inkling108) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 14:38:35 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110368 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tonks_op" > Tonks op wrote: But there is a question that I too ask myself about > Harry. How is it that he is so good? Now the Dursleys were not > all that bad. He could have fared much worse. They must have done > something right. Inkling now: As a mother I have always wondered how Harry could have turned out so healthy when he seems to have received virtually no love from the age of fifteen months on. If true, this would be a real miracle -- very high magic, requiring tremendous strength of personality. Most extraordinary is his willingness to trust people in spite of everything. Maybe Petunia has another secret in addition to hidden magical tendencies. Maybe she did cuddle and nurture Harry a bit as a baby, when Vernon and Dursley weren't looking, of course. Maybe at some point Harry will look into his memory (he seems to have a very deep memory) and find some things about Petunia that he has forgotten. It's possible also that she has quietly done some things to help him at times, things Harry would never know about. While she is not exactly the Balm of Gilead, she is less aggressive toward Harry than Vernon or Dudley. And the very fact that she seems so angry at her sister indicates that she may in fact love her deep down inside. You don't usually get angry at people you are indifferent to. I would like to think she wouldn't be totally cold to Lily's baby. > Now to the question. Given the circumstances of his childhood is > Voldemort responsible for his actions? Yes. Even if he feels no > love or compassion for others he knows the difference between right > and wrong and in that way is responsible. But to some extent so are > we as a society. Given how important choice is to JKR, I would agree here. But in Voldy's case, we still need to know more. I think this is what JKR was hinting at when she said that this question is a good lead in to the Half Blood Prince. Not so much the individual HBP (whoever that may be) but the book itself -- I think she is indicating that we will find out the whole story of what made Tom Riddle into Voldy. Inkling From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 17 16:47:26 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 16:47:26 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110369 Alla wrote : > > "I know that you never give up on the most evil characters in > > "Potterverse", but don't you think especially after that answer > > that Voldie is a lost cause." Del replies : > I never really had *hope* concerning LV. I was just trying to figure > him out. But I'm afraid this last piece of information only confused > me further. I agree with what you said later : > "I think possible mental illness sounds about right or maybe Tom > was cursed right after he was born with inability to love?" > But that would make me defend him even more ! If Tom was either sick > or cursed, then he did *not* freely choose to become evil. If he is > *unable* to love, then he can't be blamed for hating. And most of > all: if he needed help and didn't get it, then he's not the only > one responsible for the existence of LV (could DD be reluctant to > kill *Tom* out of *guilt* ?). > > But that would go against everything the HP books have taught us so > far : that we are all responsible for our choices, and that LV is > truly evil because he chose to be. > > I really hate to criticise JKR, but I think she's failed to explain > and describe LV adequately, at least to me. SSSusan: I'll second the welcome back, Del. I think you're absolutely correct that *if* what you & Alla were saying is true, it *would* go against everything JKR has taught us so far. I also think that you're not really being unfairly critical of JKR when you say she hasn't explained or described LV adequately...because I think she hasn't! I think she has purpoesly saved a lot of the explanation for book 6 and/or 7. (At least I hope she has!) Anyway, I do understand your reaction to JKR's answer--"HOW could someone not have loved anyone, ever??"--and would be equally upset if Tom never had ANY love or affection directed his way, because it would mean it's not his fault/choice to not know how to love. However, *I* took what JKR said as meaning that Tom, once capable/old enough/able to choose, never *chose* to love another. In fact, I'm guessing that someone, or several someones--not the least of which probably is DD, did show love or affection or concern for Tom Riddle, and so Tom *did* have the capacity to love just like the rest of us, but that he freely CHOSE to not reciprocate. I know this isn't fully fleshed out, so there may be gaping holes in my logic. I can imagine that Tom's upbringing wasn't fun (just as Harry's wasn't), but that Harry, when shown affection by others, reciprocated, reached out to others. Tom, I suspect, did not, for *some* (as yet unknown) reason. Does that make any sense? Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 17 16:59:10 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 16:59:10 -0000 Subject: Snape experiencing love (was: Why he is still alive?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110370 "doddiemoemoe" wrote: > Neither Snape nor Voldemort have ever experienced "love" according > to JK (or probably any sort of compassion for that matter). SSSusan: Quick question for you. Can you show me where JKR said Snape had never experienced love? Are you speaking only of romantic love or any kind of love? Siriusly Snapey Susan From squeakinby at tds.net Tue Aug 17 17:05:05 2004 From: squeakinby at tds.net (squeakinby) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 13:05:05 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41223AC1.5080906@tds.net> No: HPFGUIDX 110371 inkling108 wrote: >Maybe Petunia has another secret in addition to hidden magical >tendencies. Maybe she did cuddle and nurture Harry a bit as a baby, >when Vernon and Dursley weren't looking, of course. Maybe at some >point Harry will look into his memory (he seems to have a very deep >memory) and find some things about Petunia that he has forgotten. > > > When I suggested that a couple months ago without my wand drawn, I was trounced on mightily. We don't know if Petunia went to his cot at night and sang him lullabys. It seems logical to me given how well Master Harry turned out. But then this is a work of fiction where magic is a prominent feature.... Jem From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 17:12:44 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 17:12:44 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110372 > SSSusan: > I'll second the welcome back, Del. > > I think you're absolutely correct that *if* what you & Alla were > saying is true, it *would* go against everything JKR has taught us so > far. I also think that you're not really being unfairly critical of > JKR when you say she hasn't explained or described LV > adequately...because I think she hasn't! I think she has purpoesly > saved a lot of the explanation for book 6 and/or 7. (At least I hope > she has!) Alla: Hey, Susan! I agree with you. I don't think it was that simple and what Tom Riddle chose, eventually will come back to haunt him, but I am trying to figure out that obvious inconsistency how could he not to be born evil and never loved anybody. Hmm. Another mystery. :o) And yes, I agree with Del - Voldemort is NOT described well. Right now, he is an Evil Maniac without any layers in his character. I hope that they will appear in the next books. (The layers)The guys who fight for Dumbledore have much more depth than any of the DE. I see no sympathetic villains in "potterverse'so far, on the other hand good guys have a healthy amount of "greyness" From garybec101 at comcast.net Tue Aug 17 17:24:22 2004 From: garybec101 at comcast.net (garybec101 at comcast.net) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 17:24:22 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Questions! Questions! Questions! Message-ID: <081720041724.19070.41223F460003D0BB00004A7E2200758942CECFCE0C0A0D979D0E09@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 110373 Personally I think that in some way there is only enough life between them for one person. I don't know how the metaphysics would work, but this would explain why DD couldn't kill Voldemort - if one of them died the other would still only be half alive. It also makes sense to me in terms of the prophecy. It said 'Either must die at the hands of the other, for neither can live while the other survives'. So why can neither live? Perhaps it's meant literally - that while both survive, both are only half alive. And I think the use of 'Either' is very significant - why not say 'one must die at the hands of the other'? psyche * * Becki responds; I agree that "either" is extremely significant. If it was worded "one must die at the had of the other", to me that would imply that "the one" in the prophecy is the one to die. If "either" is used, then it could aply to either person in the prophecy. *Becki Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT Yahoo! Groups Links To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: HPforGrownups-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From CareALotsClouds at aol.com Tue Aug 17 17:39:37 2004 From: CareALotsClouds at aol.com (CareALotsClouds at aol.com) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 13:39:37 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: LV never loved anyone Message-ID: <1c0.1d2c6255.2e539cd9@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110374 In a message dated 17/08/04 18:18:00 GMT Daylight Time, susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net writes: > And most of > > all: if he needed help and didn't get it, then he's not the only > > one responsible for the existence of LV (could DD be reluctant to > > kill *Tom* out of *guilt* ?). Unfortunately, I don't have the book on me, its on loan, but if I recall the duel between DD and LV, DD said 'I would not be satisfied with just killing you, Tom' (after DD just used a mysterious spell on him which was white) And he went on to explain that there are worse things than death. (If someone could find that passage I would be greatful lol) Anyway, it sounds to me as if Dumbledore erm, dislikes him greatly and seems to think he deserves to be.. erm? Im trying to choose my words carefully here... ok I have a good word. Punishment. Yes that will do. In any case however, I have often wondered that Dumbledore indeed knew back then that Riddle was going off track but all he did was 'keep an annoyingly close watch on him'. Didnt seem to help him with his incapabilities 'to love'. Having said that he has never loved... I think it kind of makes sense. Who is it that he would of loved? He lived in an Orphanage. The thought of him falling for a woman just doesnt seem to work... He had no family members to love, nor anyone close. Whether he was liked at school is a point to raise, by assuming what Dumbledore said (handsome and popular), it seems he just turned on his charm. His fake charm. He knew how to act to get what he wanted. I can't see, looking back, who he would of loved, and who would of loved him. There is still points in his life which is shrouded in mystery however... Nicola [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 17:41:06 2004 From: aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com (aboutthe1910s) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 17:41:06 -0000 Subject: Snape experiencing love (was: Why he is still alive?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110375 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > "doddiemoemoe" wrote: > > Neither Snape nor Voldemort have ever experienced "love" according > > to JK (or probably any sort of compassion for that matter). > > > SSSusan: > Quick question for you. Can you show me where JKR said Snape had > never experienced love? Are you speaking only of romantic love or > any kind of love? > > Siriusly Snapey Susan As far as compassion, I strongly disagree that we haven't seen Snape show any--admittedly his most compassionate moments may have had *other* motivations, but that doesn't mean that compassion was absolutely *not* a motive--for example, in PS, Snape's counter-curse to keep Harry from falling off of his broom has been brushed off as just having been done so Snape could even himself with James for saving his life and no longer be indebted in anyway, and while I'm sure that he was conscious of this, I really believe that there was at least some tiny spark of compassion somewhere deep down inside. And there is the way he reacts to the trio in PoA when they say that Sirius is innocent--he may not be kind or warm, but there's something about the way he believes that they have been confunded that has always struck me as--I don't know exactly, it's just somehow always given me the impression that he sort of meant well in regards to that whole situation... aboutthe1910s From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 17:51:15 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 17:51:15 -0000 Subject: Snape experiencing love (was: Why he is still alive?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110376 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "aboutthe1910s" <> As far as compassion, I strongly disagree that we haven't seen Snape > show any--admittedly his most compassionate moments may have had > *other* motivations, but that doesn't mean that compassion was > absolutely *not* a motive--for example, in PS, Snape's counter-curse > to keep Harry from falling off of his broom has been brushed off as > just having been done so Snape could even himself with James for > saving his life and no longer be indebted in anyway, and while I'm > sure that he was conscious of this, I really believe that there was at > least some tiny spark of compassion somewhere deep down inside. And > there is the way he reacts to the trio in PoA when they say that > Sirius is innocent--he may not be kind or warm, but there's something > about the way he believes that they have been confunded that has > always struck me as--I don't know exactly, it's just somehow always > given me the impression that he sort of meant well in regards to that > whole situation... > Alla: Oh, Snape and compassion. :o) I don't know about PS/SS, certainly have no clue what was going on in Snape's head. I sincerely hope that he had at least some compassion for Harry, BUT I strongly disagree that when he said that kids were confunded he was being ...eh, compassionate. Frankly, that was one of my "let's slap Snape " PoA moments. I always got an impression that Snape was lying through his teeth when he said that Trio was confunded that he was doing it for one purpose and for one purpose only - to incriminate Sirius even more. If we were to talk about Snape and compassion in PoA, I would probably choose the moment, when he screams at Harry that he is just as his father. I always thought that even though Snape was saying despicable things, he did not want James to die and that he did not want Harry to die either. From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 18:12:07 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 18:12:07 -0000 Subject: Voldermort not LV In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110377 Karen wrote: > I started scaning the books (all 5) looking for someone else refer to > LV as Voldemort without the Lord and have only found one other person > to use Voldemort instead of LV and that is Herminone at the end of > chapter 15 in OotP. > Now Cory: I've always attached a fair amount of significance to how different characters refer to Voldemort, though I've never drawn a distinction between Voldemort and Lord Voldemort before. To me, it seems that the strongest characters in the book refer to him by his proper name, while the weaker characters refer to him as "you know who" or something comparable. Incidentally, for me, one of the most powerful moments in OotP was at the end of Chapter 15, when Hermione used the name for the first time. I took it as a sign that Hermione has taken another step toward coming into her own; that in at least one way, she is now on par with the stronger characters in the book (Harry and Dumbledore). Or I could be making something out of nothing... --Cory From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Aug 17 19:07:38 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 19:07:38 -0000 Subject: Voldemort, the Prophecy and the HBP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110378 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Mandy" wrote: Mandy > I just don't know, but I am interested in your daemon possessor. Any ideas on who or what it is?< I suspect it's the opposite of the power in the locked room -- so my guess would be an embodiment or projection of hate, made concrete, and perhaps also mindful, by magic. My guess is Salazar always distrusted but didn't originally *hate* non-purebloods. However, in his quest for power he created or summoned this thing and it filled him with its hatred, or tried to. Pippin From navarro198 at hotmail.com Tue Aug 17 19:08:42 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 19:08:42 -0000 Subject: some sirius hinting... yay puns! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110379 HunterGreen: Not to mention the number of families with only one child. Perhaps its just because its simplier to write, but the only siblings that we know of are the Weasleys, the Creeveys, the Blacks, the Evans' the Dumbledores and the Patils (who only sort of count because the girls are twins). Bookworm: According to the "Extra Stuff/Edits" on JKR's website, Dean Thomas has "a number of half-brothers and sisters." Mostly likely they are all muggles and just aren't important to the story, so we haven't heard about them, i.e. JKR doesn't waste valuable page-room on non-essentials like extra siblings :-) Huntergreen: James had to get all that > money from somewhere. I wonder if he had inheritence too? Josh: I do believe James' inheritance has already been mentioned in a chat/interview. It's just hard to always find this stuff! :) Bookworm: >From an interview back in 2000: <> http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2000/1000-livechat-aol.html Ravenclaw Bookworm From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Aug 17 19:12:10 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 19:12:10 -0000 Subject: DD - maybe. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110380 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > > Yes, I've mentioned all of these things before. Also, and including, > that Ron is Dumbledore and that the reason we have not seen his > patronus is because it's obviously the same one. > Kneasy: A bit late, but never mind; maybe you'll read the back posts and find out just how many have said the same thing. But not very many of those subscribe to this Time Travel perversion. The one stone cold blocker on all these TT theories:_ Why is all the action *now* when all the preliminaries, foundations, original acts happened way back *then*? Why hasn't Voldy already been sorted? What's the delay? Hasn't DD/Ron already had 50 years to sort out the Tom Riddle problem? And 15 years to sort out the Voldy problem? Or perhaps he forgot to wind his watch. It's no good having TT if you don't use it, and I see no point in DD allowing who knows how many to die when a little judicious TT would prevent it. It's the equivalent to allowing Harry to die by the Lake, something that did not happen because it was preventable *at the time*. But TT was used and the result is there is only one timeline for what happened at the Lake; at no time did Harry get taken by the Dementors. It seems to me your theory requires 2 separate over-lapping timelines. I won't accept that as a reasonable plot wrinkle. If JKR tries that I'll be sending a *very* nasty letter enclosing a torn-up book to Scotland. vmonte: > > I would get a kick if... > Ron got blasted into the past during a fight/encounter with > Bellatrix. (Perhaps there will be another fight at the DoM and Ron > will get blasted into the curtain, but just as he flies through it > Hagrid tosses him a portkey.) People will assume he is dead but he > really is not. > > Ron is transported back 132 years. He realizes that he is stuck in > the past and goes to Hogwarts to finish his 7th year. As a joke he > registers himself at school as Albus Dumbledore (not realizing that > he will really be known as this person). Kind of like when Harry > jumped on the Knight Bus and introduced himself as Neville, and we > later find out the prophecy could have been about him. The last line > of the book clues the readers to the fact that Ron is actually DD > because we see a close-up of the scar on Ron's leg that looks like > the london underground. HAHAHA > Kneasy: Vivid imagination. But it ain't gonna happen, we both know that. 'Cos Ron is, to put it mildly, an intellectual lightweight verging on half-wit. Ron? Become DD? Yeah, and Trevor is Godric Gryffindor. Ron will be bloody lucky if he survives to the end of the series. As yet I haven't bothered writing many posts about the kids in the books, mostly because they aren't as interesting as the adults. Frankly, who the hell cares what a teenager thinks? Assuming that they think at all, which is not something one can take for granted. But maybe I should cast my beady eye over a few of these post-adolescent wonders with an in-depth analysis or two. Right; make a note, "As soon as the Olympics are over and before the Ryder Cup starts, have a good look at these irritating little squits." Kneasy From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 19:22:07 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 19:22:07 -0000 Subject: DD - maybe. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110381 Kneasy wrote: > Vivid imagination. But it ain't gonna happen, we both know that. > 'Cos Ron is, to put it mildly, an intellectual lightweight verging on > half-wit. > Ron? Become DD? Yeah, and Trevor is Godric Gryffindor. Now Cory: This is true (if a bit harsh). However, I seriously doubt that Dumbledore was as wise at age 15 as he is at 150, regardless or whether or not he is Ron. --Cory (Still not sold on Ron=DD, but I do think it's an interesting theory.) From navarro198 at hotmail.com Tue Aug 17 19:45:26 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 19:45:26 -0000 Subject: Godparents (WAS: some sirius hinting... yay puns!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110382 >>> Lissa wrote: > I admit, I've been thinking this too. However, I wonder if the rest of the sentence of "If Sirius had married...." would have been, "If Sirius had married, then Harry might have had a godmother." Godparents don't have to be married, but since it appears that the godparents are also the guardians, then if Sirius WAS married then the wife WOULD be a guardian as well. <<< Brenda: Well... I don't know how godparents are appointed, but the fact that Sirius was married would not necessarily hint that his wife is Harry's godmother. Wouldn't it be Lily's turn to choose her baby's godmother? Bookworm: Godparents are asked, not appointed. In our case, my husband and I decided together on who we would ask - not you pick one, I pick the other. Also, godparents are not *necessarily* named as guardians. They frequently are, only because you pick people closest to you for both the honor and the responsibility. Example: I have two children and two sisters. As you might guess, each sister is godmother to one of my children. The husband of one sister is also godfather, but the other sister isn't married, so a close friend agreed to be godfather. However, only one sister has been named as guardian in the event it is necessary. Look at James' and Lily's families: Lily was estranged from the only sibling we know about. James had no sibling. The one person who was *like a brother* to James was asked to be godfather. Usually there is only one godparent of each gender, so James asked the closest of his three friends. If Sirius had been married it was likely his wife would have been asked, but that isn't a requirement. I read JKR's statement as saying that the ceremony was planned so quickly and secretly they couldn't invite anyone else, but that Sirius' wife would have been included with him if she had existed. Ravenclaw Bookworm From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 17 19:49:21 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 19:49:21 -0000 Subject: Draco's nature (was Power vs Morality was LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110383 AmanitaMuscaria: > > Hmmm - who else do we know of who doesn't even > > pretend to be good, and yet was made a prefect? Draco doesn't > > even have the excuse of being in an orphanage to excuse his > > spite. psyche/Kate: > I think Draco's excuses are just as good as LV's. He's had a > neglectful, loveless, abusive upbringing by a Death Eater. It's > clear that his father has left huge scars on him. I get the > impression of a miserable, frightened, lonely boy who tries to make > himself feel and look big by bullying. Even his loathing of Harry > seems to me mostly rooted in wounded pride and jealously, > maintained by the impulse to agree with his father rather than a > simple rejection of Harry's personal qualities. His cruelty > and disdain have been shaped by lack of authentic love combined > with excessive material spoiling. SSSusan: I think you're right that Draco is frightened of his father and probably somewhat miserable, but I don't see how you can conclude that his life has been *loveless*. Are you positive Lucius doesn't love Draco? Surely he's a tough disciplinarian, but are you sure he doesn't love him? And Narcissa? Yes, she seems to spoil him to no end, but I also got the impression (founded? unfounded?) that she loves him very much. Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 17 20:02:30 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 20:02:30 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110384 Alla: > Hey, Susan! I agree with you. I don't think it was that simple and > what Tom Riddle chose, eventually will come back to haunt him, but I > am trying to figure out that obvious inconsistency how could he not > to be born evil and never loved anybody. Hmm. Another mystery. :o) SSSusan: I guess I look at it this way. NO, Tom was absolutely not born evil. He was *just born* and, unfortunately, was one of those very, very unlucky people who ends up in an orphanage because there is no family member willing or able to take him. I reiterate, no, he was not born evil. While I assume we're supposed to believe the orphanage experience wasn't a pleasant one, I still believe that there may have been a worker or two who showed an interest in him. And even if not, when he arrived at Hogwarts, I'm betting that at LEAST DD, and likely other people [his HoH, teachers, fellow students], showed an interest in him as well. Granted, having had NO time w/ a loving family, his task of learning to love or empathize w/ others is a pretty big one, but per Pam's comments earlier, it would be possible. Now, Harry had the relative luxury of having had 15 very important months of loving and bonding with his parents. Unlike Tom, we *know* a certain amount about what his treatment was like for the next 10 years, and it wasn't pretty. Yet when Harry arrived at Hogwarts, he was OPEN to reaching out to others, being compassionate, establishing loving relationships. Can the differences in Harry & Tom ALL be attributed to the differences in the first 15 months of their lives? I'll bet some of it can be, but I'm not buying that ALL of it can. Based on the kinds of things JKR has stated about choice so far, I believe that we'll find that Tom had opportunity to overcome the bummer of a start he had in life and that he ELECTED to not do so. Just my hypothesis on this one. Siriusly Snapey Susan From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Aug 17 20:09:52 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 20:09:52 -0000 Subject: DD - maybe. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110385 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > Vivid imagination. But it ain't gonna happen, we both know that. > 'Cos Ron is, to put it mildly, an intellectual lightweight verging on half-wit.< He may prefer to coast through his classes, but IIRC, Ron's grades are comparable to Harry's -- he'll never get the Granger award for academic excellence, but he's not such a slouch. Hermione may be helping out with his homework, but she's not sitting his exams. And our boy is a chess player -- not a game for nitwits--and he knows how to win, so he can *plan* . And who does that sound like? Not that I think that Ron is DD!, but you can't rule it out for lack of intellect. I'd be more convinced if Ron took up chamber music and tenpin bowling. Pippin From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Aug 17 20:20:13 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 20:20:13 -0000 Subject: Voldermort not LV In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110386 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kmcbears1" wrote: > I just re-read PS/SS, CoS, and PoA this weekend and noticed something > interesting. > > Harry never calls LV by his title - Lord. > .....and have only found one other person > to use Voldemort instead of LV and that is Herminone at the end of > chapter 15 in OotP. Geoff: You overlooked... '"Well, I don' like sayin' the name if I can help it, No one does." "Why not?" "Gulpin' gargoyles, Harry, people are still scared. Blimey, this is difficult. See, there was this wizard who went.... bad. As bad as you can go. Worse. Worse than worse. His name was..." Hagrid gulped but no words came out. "Could you write it down?" Harry suggested. "Nah - can't spell it. All right - Voldemort." Hagrid shuddered.' (PS "The Keeper of the Keys" p.45 UK edition) From dk59us at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 20:25:38 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 20:25:38 -0000 Subject: Is JkR about to reveal? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110387 Valky wrote: > In her Edinborough interview, Jkr says perhaps *too* much about > Petunia. > > If Petunia is a witch, will Jo be soon revealing it? I see her > making /no/ effort to hide it anymore in her interview. 'That's a > good guess...' hence leaving not much option but to call > her "WITCH!" seems to me like a shrug from JkR saying 'the game is > up.. I will have to tell you the truth about that soon.' > vmonte responds: > Petunia is definitely the witch who will get her powers late in > life. I think JKR is implying/spilling the beans about this. Now Eustace_Scrubb: Especially when combined with the subsequent question and answer about Dudley: Is there more to Dudley than meets the eye? No. [Laughter]. What you see is what you get. I am happy to say that he is definitely a character without much back story. He is just Dudley. This seems to pretty much eliminate one of the other prime candidates for being the late bloomer. Now, it sounds like it doesn't happen until the 7th book, _unless_ the incident helps propel Harry out of Privet Drive early in the 6th book. Once again, one wonders what Dumbledore offered Petunia in return for taking Harry in? Can DD have given her the ability to tap into some recessive magic gene in a case of dire emergency? Seems far-fetched...could the ancient magic that protected Harry extend to a one-time ability to use magic on Petunia's part? Maybe she doesn't turn out to be a full-fledged witch. Questions...they're what we live on! Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 20:36:56 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 20:36:56 -0000 Subject: Draco's nature (was Power vs Morality was LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110389 > > SSSusan: > > I think you're right that Draco is frightened of his father and > > probably somewhat miserable, but I don't see how you can conclude > > that his life has been *loveless*. Are you positive Lucius doesn't > > love Draco? Surely he's a tough disciplinarian, but are you sure > he > > doesn't love him? And Narcissa? Yes, she seems to spoil him to no > > end, but I also got the impression (founded? unfounded?) that she > > loves him very much. > > > > > Alla: > > Definitely Sussan. I am with you on this one too. Could anybody show > me ONE example from the books where we can see or at least infer that > Draco is not loved? > > Draco is heavily influenced by his father, sure, but not loved? > Or ...abused? Where, where, where? > > I have an impression that Draco has everything he wants and very > happy with what he has. Except of course he alwasy wants what Harry has. Let me just express again my kind of annoyance > that JKR gave up on that character so easily. From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Tue Aug 17 20:42:17 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 20:42:17 -0000 Subject: Voldermort not LV In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110390 >>> Karen wrote: > Harry never calls LV by his title - Lord. Many of you may have > picked up on this before but by time I was finished book two. I > don't know if I glossed onver this in previous readings (and there > have been many) but it was as if the absense of the word Lord were > neon underscores. Harry is the only one to use just "Voldermort" > when refering to LV. <<< Brenda: I have always viewed Harry calling him Voldemort as one of the many things he had missed out from WW. The first time he learns the name from Hagrid, he has no idea how much terror Voldemort has caused. Sure, he 'heard' about it, but it takes time to register. I don't think he *really* knew how frightening Voldemort really was till the rebirth ceremony in GoF. God knows I did. I mean, Dark Lord or not, we are talking someone who failed to kill him when he was 1. Would you be so frightened if you were Harry and knew nothing of the dark times? Harry uses the name (almost) recklessly. He attempted "You-Know-Who" but after Dumbledore's 'fear of the name increases fear of the thing itself' speech, he never looks back. Everytime he says "Voldemort", there is ALWAYS a mention of *someone* gasping or terrified (usually Ron, Molly, other DA members, etc). Everytime I read it I get this slight uncomfortable feeling that Harry is PROUD of it. That he can use the terror name freely while others are too cowardly to do so. Makes him look stronger, doesn't it. As for Harry calling him Lord, "I will eat Buckbeak" (Sirius, GoF) before that happens. Remember during Harry's duel with Bellatrix, he carelessly screamed 'Voldemort' and 'did you know, he was half-blood too...' He will never 'Lord', Voldy has done too many spiteful things to Harry. Now, when Hermione refered to him as "Voldemort", it took real courage out of her. The powerful effect it'd brought upon Harry, he controls his rage after that (I believe he was upset about DA suggestion). > Dumbledore uses Lord Voldemort or Tom, Death eaters use Dark Lord, > even Sirius and Lupin use the title. I don't remember Sirius and Lupin calling him 'Lord'... was that in OoP? Or... Brenda From caesian at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 20:51:38 2004 From: caesian at yahoo.com (caesian) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 13:51:38 -0700 Subject: Petunia's Secret Message-ID: <3C0019BD-F08F-11D8-9580-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110391 I've also posted this over at the HogsHead, so to those of you who follow both please forgive me for belaboring this particular subject. The overall argument of the essay can be summarized as follows. 1) Petunia and Dumbledore have a pact, the terms of which were arranged in the letter Dumbledore left with Harry and were sealed when Petunia accepted Harry into her home. 2) Vernon is unaware of this pact, even of the protection given Harry by his residence at the Dursleys. 3) Dumbledore knew the pact would be sealed when he left Harry in Privet Drive, although he also knew Harry would suffer at the hands of the Dursleys. 4) Petunia accepted Harry despite her bitter resentment of him and her sister, and in full knowledge that Harry was in grave danger, a danger that could pose a threat to her own family. 5) That there is more to this "pact" than mere protection of Harry and/or the Dursleys. 6) That whatever Petunia is getting in return for allowing Harry houseroom, she has kept the deal a secret from Vernon for nearly 15 years. 7) The pact may pertain to either magical abilities, or a secret from the wizarding world. Petunia's Pact On "the dull, grey Tuesday our story starts", while Uncle Vernon is plagued by visions of literate cats and the absence of collecting tins, "Mrs Dursley had a nice, normal day." Late on Halloween night, the very night before our story starts, her sister and her brother-in-law, Lily and James Potter (who she "hadn't met in several years"), were killed by the most evil wizard of all time. Petunia's infant nephew Harry was taken from the ruined house in Godric's Hollow, scarred but alive. Although the first half of the opening chapter, The Boy Who Lived, is often told from Vernon's point-of-view, these initial descriptions are given by the author's own voice. The author tells us that Mrs. Dursley noticed nothing unusual during her "nice, normal day" that Tuesday - not the owl flying past her kitchen window, or even the cat on the garden wall with spectacle markings. Unlike Vernon, she overheard nothing, was not hugged by any strangers wearing violet cloaks, and was not called a "muggle, whatever that means". She is blissfully unaware of shooting stars, funny looking people all over the place, and "a whisper, a whisper about the Potters". She tells Vernon that she hasn't spoken to her sister lately, and is angered when he asks - because "they normally pretended she didn't have a sister". That night, while Vernon peaks out the window to see the map-reading cat still on his garden wall - as he lays fretting over the mysterious events of the day - "Mrs Dursley fell asleep quickly". That Petunia might have had a terrible Halloween night, including any knowledge of the Potter's fate, seems very unlikely. All of this is about to change for Petunia. That night, her nephew Harry Potter is left on the doorstep of number 4 privet drive, clutching an envelope in one small hand. The envelope contains a letter from Albus Dumbledore and it is Petunia Dursley who finds Harry and the letter the following morning, waking him with a scream as she puts out the milk bottles. The letter was originally intended for the Dursleys: "[Harry's] aunt and uncle will be able to explain everything to him when he's older. I've written them a letter." The letter probably explained that the Potter's house had been destroyed, because Petunia mentions it twice: PS, The Keeper of the Keys "-and then, if you please, [Lily] went and got herself blown up and we got landed with you!" PS, The Vanishing Glass '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 house in ruins?" she snarled. 'I won't blow up the house," said Harry.... The letter probably also explained that the Potter's house had been destroyed in a deadly struggle concerning her nephew and Lord Voldemort. Petunia's response to his return, so different from Vernon's, belies that she also "had an inkling of what Lord Voldemort being back might mean": OotP, A Peck of Owls "He's back," said Harry heavily. .... "Back?" whispered Aunt Petunia. She was looking at Harry as she had never looked at him before. And all of the sudden, for the very first time in his life, Harry fully appreciated that Aunt Petunia was his mother's sister. ... Her large, pale eyes (so unlike her sister's) were not norrowed in dislike or anger; They were wide and fearful. ... "Yes," Harry said, talking directly to Aunt Petunia now. "He came back a month ago. I saw him." Her hand found Dudley's massive leather-clad shoulders and clutched them. But the letter had other purposes as well. We know, as stated by Dumbledore, that the letter informed Petunia that "allowing [Harry] houseroom may well have kept [him] alive for the past fifteen years" (OotP, The Lost Prophecy). And we know that by taking Harry into her home, Petunia sealed a pact with Dumbledore. OotP, The Lost Prophesy "She doesn't love me," said Harry at once. "She doesn't give a damn - " "But she took you," Dumbledore cut across him. "She may have taken you grudgingly, furiously, unwillingly, bitterly, yet still she took you, and in doing so, SHE SEALED THE CHARM I PLACED UPON YOU. Your mother's sacrifice made the bond of blood the strongest shield I could give you." ... "...Your aunt knows this. I explained what I had done in the letter I left, with you, on her doorstep. She knows that allowing you houseroom may well have kept you alive for the past fifteen years." .... "I thought she might need reminding of the PACT SHE HAD SEALED by taking you...." (my caps) It seems that the only way she could have learned of the fate of the Potter's house is through Dumbledore's letter, although they have probably had no direct contact since that time. Certainly, she is unaware of Voldemort's return until Harry tells her. Harry has never seen the letter, nor does he understand why Aunt Petunia agreed to "grudgingly, furiously, unwillingly, bitterly" seal a "pact" by taking him in. By the time Harry is sitting in Privet drive on Dudley's 11th birthday, when Petunia scoffs that he'll reduce the house to ruins if left there alone, the pact has been sealed nearly 10 years, and as far as anyone can see "Privet Drive had hardly changed at all." As for Vernon, he knew before Harry arrived at number 4 that Petunia's sister was a "freak", that her husband was a "good-for-nothing", and that "the Potter's were as unDursleyish as it was possible to be". After Harry arrived in Privet Drive, Vernon and Petunia made their own pact. "I'm not having one in the house, Petunia! Didn't we swear when we took him in we'd stamp out that dangerous nonsense?" PS, The Vanishing Glass "We swore when we took him in we'd put a stop to that rubbish,' said Uncle Vernon, 'swore we'd stamp it out of him! Wizard indeed!' PS, The Keeper of the Keys But, curiously, Uncle Vernon seems to be largely unaware of the contents of Dumbledore's letter. Thus far, canon evidence suggests that he knows nothing more than the cover story they gave to Harry, and that the boy was likely to take after his unDursleyish parents if not properly stamped upon, starved and generally bullied. Aunt Petunia looked as though she might faint. She sank into the chair beside Dudley, her face in her hands. The remains of the envelope smoldered into ash in the silence. "What is this?" Uncle Vernon said hoarsely. "What - I don't - Petunia?" Aunt Petunia said nothing. Dudley was staring stupidly at his mother, his mouth hanging open. The silence spiraled horribly. Harry was watching his aunt, utterly bewildered, his head throbbing fit to burst. "Petunia, dear?" said Uncle Vernon timidly. "P-Petunia?" She raised her head. She was still trembling. She swallowed. "The boy - the boy will have to stay, Vernon," she said weakly. "W-What?" "He stays," she said. She was not looking at Harry. She got to her feet again. "He ... but Petunia ..." OotP, A Peck of Owls The scene goes on in this vein. It is clear that Vernon hasn't the faintest idea what is going on. Petunia makes the decision that Harry must stay, and it is to Petunia that the Howler is addressed. Petunia is the on commanded to "REMEMBER MY LAST". But what transpires immediately prior to the Howler is even more telling of Vernon's ignorance. OotP, A Peck of Owls "He must have sent them," Harry said quietly, more to himself than to Uncle Vernon. "What's that? Who must have sent them?" "Lord Voldemort" He registered dimly how strange it was that the Dursleys, who flinched, winced, and squawked if they heard words like "wizard," "magic," or "wand", could hear the name of the most evil wizard of all time without the slightest tremor. "Lord - hang on," said Uncle Vernon, his face screwed up, a look of dawning comprehension in his piggy eyes. "I've heard that name .. that was the one who ..." "Murdered my parents, yes," Harry said dully. "But he's gone," said Uncle Vernon impatiently, without the slightest sign that the murder of Harry's parents might be a painful topic to anybody. "That giant bloke said so. He's gone." .... "He's back," said Harry heavily. .... "Hang on," said Uncle Vernon, looking from his wife to Harry and back again, apparently dazed and confused by the unprecedented understanding that seemed to have sprung up between them. "Hang on. This Lord Voldythingy's back, you say." "Yes." "The one who murdered your parents." "Yes." "And now he's sending dismembers after you?" "Looks like it," said Harry. "I see," said Uncle Vernon, looking from his white-faced wife to Harry and hitching up his trousers. He seemed to be swelling, his great purple face stretching before Harry's eyes. "Well, that settles it," he said, his shirt straining as he inflated himself, "*you can get out of this house, boy!" Vernon then rants for several paragraphs, citing previous provocations - Aunt Marge bobbing around on the ceiling, that flying Ford Anglia. He gives no indication that he has ever understood until that moment that Harry was in any danger from anyone in the WW. Why does Vernon only now realize that allowing Harry houseroom may pose a danger to his family? Furthermore, he seems completely unaware that, so long as Harry stays in the house, he is protected. The basic terms of the sealed pact - that Harry is in danger, which is why he must stay with the Durlseys, because, so long as he stays in the house he is protected there - are evidently unknown to Vernon Dursley. In fact, it is possible that Vernon's only source of information about Harry's special circumstances in the WW comes from what Hagrid said to Harry in the Hut on the Rock. It certainly seems that Petunia has not discussed Voldemort with him. With the sole exception that he knew Harry was in need of "stamping out", Vernon has never made any indication to suggest that he knows more than what Harry or Hagrid have said in his presence. We don't even know for sure that the car-crash story was not also told to Vernon. And while Petunia responds to the return of Lord Voldemort with an inkling of what this means, Vernon has to struggle to even remember who Lord Voldemort is. It seems that Vernon knows only what he needs to know to behave towards Harry as he does. What did Petunia tell Vernon about the sudden appearance of their nephew? Probably very little. Vernon already knew that something was going on because the day before Harry appeared, he had heard whispers of the Potters, saw strange people in cloaks and was being stalked by a literate cat. Petunia certainly told him that the Potters were dead and that they were stuck with Harry. If he asked why the couldn't just send the boy to an orphanage, I doubt Petunia would have needed to give much reason. She certainly gave little explanation for Harry's continued residence even after the Dementor attack, and Vernon seemed bewildered but did not argue. Perhaps she told him that otherwise the neighbors would talk. It seems clear that Petunia and Vernon agreed then that Harry's magical abilities should be squashed out of him, and that they should keep him as downtrodden as possible in hopes of accomplishing this. Petunia certainly had never feigned any affection for Harry. He has never needed to understand that there is another reason his nephew lives at Privet Drive. After the Howler arrives, Vernon is left stammering in confusing at the unexpected and inexplicable change of heart on the part of his wife. He evidently does not know of the pact between Petunia and Dumbledore because Petunia has not told him in the 14 years since it was sealed. Although Dumbledore originally left his letter for both of the Dursleys, he now seems to know that it is Petunia alone that he is dealing with. It is to Petunia that he addressed his Howler, and of Petunia alone that he speaks when he explains the pact to Harry in OotP. Why is Petunia keeping the pact a secret from Vernon? Edinburgh festival interview, August 14 2004: Q: Is Aunt Petunia a Squib? A: Good question. No, she is not, but - [Laughter]. No, she is not a Squib. She is a Muggle, but - [Laughter]. You will have to read the other books. You might have got the impression that there is a little bit more to Aunt Petunia than meets the eye, and you will find out what it is. She is not a squib, although that is a very good guess. Oh, I am giving a lot away here. I am being shockingly indiscreet. But, there is another question to ask first: why did Petunia agree? Especially as it does seem that she was aware of the possibility of danger to herself, Vernon or Dudley as a consequence of doing so. She knew on the morning she took Harry and sealed the pact that an evil wizard had killed her sister and brother-in-law, destroyed their home, and that their orphan son was in grave danger. A danger so severe that only allowing him houseroom with her family could ensure his safety (Dumbledore tells Harry that this was explained in the letter). When Dumbledore sends a Howler to Privet Drive ("REMEMBER MY LAST, PETUNIA" OotP, A Peck of Owls), he does so because he "suspected the dementor attack might have awoken her to the dangers of having you as a surrogate son." /Awoken./ 1. To rouse from sleep; waken. 2. To stir the interest of; excite. 3. To stir up (memories, for example). Why, in spite of danger, and grudging, furious, unwilling and bitter feelings towards her nephew, does she take Harry and seal the pact? Why does she take him when she "doesn't give a damn -" about Harry? Why does she enter into an agreement that seems to terrify her, and into a relationship with Dumbledore, a powerful wizard, that is hardly amicable in nature: OotP, A Peck of Owls "An awful voice filled the kitchen, echoing in the confined space, issuing from the burning letter on the table. REMEMBER MY LAST, PETUNIA. Aunt Petunia looked as though she might faint. She sank into the chair beside Dudley, her face in her hands. The remains of the envelope smoldered into ash in the silence. "What is this?" Uncle Vernon said hoarsely. "What - I don't - Petunia?" Aunt Petunia said nothing. Dudley was staring stupidly at his mother, his mouth hanging open. The silence spiraled horribly. Harry was watching his aunt, utterly bewildered, his head throbbing fit to burst. "Petunia, dear?" said Uncle Vernon timidly. "P-Petunia?" She raised her head. She was still trembling. She swallowed. "The boy - the boy will have to stay, Vernon," she said weakly. "W-What?" "He stays," she said. She was not looking at Harry. She got to her feet again. "He ... but Petunia ..." And then, why doesn't she tell her husband, Vernon - her stalwart, walrus-mustachioed protector from most things magical? If she has taken in Harry because she promised Lily, or feels obligated to honor her sister in death, then why keep it a secret? (It very unlikely that Lily would have wanted Harry raised by Petunia and Vernon, or that she would have asked her sister to care for Harry in the event of her death. This seems instead to have been Dumbledore's choice, by his own recounting of events.) Likewise, if Petunia has taken in Harry only because otherwise he would die, or because the protection placed on Harry also protects the Dursleys - why not tell Vernon? Personally, I agree with Harry that Petunia doesn't give a damn about him. She's not just the muggliest muggle, she's a Dursley. She certainly has treated him horribly, or completely ignored him, throughout any and all interactions in canon. She is virtually absent between PS and OotP, letting Vernon do the bullying, and simply starving Harry and maintaining a stony silence when not pursing her lips and chewing her tongue. Does she care if Harry lives or dies? Maybe. Vernon is the one who is always hoping Harry will get the death penalty, or some such. It is, of course, possible that Petunia took Harry only because otherwise he would die. It is also possible that Dumbledore merely promised that the Dursleys would be protected, given the additional risks they were incurring by taking Harry in. But then why make a "pact" and keep it a secret from Vernon? Vernon tries to throw Harry out in OotP. Why try to throw him out in the first place if there is a "pact" to keep the family safe from just this kind of situation? He acts, instead, as if he has only just realized that Harry poses a considerable threat to the Dursley family by his associations with the WW, LV in particular. He certainly does not act as if this eventuality was one he anticipated, had planned for, or had allowed Harry to live with his family for years for the reason of averting such a distaster. While Petunia might have a heart of gold under her angry exterior - if she took Harry in to protect him - there is just no reason to keep it a secret from Vernon. Vernon has always known that Harry is a wizard, and that Lily and James had been a witch and a wizard. Why is Petunia keeping the terms of this terrifying agreement secret from Vernon? Certainly not because it pertains to the magical world - because Vernon already knows about magic, witches and wizards. There also seems to be no evidence to suggest that the Dursley's, if they had not taken Harry in, would have needed protection after Voldemort's fall, or that it had been provided prior. And if Petunia's motive was the protection of the family, less secrecy and anti-wizard feeling might have been one expected result. OotP, The Lost Prophecy, again: "But she took you," Dumbledore cut across him. "She may have taken you grudgingly, furiously, unwillingly, bitterly, yet still she took you, and in doing so, she sealed the charm I placed upon YOU [Harry]. Your mother's sacrifice made the bond of blood the strongest shield I could give YOU [Harry]." - my caps This seems to me that Lily's sacrifice was used by Dumbledore to protect Harry, and Harry alone. I do not see any evidence to suggest that the Dursleys ever were in danger prior to Voldemort's fall. The only reason they could possibly be in danger now is because they have taken in Harry. If they had not taken in Harry, they would not be in any danger. Further, I do not imagine that Dumbledore would fail to protect them, even if they did not take in Harry, if they had been in any independent danger after the fall of LV. The Dursleys are protected at Privet Drive because Harry is so well protected at Privet Drive. But the reason that that protection is necessary, because they have taken in Harry, is not a reason TO take in Harry, follow? And again, if the deal is meant to keep the Dursley's safe - why is it a secret from Vernon? Why do the Dursleys (even being Dursleys) continue to fear wizards if they are under the protection of Albus Dumbledore. In fact, it seems that Vernon has never even heard of Albus Dumbledore prior to the Hogwarts letters and his meeting with Hagrid in PS. "I will not pay to have some crack-pot old fool teach him magic tricks!" Hardly a way to refer to the family protector. Let's look at it logically (is that Lavender Brown wailing in the background?): if the pact was that Dumbledore was protecting the family, and Vernon knew that this was why they had taken in Harry, he would either a) be more impressed by Dumbledore because he believed he was being protected or b) if he thinks Dumbledore is a crack-pot old fool, he wouldn't keep Harry, because the protection Dumbledore was providing would be considered useless. And what is Dumbledore's "LAST"? Why is he sending Petunia Howlers that mystify Vernon? Why is Petunia so terrified by his message? These are not events consistent with the idea of a simple protection pact. To sum up what we know already, Petunia entered into a terrifying pact with Dumbledore and has kept it a secret from her husband for nearly 15 years. She did so although she has never given any sign that she cares for Harry, and in spite of considerable risk to her own family. That must have been one persuasive letter. How else could Dumbledore have felt confident enough to merely leave Harry on a doorstep, with only a letter for persuasion? He must have known enough to make him certain that his terms would be accepted. And, we are assured he knows what he is doing. When Professor McGonagall expresses shock and outrage on hearing the nature of Dumbledore's errand (PS, The Boy Who Lived), mentioning the dubious character of the inhabitants of 4 Privet Drive, Dumbledore does not express surprise. He knew already what the Dursley's were like, and knew that he was "condemning [Harry] to ten dark and difficult years." (OotP, The Lost Prophecy) "You might ask - and with good reason - why it had to be so." What is the nature of the pact between Petunia and Dumbledore? We know, because Dumbledore has now explained to Harry, what he gained by the pact. Harry is somehow protected from physical harm (if not psychological abuse), by Voldemort, his followers, and probably even muggles like Uncle Vernon when he is at 4 Privet Drive. It seems that this facilitated protection for Harry is sufficient reason for the pact on Dumbledore's side, and there may be little else he expects of Petunia. Clearly, kind treatment of Harry was not part of the bargain, as Dumbledore is keenly aware of Harry's mistreatment at the hands of the Dursleys, including Petunia. Although he disapproves, he rarely intervenes ("Harry Potter, The Cupboard Under the Stairs/The Smallest Bedroom/ The Floor..."). But what is Petunia getting? I doubt Dumbledore resorted to threats, falsehoods or deception in his letter (although a bit of Peter Rabbit trickery would seem fitting). He also seems to have intended the letter for both Dursleys, although Petunia keeping it a secret, and he now seems to regard it as a pact between himself and Petunia alone. We can only guess at the nature of the pact for Petunia, but certain antecedents are available for logical inference. First of all, Ms. Rowling both loves and hates the Dursleys. She enjoys writing about them: 16 November 2000 Dateline Harry Pottermania in Vancouver, with J.K. Rowling `I like torturing them,` said Rowling. `You should keep an eye on Dudley. It?s probably too late for Aunt Petunia and Uncle Vernon. I feel sorry for Dudley. I might joke about him, but I feel truly sorry for him because I see him as just as abused as Harry. Though, in possibly a less obvious way. What they are doing to him is inept, really. I think children recognize that. Poor Dudley. He?s not being prepared for the world at all, in any reasonable or compassionate way, so I feel sorry for him. But there?s something funny about him, also. The pig?s tail was irresistible.` Q: Which character do you most enjoy writing for? A:Good question... Gilderoy Lockhart was loads of fun, but he was a bit of a one-joke character, and I think I did as much as I could with him. I love writing Hagrid and the Dursleys, too oh, and Fred and George,all of them, now I come to think of it. And, of course, her recent comments that Petunia may be more than she now seems. Edinburgh festival interview, August 14 2004: Q: Is Aunt Petunia a Squib? A: Good question. No, she is not, but - [Laughter]. No, she is not a Squib. She is a Muggle, but - [Laughter]. You will have to read the other books. You might have got the impression that there is a little bit more to Aunt Petunia than meets the eye, and you will find out what it is. She is not a squib, although that is a very good guess. Oh, I am giving a lot away here. I am being shockingly indiscreet. But she also singled out Uncle Vernon as the character she most dislikes! J.K. Rowling's World Book Day Chat: March 4, 2004 LRGS School: Which character do you most dislike ? JK Rowling replies -> Probably Uncle Vernon. Although I believe Vernon is very, very nasty - I was shocked that she dislikes him more than, say, Lucius Malfoy, or Peter Petegrew, or even - as this particular chat was conducted after OotP, Dolores Umbridge. Aside from the JKR's feelings about the Dursleys (and they are shared by the overwhelming majority of her readers), there is the character of Dumbledore to consider. The terms of the pact must fit with Dumbledore's character. While he might do many things to ensure Harry's safety - the man has "style". Many things that the Dursleys might want, would probably be things that Dumbledore would be unwilling to give in this situation. For example, could you imagine him offering Petunia money for the 16 years of abuse, hand-me-downs and wilted salads she had provided? It lacks the twinkling-eyed karmic come-upance I would expect from both Dumbledore and JKR. While the Dursleys may want money, we don't want them to have it. While the bargain must be for something Petunia deeply wants, it must also be something that the rest of us will find somehow just, or even sad, in ultimate reality. In fact, it seems unlikely to me that Dumbledore has agreed to give her anything that he feels would be valuable (except with the possible exception of something that could help to redeem Petunia). Dumbledore is fully aware of her treatment of Harry and does not approve of it. His small expressions of disapproval ("Harry Potter, The Cupboard Under the Stairs/The Smallest Bedroom/ The Floor...") suggest he is unlikely to consider her kindly. He certainly does not bother to argue the point when Harry claims that Petunia doesn't give a damn about him. The pact between Petunia and Dumbledore does not seem to be an amicable one. It may also be possible that whatever Petunia will get is some sort of sacrifice on Dumbledore's part. He is clearly willing to sacrifice a great deal for Harry, and this pact is apparently very important to him. Whatever it is must find someway to account for the Howler, "REMEMBER MY LAST, PETUNIA". Whose last what? This is so vague and impenetrable that this deal must be a heart-stopper. JKR is unwilling to reveal even the slightest hint of what it might be in that message. Finally, there is the fact that Petunia has not revealed the nature of the bargain to Vernon. The proposed bargain must be consistent with all of these factors. I believe there are at least two plausible possibilities for Petunia's end of this deal. The first is that she is to receive something that she wants very badly but is also afraid to admit to Vernon. The second is that the pact concerns a secret, one that she wants never discovered by her husband and son. Let's consider the first possibility. We know that very little has changed at Privet Drive between that dull grey Tuesday and the morning of Dudley's 11th birthday - nearly 10 years later. If the deal were that Petunia would receive something she did not have at the time the pact was sealed, then she probably hasn't got it yet. Petunia may get her bargained reward when Harry comes of age or if, as many have speculated - Dumbledore is not long for this world, then at the time of his death. And whatever "it" is, it must satisfy the criterion of seeming a fitting bargain to Dumbledore and JKR. I would imagine this falling into the "be careful what you wish for" category. My first, gut feeling was that this bargain concerns Petunia and magical powers. For example, that she would be given some, or all, of Dumbledore's magical ability when he dies. Would Petunia want this when she has professed to hate magic, and clearly fears it? Many have suggested that Petunia's vociferous hatred of magic is mostly sour grapes, jealousy of Lily, and fear of Vernon's disapproval. It may also be, in part, motivated by fear of her helplessness in the magical world. Magical ability might well appeal to Petunia. This would probably be a sacrifice on Dumbledore's part. It would be consistent with keeping the pact secret from Vernon. And while I doubt many of us would cheer if Aunt Petunia suddenly had or found magical powers, I could see this as akin to a leprechan's promise. In other words, if this were the deal, Dumbledore knows that the result will not be what Petunia expects. He may even know that all the magical ability in the world would avail her but little. There is a slim chance, given the most recent comments by JKR, that Petunia already IS magical. If so, she must be somehow blocked, perhaps by the sad failings of her character. And, of course, he would have to be fairly certain she would not be able to use her powers for evil. So, there is only one way I could see Dumbledore making a pact with Petunia that would result in her having magical ability - if he knows she will either not be rewarded by this, or will be redeemed by it. If there is some subtle trickery in their pact, it might be that Dumbledore could give her all of the magical ability in the world, but that for some reason Petunia could make little use of it. Another possibility is that what Petunia is getting from this pact is a secret. A secret that is kept from, or for, Vernon. The Dursleys live on Privet Drive (i.e., private, a secret). And "The Dursleys had everything they wanted, but they also had a secret, and their greatest fear was that somebody would discover it." If anyone knows the secret, it would be Aunt Petunia. The most consistent description of her characteristics is that she is "the nosiest woman in the world". So, it is possible that the secret Petunia is keeping from Vernon (and everyone else), the secret that perhaps (among the living) only Professor Dumbledore also knows - is her reason for agreeing to the pact. By doing so, she is assured that Dumbledore will keep her secret. I can only imagine what this might be. However, there is one other small detail which may pertain to this secret hypothesis: "And what the ruddy hell are dementors?" "They guard the wizard prison, Azkaban," said Aunt Petunia. Two seconds ringing silence followed these words and then Aunt Petunia clapped her hand over her mouth as though she had let slip a disgusting swear word. Uncle Vernon was goggling at her. Harry's brain reeled. Mrs. Figg was one thing - but Aunt Petunia? "How d'you know that?" he asked her, astonished. Aunt Petunia looked quite appalled with herself. She glanced at Uncle Vernon in fearful apology, the lowered her hand slightly to reveal her horsey teeth. "I heard - that awful boy - telling her about them - years ago," she said jerkily. ... [Harry] was astounded that [Aunt Petunia] had remembered this scrap of information about the magical world for so long, when she usually put all her energies into pretending it didn't exist. (OotP, A Peck of Owls) Given the scarcity of information we have been given about Aunt Petunia, this little detail seems of import. Perhaps the secret in some way involves Dementors - and Petunia has good reason to remember this particular detail very well. It does not seem that she has any personal experience with a Dementor, as she does not seem to recognize Dudley's symptoms. And it does not seem like Dumbledore's style to threaten her, or suggest that if she goes against her pact, she'll be sent to Azkaban. So, here is were speculation begins to stretch credibility, but I'll just follow the logic (which, given inaccurate or incomplete antecedents, can be a sad sight - witness Sirius Black's fate or Hermione's midget Easter Egg). Petunia did something prior to Lily's death that could have been punishable by a sentence in Azkaban (assuming, of course, that muggles like Petunia may be tried according to wizard law for crimes within/against the magical community). Her crime would have been shameful, and having to do with her nosy or spying habits, or with her relationship to Vernon - but probably cannot be so bad as to make her, for example, culpable in the death of her sister. Dumbledore has promised to keep her secret, provided she keeps Harry. This, for him - seems like perfect justice - we know he disapproves of Dementors anyway and in this way is giving her nothing that she did not already have (except in her own mind). And Petunia, by living her life as she is - may be inflicting a punishment on herself nearly as terrible. So, to conclude, Petunia is keeping a very big secret and it has to do with the pact she sealed by giving Harry the protection of her house. What it is can only be guessed at now, but recent comments by the author suggest that we will discover there is more to Petunia than it now seems. Cheers, Caesian [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Tue Aug 17 21:38:49 2004 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 21:38:49 -0000 Subject: Questions! Questions! Questions! In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040817075530.01cc1008@pop3.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110392 --- Kate Harding wrote (in response to djrfdh): >> >> djrfdh: >> I suspect he couldn't kill Voltemort without also >> killing Harry, for I rather think they are one in >> the same person...in fact, I think, in the end, we >> will find that this is the story of a very demented >> child [who] has found solice in becoming numerous >> personalities in order to preserve what little sanity >> he has left! > > Kate Harding: > While I can't agree with the second half of this, I do > think you're right about Voldemort and Harry being in > some sense the same person. Personally I think that in > some way there is only enough life between them for one > person. I don't know how the metaphysics would work, but > this would explain why DD couldn't kill Voldemort - if > one of them died the other would still only be half alive. > It also makes sense to me in terms of the prophecy.... > > We've seen that some of Voldemort passed into Harry > (parseltongue, memories), so it seems plausible that some > of Harry passed into Voldemort. Perhaps this exchange was > lifeforce, for want of a better word. I don't have much to add in terms of the theory itself, but wanted to point out that this type of explanation would conceivably answer both of JKR's "unasked" questions -- that is, the life-bond, or whatever it is, between Harry and Voldemort may be both the reason that Voldemort survived his own rebounded curse and the reason that Dumbledore would not (or could not) kill Voldemort. -- Matt From mochajava13 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 22:04:17 2004 From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 22:04:17 -0000 Subject: Is JkR about to reveal? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110393 My thought on Petunia is that she could have become a witch, but decided not to. She seems to know more about the wizarding world than she lets on, and how could she have learned all about the wizarding world through a sister she hated? From orly_w at hotmail.com Tue Aug 17 17:17:52 2004 From: orly_w at hotmail.com (grebniew2004) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 17:17:52 -0000 Subject: Can Dumbledore Kill Voldemort? ( Re: Questions! Questions! Questions!) In-Reply-To: <003101c48471$785f5120$6402a8c0@Pandemonium> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110394 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Alina" wrote: > On the general subject of The Important Question (that is: Why didn't DD > kill Voldemort, or try to?) > > I always thought that the answer has to do with Dumbledore's words that > there are things worse than death. I don't think killing Voldemort is what > he has in mind, but rather those very things. > > As for the theories that Harry has to be the one to do it and whatnot... I > don't think DD is all that thrilled at the thought of Harry turning into a > murderer, regardless that it's Voldemort he gets to kill. I myself am sure > there's more than a literal meaning to the prophecy and Harry won't have to > commit murder in the end. I guess I just can't see Harry killing as > resolution to the books. > > Alina. Hi! As to why DD didn't kill LV, I agree that the prophecy must be taken literally, but I also think this puts the onus of destroying Voldemort squarely on Harry's shoulders. We all saw what happened when Voldemort tried to interfere with Trelawney's prophecy: in attempting to kill Harry, LV marked him as an equal, thus fulfilling the prophecy unknowingly. I think it's not a good idea to mess with prophecies and DD knows it. If DD had tried to kill LV at the MOM, it may have wreaked havoc with the course of the prophecy. Because LV had gone to lengths to protect his mortality, who knows what chain of events that action by DD might have set off? Trelawney's words have pitted Harry and LV against each other, and I think they will be held by those words. One thing that puzzles me is that if neither can live while the other survives, how long a period is referred to? Obviously, LV was alive for over a year after Harry was born; again, since the end of GoF, a year has passed with both HP and LV co-existing in the magical community. How does the presence of one character interfere with the survival of the other? I wonder if JKR will spell that out in books six or seven. Orly, who loves the enigma From snow15145 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 22:22:58 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 22:22:58 -0000 Subject: Is JkR about to reveal? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110395 Eustace_Scrubb: >snipped< Once again, one wonders what Dumbledore offered Petunia in return for taking Harry in? Can DD have given her the ability to tap into some recessive magic gene in a case of dire emergency? Seems far-fetched...could the ancient magic that protected Harry extend to a one-time ability to use magic on Petunia's part? Maybe she doesn't turn out to be a full-fledged witch. I believe so with a big emphasis on believe. This is the definition of the word pact: Noun: mutual agreement: an agreement made between two or more groups or individuals, either formally or informally, to do something together or for each other Dumbledore and Petunia formally or informally made a pact by doing something together or something for each other. Does that sound about right? Formally or informally wouldn't that require them to be physically together when the agreement was made? Did they do something together to create the pact or something for each other to create the pact, or both? I realize the following is based mostly on speculation but as we don't have the next book it's about all we can do. I think it's rather good actually; you'll have to let me know. The missing 24 hours. It very well could have been in this time frame that the pact between Dumbledore and Petunia was made. The sketchy proof of this is in Dumbledore's statement to Harry that she may have taken you grudgingly ect. How would Dumbledore have known how Petunia had felt if he had not personally witnessed how she reacted when she was asked to take Harry? This private setup could have been to assure that Vernon was unaware of the true circumstances behind why Petunia took Harry and what she received for taking him also to ensure that she would take Harry in at all of course sealed with a consequence if ever she reneged. Not exactly sure what the consequence would have been if she ever denied Harry houseroom. When she surprisingly found the baby on her doorstep the next morning, she could act appropriately having already thought matters through. Vernon would be left in the dark except for what had been written in the note left by Dumbledore and approved by Petunia for Vernon's benefit. Vernon wouldn't know what Petunia received if anything from Dumbledore along with the bargain she actually made with Dumbledore. There could be a bit more than meets the eye with the blood issue. My next hypothesis is what Dumbledore had bargained Petunia with. What could he have offered her or better yet what could she have wanted in return in this bargain? A while back I thought it might have been to ensure Dudley was not sent a letter from Hogwarts but that matter has certainly been cleared up by JKR. The other thing I thought of way back was that Petunia may have been a squib which of course was denied by JKR with a but so I'm going to harp again on Petunia's surgically clean kitchen announced in most of the books. This one is a far leap but could Petunia have asked Dumbledore for Lily's wand and possibly a bit of magic to go with it? I told you it was a far stretch but I could see the most powerful wizard alive accomplishing something to this degree especially if it was the contingency for Petunia taking Harry. Petunia acted a bit jealous of her sister's special talents and may have secretly wanted to have those talents herself. Petunia would only be able to use this magic in secret to do household chores or whatever while Vernon was at work but one day little Dudley walked in and saw what she was doing. Oh! so that's what little duddykins was seeing when the dementor attacked. We all know how scared he is of magic. Couldn't resist putting that last one in. Snow-who thinks Petunia was a different person especially to Harry in the baby stage, when Vernon wasn't around...I think he was left in the dark quite a bit. From mochajava13 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 22:31:45 2004 From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 22:31:45 -0000 Subject: Questions! Questions! Questions! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110396 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "djrfdh" wrote: > Why didn't Voltemort die when he attacked Harry? And why didn't > Dumbledore kill, or at least try to kill Voltemort in the Ministry of > Magic , (OOTP) I've got some theories on this one. Voldemort didn't die when he tried to attack Harry because of all the magical transformations he underwent. I'm wondering what those transformations are. The death eaters know and were probably there. I think that there's some kind of dark ritual that tied Voldemort to the living side of the veil. His body was destroyed but his essence wasn't. I think in normal circumstances, a person's essence crosses through the veil when they die. Voldemort did something so that his essense would remain behind even if his body was destroyed. Not a ghost, but the essence of what makes a person human. Also, it's from the prophecy. Voldemort could only be destroyed by someone he marked. The rebounded curse marked Harry and created the one that could destroy Voldemort. Make any sense? And as to why Dumbledore didn't try to kill Voldemort, I don't think he is able to. Probably because of the prophecy. Also why no one can destroy Voldemort besides Harry. Here's my theory: Voldemort and Harry are connected. That's pretty obvious. They're two sides of the same coin. Like Yin and Yang, they are two parts to one whole. I think they're the live/death cycle. (Far fetched but here's my reason: their wands have a phoenix feather core. A phoenix is a symbol of death and rebirth. Voldemort's wand is made of yew, considered the tree of death. Notice the thestrals were seen peeking through yew trees in OotP in Hagrid's class on thestrals. Harry's wand is made of holly, a symbol of life.) Voldemort is death; he brings death where he goes and looks like the grim reaper. (Tall thin and wrapped in a cloak with pasty white hands.) Harry is life. Just like life and death can't exist at the same time, Harry and Voldemort can't exist at the same time. Also, another theory that I've had for a while about the connection between Harry and Voldemort: I think that Harry has some part of Voldemort in him from the rebounded curse. In SS, Harry remembered a lot of green light and a searing pain on his forehead. Maybe the pain was part of Voldemort getting seared into Harry's brain? Now, the part of Voldemort in Harry allows Harry to access Voldemort's thoughts and feelings. So, the only way to completely destroy Voldemort is for Harry to destroy the part of Voldemort that resides in him. Anyone else killing Voldemort wouldn't destroy him. Make any sense? Sarah From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 17 22:43:48 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 18:43:48 -0400 Subject: Draco's nature Message-ID: <002d01c484ab$a962e040$8362acce@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 110397 psyche/Kate: "I think Draco's excuses are just as good as LV's. He's had a neglectful, loveless, abusive upbringing by a Death Eater. It's clear that his father has left huge scars on him. I get the impression of a miserable, frightened, lonely boy who tries to make himself feel and look big by bullying. Even his loathing of Harry seems to me mostly rooted in wounded pride and jealously, maintained by the impulse to agree with his father rather than a simple rejection of Harry's personal qualities." DuffyPoo: I've never seen Draco in this light at all. I think he comes from a very priviledge background. A loving, wealthy family as pure-blood as they come and gets away with everything (quite like Dudley) with perhaps a little scolding for being indiscreet. He is what I thought DD was trying to avoid by placing Harry with the Dursleys instead of a Wizarding family (that and the charm, of course). "You were not a pampered little prince, but as normal a boy as I could have hoped under the circumstances." (OotP) Lucius not only bought a top of the line racing broom for Draco, but one for every member of the Slytherin House team so Draco could play. When Draco was cut by Buckbeak, Lucius pulled out all the stops to have the thing slaughtered. Lucius wanted to send Draco to Durmstrang for real Dark Arts study - important to him - but Narcissa over-ruled him, not wanting Draco so far from home. Draco has been home for Christmas, as far as we know, every year but two. "Malfoy's eagle owl was always bringing him packages of sweets from home, which he opened gloatingly at the Slytherin table." (PS) I think there have been moments in the past for Malfoy, Sr., and may be more in the future, when it will not be - shall I say - prudent for him to show his overwhelming love for his son. Knowing that Draco could come in for a share of any punishment given if he were to refuse to participate in an activity. Or knowing that his love for Draco could be held against him by LV/DEs as being soft. I think that Lucius may be quite strict with Draco, on some level, but that is for his own protection. "You have told me this at least a dozen times already and I would remind you that it is not -- prudent -- to appear less than fond of Harry Potter, not when most of our kind regard him as the hero who made the Dark Lord disappear." Appearing less than fond of Harry Potter, in some particular manner, may give away that daddy dearest is still a DE, something which he is still denying. Still, Draco apparently does not listen to LM's repeated warnings as here he is complaining about HP again and Father has to 'remind' him not to appear less than fond of Harry! Draco's been whining and snivelling about HP (perhaps Hermione beating him in exams as well) all summer from the sounds of it and Dad finally got fed up. I personally think Draco is a spoiled rotten, 'pampered prince' who looks up to Dad for who he is and what he's done, and thinks there's no one better. Draco would be just like Dad, but I don't personally think he's got what it takes. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mochajava13 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 22:45:29 2004 From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 22:45:29 -0000 Subject: Can Dumbledore Kill Voldemort? ( Re: Questions! Questions! Questions!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110398 > One thing that puzzles me is that if neither can live while the > other survives, how long a period is referred to? Obviously, LV was > alive for over a year after Harry was born; again, since the end of > GoF, a year has passed with both HP and LV co-existing in the > magical community. How does the presence of one character interfere > with the survival of the other? I wonder if JKR will spell that out > in books six or seven. > > Orly, who loves the enigma My shot at answering the enigma: we're already seeing it when Harry gets his dreams/visions of being Voldemort. In OotP, at one point Harry collapsed on the stairs to the boys dorms and started laughing manically because Voldemort was laughing. Harry sees through Voldemort's eyes. He doesn't have a sense of being Harry at these times. He believes himself to be Voldemort. (Ever see Being John Malkovich? I think it's like that.) Sarah From caesian at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 22:44:56 2004 From: caesian at yahoo.com (caesian) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 15:44:56 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lovely Snape In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1003946A-F09F-11D8-9580-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110399 On Aug 17, 2004, at 9:59 AM, cubfanbudwoman wrote: > "doddiemoemoe"? wrote: > > Neither Snape nor Voldemort have ever experienced "love" according > > to JK (or probably any sort of compassion for that matter). > > > SSSusan: > Quick question for you.? Can you show me where JKR said Snape had > never experienced love?? Are you speaking only of romantic love or > any kind of love? > > Siriusly Snapey Susan > Here are some quotes from QuickQuills about Snape and Love (and a few that are just fun) The Connection 12 October 1999 One of our internet correspondents wondered if Snape is going to fall in love. (JKR laughs) Who on earth would want Snape in love with them? That?s a very horrible idea. BBC News June 19, 2003 Jeremy Paxman JEREMY PAXMAN: Are we going to discover anything more about Snape ? JK ROWLING: Yes. JEREMY PAXMAN: And Harry's mother? Did he have a crush on Harry's mother or unrequited love or anything like that? JK ROWLING: Hence his animosity to Harry? JEREMY PAXMAN: Yes. JK ROWLING: You speculate? JEREMY PAXMAN: I speculate, yes, I'm just asking whether you can tell us. JK ROWLING: No I can't tell you. But you do find out a lot more about Snape and quite a lot more about him actually. Summer 1999 Harry Potter Author Works Her Magic Katy Abel Q: Who's your favorite character besides Harry Potter? A: It's very hard to choose. It's fun to write about Snape because he's a deeply horrible person. AOL Chat 19 October 2000 Ms. Rowling, which character besides Harry is your favorite, and why? I think that would have to be Hagrid -- but I love Ron and Hermione too, and I also love writing characters like Gilderoy Lockhart, Snape, the Dursleys... it's such fun doing horrible things to them. The Connection 12 October 1999 What about Snape? Snape is a very sadistic teacher, loosely based on a teacher I myself had, I have to say. I think children are very aware and we are kidding ourselves if we don?t think that they are, that teachers do sometimes abuse their power and this particular teacher does abuse his power. He?s not a particularly pleasant person at all. However, everyone should keep their eye on Snape, I?ll just say that because there is more to him than meets the eye and you will find out part of what I am talking about if you read Book 4. No, I?m not trying to drum up more sales, go to the library and get it out. I?d rather people read it. There?s an important kind of redemptive pattern to Snape He, um, there?s so much I wish I could say to you, and I can?t because it would ruin. I promise you, whoever asked that question, can I just say to you that I?m slightly stunned that you?ve said that and you?ll find out why I?m so stunned if you read Book 7. That?s all I?m going to say. BBC News June 19, 2003 Jeremy Paxman 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. Caesian [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 23:06:16 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 23:06:16 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110400 SSSusan wrote : "Based on the kinds of things JKR has stated about choice so far, I believe that we'll find that Tom had opportunity to overcome the bummer of a start he had in life and that he ELECTED to not do so. " Del replies : That's more or less what I used to think too, but JKR's answer makes me wonder. She did not just say that Tom never loved or cared for anyone (which technically wouldn't be true anyway if he did experience feelings of love but then decided to reject them), she went as far as saying that *if he had, he couldn't possibly be what he is*. The way I understand it, Tom could not have become LV if he had ever loved, *even briefly*. And then she adds that we will learn *much* more about that. She really doesn't make it sound like Tom is just one of those (adult !) people who harden their hearts and refuse to give in to their loving feelings. Snape might be one of those people, but it seems like Tom's case is much more complicated. Del From Malady579 at hotmail.com Tue Aug 17 23:08:14 2004 From: Malady579 at hotmail.com (Melody) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 23:08:14 -0000 Subject: Why he is still alive? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110401 SS Susan wrote: > My big question concerning this idea has to do with DD's willingness > to hold off like this--to await the big opportunity for eradicating > Voldy until a) the public is fully aware of his return as Big Baddy > and b) the eradication will be big enough news. It is not that the eradication would be big news; it is more to show the public that Voldie is not something to be feared anymore. Not because he is dead, but because he is not the worse thing ever and not someone worthy of being feared anymore. Make his name a joke not a fear. And Dumbledore holds off so that the public can know that their fear is not founded anymore. Not because *he* says so, since after all they did not believe him before, but because they have *proof*. >Do you think DD would hold off *if* it means several people will >likely be attacked & killed by Voldy & his henchmen in the meantime? Yes, I do. As I compared in my first post, sometimes the general of war has to make hard choices. In order to save thousands, he has to sometimes allow a few to *possibly* die to accomplish complete eradication of the enemy for a time. It is a terribly troubling choice, but a necessary one. Dumbledore has to get the WW back on its feet, and sometimes that involves more than just the MoM telling them everything is alright. They have to believe it so. (Why am I thinking of Tom Ridge right now...) >Or do you think the Order and others-against-Voldy will manage to >show that he & the DEs are not such baddies after all? [I suppose >we're back to the old question about the greater good: do a few >suffer for the larger cause? (Unless you do think it's possible to >show that Voldy's NOT so much to be feared?)] Yes the old question does apply to this, but more I don't think the Order needs to show they are not that bad, but more show that they are not that powerful. That good can over come the bad. In the past, the good was overwhelmed by the Death eaters. Dumbledore was loosing his battle. Now he has had 13 odd years to think of a new plan to win the war, and get the WW to stop fearing them. Now what that plan is...hmmm...will have to work it out. But he has two years to make it happen. Though I assume that because *I* know there are two more books. Dumbledore does not. Melody From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Tue Aug 17 23:16:16 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 23:16:16 -0000 Subject: Snape experiencing love (was: Why he is still alive?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110402 >>> Alla wrote: > Frankly, that was one of my "let's slap Snape " PoA moments. I always got an impression that Snape was lying through his teeth when he said that Trio was confunded that he was doing it for one purpose and for one purpose only - to incriminate Sirius even more. <<< Brenda: Hiya Alla! How did I know that you will be responding to this thread?! ;P Well, Snape had every reasons to believe that Sirius had in fact confunded the trio. The whole wizaring community believes Sirius to be the mass murderer at that point, even Dumbledore. The trio and Lupin, and Peter were the only people who had just heard the whole truth. And the fact that Sirius had supposedly confunded the 3 13- year-old kids... well that's hardly more incriminating and adding more incredibility to his 13-murder list, does it. Also in CoS, when he had just heard the news that Ginny had been taken to the Chamber itself - Snape is very much determinate and quickly comes up with a solution ('let's leave it to Lockhart!') I think Snape was showing his ill-illustrated compassion to Harry throughout PoA, when he repeatedly warned Harry dangers of strutting around the castle and sneaking out to Hogsmeade. For heaven's sake the Dementors were patched to protect Harry (in essence) AND he disregards the rule completely! Typical 'I-need-to-save-the-world' teenager! *eyeroll* And during the Occlumency lessons as well - he doesn't taunt Harry about all the ridicule Harry had to suffer. I was actually surprised to see Snape being rather 'ignorant' about it. > If we were to talk about Snape and compassion in PoA, I would > probably choose the moment, when he screams at Harry that he is just as his father. I always thought that even though Snape was saying despicable things, he did not want James to die and that he did not want Harry to die either. Hehe yeah, I'm not so sure he wants Harry dead either, lol. I think he wants Harry alive so that he can tease and pick on Harry in Potions class, till year 7. *giggles* Brenda From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Tue Aug 17 23:21:04 2004 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 23:21:04 -0000 Subject: Voldermort not LV In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110403 --- Karen wrote: > I just re-read PS/SS, CoS, and PoA this weekend and > noticed something interesting. > > Harry never calls LV by his title - Lord. Many of you > may have picked up on this before but by time I was > finished book two.... > > I started scaning the books (all 5) looking for someone > else refer to LV as Voldemort without the Lord and have > only found one other person to use Voldemort instead of LV > and that is Herminone at the end of chapter 15 in OotP. > > Dumbledore uses Lord Voldemort or Tom, Death eaters use Dark Lord, > even Sirius and Lupin use the title. Not really. Dumbledore and McGonagall both use plain "Voldemort" throughout the first chapter of SS, where the original admonition to "call him by his real name" appears: [Dumbledore] "for eleven years I have been trying to persuade people to call him by his proper name: Voldemort." Professor McGonagall flinched .... "I have never seen any reason to be frightened of saying Voldemort's name." "I know you haven't, said Professor McGonagall, sounding half exasperated, half admiring. "But you're different. Everyone knows you're the only one You-Know- oh, all right, Voldemort, was frightened of." Same for Dumbledore in chapter 17: "Call him Voldemort, Harry. Always use the proper name for things. Fear of a name increases fear of the thing itself." Dumbledore never uses "Lord Voldemort" in SS. He does in CS (where the "Lord" part becomes significant as part of the anagram for Tom Riddle's name). The Harry-POV narrator also uses the term frequently in CS and PA, as does Harry in dialogue with Arthur Weasley in chapter 5 of PA. By PA, however, Dumbledore is back to plain old "Voldemort" (ch. 22), which is the same appellation Sirius consistently uses (ch. 19; one exception). I haven't gone through GF or OP, but I sort of have the impression DD uses "Voldemort" alone when he is addressing Harry or another ally, and "Lord Voldemort" when he is addressing a broader audience. -- Matt From saraandra at saraandra.plus.com Tue Aug 17 23:24:08 2004 From: saraandra at saraandra.plus.com (amanitamuscaria1) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 23:24:08 -0000 Subject: Why he is still alive? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110404 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Melody" wrote: > SS Susan wrote: > > My big question concerning this idea has to do with DD's willingness > > to hold off like this--to await the big opportunity for eradicating > > Voldy until a) the public is fully aware of his return as Big Baddy > > and b) the eradication will be big enough news. > > It is not that the eradication would be big news; it is more to show > the public that Voldie is not something to be feared anymore. Not > because he is dead, but because he is not the worse thing ever and not > someone worthy of being feared anymore. > Melody Now AmanitaMuscaria : Sorry; this just sounds too much like LV's big return. So LV gets Harry to the graveyard, does his big revival scene, then tells the DEs there's nowt to fear from this boy, and to prove it, he'll kill him, right here, right now. Except it doesn't happen. I can't see DD falling into the same trap so soon. Cheers. AmanitaMuscaria From srae1971 at bellsouth.net Tue Aug 17 23:31:37 2004 From: srae1971 at bellsouth.net (Shannon) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 19:31:37 -0400 Subject: Pureblood Weasleys? Message-ID: <41229559.8010009@bellsouth.net> No: HPFGUIDX 110405 A friend of mine and I are discussing various possibilities regarding who the half blood prince might be. She asked me if the Weasleys were pure blood, and I said that they were. But when we started talking about it, I can't remember any moment in the books in which this is outright stated. At first I thought, well, they're on the Black family tree and they wouldn't be if they weren't pure blood. But on checking, I saw that they were not, in fact, on the tree. Sirius says he's related to Molly by marraige, and Arthur is a second cousin once removed. But they aren't actually on the tapestry. He says, "If ever a family was a bunch of blood traitors it's the Weasleys." (OOP pg 113 US edition). Ron, in COS, says "Most wizards these days are half-blood anyway. If we hadn't married Muggles we'd've died out." (pg 116, US edition). Which does seem to imply that marrying Muggles (which wasn't even what they were talking about, they were talking about Mudbloods...wizarding children from Muggle parents) is familiar and normal to him. He also says on the same page, "There are some wizards--like Malfoy's family--who think they're better than everyone else because they're what people call pure-blood." He says "they're" which might suggest he's speaking of something other than himself....he could just as easily have said "...who think pure-bloods are better than everyone else." I do remember Ron telling Harry that all his family were wizards, but that doesn't necessarily mean *everyone,* it could just mean current family. I checked the lexicon and it says they are pure blood, but again is this just assumed or is there a direct quote or something from the book that confirms it? Because I honestly can't think of where it might have been explicitly stated. Shannon, the eternally confuzzled. From saraandra at saraandra.plus.com Tue Aug 17 23:34:02 2004 From: saraandra at saraandra.plus.com (amanitamuscaria1) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 23:34:02 -0000 Subject: LV, Harry, DD and the Power behind the door In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110406 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "amanitamuscaria1" > wrote: > As for DD not killing LV, I waver between several theories. two, > killing him would make him into a ghost or worse, a poltergeist like > Peeves -yikes!; > > Valky: > You say this in jest amanita? > But hey isn't a ghost someone who is afraid of death. Maybe > Vapormort is an exaggerated form of a ghost. It makes sense really > because LV is intensley afraid to die isn't he? AmanitaMuscaria again : Why in jest? I find Peeves extremely interesting - what does he add to the books except for chaos? He moves the story along by snitching on students, but then again, he salutes the Weasley twins and obeys their injunction to give Umbridge hell. We're told noone controls him except for the Bloody Baron, and we've never been given a glimpse on how that might work. What's Peeves doing in Hogwarts? cheers. AmanitaMuscaria From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Tue Aug 17 23:46:12 2004 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 23:46:12 -0000 Subject: Prophecy/"Either" In-Reply-To: <081720041724.19070.41223F460003D0BB00004A7E2200758942CECFCE0C0A0D979D0E09@comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110407 >>Kate Harding wrote: >> >>Personally I think that in some way there is only >>enough life between them for one person.... >>It also makes sense to me in terms of the prophecy. >>It said 'Either must die at the hands of the other, >>for neither can live while the other survives'.... >>I think the use of 'Either' is very significant - why >>not say 'one must die at the hands of the other'? > >Becki responded: > >I agree that "either" is extremely significant. If it >was worded "one must die at the had of the other", to me >that would imply that "the one" in the prophecy is the >one to die. If "either" is used, then it could apply to >either person in the prophecy. Or, as I and others have pointed out, the term "either" could apply to each of them, as in the phrase "the trees along either side of the road." On that reading, the prophecy would mean that Harry and Voldemort must *each* die at the hand of the other. That reading also suggests, although it does not require, a more metaphorical reading of the term "die." It could refer to the elimination or resolution of some sort of duality between Harry and Voldemort (e.g. love vs. hate) rather than physical death. Possibly Voldemort has to cease being Voldemort and Harry has to cease being Harry, in some sense. While I'm not exactly an advocate of the "conjunctive" reading of last part of the prophecy, I do think it provides an interesting jumping-off point for many threads of this discussion. -- Matt From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 00:03:40 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 00:03:40 -0000 Subject: Peeves (Was Re: LV, Harry, DD and the Power behind the door) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110408 ---> > AmanitaMuscaria again : > snip> I find Peeves extremely interesting - what does he add to the books > except for chaos? He moves the story along by snitching on students, > but then again, he salutes the Weasley twins and obeys their > injunction to give Umbridge hell. > We're told noone controls him except for the Bloody Baron, and we've > never been given a glimpse on how that might work. > What's Peeves doing in Hogwarts? > cheers. AmanitaMuscaria mhbobbin: I've always understood that the *whatever energy* it is that is called a Poltergeist is associated with teens, and that Poltergeists are usually *found* in homes with teens. They channel the excess negative energy, the slamming doors, the anger and mischief of teens. Perhaps, DD keeps his pet Peeves around for this very reason. Perhaps Peeves feeds off the adolescent angst in the air and is one disturbance, preferable to having multiple out-of-control disturbances from the flesh and blood kids all over the place. As for the Bloody Baron---wouldn't we like to know his story. Okay not really. He can just stay mysterious to the side as far as I'm concerned. Far far to the side. mhbobbin From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 18 00:21:57 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 00:21:57 -0000 Subject: Lovely Snape In-Reply-To: <1003946A-F09F-11D8-9580-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110409 "doddiemoemoe"? wrote: > > > Neither Snape nor Voldemort have ever experienced "love" > > > according to JK (or probably any sort of compassion for that > > > matter). SSSusan: > > Quick question for you.? Can you show me where JKR said Snape > > had never experienced love?? Are you speaking only of romantic > > love or any kind of love? Caesian added: > The Connection 12 October 1999 > One of our internet correspondents wondered if Snape is going to > fall in love. (JKR laughs) Who on earth would want Snape in love > with them? That's a very horrible idea. > > BBC News > June 19, 2003 > Jeremy Paxman > JEREMY PAXMAN: Are we going to discover anything more about Snape ? > JK ROWLING: Yes. > JEREMY PAXMAN: And Harry's mother? Did he have a crush on Harry's > mother or unrequited love or anything like that? > JK ROWLING: Hence his animosity to Harry? > JEREMY PAXMAN: Yes. > JK ROWLING: You speculate? > JEREMY PAXMAN: I speculate, yes, I'm just asking whether you can > tell us. > JK ROWLING: No I can't tell you. > > Summer 1999 > Harry Potter Author Works Her Magic > Katy Abel > Q: Who's your favorite character besides Harry Potter? > A: It's very hard to choose. It's fun to write about Snape > because he's a deeply horrible person. > > The Connection 12 October 1999 > What about Snape? > Snape is a very sadistic teacher, loosely based on a teacher I > myself > had, I have to say. He's not a particularly pleasant person > at all. However, everyone should keep their eye on Snape, I'll > just say that because there is more to him than meets the eye and > you will find out part of what I am talking about if you read Book > 4. > > BBC News > June 19, 2003 > Jeremy Paxman > 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. SSSusan: Thanks, Caesian, for the quotes; it's fun to have them pulled together like this. *AND* you'll note, I'm sure, that there is *nothing* in this batch of comments which says that Snape has never experienced love. (Since we were talking about Voldy & love originally, I assumed we were talking about **any** kind of love, not just romantic. So even if I have my doubts about Snape & romantic love, I can't recall any place where JKR has said or written that Snape has *never* been loved.) Siriusly Snapey Susan From ctcasares at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 17 17:21:41 2004 From: ctcasares at sbcglobal.net (tylerswaxlion) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 17:21:41 -0000 Subject: SPOILER Numbers behind the door [Re: McLagan] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110410 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Josh Warren" > > This > > is > > spoiler > > space > > so > > people > > can > > ...figure out the puzzles for themselves.. > > since > > I'm > > reposting > > due > > to > > the > > message > > from > > Hexquarters > > (hope this is good enough to not get deleted!) > > ...so leave this space if you reply > > > That wasn't the easiest 'puzzle' to get to the thing... 7 1 3 would > be Harry's birthday in European format (31/7), backwards. What is > 302723 about? 713 is also the number of Harry's safe at Gringotts'. Gringotts is a goblin bank. Peeves reveals the biz card for "Gobb Lynn" or *goblin* Goblin's number is 302723--and that unlocks the safe. I think that's all there is to it. > Josh (yes, very evil of me!) Tyler From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 18 00:29:13 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 00:29:13 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110411 SSSusan wrote : > > "Based on the kinds of things JKR has stated about choice so > > far, I believe that we'll find that Tom had opportunity to > > overcome the bummer of a start he had in life and that he > > ELECTED to not do so. " Del replies : > That's more or less what I used to think too, but JKR's answer > makes me wonder. She did not just say that Tom never loved or > cared for anyone (which technically wouldn't be true anyway if he > did experience feelings of love but then decided to reject them), > she went as far as saying that *if he had, he couldn't possibly be > what he is*. The way I understand it, Tom could not have become LV > if he had ever loved, *even briefly*. And then she adds that we > will learn *much* more about that. She really doesn't make it > sound like Tom is just one of those (adult !) people who harden > their hearts and refuse to give in to their loving feelings. Snape > might be one of those people, but it seems like Tom's case is much > more complicated. SSSusan again: Highlighting this one sentence of yours: "The way I understand it, Tom could not have become LV if he had ever loved, *even briefly*." Yes, I think that's right. I think Voldy could not have become what he is if he had ever loved, because what he has become is pretty much Hate Personified. Probably anyone who's ever loved another could never WANT to be Hate Personified. *If* I'm right, Voldy must have decided he wasn't even interested in love--wouldn't allow himself to be interested in love--told himself it does nothing but make a wizard WEAK.... But what do I know?!? :-) You're surely right that Tom's case is going to prove to be complicated. It *better* be, or I think lots of people won't be satisfied, you know? Siriusly Snapey Susan From Snarryfan at aol.com Tue Aug 17 19:33:55 2004 From: Snarryfan at aol.com (evita2fr) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 19:33:55 -0000 Subject: Godparents and Half-Brothers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110412 > Stella wrote : > > there is nothing in canon to suggest any resemblance between > > Snape and Sirius other than the dark coloring. In real > > genetics, facial structures of even half-siblings have > > similarities. > Del replies : > 2. We're not sure whether the narrator is being impartial when > describing Snape and Sirius, or whether he's telling us how *Harry* > sees them. Harry hates Snape and after the end of PoA he loves > Sirius : he would never willingly acknowledge any similiarities > between the two. But interestingly enough, the descriptions of > Sirius we get at the beginning of PoA, when Harry does *not* like > Sirius yet, are quite reminiscent of his descriptions of Snape. Wow, I wasn't here from a moment. I use my cousin's computer to add something quickly in Snape/Sirius half-brother theory. >From Sirius himself: "You know, I think I'd prefer if you didn't give orders here, Snape. It's my house, you see." It's *my* house. Why Sirius precise that ? And why Snape reacted like he did (an ugly flush suffused Snape's pallid face.)? There is something, here. Sirius searched to make Snape angry in remembering him who receive the house. And it worked. Christelle (who wondered why her family doesn't have a french/english dictionnary and can't wait to use back her own) From orly_w at hotmail.com Tue Aug 17 20:02:10 2004 From: orly_w at hotmail.com (grebniew2004) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 20:02:10 -0000 Subject: Is JKR about to reveal? (NotASquib!Petunia) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110413 Valky wrote: > > If Petunia is a witch, will Jo be soon revealing it? I see her > > making /no/ effort to hide it anymore in her interview. aboutthe1910s: > I somehow don't think it's going to be as straight forward as > this--I do think that Petunia will be the late bloomer we have > heard about, and, obviously, ("She is a Muggle...") she doesn't > have *any* powers *at this point*, but I really feel (and I don't > see how I can be alone here) that there must already be something > in Petunia's past that connects her to the wizarding world--aside > from a sister that she couldn't stand and took no interest in. Hmmm.... Could Petunia have had relations with a wizard resulting in the Half-Blood Prince, which Vernon Dursley knows nothing about? Perhaps her hatred of magic is a face she puts on to hide dirty little secrets in her past.... and it would help explain how she already seems to know a few facts about the wizarding world. Orly around the bend From ujs31415 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 21:42:57 2004 From: ujs31415 at yahoo.com (ujs31415) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 21:42:57 -0000 Subject: Petunia's Secret In-Reply-To: <3C0019BD-F08F-11D8-9580-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110414 A guess: Dudley's life is in danger. DD's pact is that he will protect Dudley if Petunia lets Harry stay at Privet Drive. (snipped from caesian's post) >OotP, A Peck of Owls >"He's back," said Harry heavily. >.... >"Back?" whispered Aunt Petunia. >She was looking at Harry as she had never looked at him before. And >all of the sudden, for the very first time in his life, Harry fully >appreciated that Aunt Petunia was his mother's sister. ... Her large, >pale eyes (so unlike her sister's) were not norrowed in dislike or >anger; They were wide and fearful. ... >"Yes," Harry said, talking directly to Aunt Petunia now. "He came back >a month ago. I saw him." >HER HAND FOUND DUDLEY'S MASSIVE LEATHER-CLAD SHOULDERS AND CLUTCHED >THEM. (my caps). She didn't put her hand on her heart. She put them on Dudley's shoulders. She dotes on him too much. Is it just bad parenting, or does she know he is in mortal danger from (what?)... (also snipped from caesian's post) >16 November 2000 Dateline Harry Pottermania in Vancouver, with J.K. >Rowling >`I like torturing them,` said Rowling. `You should keep an eye on >Dudley. It's probably too late for Aunt Petunia and Uncle Vernon. I >feel sorry for Dudley. I might joke about him, but I feel truly sorry >for him because I see him as just as abused as Harry. Though, in >possibly a less obvious way. What they are doing to him is inept, >really. I think children recognize that. Poor Dudley. He's not being >prepared for the world at all, in any reasonable or compassionate way, >so I feel sorry for him. But there's something funny about him, also. >The pig's tail was irresistible.` Is it just that his parents have poor parenting skills or have they not taken steps to lessen his danger? Will Dudley not survive the series? Is that why Ms.JKR feels sorry for him? "ujs31415" From melaniertay at yahoo.com Tue Aug 17 21:51:22 2004 From: melaniertay at yahoo.com (Mel) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 21:51:22 -0000 Subject: Snape experiencing love (was: Why he is still alive?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110415 Dumbledore11214 wrote: > > I strongly disagree that we haven't seen Snape > > show any--admittedly his most compassionate moments may have had > > *other* motivations, but that doesn't mean that compassion was > > absolutely *not* a motive--for example, in PS, Snape's counter- > > curse to keep Harry from falling off of his broom has been brushed > > off as just having been done so Snape could even himself with James > > for saving his life I disagree in that it is not "compassionate" by definition to not want someone dead. I don't want anyone to die, but that is not a show of compassion for them, it's a general morality decision. It doesn't mean I have any feeling for them one way or another. "Mel" From karen.lyall at blueyonder.co.uk Tue Aug 17 23:21:59 2004 From: karen.lyall at blueyonder.co.uk (karenlyall666) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 23:21:59 -0000 Subject: Apparating/Disapparating Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110416 I searched the archives and could find nothing on this question, so I apologise if it has already been covered to death. Can someone please help me understand how Dumbledore's original arrival in Private Drive was silent, when all other cases of apparition/disapparition is heralded by a noise? UK PS PB p12 " A man appeared on the corner the cat had been watching, appeared so suddenly and silently you'd have thought he'd just popped out of the ground." UK GOF PB p114 "..., he disapparated with a small pop." And although I don't have OOTP to hand I recall all instances of Mundungus or the Weasley twins apparating/disapparating to be heralded by a resounding crack. Any ideas anyone Karenlyall666 From sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 01:05:39 2004 From: sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com (sevenhundredandthirteen) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 01:05:39 -0000 Subject: Why didn't DD try to kill V'mort (was Questions! Questions! Questions!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110417 djrfdh wrote: > I suspect he [Dumbledore] couldn't kill Voltemort without also > killing Harry, I (Laurasia) reply: Dumbledore may like Harry, but he's not stupid. If Dumbledore could kill Voldemort for good, what does it matter if Harry also has to die? Voldemort is capable of killing tens of thousands of people, maybe hundreds of thousands or millions unless he is stopped! Surely the loss of one boy's life is worth all those people's lives! Even though Dumbledore admits that he cares for Harry, at the end of OotP, AND admits that he was foolishly thinking of the well-being of one child instead of the lives of all the nameless, faceless people and creatures Voldemort could kill if he ever came back to power, he's still not stupid. Dumbledore did delay recounting the prophecy to Harry because, during his first few years at Hogwarts, there was no need for him to think about it yet (As in, there's no pressing need to tell him in CoS, for instance, when Voldemort may take another 25 years to reclaim his body). But Dumbledore still told him as soon as Voldemort had reclaimed his body and had directly lead to a human murder in his new human form. Dumbledore is an intelligent and experienced warlock who's actions, especially in OotP, demonstrate he is thinking of the BIG picture. At the moment, there's no indication that Harry has developed the power to defeat Voldemort, so if Dumbledore could kill Voldemort, even at the expense of Harry's life, he must do it. Dumbledore is not stupid. Maybe he wants Harry to understand why he has to die, but then why didn't he tell him that when he recounted the details of the prophecy? Dumbledore said that one or the other had to die, he didn't say both. If Dumbledore believes that Harry must die (whether as sacrifice or murder) then he should let the guy know! Also, I don't believe that Dumbledore didn't try to kill Voldemort because he doesn't believe he can. Dumbledore isn't stupid- he should at least give it a *TRY* just to see if the prophecy is true or not. As in, *maybe* the prophecy is true and only Harry can kill Voldemort, but the prophecy is also extremely ambiguous and not necessarily true. Why doesn't Dumbledore (at least!) make one little attempt at killing Voldemort for good? If it turns out the prophecy is true, then it won't have made any difference. If it turns out the prophecy is a lie then he will have just killed the power evil wizard in history! The only option as to why Dumbledore didn't even *try* to kill Voldemort must be because he knows Voldemort will become *more powerful* if he does (Of course, the exact details of this growing power is up for grabs). Dumbledore must know that an AK would actively *strengthen* Voldemort's power. I don't think it can have anything to do with not believing hismelf capable (or else why not give it a try? If he can't do it, he's lost nothing) or killing Harry (because that's a sacrifice you just have to make- Read Ron/Chess). Maybe Dumbledore knows the exact details of what Voldemort has done to ensure he can't die. Maybe Dumbledore knows he *can* cast an AK on Voldemort but only reduce him to Vapor!Mort again. But maybe when Voldemort reclaims his body using 'flesh, blood and bone' the second time he won't use Harry's blood and Wormtail's flesh. Maybe the reason Dumbledore won't kill Voldemort is intrinsically related to the 'Gleam of Triumph' in GoF and the Life-Debt between Harry and Wormtail in PoA. ~<(Laurasia)>~ From misty_december at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 00:03:54 2004 From: misty_december at yahoo.com (Misty) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 00:03:54 -0000 Subject: Why didn't Voldemort die? (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110418 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mz_annethrope" wrote: > Why didn't Voldemort die when he tried to kill Harry, this was the > first of the two important questions that JKR thought her fans might > like to ponder. Misty speaking: This was interesting for me to hear JKR say that she had never been asked this question. As someone very new to the books, I didn't ask these questions after finishing them because I thought, after reading the prophecy, that I had the answer - it didn't occur to me to ask. I guess I am just a little bit too unsophisticated in this regard. This may have been addressed here before - I am new to this group, too - but I assumed, since the prophecy says LV must "die at the hands of" Harry, that that is why LV *didn't* die when the curse rebounded. Again, I am probably being really simplistic, here, but "at the hands of" implies some action on the part of the other. Harry was protected by his mother - that is why *he* didn't die, but Harry was just a sitting duck for LV. Harry did not do a thing to *try* to kill LV; he was too young, and certainly didn't know what he was doing. However, Harry must take some action before LV is killed. To me, that is what the phrase "at the hand of" means. Also, why DD didn't kill LV at MoM - again it may just be my simplistic understanding of this, but because DD knew the prophecy - why *would* he try to kill LV? He knew that Harry must do that. I apologise if this has all been rehashed before. Misty From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 00:18:33 2004 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 00:18:33 -0000 Subject: Can Dumbledore Kill Voldemort? ( Re: Questions! Questions! Questions!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110419 Orly wrote: One thing that puzzles me is that if neither can live while the other survives, how long a period is referred to? Obviously, LV was alive for over a year after Harry was born; again, since the end of GoF, a year has passed with both HP and LV co-existing in the magical community. How does the presence of one character interfere with the survival of the other? I wonder if JKR will spell that out in books six or seven. Sarah responded: My shot at answering the enigma: we're already seeing it when Harry gets his dreams/visions of being Voldemort. In OotP, at one point Harry collapsed on the stairs to the boys dorms and started laughing manically because Voldemort was laughing. Harry sees through Voldemort's eyes. He doesn't have a sense of being Harry at these times. He believes himself to be Voldemort. (Ever see Being John Malkovich? I think it's like that.) Marcela here: And don't forget that Voldemort was able to feel Harry's presence when he was attacking Mr. Weasley. Evidently, when Harry is under a lot of stress or caring for a loved one (Mr. Weasley's attack, Sirius' death) Voldemort can't stand it. Unfortunately for Harry, he did not experience intense feelings of love in fifth year (they were mainly feelings of rejection, neglect, hatred, missunderstanding). I wonder what would Voldemort feel now that Harry is mourning a very close loved one, I guess we will have to wait for Snape's report on that. Marcela From carodave92 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 00:18:53 2004 From: carodave92 at yahoo.com (carodave92) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 00:18:53 -0000 Subject: Pureblood Weasleys? In-Reply-To: <41229559.8010009@bellsouth.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110420 Shannon wrote: > She asked me if the Weasleys were pure blood, and I said > that they were. But when we started talking about it, I can't > remember any moment in the books in which this is outright stated. > I do remember Ron telling Harry that all his family were wizards, > but that doesn't necessarily mean *everyone,* it could just mean > current family. When Ginny is taken in to the Chamber of Secrets, Ron theorizes that she must have seen something suspicious, otherwise there would be no reason to take her since she's a pureblood. Caroline From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 01:15:51 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 01:15:51 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110421 SSSusan wrote : "*If* I'm right, Voldy must have decided he wasn't even interested in love--wouldn't allow himself to be interested in love--told himself it does nothing but make a wizard WEAK.... " Del replies : But SSSusan, can you *really* imagine a little boy, say 6 or 9 years old, not loving or caring for *anyone* or anything ?!? I simply cannot imagine a *normal* little boy, no matter how harsh his life conditions might be, not caring for anything, and not having affection for anyone. Unless Tom was *not* normal, unless he was a psycho right from birth (or from the moment his mom died, it's pretty much the same anyway), which would mean that his values are inherently different from ours and most importantly that he did NOT make a choice to be evil and to not love : he *was* loveless by nature. Sad, sad thought. Del, who at the age of 9 tried real hard for months to become devoid of emotions, only to discover that they came back with a vengeance a couple of years later : normal kids can NOT prevent themselves from loving. From marmys at bellsouth.net Tue Aug 17 22:22:48 2004 From: marmys at bellsouth.net (cybermarmy) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 22:22:48 -0000 Subject: Petunia's Secret In-Reply-To: <3C0019BD-F08F-11D8-9580-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110422 caesian wrote: > > So, to conclude, Petunia is keeping a very big secret and it has > to do with the pact she sealed by giving Harry the protection of > her house. What it is can only be guessed at now, but recent > comments by the author suggest that we will discover there is more > to Petunia than it now seems. Marleen replies: Caesian that was fantastic. I thoroughly enjoyed reading your theory! When I came to the end it made me think that maybe the secret that Petunia has, with a pact with DD, is that she was the one that told Voldemort(not really realizing it) where her sister and family were. Think about how much she disliked her sister, etc. Maybe she was too stupid to know what the outcome would be. Maybe Sirius was only a scapegoat. DD did know he was innocent, but it was more important to keep Harry safe because of the prophecy. I know it sounds far fetched. What do you think? From caesian at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 01:20:23 2004 From: caesian at yahoo.com (caesian) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 18:20:23 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Apparating/Disapparating In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110423 On Aug 17, 2004, at 4:21 PM, karenlyall666 wrote: > I searched the archives and could find nothing on this question, so I > apologise if it has already been covered to death. > > Can someone please help me understand how Dumbledore's original > arrival in Private Drive was silent, when all other cases of > apparition/disapparition is heralded by a noise? > > UK PS PB p12 > " A man appeared on the corner the cat had been watching, appeared so > suddenly and silently you'd have thought he'd just popped out of the > ground." > > UK GOF PB p114 > "..., he disapparated with a small pop." > > And although I don't have OOTP to hand I recall all instances of > Mundungus or the Weasley twins apparating/disapparating to be > heralded by a resounding crack. > > Any ideas anyone > > Karenlyall666 > Caesian: Hi Karenlyall - I think this is a very interesting question. It has been speculated by others that the overt signs of magic, the pops, flashes and even spells are inversely correlated to the power of the witch or wizard casting them. In other words, Dumbledore make a very quiet (or no) noise because he is a more powerful wizard. Other adult witches and wizards, such as Mr. Weasley, make louder noises, and beginning apparators come in with a bang. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From srae1971 at bellsouth.net Wed Aug 18 01:22:58 2004 From: srae1971 at bellsouth.net (Shannon) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 21:22:58 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Pureblood Weasleys? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4122AF72.8080408@bellsouth.net> No: HPFGUIDX 110424 Caroline wrote: > When Ginny is taken in to the Chamber of Secrets, Ron theorizes that > she must have seen something suspicious, otherwise there would be no > reason to take her since she's a pureblood. > > Caroline Aha! I knew that if there was something there, it'd be in that book. I just couldn't *find* anything. Thank you, my friend will be very pleased to hear this. Shannon From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 18 01:41:35 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 01:41:35 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110425 SSSusan wrote : > > "*If* I'm right, Voldy must have decided he wasn't even > > interested in love--wouldn't allow himself to be interested in > > love--told himself it does nothing but make a wizard WEAK.... " Del replies : > But SSSusan, can you *really* imagine a little boy, say 6 or 9 > years old, not loving or caring for *anyone* or anything ?!? > > I simply cannot imagine a *normal* little boy, no matter how harsh > his life conditions might be, not caring for anything, and not > having affection for anyone. ...normal kids can NOT > prevent themselves from loving. SSSusan: Good ages to give me, Del, as I have an 8-year-old and an almost-6- year-old. :-) I know it *is* hard to imagine them not showing love for anyone, because my two are very loving kinds of kids (esp. the 6yo), but they're "normal kids". I think, though, that we simply can't ignore the studies that tonks & Pam pointed us to concerning children in hands-off/little-interaction orphanages. (My BS and MA degrees are in psych/counseling, so I've heard of these studies, too.) They show that, while terribly sad, yes, it is possible that these children can show no attachment, empathy or bond to another whatsoever. **BUT**, I'd like to go back to what I said in my first response to your first post in this thread. Here's what I said then: "*I* took what JKR said as meaning that Tom, once capable/old enough/able to choose, never *chose* to love another." While I would argue that it is possible for a child, esp. one in Tom's situation, to not feel love for another, my idea really works best if I've grasped JKR's meaning correctly: never as a cognizant individual. If I'm wrong and she truly meant "never" going all the way back to his birth, then I'm not sure what I think. Siriusly Snapey Susan From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 02:27:52 2004 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 02:27:52 -0000 Subject: Questions! Questions! Questions! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110426 Mochajava13 wrote: And as to why Dumbledore didn't try to kill Voldemort, I don't think > he is able to. Probably because of the prophecy. Also why no one > can destroy Voldemort besides Harry. Here's my theory: Voldemort > and Harry are connected. That's pretty obvious. They're two sides > of the same coin. Like Yin and Yang, they are two parts to one > whole. I think they're the live/death cycle. (Far fetched but > here's my reason: their wands have a phoenix feather core. A > phoenix is a symbol of death and rebirth. Voldemort's wand is made > of yew, considered the tree of death. Notice the thestrals were > seen peeking through yew trees in OotP in Hagrid's class on > thestrals. Harry's wand is made of holly, a symbol of life.) > Voldemort is death; he brings death where he goes and looks like the > grim reaper. (Tall thin and wrapped in a cloak with pasty white > hands.) Harry is life. Just like life and death can't exist at the > same time, Harry and Voldemort can't exist at the same time. > > Also, another theory that I've had for a while about the connection > between Harry and Voldemort: I think that Harry has some part of > Voldemort in him from the rebounded curse. In SS, Harry remembered > a lot of green light and a searing pain on his forehead. Maybe the > pain was part of Voldemort getting seared into Harry's brain? Now, > the part of Voldemort in Harry allows Harry to access Voldemort's > thoughts and feelings. > > So, the only way to completely destroy Voldemort is for Harry to > destroy the part of Voldemort that resides in him. Anyone else > killing Voldemort wouldn't destroy him. Make any sense? > Sarah Antosha: I posted a similar (if less-well rounded-out) theory in post 110167. Astrofiammante made the excellent point in 110237 that we already knew this *before* Edinburgh--that JKR was letting us know that there's something more going on... We'll see. Your post did spark something in my head, however. In GoF, Ch. 33 ("The Death Eaters"), p. (US ed.), LV says: "You know my goal - to conquer death. And now, I was tested, and it appeared that one or more of my experiments had worked ... for I had not been killed, though the curse should have done it. " HE doesn't know how he was spared! HE DOESN'T know which spell/ritual/potion did the trick! It is entirely possible that when he discovers that, he will, in fact, discover that he has lost part of himself to Harry--which leads to any number of theories that have been bandied about here over the last month or so. One of the most interesting is the idea that, in fact, LV was a composite creature made up of the spirit of Salazar Slytherin and Tom Riddle, whom he possessed when he (TMR) entered the Chamber of Secrets for the first time. That TMR is the link between Harry and LV (perhaps the third-party "other" of the prophecy?). That it is Tom's soul that has resided in Harry since Halloween, 1981, and that by releasing that part of LV (and himself) to death, Harry will defeat LV, and, in all likelihood, lose some of his own power. I still would bet that we're going to lose Harry behind the veil for at least a page or two when all of that happens.... Antosha From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 02:44:16 2004 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 02:44:16 -0000 Subject: Pureblood Weasleys? In-Reply-To: <4122AF72.8080408@bellsouth.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110427 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Shannon wrote: > Caroline wrote: > > > When Ginny is taken in to the Chamber of Secrets, Ron theorizes that > > she must have seen something suspicious, otherwise there would be no > > reason to take her since she's a pureblood. > > > > Caroline > > > Aha! I knew that if there was something there, it'd be in that book. I > just couldn't *find* anything. Thank you, my friend will be very > pleased to hear this. > > Shannon Also, Ron says, ""I always knew Salazar Slytherin was a twisted old loony," Ron told Harry and Hermione as they fought their way through the teeming corridors at the end of the lesson to drop off their bags before dinner. "But I never knew he started all this pure- blood stuff. I wouldn't be in his house if you paid me. Honestly, if the Sorting Hat had tried to put me in Slytherin, I'd've got the train straight back home ...." CoS p 151 (US Ed.) Then, during the Polyjuice episode, Malfoy says "Arthur Weasley loves Muggles so much he should snap his wand in half and go and join them," said Malfoy scornfully. "You'd never know the Weasleys were pure-bloods, the way they behave." CoS p. 221 (US Ed.) I have a memory of DD mentioning them being one of the old pure-blood families in PS/ SS, but couldn't find it... From dk59us at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 02:47:19 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 02:47:19 -0000 Subject: Is JkR about to reveal? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110428 Eustace_Scrubb: > >snipped< > Can DD have given her the ability to tap into some > recessive magic gene in a case of dire emergency?... > Maybe she doesn't turn out to be a full-fledged witch. Then Snow theorized: > I believe so with a big emphasis on believe. > > Dumbledore and Petunia formally or informally made a pact by doing > something together or something for each other. Does that sound > about right? > I'm going to harp again on > Petunia's surgically clean kitchen announced in most of the books. > This one is a far leap but could Petunia have asked Dumbledore for > Lily's wand and possibly a bit of magic to go with it? I told you it > was a far stretch but I could see the most powerful wizard alive > accomplishing something to this degree especially if it was the > contingency for Petunia taking Harry. Petunia acted a bit jealous of > her sister's special talents and may have secretly wanted to have > those talents herself. Petunia would only be able to use this magic > in secret to do household chores or whatever while Vernon was at > workbut one day little Dudley walked in and saw what she was doing. > Oh! so that's what little duddykins was seeing when the dementor > attacked. We all know how scared he is of magic. Couldn't resist > putting that last one in. Eustace_Scrubb again: Well, that's most interesting! So you think Petunia's been doing magic but sweeping the evidence under the rug (or just scourgifying it, rather)? It could make sense. And then something really bad happens and she ends up doing some really powerful DADA in dire circumstances? Saving Dudley and Harry from Goyle Sr., perhaps? Hmmm...this is all pretty believable...but I still wonder whether anyone--even a wizard as powerful as Dumbledore could enable a muggle to do magic, either for mundane or really important reasons. I can't begin to theorize on that one, but I hope someone can! Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From snow15145 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 03:42:58 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 03:42:58 -0000 Subject: the lion discription Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110429 Did anyone else notice that there is an owl in the very first book, page 2, that was unnoticed by the Dursleys? [None of them noticed a large, tawny owl flutter past the window.] This is right before Vernon heads off to work. Thought I would mention it because of the discription of tawny. Snow From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Wed Aug 18 04:02:35 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 04:02:35 -0000 Subject: Compassionate and Selfless Snape! (experiencing love) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110430 >>> Alla wrote before: > admittedly his most compassionate moments may have had > *other* motivations, but that doesn't mean that compassion was > absolutely *not* a motive--for example, in PS, Snape's counter- > curse to keep Harry from falling off of his broom has been brushed > off as just having been done so Snape could even himself with James for saving his life > >>> Mel responded: > I disagree in that it is not "compassionate" by definition to not > want someone dead. I don't want anyone to die, but that is not a > show of compassion for them, it's a general morality decision. It > doesn't mean I have any feeling for them one way or another. <<< Brenda now: True, it *is* a general morality decision, but if you had just 'volunteered' to save someone's life without letting him know, I'll say it does reflect some degree of compassion. I realize you can argue that Snape was the only one who really knew Quirrell's true intention and only he could have saved Harry. I will even stretch this to say if Snape had not muttered counter-jinx here Snape IS a real cold-hearted bastard. Any moral upright human being would have done so. What is more impressive is that he had volunteered to referee for the next Quidditch match, 'making himself unpopular' according to Quirrell. Seems to me Snape was genuinely concerned for Harry's life and had enough compassion to make further attempts in preventing possible disasters. And the real biggie: I have yet to hear Snape gloating over Harry on this?? I don't recall him ever saying "Remember Potter, I saved your life and this is how you treat me?" So he quietly saved Harry's life but never rubbed it in his face? Not even to staffs? It seems to me the only people who know about this is Quirrell and Dumbledore. Brenda From vmonte at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 04:09:30 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 04:09:30 -0000 Subject: DD - maybe. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110432 Kneasy: A bit late, but never mind; maybe you'll read the back posts and find out just how many have said the same thing. vmonte responds: Oh, I agree with you on this point. Kneasy: But not very many of those subscribe to this Time Travel perversion. vmonte responds: I agree with you here as well, and it's ok with me if you don't. Kneasy: The one stone cold blocker on all these TT theories:_ Why is all the action *now* when all the preliminaries, foundations, original acts happened way back *then*? Why hasn't Voldy already been sorted? What's the delay? Hasn't DD/Ron already had 50 years to sort out the Tom Riddle problem? And 15 years to sort out the Voldy problem? Or perhaps he forgot to wind his watch. It's no good having TT if you don't use it, and I see no point in DD allowing who knows how many to die when a little judicious TT would prevent it. vmonte responds: The problem with being a great strategist is that it might work fine when all you have to rely on is yourself and ivory chess pieces. Things tend to get messy when your working with real live people. You know it's that small problem called "free will." You can't always get people to behave the way you want them to, but you can create some changes. And I don't think that DD would TT to the past to kill baby Riddle. JKR makes a point of telling her readers in OOTP that killing a child is wrong (the scene where Hermione yells at Harry not to hurt the baby-headed DE. Even though we know that Tom Riddle will grow up to be evil, it's not ok to go back in time and kill him as a baby). I agree with your thought that the Order might be an ancient society. It seems to me that Flamel was also probably involved with the Order, and he was 666 years old at last count. If he is GG, then he is probably even older than that. You know your theory about the entity might just be true. Maybe Salazar has lived so long because of his parasitic abilities. You accept him into your soul, and presto, he's growing out of the back of your head or living inside you. Kneasy: 'Cos Ron is, to put it mildly, an intellectual lightweight verging on half-wit. Ron? Become DD? Yeah, and Trevor is Godric Gryffindor. Ron will be bloody lucky if he survives to the end of the series. vmonte responds: Ron is being set-up for something, Kneasy. I'm positive that his parents (or at least Molly) are going to be killed next. There is nothing like a little tragedy to make someone grow up--fast. Oh yeah, I'm also sure the kids will be able to join the Order once their mother is gone. Page 450 OOTP, U.S. edition: The scene right after Hagrid shows the students the thestrals... "Yeah, Weasley, we were just wondering," said a malicious voice nearby. Unheard by any of them in the muffling snow, Malfoy, Crabbe, and Goyle were walking along right behind them. D'you reckon if you saw someone snuff it you'd be able to see the Quaffle Better?" vivian: Yeah, I reckon... :) From msturbo209 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 02:21:38 2004 From: msturbo209 at yahoo.com (stellablue571) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 02:21:38 -0000 Subject: Draco's nature (was Power vs Morality was LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110433 - > > > SSSusan:> I think you're right that Draco is frightened of his father and > probably somewhat miserable, but I don't see how you can conclude > that his life has been *loveless*. Are you positive Lucius doesn't > love Draco? Surely he's a tough disciplinarian, but are you sure he > doesn't love him? And Narcissa? Yes, she seems to spoil him to no > end, but I also got the impression (founded? unfounded?) that she > loves him very much. > > Siriusly Snapey Susan Stella says: Remeber why Draco didn't go to Durmstrang? His mother didn't want him too far away...this suggests love to me. From misty_december at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 02:10:53 2004 From: misty_december at yahoo.com (Misty) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 02:10:53 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110434 > While I would argue that it is possible for a child, esp. one in > Tom's situation, to not feel love for another, my idea really works > best if I've grasped JKR's meaning correctly: never as a cognizant > individual. If I'm wrong and she truly meant "never" going all the > way back to his birth, then I'm not sure what I think. > > Siriusly Snapey Susan ****************************************************** I believe that *is* what she meant - that Voldemort is not capable of caring for anyone, nor has he ever cared for anyone. JKR says "If he had, he couldn't possibly be what he is". Since I am the one who brought up the subject of young children who do not bond with others, maybe I should go one step further and say that that is most likely what happened to Tom Riddle. He is what was once called a "psychopath". Someone who has no soul, but can be very charming and persuasive. Most people do not see the evil side. Has anyone seen the movie, "The Bad Seed"? Tom Riddle had serious bonding issues. Maybe because JKR is an advocate for abused children she is familiar with this sort of thing. Just guessing. Misty From spinelli372003 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 02:52:23 2004 From: spinelli372003 at yahoo.com (spinelli372003) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 02:52:23 -0000 Subject: Apparating/Disapparating In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110435 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, caesian wrote: > On Aug 17, 2004, at 4:21 PM, karenlyall666 wrote: > > > I searched the archives and could find nothing on this question, so I apologise if it has already been covered to death. Can someone please help me understand how Dumbledore's original arrival in Private Drive was silent, when all other cases of apparition/disapparition is heralded by a noise? I have also searched for a long time and have another question. Although it is more speculation I guess. I have been rereading OOTP american version. On page 446 Hagrid is talking about thestrals. It has been said many times by Hermione that "I read it in Hogwarts a history....." "You can't Apparate on hogwarts grounds". Yet on page 446 of OOTP Hagrid says "Course this lot don't get a lot of work, its mainly just pullin' the school carraiges unless Dumbledoor is takin' a long journey an' don't want to apparate--an' here's another couple, look--" So if we go under the assumption that Dumbledoor is using the Thestrals for long trips from Hogwarts then apparantly Apparating is happening on Hogwarts grounds. sherry From minervakab at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 03:12:37 2004 From: minervakab at yahoo.com (minervakab) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 03:12:37 -0000 Subject: The Clue Behind the Door Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110436 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lisa" wrote: > As the elves pointed out this morning, the Do Not Disturb sign has > come down off the door at JKR's website, and there's an interesting > clue inside. > > I won't post the clue here, as I'm sure some would like to check it > all out themselves. Could this be a hint to the identity of the Half > Blood Prince himself? There's someone in canon who bears an uncanny > resemblance in my mind's eye to the note here..... > > Lisa, ever pondersome spoiler v v v v v v v v v v v v minervakab says: I believe it is a description of the Half Blood Prince who is DD's brother who is also the proprietor of the Hog's Head Inn where DD hears the original prophesy and who has been hired as the next DADA teacher. We are all dying to know who the HBP is so I think JKR gave us a description of him. The glasses, the hair, and the eyebrows remind me of DD. The fact the JKR would not tell anything about the propietor in her interview at the recent book signing add weight to the speculation about DD's brother owning the Hog's Head. As for the DADA part, I have no good reason for it. I just think it would be cool. Minervakab From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Wed Aug 18 04:39:53 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 04:39:53 -0000 Subject: Apparating/Disapparating vs. Portkey In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110437 >>> Sherry wrote: > [On thestrals] Hagrid says "Course this lot don't get a lot of work, its mainly just pullin' the school carraiges unless Dumbledoor is takin' a long journey an' don't want to apparate--an' here's another couple, look--" > > So if we go under the assumption that Dumbledoor is using the > Thestrals for long trips from Hogwarts then apparantly Apparating is happening on Hogwarts ground <<< Brenda now: Dumble-bumbly-door? Lol. That is an excellent point. I have often wondered about this. I mean you can't Apparate and Disapparate from Hogwarts ground, but you can use the Portkey to get there? Remember at the end of OoP, Dumblydore sends Harry back to Hogwarts with a Portkey. From Fudge's reaction I'll say creating portkeys is carefully monitored and somewhat illegal. BUT if it can be done, then why bother with all the anti- Apparation protection? Portkeys will easily transport you to Hogwarts just the same. Unless 'You can't Apparate from Hogwarts!' is another one of 'You- Know-Who' thing. A means to discourage people from doing it. Brenda From caesian at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 04:51:45 2004 From: caesian at yahoo.com (caesian) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 21:51:45 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hide the animals! was Re: The Clue Behind the Door In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4E867298-F0D2-11D8-8A33-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110438 On Aug 17, 2004, at 8:12 PM, minervakab wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lisa" wrote: > > As the elves pointed out this morning, the Do Not Disturb sign has > > come down off the door at JKR's website, and there's an > interesting > > clue inside. > > > > I won't post the clue here, as I'm sure some would like to check > it > > all out themselves. Could this be a hint to the identity of the > Half > > Blood Prince himself? There's someone in canon who bears an > uncanny > > resemblance in my mind's eye to the note here..... > > > > Lisa, ever pondersome > > spoiler > v > v > v > v > v > v > v > v > v > v > v > v > minervakab says:? I believe it is a description of the Half Blood > Prince who is DD's brother who is also the proprietor of the Hog's > Head Inn where DD hears the original prophesy and who has been hired > as the next DADA teacher.? > > We are all dying to know who the HBP is so I think JKR gave us a > description of him. The glasses, the hair, and the eyebrows remind me > of DD.? The fact the JKR would not tell anything about the propietor > in her interview at the recent book signing add weight to the > speculation about DD's brother owning the Hog's Head.? As for the DADA > part, I have no good reason for it.? I just think it would be cool. > > Minervakab > > > Caesian here: This may be the case, but as I understand it Alberforth - Dumbledore's brother, and the vaguely familiar, surly barkeep of the HogsHead - is barely literate and has a unwholesome interest in goats. I'm not sure he's a suitable applicant - even for the much maligned DADA post. ;-) Cheers, Caesian [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From susan7gail at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 04:35:02 2004 From: susan7gail at yahoo.com (susan7gail) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 04:35:02 -0000 Subject: Is JkR about to reveal? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110441 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mochajava13" wrote: > My thought on Petunia is that she could have become a witch, but > decided not to. She seems to know more about the wizarding world > than she lets on, and how could she have learned all about the > wizarding world through a sister she hated? Hi, this is my first post. I've been lurking for a week or so... I agree with you. I'm wondering if Dumbledore's pact with Petunia involves blocking her magical abilities so they don't crop up at an awkward time. Susan From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Aug 18 06:40:40 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 06:40:40 -0000 Subject: Draco's nature (was Power vs Morality was LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110442 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: Alla: > > > > Definitely Sussan. I am with you on this one too. Could anybody > show > > me ONE example from the books where we can see or at least infer > that > > Draco is not loved? > > > > Draco is heavily influenced by his father, sure, but not loved? > > Or ...abused? Where, where, where? > > > > I have an impression that Draco has everything he wants and very > > happy with what he has. Except of course he alwasy wants what Harry > has. > > Let me just express again my kind of annoyance > > that JKR gave up on that character so easily. Geoff: Maybe not so strong as to be not loved, but I read into the scene at Borgin and Burkes (COS "At Flourish and Blotts" pp.42-44 UK edition) that he is undervalued by Lucius; the latter doesn't come over as the sort of father I would have wanted.... Again, Lucius comes over in other scenes as being more interested in "Number One" than in what anyone else needs or feels. From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Wed Aug 18 06:47:48 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 06:47:48 -0000 Subject: Gringotts: Sirius' Vault & Harry's Inheritance Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110443 JKR's Dartboard -- Everyone says it's Harry's birthday but I believe it is 7-1-3, the secret vault from Gringotts where the Sorcerer's Stone was kept. I later realized, the sequence mattered. Only 7-1-3 worked, not others. Odd info that has constantly bothered me -- From Sirius' letter to Harry: "I used your name but told them to take the gold from Gringotts vault number seven hundred and eleven - my own." (PoA, 315. UK) Am I alone in finding it rather funny how Sirius gave his vault number to Harry? In the first letter to his godson, after having met him briefly (which wasn't even all loving/touching, half of it was spent on misunderstanding/strangling), he tells Harry this. This is the most-wanted guy on a run by the way. Why? Then it occurred to me -- his inheritance! Harry's name must be on the safe-list in case of emergency. Harry can take out Sirius' gold without approval. Which means Harry has full access to the vault, and now that Sirius is dead *hiccup* it's all his. I don't necessarily believe the Grimmauld Place will become Harry's property, let alone that Kreacher, but I think Grigotts vault is definitely his. Another thing -- assuming the vaults in Gringotts are arranged numerically, Sirius' vault (711) must be near the secret one (713), in fact very close. ----------------------------------------------------- They were going even deeper now and gathering speed. The air became colder and colder as they hurtled round tight corners. They went rattling over an underground ravine and Harry leant over the side to try and see what was down at the dark bottom but Hagrid groaned and pulled him back by the scruff of his neck. Vault seven hundred and thirteen had no keyhole. 'Stand back,' said Griphook importantly. He stroked the door gently with one of his long fingers and it simply melted away. 'If anyone but a Gringotts goblin tried that, they'd be sucked through the door and trapped in there,' said Griphook. --------------------------------------------[PS/SS, 58-59. UK] Could Sirius' vault be one of these top-security ones as well? Any thoughts? Brenda From tonks_op at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 05:28:22 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 05:28:22 -0000 Subject: Power vs Morality (LV never knew love) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110444 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > We know he could *pretend* to be a good person while at Hogwarts... He seemed to have put up a > good pretence to be a good boy, when in fact he despised that role. > But I find this quite scary, because it means that by the age of 11 he > was already so damaged that he could not enjoy the rewards that being > a good boy can bring you : attention, favours, honours and so on. He > seemed to have been past that already. It seems he was already > thinking that the only thing that matters is *power*. This is > something that his life at the orphanage undoubtedly taught him, but > it seems to have been ingrained so deeply into him that even the > discovery of a whole new world where he was offered a new clean start > was not enough to change his mindset. -------------------------------------- In reply: First not every person with Anti-Social Personality disorder has the inability to bond. There are degrees. Some gang members bond with the members of their group. However when we are talking about Voldemort, we are seeing the most extreme example. (The serial killer Jack Bundy was also like this.) People with Voldemort's early life experience and the inability to bond or develop empathy can learn behaviors that make them appear to be normal. If they are very intelligent as Voldemort apparently is, they can watch others and learn to pretend to be like them. They do not know what love feels like and see it as a weakness in others. They, like Voldemort, see love and compassion as a weakness that they can exploit for their own gain. (Bundy pretended to be handicapped and asked his victims for help.) For Voldemort to say "there is no good or evil, only power and those too afraid to use it" makes perfect sense to a person who does not know love. It is difficult for the majority of us who have experiences being loved and loving to truly understand what it must be like to be Voldemort. Often we can put ourselves in another's place and try to imagine what it would be like. It is almost impossible for us to imagine what it must be like to not feel love. So Voldemort is in a place within himself and within society (although he is not really IN society because he really can not relate to the rest of us) that must be a very lonely place. But because he does not know love he is not even aware of his loneliness. He would be aware that he is different. He might even be aware of why he is different, in that it involved not having a family home to grow up in. His awareness would contribute to his anger actually rage which is an even deeper emotion. Rage is the emotion that cuts to the core of the person and can cause the most severe behaviors up to and including murder. A person like Voldemort can find pleasure in the pain of others. None of us would want to meet, even in the daylight in a crowded room, someone like Voldemort!!! I actually had that experience once. And I felt a cold pass through me as if I had been in the presence of the devil himself. ----------------------------------- So I'm asking you again : what makes people choose between right and > wrong ? What could have make Tom change his priority from searching > power to acting nice ? You say he was probably unable to bond and > experience love and caring, so *why* should he have believed that > being and doing good was more important than being powerful ? Reply: This is a very difficult question, especially from a spiritual perspective, isn't it? >From a mental health perspective there is no "cure" for Voldemort's type of personality disorder. It is called a "personality disorder" because it is part of the person's identity and is more serious that a "mental illness". People with a personality disorder can in some rare cases be helped to change, but the diagnosis of "antisocial personality disorder" is the only one that is basically hopeless. The only thing that a therapist can do is to teach the person the consequences of their behavior on themselves. For example: "If you kill someone for his CD player you will go to jail, and you will not like being in jail, therefore it might be best not to kill anyone." There are much deeper questions about Voldemort and his behavior. I don't like to think that he can't be redeemed, especially given that he is not wholly to blame for his situation. Tonks_op From tonks_op at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 06:55:52 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 06:55:52 -0000 Subject: Why didn't DD try to kill V'mort (was Questions! Questions! Questions!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110445 (Laurasia) wrote: > ..."The only option as to why Dumbledore didn't even *try* to kill > Voldemort must be because he knows Voldemort will become *more > powerful* "... Reply: This is a good point. Sort of like if we chose to do an act of evil it adds to the evil in the world and somehow gives it more strength. So for a good person like Dumbledore to to a killing curse on Voldemort would be playing into Voldemort's hands. .. doing what he wants him to do.. to do an act of evil. I think the "punishment" Dumbledore had in mind was something that Voldemort would have really hated.. something like compassion and love.. It is said that people in Hell chose to be there, that God does not put them there, but that they CHOOSE to be there because they can not stand to be in the presence of an all loving God. So I think that for Voldemort, something like that would be the most torturous thing he could face. tonks_op From b_boymn at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 07:25:30 2004 From: b_boymn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 07:25:30 -0000 Subject: Apparating/Disapparating vs. Portkey In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110446 > >>> Sherry wrote: > > [On thestrals] Hagrid says "Course this lot don't get a lot of > work, its mainly just pullin' the school carraiges unless Dumbledoor > is takin' a long journey an' don't want to apparate--an' here's > another couple, look--" > > > > So if we go under the assumption that Dumbledoor is using the > > Thestrals for long trips from Hogwarts then apparantly Apparating > is happening on Hogwarts ground <<< > Brenda now: > > Dumble-bumbly-door? Lol. > > That is an excellent point. I have often wondered about this. I mean > you can't Apparate and Disapparate from Hogwarts ground, but you can > use the Portkey to get there? Remember at the end of OoP, Dumblydore > sends Harry back to Hogwarts with a Portkey. From Fudge's reaction > ...edited... Portkeys will easily transport you to Hogwarts just the > same. > > Unless 'You can't Apparate from Hogwarts!' is another one of 'You- > Know-Who' thing. A means to discourage people from doing it. b_boymn (was asian_lovr2): Let's not lose sight of the fact that all you have to do to Apparate is step outside the grounds. You may not be able to apparate into or out of the grounds, but you can from the train station or the village. As far as Portkeys, we have only one instance of a Portkey that wasn't controlled by Dumbledore, and that is the Tri-Wizard's Cup. However, there is a large group of people that support the idea that the Cup was alway a Portkey to take the winning champion to a location just outside the maze. What Fake!Moody did was add another stop to the Cup. Moody's destination was put on last, so it was used first, that took Harry and Cedric to the graveyard. That left the original destination unactivated, and Harry used this to get back Hogwart at a location just outside the maze. All other entrances and exists by /wizards/ have been controlled by Dumbledore. Since Dumbledore controls the protections to Hogwart's castle and grounds, he also controls the acceptions. As an extension of this, note that most acceptions involving wizards were related to transport into and out of Dumbledore's office. Just a thought. Steve/b_boymn From b_boymn at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 07:38:40 2004 From: b_boymn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 07:38:40 -0000 Subject: Gringotts: Sirius' Vault & Harry's Inheritance In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110447 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Brenda M." wrote: >> ...edited... > > Odd info that has constantly bothered me -- From Sirius' letter to > Harry: > > "I used your name but told them to take the gold from Gringotts > vault number /seven hundred and eleven/ - my own." (PoA, 315. UK) > > Am I alone in finding it rather funny how Sirius gave his vault > number to Harry? In the first letter to his godson, after having met > him briefly ..., he tells Harry this. This is the most-wanted guy on > a run by the way. Why? > > Then it occurred to me -- his inheritance! Harry's name must be on > the safe-list in case of emergency. Harry can take out Sirius' gold > without approval. Which means Harry has full access to the vault, > and now that Sirius is dead *hiccup* it's all his. > > ...edited... > > Could Sirius' vault be one of these top-security ones as well? > > Any thoughts? > > > Brenda B_Boymn: Let's look at the letter again as it's cause quite a bit of controversy in the past. First, I like your idea that Sirius had a very specific and intensional reason for giving Harry his vault number. Also, note that that vault number is not contained in every edition of the book. Back to the letter; the letter is explaining that Sirius ordered the Firebolt racing broom IN HARRY'S NAME and told the Quidditch Store to take the money out of Vault 711 - Sirius's vault. A broom was bought /in Harry's name/ and like any mail order, the mail order form is the note of authorization to withdraw funds from an account. Extending that, it would imply that indeed funds could be withdrawn in Harry's name. In other words, withdrawn by Harry. I'm a strong supporter of this belief that Harry has some degree of access to Sirius's vault, and you made a very important connection that I had never see before, despite the fact that I have analysed that letter and posted extensive speculations about it. One additional note, that vault probably represent Sirius's personal fortune and is not tied or encumbered by the Black Family Estate. It will be a lot easier for Harry to inherit Sirius's personal estate, than it will be for him to inherit the Black Family Estate. I forsee a nice conflict between Harry and Draco over the Family Estate. Nice work; thanks. Steve/b_boymn (was asian_lovr2) From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 18 07:59:44 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 03:59:44 -0400 Subject: Pureblood Weasleys? Message-ID: <001a01c484f9$53b65d40$7bc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 110448 Shannon "I checked the lexicon and it says they are pure blood, but again is this just assumed or is there a direct quote or something from the book that confirms it? Because I honestly can't think of where it might have been explicitly stated." DuffyPoo: In CoS DD says "The Weasleys are one of our most prominent pure-blood families" when talking with Lucius Malfoy near the end of the book. I speculated some time ago that the reason Sirius says his family considers the Weasleys blood traitors is because they married Muggle-borns/half-bloods. There is a different meaning to the term pure-blood depending on where your prejudice lies. For the Blacks/Malfoys it means there can be no non-magic influence in any of the family line. For those like DD and the Weasleys it means everyone in the family is magical. My thoughts at least. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tonks_op at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 07:41:41 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 07:41:41 -0000 Subject: Apparating/Disapparating vs. Portkey In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110449 Brenda : > I have often wondered about this. I mean you can't Apparate and > Disapparate from Hogwarts ground, but you can use the Portkey to > get there? Remember at the end of OoP, Dumblydore sends Harry back > to Hogwarts with a Portkey. From Fudge's reaction I'll say creating > portkeys is carefully monitored and somewhat illegal. BUT if it can > be done, then why bother with all the anti-Apparation protection? > Portkeys will easily transport you to Hogwarts just the same. ====================== Hi: I have been wondering about that. If you can't apparate into Hogwarts or disapparate out.. How did Dumbledore get out of Hogwarts when he was in his office and about to be taken by Fudge and the other MoM people in the 5th book. He grabbed Fawke's tail and .. was gone. How? tonks_op From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com Wed Aug 18 10:45:21 2004 From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 10:45:21 -0000 Subject: Apparating/Disapparating, Portkeys & Phoenix In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110450 karenlyall666 wrote: > Can someone please help me understand how Dumbledore's original > arrival in Private Drive was silent, when all other cases of > apparition/disapparition is heralded by a noise? > > UK PS PB p12 > " A man appeared on the corner the cat had been watching, appeared so > suddenly and silently you'd have thought he'd just popped out of the > ground." > > UK GOF PB p114 > "..., he disapparated with a small pop." > > And although I don't have OOTP to hand I recall all instances of > Mundungus or the Weasley twins apparating/disapparating to be > heralded by a resounding crack. > > Any ideas anyone > > Karenlyall666 Someone else mentioned that it is related to the power of the wizard - I don't quite agree with that. I think it just comes down to regular ability. After all, disapparating involves moving your body suddenly out of a place and into another. When you suddenly remove a mass from a physical space, a lot of air runs to fill the sudden emptiness, causing a noise. This is probably coupled with the magic effect itself - magic traditionally likes to announce its presence with bangs and cracks. And then there is the teenager tendency to be loud and shout "look at me!" with every action. All this leads to the idea that, as an apparating wizard gets older, he'll tend to become better at apparating and keep the noise down, out of practice. Going back to the driving parallel (present even in the books), when you first start driving, you tend to do unnecesary accelerations, making a huge amount of extra, unnecesary noise (at least with geared cars - not sure in automatic). As you get better, your driving becomes more calm and efficient. In magical terms, it means that as you get better at what is reportedly an extremally difficult and dangerous spell, you start worrying less about splinching, cast it more on automatic and can concentrate on being less loud - maybe taking slightly longer (milliseconds instead of instantanous) to cast, so that you ease the air in and out, reduce the magic output so that it doesn't make as much noise, etc. Dumbledore has been doing that for over 100 years, so he's got good at it. Mundungus strikes me as a remarkadly incompetent wizard, so he's loud (although he's probably useful for the Order in other ways - but that is a matter for another post). Of course, in general, the more powerful wizards will tend to be quieter, but that is usually because the powerful wizards have been practising magic. I think it is quite possible that Harry will learn apparating in book 6 (he has a knack for learning spells before he's legally able to, just like his father), and we'll be able to test this hypothesis - Harry is extremelly powerful, as we know, but has very little experience, and I postulate that his first attempts at apparating will be loud (and given his history, will attract the attention of Filch or Snape :D ). Sherry said: > So if we go under the assumption that Dumbledoor is using the > Thestrals for long trips from Hogwarts then apparantly Apparating is > happening on Hogwarts grounds. > sherry Actually, no. Apparitioning can be done from outside Hogwarts (I assume outside enough that anyone apparating with evil intentions like, say, Voldemort would have a hard time storming the school). Remember long distance apparating is dangerous, which is why even Dumbledore seems to prefer other methods. Brenda added: > I mean > you can't Apparate and Disapparate from Hogwarts ground, but you can > use the Portkey to get there? Remember at the end of OoP, Dumblydore > sends Harry back to Hogwarts with a Portkey. From Fudge's reaction > I'll say creating portkeys is carefully monitored and somewhat > illegal. BUT if it can be done, then why bother with all the anti- > Apparation protection? Portkeys will easily transport you to > Hogwarts just the same. > > Unless 'You can't Apparate from Hogwarts!' is another one of 'You- > Know-Who' thing. A means to discourage people from doing it. > > Brenda As Steve already pointed out, Dumbledore seems the only one that can create portkeys *to* Hogwarts - maybe you need some kind of magical password (assuming you believe that the cup was a portkey to take you out of the maze, which I've always felt was a safe assumption). Recently, however, I came with another possibility rather than the password idea: creating a portkey might require some kind of physical component - a piece of the place you want to go to. If this was the case, Dumbledore would have access to such components for Hogwarts, and Voldemort (and thus Crouch Jr) would have the component for the graveyard. The weak point of this is, of course, that such a component would necesarily be difficult to find, otherwise everyone and their little cousin could use one of their old Hogwart souvenirs to pop back into the school whenever they wanted - even Voldemort could use his old books to pop back. tonks_op mentioned: > I have been wondering about that. If you can't apparate into > Hogwarts or disapparate out.. How did Dumbledore get out of > Hogwarts when he was in his office and about to be taken by Fudge > and the other MoM people in the 5th book. He grabbed Fawke's tail > and .. was gone. How? > > tonks_op More and more magical creatures seem to be outside many of those rules. We know that house elves can apparate within Hogwarts and in fact do so regularly. We also had a previous clue to Fawke's abilities in CoS when he appeared *immediately* when Harry defended Dumbledore's honour in the chamber. Interestingly enough, he flew them out later through the pipes, but maybe they were simply too many to safely disapparate them (he was carrying four people there at the end, plus sword and hat). And of course, while it is quite clear that you can't apparate in or out of Hogwarts, that doesn't really rule out apparating *within* hogwarts - Dumbledore could've simply gone to another room in the castle. I find unlikely this possibility, though - I think it is rather more probable that some magical creatures like elves or phoenixes can apparate where humans cannot (maybe simply because the anti-apparition charmed were set only against humans, old wizards not being particularly known for their tendency to think of non-human races as viable oponents - IIRC, the protection spells are mentioned in Hogwarts: a History, so they probably predate Dumbledore). Hope that helps, Grey Wolf, who might or might not be back From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com Wed Aug 18 11:10:06 2004 From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:10:06 -0000 Subject: Gringotts: Sirius' Vault In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110451 Brenda wrote: > Could Sirius' vault be one of these top-security ones as well? > > Any thoughts? > > > Brenda It could, but numerical order isn't exactly a relevant indicator of it. Let me explain: the Black family could, indeed, have enough cash and trinkets to justify the use of a high security vault (although notice that Harry's parents' weren't exactly hurting either, and they had a regular account). The most telling clue for the vault being high security is not the numbering (more on that a little later) but the fact that Sirius just wrote a letter and that was enough to grant access to it. Let me expand: When Harry was to the bank in PS, we saw two different approaches to the vaults. In Harry's case, the goblin asked for the key - which Hagrid carried with him. However, for access to the PS, Hagrid only had to hand a letter from Dumbledore, not a key. Since Sirius's account works in the same way, we can safely assume his was high security. Unfortunately, neither us nor Harry really know what those letters actually say. I would assume something a little more sophisticated than "hi, I'm Harry and I'd like access to high security vault 711" is required in those pieces of paper - possibly passwords, secret numbers, etc. When all's said and done, the secutiry of such vault relies on needing a goblin to open it, rather than a key, so you must first convince the goblin that you really have access to the vault. Now, to the bit I'm actually interested in: numbering vaults. Gringotts is described as a maze, almost. I think you'd agree than when building a maze, you want to steer away from any kind of logical pattern that makes finding places easier for anyone. Notice that the goblin that goes with Harry and Hagrid doesn't actually drive the cart - in fact, it is especifically noted that he doesn't, and that the cart knows where it is going on its own. As a CS, I can't help but think that the entire system of caverns was designed completely randomly, and that the chances of two vaults with similar numbers being next to each other would be of 1 in the total number of vaults (shannon's information theory states that this is the arrangement that provides the least amount of information). The resulting mess was simply "loaded" magically into the cart's driving mechanism, and then every plan destroyed. In this same line, the goblins would've tried to stay away from obvious patterns such as "all high security vaults are 700s" and such, since anyone who managed to enter the bank, finding one such vault, would know that the things inside would be particularly valuable (granted, the no keyhole bit would also be a dead give away). In conclussion, I think we can conclude that Sirius's vault is high security, but not because of the numbering, if the goblins are as efficient as we've been told. Hope that helps, Grey Wolf From sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 11:34:26 2004 From: sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com (sevenhundredandthirteen) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:34:26 -0000 Subject: Not Harry's Vault, The Philosopher's Stone's Vault In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110452 Tyler wrote > 713 is also the number of Harry's safe at Gringotts'. I (Laurasia or SevenHundredAndThirteen) reply: 713 is the vault the Philospoher's Stone was in, not Harry's vault. Sirius' vault was/is 711, which suggests his is in the high security area. 713 could be Dumbledore's or Flamel's vault. ~<(Laurasia)>~ From xmezumiiru at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 12:00:48 2004 From: xmezumiiru at yahoo.com (An'nai Jiriki) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 05:00:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] "A" Teacher's Personality WAS: Lovely Snape In-Reply-To: <1003946A-F09F-11D8-9580-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040818120048.8274.qmail@web12210.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110453 --- caesian wrote: > The Connection 12 October 1999 > What about Snape? > Snape is a very sadistic teacher, loosely based on > a teacher I myself > had, I have to say. I think children are very aware > and we are kidding > ourselves if we dont think that they are, that > teachers do sometimes > abuse their power and this particular teacher does > abuse his power. > Hes not a particularly pleasant person at all. > However, everyone > should keep their eye on Snape, Ill just say that > because there is ... I had a disturbing thought. In this, JKR never says "Snape" misuses his power, and is not a pleasant person, directly. My first reading was she was still talking about her teacher, and grammatically, the last person she was talking about was her teacher. I think Snape does misuse his powers and is not pleasant, but unless I am missing vocal inflection that cannot come through print, I do not think she was talking about Snape in those lines. It is also possible that DD (who I believe is ESE) gave Snape the power, however directly or indirectly, to abuse his classes like that. We also don't know if it is only Harry's class: Example: In PS/SS, when Percy tells Harry about Snape, he never says anything about his personality, only that he is into Dark Arts. Example: In OotP, there is a high level of desire to pass into NEWT Potions, otherwise Snape would not put a cap on the amount of students is his class (a matter of statistics, here). I also do not believe at 15, most students know enough about their future to purposely torture themselves with Snape, just to take an additional class. Example: Never, anywhere in the books, do students outside of Harry and Ron badmouth Snape by calling him 'evil' or 'greasy'. 'Unfair', yes, but McGonnagal (sp?) is called that as well. Obviously, we are missing something outside of Harry's perspective. Also, I do believe that Harry saw an abnormal amount of inspections during Umbridge's reign. It could be passed off as she was inspecting NEWT classes, or she was after Harry, but I do not think this is the case. I think she inspected every year and Harry saw some of the first inspections (McGonnagal & Trelawney). As evil as Umbridge was, I do not think she would have let a bad of a teacher as Snape is to Harry continuously harass the students in every class. It would be devastating to the Ministry she is so attached to; no potion lovers exiting Hogwarts, no potion masters/experts entering the Ministry. This case would be a selfish 'saving our own neck' scenario. In conclusion, Snape is sadistic and misuses his powers. However, he only 'lets go' around Harry, and is tempered in the rest of his classes. ===== "You irritate me. Kill me now." ~Javert, Les Miserables __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 18 12:00:19 2004 From: pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net (pcaehill2) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 12:00:19 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110454 Misty wrote: > I believe that *is* what she meant - that Voldemort is not > capable of caring for anyone, nor has he ever cared for > anyone. JKR says "If he had, he couldn't possibly be what > he is". Since I am the one who brought up the subject of > young children who do not bond with others, maybe I should > go one step further and say that that is most likely > what happened to Tom Riddle. He is what was once called > a "psychopath". Someone who has no soul, but can be very > charming and persuasive. Most people do not see the evil > side. Has anyone seen the movie, "The Bad Seed"? > > Tom Riddle had serious bonding issues. Maybe because JKR > is an advocate for abused children she is familiar with > this sort of thing. Just guessing. Pam now: I still can't get away from Dumbledore's statement re: it is the *choices* we make that define us, not destiny (or predestination, for that matter). This is why I don't believe that bloodlines (whether ancestor or descendant) will be a determining factor of major heroism in this story; nor do I believe that (in this world or JKR's world) anyone is predetermined genetically OR by their experience during infancy to be ESE! Along these lines, it's a serious mistake to do "black/white" thinking -- there are so many factors involved in childhood development (temperament, physical hardiness, etc.) and the interaction between choice/predilection/awareness/unconscious is a lifelong struggle. AND it is also important to realize that, even with psych. diagnoses, there is always a *spectrum* of frequency and severity of symptoms. I have met folks with symptoms of antisocial personality disorder at various stages/degrees of exhibiting such symptoms -- this is why not everyone with antisocial symptoms is a gang member or serial killer (for this reason, I always avoid saying "folks with xyz disorder", I think it's best to say they show xyz symptoms). Back to canon: Voldemort had a choice, somewhere along the line, to progress in his evil ways rather than do battle with his lower nature. We all do. Pam From pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 18 12:05:26 2004 From: pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net (pcaehill2) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 12:05:26 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110455 And another thing: We shape our choices, and our choices shape us. Even if one is raised without love, the loveless choices one makes (and continues to make) or refrains from doing (and continues to refrain from doing) also shape us. I believe that these lifelong choices are what distinguishes Harry from Voldemort, more than their infant experiences. This relates less to "The Bad Seed" (which I have seen) than to Oscar Wilde's story about the evil man who loved a beautiful woman, and had a mask made to hide his evil being, then did good deeds until his true face was just as honest/good as the mask as he made. Pam From romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 08:36:14 2004 From: romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com (romuluslupin1) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 08:36:14 -0000 Subject: James & Snape: Related? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110456 "Maren Gest" wrote: > >if Snape and James were brothers, why don't they have the > same last > > name? "tookishgirl_111" wrote: > Were Snape to be the illegimate son of James's mother from an affair with Snape's father (we got a > glimpse of what was most likely Snape's father in book 5 and looks > nothing like James so it's unlikely he's also James's father) than > it would explain a number of other things as well. It would explain > the different last names, the general difference in appearance, and > possibly why Snape continuely claims that James was arrogant and > would "strut" about the castle (it wasn't just because he was good > at Qudditch; it was because he was favored over Snape by his mother - > he was not the one born out of an affair). Now Romulus Lupin: I know it's barely possible for brothers to be born less than 12 months apart from one another, I've seen it happen, but this is supposed to be a *rare* occurrence. Do you think that within the same year (for them to be in the same year at school) James' mother had time to have a son, have an illicit affair and have another son? (the other way round, have an illicit affair, have a son by this man, and then marry or make up with her husband and have another son by him sounds even more farfetched to me). Sorry if this had already been answered Romulus Lupin, who thought Dumbledore name meant something like Silence is golden (Dumb=mute l'? d'or=it is golden) before finding out the bumble bee affair and thinks his Italian name fits this interpretation ;-) From romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 09:22:05 2004 From: romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com (romuluslupin1) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 09:22:05 -0000 Subject: AlwaysMonday In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110457 Marita wrote << I believe that in every book, the letters they get from Hogwarts > mention catching the train on September 1. I don't remember it giving > the day of the week, just the date. Funny, though, I never caught the > next day/first day of classes always being Monday, though. Which, of > course, is impossible. >> "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: > Some things are different in magic places like Hogwarts than in muggle > places, like paintings that converse with viewers, and go visit other > paintings. Maybe the day of the week is one of those differences. > Maybe part of why the kids travel on the Hogwarts Express is to move > gradually from whatever day it was when they left London into Sunday > evening. I do wonder a little about ALL THOSE SUNDAYS and no mention > of ANYONE going to church or feeling bad about missing church. Now Romulus Lupin: I tried to post this yesterday but it bounced, so I'm trying again. My copy of PS is on loan, so I can't check if September 2nd was a Monday, but September 1st couldn't possibly have been a Sunday. Here's why. Vernon agrees to drive Harry to King's Cross because he's goingo to London to have Dudley's tail removed. This sounds like an arranged appointment, most probably at a provate clinic, and beleive me, there is no way a hospital (private or otehrwise) would schedule surgery on a Sunday. Only emergency surgery during weekends! One more thing that's bugged me for a while. Why do lessons always start on September 2nd? Isn't term supposed to start on September 1st? Shouldn't the Hogwarts Expert leave on August 31st and lessons start on September 1st? And why did the Dursleys wait till the last possible day to have Dudley's tail removed? Shouldn't he have been in Smeltings on September 1st? And how did he justify his "appendix" with his friends? I'm really confused Romulus Lupin, who really likes Snape's French name, Rogue... From phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk Wed Aug 18 10:06:33 2004 From: phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk (Kate Harding) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:06:33 +0100 Subject: Draco's nature (long!) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040818094710.01c15088@pop3.demon.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 110458 SSSusan said: I think you're right that Draco is frightened of his father and probably somewhat miserable, but I don't see how you can conclude that his life has been *loveless*. Then Alla said: Definitely Sussan. I am with you on this one too. Could anybody show me ONE example from the books where we can see or at least infer that Draco is not loved? Then DuffyPoo said: I've never seen Draco in this light at all. I think he comes from a very priviledge background. A loving, wealthy family as pure-blood as they come and gets away with everything (quite like Dudley) with perhaps a little scolding for being indiscreet. Now psyche: Wow! I'm definitely in the minority on this one. I'd better argue my case! There is limited evidence in the books for the nature of these relationships, and partly my gut feeling on the subject comes from Draco's own behaviour. That, of course, is not much help here, as I'm trying to argue the causes of his personality, not the result. But I don't think Draco acts like someone who has received real love. Neither does Dudley, IMO. I'll have a look at that at the end, though - first I'd better look at whatever evidence there is in the books about his parents. Firstly, Narcissa. We have so little information on her. I can only think of 4 pieces: 1. Her name. 2. Her brief appearance at the QWC, where she did little but sneer. 3. The overheard conversation on the train, where Draco said that he would have gone to Durmstrang but his mother wanted him close. 4. Her family tree - she's a Black. All that 3. tells us, I think, is that she's a snob, and we could have guessed that. Similarly, 4. gives us limited information, because we know that in the Potterverse your genetics have limited influence - Lily and Petunia are worlds apart. 2. is more promising. We *might* infer from the fact that she wants him close that she loves him. But I don't think that's a safe assumption. This could as easily fit with neurotic controlling. She might think of him as a prize possession to be shown off, or as a familial servant at her beck and call - for either reason she'd want him close. She might be obsessed with him, which is definitely not the same as love. So I don't believe this is actual evidence of love. I think her name is by far the best piece of evidence we have on her, since in the Potterverse names are almost always of immense significance. And what her name tells us is that her primary traits are vanity and self-obsession. This does not make for healthy maternal love. In fact, there's a personality disorder called narcissism, named for the same myth (man so obsessed with his own beauty that he can't tear himself away from his reflection in the pool and is turned into a flower overhanging it) - have a look here http://groups.msn.com/NARCISSISTICPERSONALITYDISORDER/links6.msnw for information - which is infamous for its disastrous effects on the children of sufferers. (I did psych at Uni and now work for the Tavistock Clinic, a mental health organisation). Now I'm not saying that Jo was thinking of this disorder when she wrote Narcissa, I'm just trying to demonstrate how incompatible self-obsession is with genuine, selfless, nurturing love. So, to sum up on Narcissa, I believe she may be obsessed with Draco, but that obsession is all about her. OK, Lucius. Let's see what we've got. Much more evidence here. 1. Lucius is cold. Overall, the thing that strikes me about Lucius is his intense coldness. Even his colouring is cold. The word cold is repeatedly used in describing him, his eyes, his tone, his gaze. I simply can't imagine this man showing any affection to anyone. 2. He buys Draco a lot of stuff. This is no evidence of love. In fact, parents who buy their children excess amounts of stuff often do it as a *substitute* for love. Look at the exchange in Knockturn Alley. This to me looks like Lucius trying to shut Draco up with a racing broom. Furthermore, I believe Lucius' overblown provision for his son has more to do with his pride than with love. In Flourish and Blotts he says to Ginny, 'Here girl - take your book - it's the best your father can give you -'. Note that throughout the series most of his insults are connected to money, namely to how little of it others have, and how much more he has than they do. I believe he spends so much money on Draco because to him it's one more way to show off his cash, one more thing that Malfoys have which others don't. 3. He doesn't listen. In Knockturn Alley, Draco is banging on about Hermione. Lucius' response is 'You have told me this at least half a dozen times already.' While Draco is talking and talking, Lucius' attention is elsewhere. he's drumming his fingers, waiting for the shopkeeper, looking at the display. He is not focused on Draco. Now this is understandable behaviour for a parent with a screaming toddler. At that age, sometimes all you can do is let them cry it out. But by Draco's age... From this interaction I get the impression that Lucius didn't listen to these complaints the *first* time, and that's why Draco's still banging on. Lucius gives the impression that he is simply not interested in his son's thoughts and feelings. 4. He overreacts. QV Buckbeak. When Draco told Lucius about the Buckbeak incident, he completely overreacted. I don''t think we can take this as evidence of love. It may be that Narcissa went hysterical and insisted the animal be killed. It may be that Lucius' motive was to demonstrate once again that noone will be allowed to mess with the Malfoys. 5. Nothing is ever good enough. 'I hope my son will amount to more than a thief or a plunderer... though if his school marks don't pick up,' said Mr Malfoy, more coldly still, 'that may indeed be all he is fit for.' The subtext - Draco doesn't meet Lucius' exacting criteria for his son - he is a disappointment. If there were real love there, you could imagine such a remark being made jokily, with warmth. You could even understand a parent might snap - teenagers can be exasperating. But so coldly, in all seriousness, in front of a stranger - that's not a loving thing to do to your son. OK. What does Draco's behaviour tell us about his parents? 1. He is spoilt He gets everything he wants materially, and he still wants more. That kind of hunger suggests to me an attempt to compensate for a lack of genuine love and interest. 2. He is cowardly Which could suggest that he's never experience any actual physical danger, or that he's experienced a lot of it in a situation where he was powerless. So he may be an abused boy, or, more likely, physically pampered but emotionally neglected. 3. He is lazy. Rather than work at his Quidditch skills, he bought his way onto the team. He hasn't been given the confidence in his own abilities to think he could get there on merit. Which means he's been habitually bought off, instead of praised and encouraged. 4. He is jealous and vindictive, proud and bullying Someone who spends so much time trying to make others feel small generally has been made to feel small at home. Genuine parental love creates a feeling of security in a child, of their own self-worth. Draco behaves like someone who is entirely lacking in this. The smallest insult must be avenged. He must win at everything. 5. 'Father says...' He's constantly quoting or referring to his father. Which suggests to me a complete lack of faith in himself. He's not been made to feel that he himself has anything to offer. In an environment where the parent is never wrong and the child can't do anything right, the safest strategy for a child is to try to conform to the parent's expectations as much as possible - the parent becomes god. I think Draco and Dudley make an interesting comparison. Dudley, like Draco, is cruel and bullying. Dudley, we know, has been doted on all his life. But I don't consider that authentic parental love. Adoration does not make for healthy children. Genuine parental love, to my mind, loves a child as they are, but *sees* them as they are, and seeing that, wants to help them grow to be a fine young person. It requires gentle, loving correction when they misbehave and plenty of loving praise when they do well. If either is missing, IMO that's not a healthy environment. The Dursleys have always seen Dudley as perfect, however obnoxious his behaviour. The lesson that has taught him is that his obnoxious behaviour is good and loveable. Or perhaps that it doesn't matter how bad he is, his parents simply don't care what kind of person he is - he's what John Holt would call a love object. We can't be sure from the text whether Draco is doted on or neglected at home, but I'm sure it's one or the other - IMO probably both, with obsessive doting from Narcissa and neglect from Lucius. He is missing all the signs of a child who has received healthy parental love. Instead I get the impression of a child who has been alternately spoilt and blamed, until he has no idea which way is morally up. Phew! Hope that made sense - it was written in something of a hurry. psyche ---------- --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.726 / Virus Database: 481 - Release Date: 22/07/2004 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From griffin782002 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 11:32:59 2004 From: griffin782002 at yahoo.com (sp. sot.) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 04:32:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Godparents and Half-Brothers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040818113259.42543.qmail@web90003.mail.scd.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110459 evita2fr wrote: Wow, I wasn't here from a moment. I use my cousin's computer to add something quickly in Snape/Sirius half-brother theory. >From Sirius himself: "You know, I think I'd prefer if you didn't give orders here, Snape. It's my house, you see." It's *my* house. Why Sirius precise that ? And why Snape reacted like he did (an ugly flush suffused Snape's pallid face.)? There is something, here. Sirius searched to make Snape angry in remembering him who receive the house. And it worked. Christelle (who wondered why her family doesn't have a french/english dictionnary and can't wait to use back her own) Griffin782002 now: Oh!!! Wait a second! I don't know how much J.K.R. likes throwing small clues here and there about future developments, but if I am not wrong, in GoF (sorry I don't have the book at hand), before the anouncement of the champions or the the first task, it says that Snape would rather adopt Harry than let them play in class. Now imagine Harry finding out that the person he hates most could be considered as his rightful guardian. :-) Please coreect me if I am wrong. Griffin782002 From riberam at glue.umd.edu Wed Aug 18 12:42:51 2004 From: riberam at glue.umd.edu (Maria Ribera) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 08:42:51 -0400 Subject: Petunia not a squib but... In-Reply-To: <1092802571.12060.44351.m24@yahoogroups.com> References: <1092802571.12060.44351.m24@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <1E151264-F114-11D8-AC56-000393BA8C1A@glue.umd.edu> No: HPFGUIDX 110460 With all these very interesting theories about Petunia floating around, i started thinking about what JK may have tried to say when she stated that Petunia is not a squib, "but that is a good guess". I have been reading around a bit trying to figure out what people understand as Squib, and was glad to see that i am not the only one who thinks that Squibs, who are people with some magical trace but not strong enough to perform magic, can be born both of wizarding and muggle families. People like Filch or Mrs. Figg are born in the middle of the magic world, know it well (even better than the muggle world in most cases, i dare say) and stay in it without the capacity to perform magic. We have seen two so far, and they are oldish, but i guess a young squib would continue to live with his/her magic family without problems. For instance, if Neville hadn't turned out magical enough, he would probably continue to live with his grandmother, although maybe would attend the local muggle school to get some education. In the same line, those muggle-born people who have a bit of magic but not enough to be fully magical are somehow squibs. Most of those in this second category might not even notice. Harry had no idea of the magical world before his 11th birthday, and while he was aware that strange things happened to him, he couldn't relate them to magic and didn't change his life in the muggle world at all. So if a "muggle-squib" has even less magic than a full wizard like Harry, there might be even less chances for him/her to notice. Now, on the issue of bitterness. We only know two official Squibs, so we can't really tell much. But we can easily see that Filch is a very bitter man. He seems to be angry at the whole world for his lack of magic and tries hard to exploit the little he has (Quickspell). Mrs. Figg we can't tell if she is bitter or not, but i don't think she is. She seems to have found her place in life and still be useful in the wizarding world without enough magic. On the other hand we have Petunia, who is very bitter at her sister for the reasons we all know. So here is my Theory: Part 1 - Squibs that are born of Muggle parents are not called Squibs, but something else. Let us called them Mibs for now. We can change that later. They are a closer to muggles than to Squibs. They might never know they have a bit of magical blood, but could be aware of strange things happening to them "as if by magic". However, if in contact with a magical person, they might reach some understanding of what the strange things happening are and realize their condition of Mibs. Like Squibs, they might be able to interact with Kneazles, do some very simple magic (Quickspell) or see Dementors. However, most of them do not know what these are, unless they are aware of the wizarding world. Part 2 - Petunia is a Mib. This might explain why JK Rowling said that Petunia is not a Squib but... If Squibs are rare, Mibs are even rarer. They are basically Muggles. She would have lived completely unaware of magic if it wasn't because her sister was fully magical. It gives her a big reason to be bitter at Lily. Also explains why she knows about Dementors... she could have seen them, not only heard about them. Now, anyone ones to give their point of view on this pet theory of mine? Maria [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Aug 18 13:22:23 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:22:23 -0000 Subject: AlwaysMonday In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110461 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romuluslupin1" wrote: Romulus Lupin: > One more thing that's bugged me for a while. Why do lessons always > start on September 2nd? Isn't term supposed to start on September > 1st? Shouldn't the Hogwarts Expert leave on August 31st and lessons > start on September 1st? And why did the Dursleys wait till the last > possible day to have Dudley's tail removed? Shouldn't he have been in > Smeltings on September 1st? And how did he justify his "appendix" > with his friends? I'm really confused Geoff: Another difference between Hogwarts and other schools seems to be the start date. Traditionally, UK schools have started several days into September and private schools tended to start even later than state schools. Curiously, everyone in the area where I live has commented that the schools are starting back very early - on 1st September - because the LEA (Local Education Authority) is trying to shorten the length of the summer holidays. This is linked to a lot of talk at authority and government level about having a six term year - and a corresponding amount of "consumer resistance" from parents...... From eloiseherisson at aol.com Wed Aug 18 13:37:35 2004 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloise_herisson) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:37:35 -0000 Subject: Another US/UK variation (was: Re: the lion discription) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110462 Snow: > Did anyone else notice that there is an owl in the very first book, > page 2, that was unnoticed by the Dursleys? > > [None of them noticed a large, tawny owl flutter past the window.] > > This is right before Vernon heads off to work. > > Thought I would mention it because of the discription of tawny. Good catch, although I don't think in fact that it is related. An extra comma appears to have crept into the quote in the US edition. In the UK edition, it says simply 'a large tawny owl', which is exactly what I would expect because 'tawny owl' is the name of a type of owl, just like eagle owl or snowy owl. As they are an Old World bird, presumably the US publishers weren't familiar with the name and thought that 'tawny' was a description rather than a name and therefore inserted the extraneous comma. I wonder if the same alteration has been made elsewhere. ~Eloise From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 13:39:46 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:39:46 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110463 Pam wrote : "Back to canon: Voldemort had a choice, somewhere along the line, to progress in his evil ways rather than do battle with his lower nature. We all do." Del asks : How is that canon ? We do NOT know that Tom had such a choice. As you say later : "We shape our choices, and our choices shape us." Tom grew up in an orphanage, he learned there that power, not morality, is what matters in order to live in relative peace. He also grew up without a sense of identity. Those were *not* choices on his part, they were imposed on him. Then he went to Hogwarts. The WW values power at least as much as the Muggle world : be the best at jinxes and charms and people will instantly admire and respect you. So Tom sure didn't unlearn the importance of power there. Nor did he learn much about the importance of morality, especially in Slytherin House. And most important of all, Tom discovered his identity there : he was the Heir of Slytherin, no less ! He was no more than 12 or 13 then, and here he was, discovering that he was the Heir of one of the greatest wizards of all time : how could he *not* fully embrace that new-found identity ? So embrace it he did. Slytherin valued power and cunning ? Happy coincidence, Tom already valued those traits anyway. Slytherin hated the Muggle-borns ? Well he had it right, after all : if Tom's pureblood mother had not meddled with Muggles, she would not have been deserted, she would probably still be alive, and Tom would not have had a nightmarish childhood. It was all the fault of that horrible Muggle man. He deserved to die, just like Tom's mother had. They *all* deserved to die, all those treacherous, horrible, worthless Muggles, and their freakish kids. Just look at them, strutting around the school as though they belonged here, as though they were a part of the WW, when in fact it was just an accident of nature if they had any magic in them at all. And to think they were given the same education, the same privileges as the *real* wizard kids. They should all be expelled, someone should rid the school of them. Slytherin was right. So much hate, so much resentment, and all of it *reinforced* by the discovery that Tom was the Heir of Slytherin. How could Tom *not* have fallen ? Did anything happen to make him change his mind, did anyone see what was happening and try to stop it ? We don't know. But if nothing of the sort happened, then I don't see *why* Tom should have acted any differently than he did : he had not been taught morality, and he was being *encouraged* on his war path by the teachings of Slytherin, the only *family* he ever had. And finally, I'd like to point out that what Tom went looking for after school, the reason he delved deeply into the Dark Arts, was not that he wanted to dominate the world. What he wanted was *immortality* : he was afraid to *die*. But as you said, the choices he made on the way to immortality took their toll on his personality : they finished to corrupt the little of humanity he had grown up with. Pam wrote : "This relates less to "The Bad Seed" (which I have seen) than to Oscar Wilde's story about the evil man who loved a beautiful woman, and had a mask made to hide his evil being, then did good deeds until his true face was just as honest/good as the mask as he made." Del replies : I don't know the story, but I notice something in your summary : the man *loved* the woman. Love is a powerful purifier. But Tom *never* loved anyone, he never had access to that purifying power. Can we really expect someone who lived in total darkness all their life to *want* light, to look for it, to willingly *decide* to leave the familiar pitch-black cave they've lived in forever in order to go looking for something they can't even imagine, something whose value they can't understand, something they don't believe they need ? I really hope JKR will manage to convey to me why LV is so despicable, because right now I can't see him that way. Horrible and dangerous, yes. But despicable, no. I see him as a typical victim-turned-bully. He's not Tom anymore, but if Tom had had a better life, LV would never have been created : the two can't be separated. And I *do* pity the Tom we know for now. I wish that was the way Harry finally vanquishes LV : by having compassion on Tom. It would destroy LV as surely as light destroys the darkness. Del From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 18 13:54:18 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:54:18 -0000 Subject: Draco's nature (long!) In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040818094710.01c15088@pop3.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110464 SSSusan said: >>> I think you're right that Draco is frightened of his father and probably somewhat miserable, but I don't see how you can conclude that his life has been *loveless*.<<< Then Alla said: >> Definitely Sussan. I am with you on this one too. Could anybody show me ONE example from the books where we can see or at least infer that Draco is not loved?<< Now psyche: > Firstly, Narcissa. We have so little information on her. I can only > think of 4 pieces: > 1. Her name. > 2. Her brief appearance at the QWC, where she did little but sneer. > 3. The overheard conversation on the train, where Draco said that > he would have gone to Durmstrang but his mother wanted him close. > 4. Her family tree - she's a Black. > > All that 3. tells us, I think, is that she's a snob, and we could > have guessed that. Similarly, 4. gives us limited information, > because we know that in the Potterverse your genetics have limited > influence - Lily and Petunia are worlds apart. 2. is more > promising. We *might* infer from the fact that she wants him close > that she loves him. But I don't think that's a safe assumption. SSSusan: I think you may have reversed 2 & 3 in your explanation here? That is, it's 2 that shows she's a snob and 3 that might be more promising? If I've got that right--well, whatever, for the "she wants him close" item--it seems at least as fair an assumption that it means she loves him as that she merely wants to control him. It's definitely not a "given" that it's evidence Draco isn't loved. Psyche: > We can't be sure from the text whether Draco is doted on or > neglected at home, but I'm sure it's one or the other - IMO > probably both, with obsessive doting from Narcissa and neglect from > Lucius. He is missing all the signs of a child who has received > healthy parental love. Instead I get the impression of a child who > has been alternately spoilt and blamed, until he has no idea which > way is morally up. SSSusan: Yes, your assumptions about life w/ the Malfoys is exactly what I speculated originally--that Draco is frightened of his father yet spoiled by them both. And I may be walking a fine line here, but I wasn't looking for whether or not Draco had been shown "healthy parental love"; I just said I wanted to see, in canon, where we can see that Draco's life has been "loveless." It still seems a big leap, to me, to say he's not been loved. Siriusly Snapey Susan From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Aug 18 13:59:37 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:59:37 -0000 Subject: Draco and Lucius In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040818094710.01c15088@pop3.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110465 Geoff: I was most impressed with psyche's detailed look at the Malfoy family. I have been intending to post in this thread about the relationship between Draco and Lucius. I have always felt that Lucius looks down on Draco and,even when Draco is involved - as with the Buckbeak incident - he is working to a different agenda to that of protecting his son, more like doing his utmost to undermine Hogwrats, Dumbledore and maybe bring them both down. We had a long discussion on this last year and I took the trouble to look some of the comments out and re-post them here: ==================================================================== 83661 Geoff: I have very mixed feelings about Draco. Once, I considered him to be an absolute pain in the backside but I sometimes find myself harbouring more then a little bit of sympathy for him; who couldn't, with a father like Lucius?! He obviously wanted, for some reason or another, to befriend Harry right at the beginning but managed to mess this up in no uncertain terms because of his arrogant approach and that has coloured their relationship ever since. (Perhaps I have read too much fanfic lately in which he manages to reach a rapprochement with Harry, Ron and Hermione in one way or another.) I've known people who have wanted to make friends with someone who hasn't responded and it can produce all sorts of mixed reactions which leads me to my next thought.. Interestingly, I seem to have been writing a number of posts comparing people lately ? Wormtail v Wormtongue and Wormtail v Gollum for example. Arising out of reading Louis's excellent notes, the thought crossed my mind that Peter Pettigrew always wanted to be with the "big shots" and, as Sirius Black said in POA, he wouldn't come back unless he knew that Voldemort was the biggest bully in the playground. I wonder whether Draco might be tempted into that sort of scenario? He wants to be equal or better than Harry. Might he be led into some sort of betraying situation? Could he become a second Wormtail? I'd like to see him acknowledging the error of his ways and improving but I ha' ma doots; but, putting on my hat as a Christian in the real world, I've seen stranger things happen. Roll on, Book 6. 84477 Geoff wrote: > One might also start drawing hints from the Hogwarts motto: Draco > dormiens nunquam titillandus = "Never tickle a sleeping dragon". > > OK - now who's going to translate that as "Never tickle a sleeping > Draco" and start a new Slytherin thread? > :-) Me: (Berit) I don't know if the topic is interesting enough to start a new thread, but I would like to comment on the very interesting question you raise about the Hogwarts motto. Because I have got a distinct impression that is actually what Harry did at the end of OoP, "tickled a sleeping Draco"... On pages 749-751 (British Version) Harry bumps into Draco in the Entrance Hall. To me this little incident describes a "new" Draco, a much more dangerous Draco. Up till now Draco has just been "having fun" acting out the bad kid. Harry landing his father in prison (and ridiculing him in front of Draco) has however turned him into a potential Death Eater. Just read those pages, and you see a Draco angrier than Harry had ever seen him, his pale face "contorted with rage". And his voice is quiet, whispering, no more of the loud, boisterous drawling. But the most significant sign of Draco's change of attitude is the way he talks about his father. In the previous books he has always referred to him using the more formal "Father", but now he even calls him "Dad". Now, that's significant if you ask me :-) My two knuts: Harry's in deep trouble. Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus... 84482 Geoff: That's interesting. I hadn't noticed the use of "Dad" - it's right at the end of the line in my edition and I was following through the comment onto the next line. The strange thing is that he only does it once. He refers to "father" twice before in this scene. Curiously, just before DM's comment, Harry refers to "your dad" and I don't think he does that regularly. ==================================================================== Interestingly, my father was rather reserevd and not very demonstrative with his feelings and I always called him "father" unitl the last couple of years of his life when I think he began to loosen up a little. But, as with Berit's comments months ago, I wonder if the Ministry incident has started some sort of sea change with Draco? From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 14:06:13 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 14:06:13 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110466 SSSusan wrote : "it is possible that these children can show no attachment, empathy or bond to another whatsoever. **BUT**, I'd like to go back to what I said in my first response to your first post in this thread. Here's what I said then: "*I* took what JKR said as meaning that Tom, once capable/old enough/able to choose, never *chose* to love another."" Del replies : But if Tom never experienced love, then how could he ever become capable of choosing to love ?? Imagine a 11-year-old boy who's only been given fries all his life. Fries are the only food he knows to eat when he's hungry. So now you're walking through town with him and lunch hour comes. The kid is hungry. You tell him that he can choose between a serving of fries at the stand 3 feet away, or vegetables and cookies in the shop on the other side of the big busy street. What is the kid going to choose ? Fries, right ? Now, how fair would it be to scold him for not choosing to cross the street to go and get vegetables and cookies ?? *Why* would he choose to do that ?? If Tom truly never loved, then he was *never* able to choose to love. He would have needed *a lot* of care and attention and teaching, to learn that love is something worth looking for, and *how* to get to experience it. But knowing the WW as we do, I doubt anyone took the time and effort to do that. Tom was on his own, and he just didn't grasp the concept of love, nor could he see the point of it. Even decades later, he still thought that Lily was just being *silly* for risking her life in order to save her baby : that shows how much he's alien to the whole concept of love. I wish JKR hadn't answered that question so thoroughly. A nice little no would have been enough, and nowhere so disturbing. Del From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 18 14:17:22 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 14:17:22 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110467 Pam wrote : > "Back to canon: Voldemort had a choice, somewhere along the line, to > progress in his evil ways rather than do battle with his lower > nature. We all do." Del asks : > How is that canon ? We do NOT know that Tom had such a choice. As > you say later : > "We shape our choices, and our choices shape us." > Tom grew up in an orphanage, he learned there that power, not > morality, is what matters in order to live in relative peace. SSSusan: I think that's a stretch. Do we know what he did or didn't learn about morality in the orphanage? In what way does power provide a life of relative *peace* within an orphanage? Del: > He also grew up without a sense of identity. Those were *not* > choices on his part, they were imposed on him. SSSusan: I'm pretty much with you on this part. I'd say Harry had a similarly difficult time of it, given his knowledge of how much the Dursleys detested & resented him and his lack of any information on his own parentage & past. Del: > Then he went to Hogwarts. The WW values power at least as much as > the Muggle world : be the best at jinxes and charms and people will > instantly admire and respect you. So Tom sure didn't unlearn the > importance of power there. Nor did he learn much about the > importance of morality, especially in Slytherin House. SSSusan: On the other hand, Hogwarts is a lot about comradeship, as well. Kids working together on projects, studying together in their common rooms, forming Quidditch teams & clubs. I think Hogwarts DID afford Tom a chance to reach out to others, had he chosen to do so. He managed to become a house & school leader, so I doubt he was totally isolated or not respected. Del: > And most important of all, Tom discovered his identity there : he > was the Heir of Slytherin, no less ! He was no more than 12 or 13 > then, and here he was, discovering that he was the Heir of one of > the greatest wizards of all time : how could he *not* fully embrace > that new-found identity ? So embrace it he did. Slytherin valued > power and cunning ? Happy coincidence, Tom already valued those > traits anyway. Slytherin hated the Muggle-borns ? Well he had it > right, after all : if Tom's pureblood mother had not meddled with > Muggles, she would not have been deserted, she would probably still > be alive, and Tom would not have had a nightmarish childhood. It > was all the fault of that horrible Muggle man. He deserved to die, > just like Tom's mother had. They *all* deserved to die, all those > treacherous, horrible, worthless Muggles, and their freakish kids. > Just look at them, strutting around the school as though they > belonged here, as though they were a part of the WW, when in fact > it was just an accident of nature if they had any magic in them at > all. And to think they were given the same education, the same > privileges as the *real* wizard kids. They should all be expelled, > someone should rid the school of them. Slytherin was right. > > So much hate, so much resentment, and all of it *reinforced* by the > discovery that Tom was the Heir of Slytherin. How could Tom *not* > have fallen ? Did anything happen to make him change his mind, did > anyone see what was happening and try to stop it ? We don't know. > But if nothing of the sort happened, then I don't see *why* Tom > should have acted any differently than he did : he had not been > taught morality, and he was being *encouraged* on his war path by > the teachings of Slytherin, the only *family* he ever had. SSSusan: What about HARRY, then? Some of these same feelings factor in for him, too. Hate of the Dursleys, resentment over his parents' murder and all the information that's been withheld from him over the years. Frustration and anger that Snape seems to hate him from the get-go when he doesn't even know the man. An orphan who's been raised with hand-me-down, baggy clothes, bossed around like a servant, and forced to sleep in a cupboard! Why doesn't HARRY go right along with the nasty kids? Alternately, why doesn't Harry strut about as "Savior of the Wizarding World", being an arrogant berk? Because he chose not to. Yes, Tom & Harry had a different first 15 months of their lives, but after that, I'm guessing their respective orphanhoods weren't that different. I do think that 15 months counts for something--as well as the fact that he's told his parents died fighting courageously against evil. But if we see Harry choosing to fight the impulses for revenge, hate & cruelty, why CAN'T we expect Tom to choose to fight them, too, once he's at Hogwarts? I doubt Tom found out about the Heir of Slytherin thing right away-- you've suggested a year or two into his time there. I do believe he had opportunities during this time to reach out to others, to choose differently than he did. Harry chose how to act after a horrible childhood & facing all kinds of temptations; Tom did, too--they were just different choices than Harry's. I'm with Pam on this one, that even with a loveless childhood, there are moments of choice we all face. The loveless childhood makes the "bad" choice much more understandable, but it doesn't make it predetermined. Siriusly Snapey Susan From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 14:21:09 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 14:21:09 -0000 Subject: Power vs Morality (LV never knew love) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110468 Tonks_op wrote : "The only thing that a therapist can do is to teach the person the consequences of their behavior on themselves. For example: "If you kill someone for his CD player you will go to jail, and you will not like being in jail, therefore it might be best not to kill anyone."" Del replies : But unfortunately LV got over that kind of restriction by making sure he was so powerful that nobody could ever punish him for his actions. As we know, DD is the only one LV was ever afraid of, presumably because DD is precisely the only one that can enforce consequences on LV's actions. Tonks_op wrote : "There are much deeper questions about Voldemort and his behavior. I don't like to think that he can't be redeemed, especially given that he is not wholly to blame for his situation." Del replies : I agree. That's why I was so disturbed by JKR's answer that Tom never loved : because it makes things infinitely more complicated in my mind. I'd like it if he could be redeemed, but then how could he ? It would take a miracle to change his personality completely and then he wouldn't be himself anymore. So LV, as LV, cannot be redeemed. Maybe Tom could have been helped, back when he was a kid, but I guess it was already too late by the time he was 15. Which is completely in contradiction with DD's statement about choices. But then I never liked that statement, having experienced in my own life that it is simply not true. Del From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com Wed Aug 18 14:28:17 2004 From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 14:28:17 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110469 I feel like I'm jumping into the deep end of a conversation between people who actually know about psycology, but I'm not exactly known for my bashfulness, so I hope you'll all excuse me if what I'm about to say makes no sense whatsoever. Also, I did try to retrace this thread to the begining, to see if someone had pointed out my ideas before, but after a while the topic seems to have shifted. Still, sorry if I'm covering old grown. See, reading the name of the thread, a funny thought assaulted me. Sure, Voldemort never loved anyone... but doesn't the phrase usually go "Such-and-such has never loved anyone *but himself*"? This I find interesting. For one thing, it is a loophole, for another it is, at this point (to me at least), an undecided issue. Allow me to elaborate. When JKR says that LV has never loved anyone, we all assume (correctly, IMNSHO) she means love for someone other than himself. After all, although we use the word "love" when we talk about someone loving only himself, it is a slightly different kind of love - but in fact quite the opposite, since the love for other people usually involves selflessness, love for oneself involves selfishness. However, she *didn't* specify that "but himself" bit, which (knowing JKR, and knowing this group, particularly our flying hedgehog section), could be taken as a hidden clue. Conclussion: JKR's statement, I feel, doesn't specify if Voldemort loves himself or not. Usually, her statement is taken to mean that he only loved himself, but in a broader sense, she could've meant he didn't even love himself. Obviously, if Voldemort does love himself, there isn't much else to add to the picture - he's a complete and utter selfish evil guy who wants to rule the Earth, etc etc. Plain old evil overlord syndrom. But what if he does hate himself? Let me examine that possibility. As I said, I'm not really a psicologist, so I might be missing big chunks of the picture, but it is not all that uncommon to find people who hate themselves (particularly easy between adolescents, but they grow out of it). This is a road that, frecuently, finishes in suicide (at which point they either realise they do like themselves enough to continue to live, are stopped and treated or succeed). I have often been told that for someone to commit suicide, they have to fear life more than they fear death. This is an interesting point, because as humans (muggles) we don't *know* what death is like - but this is very much unlike the WW, were you *can* see that "something" "lives" on after death - ghosts. So if Voldemort did consider suicide, there might have been a fourth possibility, unavailable to muggles - he was afraid of continue to live, but he could see that such fear could perfectly land him an immortal deal - having to stay in this world he hated so much, as a ghost. A powerless ghost, too (except possibly at scaring Peeves). Voldemort wouldn't like that prospect at all. And that is what, I think, lies at his desire to become immortal - suddenly realising that, while hating himself and his life, he hated much more what he might become if he left his mortal coil behind. Of course, facing the problem of not wanting to live, but not wanting to die either is a little tricky, and it is probably what led him on his path to immortality and change. It also explains why he was so ready to experiment on himself and become snake-like: hating oneself, he wouldn't care. Unfortunately, this doesn't actually help understand his theories about good, evil and power, but I'm always been of the impression that he came up with them in later years, once he was consorting with evil powers, as a way of self-justification (or even learned from those powers). Hope that helps, Grey Wolf From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Aug 18 14:29:11 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 14:29:11 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110470 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > I really hope JKR will manage to convey to me why LV is so despicable, because right now I can't see him that way. Horrible and dangerous, yes. But despicable, no. I see him as a typical victim-turned-bully. He's not Tom anymore, but if Tom had had a better life, LV would never have been created : the two can't be separated. And I *do* pity the Tom we know for now. > Pippin: I don't see pitiable and despicable as mutually exclusive. It is a sort of hate the sin and love the sinner kind of thing. http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2000/0800-ew-jensen.ht ml (you may have to cut and paste the link into your browser to make it work) Interviewer: You referred to the darkness in your books, and there's been a lot of talk and even concern over that. JKR: You have a choice when you're going to introduce a very evil character. You can dress a guy up with loads of ammunition, put a black Stetson on him, and say, "Bad guy. Shoot him." I'm writing about shades of evil. You have Voldemort, a raging psychopath, devoid of the normal human responses to other people's suffering, and there are people like that in the world. But then you have Wormtail, who out of cowardice will stand in the shadow of the strongest person. What's very important for me is when Dumbledore says that you have to choose between what is right and what is easy. This is the setup for the next three books. All of them are going to have to choose, because what is easy is often not right. ---- Pippin From sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com Wed Aug 18 14:35:15 2004 From: sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com (Amey Chinchorkar) Date: 18 Aug 2004 14:35:15 -0000 Subject: Apparation and Sirius' vault Message-ID: <20040818143515.9126.qmail@webmail9.rediffmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110471 - b_boymn (was asian_lovr2): - Let's not lose sight of the fact that all you have to do to Apparate - is step outside the grounds. You may not be able to apparate into or - out of the grounds, but you can from the train station or the village. - As far as Portkeys, we have only one instance of a Portkey that wasn't - controlled by Dumbledore, and that is the Tri-Wizard's Cup. However, - there is a large group of people that support the idea that the Cup - was alway a Portkey to take the winning champion to a location just - outside the maze. - What Fake!Moody did was add another stop to the Cup. Moody's - destination was put on last, so it was used first, that took Harry and - Cedric to the graveyard. That left the original destination - unactivated, and Harry used this to get back Hogwart at a location - just outside the maze. Amey: Yes, I agree with the first point. You just have to get outside the grounds and *phut* you are gone. Suppose that?s what Hagrid means when he tells us that Dumbledore apparates when going somewhere. But as for the Cup, "I offered to carry the Triwizard Cup into the maze before dinner," whispered Barty Crouch. "Turned it into a Portkey. My master's plan worked. He is returned to power and I will be honored by him beyond the dreams of wizards." (GoF) So, I am not sure the Cup was already a portkey, it could be but then what Crouch did was not add a stop, but change the destination completely. - b_boymn (was asian_lovr2): - All other entrances and exists by /wizards/ have been controlled by - Dumbledore. Since Dumbledore controls the protections to Hogwart's - castle and grounds, he also controls the acceptions. As an extension - of this, note that most acceptions involving wizards were related to - transport into and out of Dumbledore's office. Amey: Yes, I think so. Or at least Dumbledore with the help of teachers (Flitwick maybe). And of course his office will be an exception because it is out of bounds for anyone who Dumbledore doesn?t want there (I hope I made some sense there). - B_Boymn: - Back to the letter; the letter is explaining that Sirius ordered the - Firebolt racing broom IN HARRY'S NAME and told the Quidditch Store to - take the money out of Vault 711 - Sirius's vault. - A broom was bought /in Harry's name/ and like any mail order, the mail - order form is the note of authorization to withdraw funds from an - account. Extending that, it would imply that indeed funds could be - withdrawn in Harry's name. In other words, withdrawn by Harry. Amey: When I read it for first time, I was reminded of internet shopping using credit card. You give anybody?s name, as long as the credit card number is valid, and the owner of the card has no problem, the transaction is valid. - B_Boymn: - I'm a strong supporter of this belief that Harry has some degree of - access to Sirius's vault, and you made a very important connection - that I had never see before, despite the fact that I have analysed - that letter and posted extensive speculations about it. - One additional note, that vault probably represent Sirius's personal - fortune and is not tied or encumbered by the Black Family Estate. It - will be a lot easier for Harry to inherit Sirius's personal estate, - than it will be for him to inherit the Black Family Estate. I forsee a - nice conflict between Harry and Draco over the Family Estate. Amey: I would love to see Harry getting 12, GP and a huge chunk of money (added to his own) from Sirius and Draco sulking because of it. Given the *Noble* house of Black, and the number of Sirius?s vault, I think he has a load of money stashed below London, in vaults of Gringotts. I would love to see what else the vault contains, given his and James? love for *different* things (like the Mirror). Maybe there will be another mirror in the vault which will help Harry to communicate with him instead of the broken one. Amey [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 18 14:44:32 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 14:44:32 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110472 Pippin: > I don't see pitiable and despicable as mutually exclusive. It is a > sort of hate the sin and love the sinner kind of thing. > Interviewer: > You referred to the darkness in your books, and there's been a > lot of talk and even concern over that. > > JKR: > You have a choice when you're going to introduce a very evil > character. You can dress a guy up with loads of ammunition, put > a black Stetson on him, and say, "Bad guy. Shoot him." I'm > writing about shades of evil. You have Voldemort, a raging > psychopath, devoid of the normal human responses to other > people's suffering, and there are people like that in the world. > But then you have Wormtail, who out of cowardice will stand in the > shadow of the strongest person. What's very important for me is > when Dumbledore says that you have to choose between what > is right and what is easy. This is the setup for the next three > books. All of them are going to have to choose, because what is > easy is often not right. SSSusan: Very interesting, Pippin; thank you for that. When JKR said, "What's very important for me is when DD says that you have to choose between what is right and what is easy" and "*All* of them are going to have to choose," is the assumption that she's INCLUDING Voldy, or that she's speaking about Wormtail, Harry, etc., but NOT Voldy since he's "a raging psychopath, devoid of the normal human responses"?? *My* take would be that JKR intends for Voldy to be included in the "all will make choices" and all "have to choose" between right & easy. Others' thoughts?? Siriusly Snapey Susan From patientx3 at aol.com Wed Aug 18 15:04:21 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 15:04:21 -0000 Subject: Apparation and Sirius' vault In-Reply-To: <20040818143515.9126.qmail@webmail9.rediffmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110473 b_boymn wrote: >> As far as Portkeys, we have only one instance of a Portkey that wasn't controlled by Dumbledore, and that is the Tri-Wizard's Cup. However, there is a large group of people that support the idea that the Cup was alway a Portkey to take the winning champion to a location just outside the maze. What Fake!Moody did was add another stop to the Cup. Moody's destination was put on last, so it was used first, that took Harry and Cedric to the graveyard. That left the original destination unactivated, and Harry used this to get back Hogwart at a location just outside the maze. << Amey replied: >>as for the Cup, "I offered to carry the Triwizard Cup into the maze before dinner," whispered Barty Crouch. "Turned it into a Portkey. My master's plan worked. He is returned to power and I will be honored by him beyond the dreams of wizards." (GoF) So, I am not sure the Cup was already a portkey, it could be but then what Crouch did was not add a stop, but change the destination completely.<< HunterGreen: But then why did the portkey return Harry to Hogwarts? While that quote seems to suggest that Barty changed the cup into a portkey, there's another that suggests that it was one already: "He opened his eyes. He was looking up at the starry sky, and Albus Dumbledore was crouched over him. The dark shadows of a crowd of people pressed in around them, pushing nearer; Harry felt the ground beneath his head reverberating with their footsteps. He had come back to the edge of the maze. He could see the stands rising above him, the shapes of people moving in them, the stars above." If it was just a two-way portkey, why didn't it bring Harry back to the center of the maze? From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com Wed Aug 18 15:15:37 2004 From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 15:15:37 -0000 Subject: The Portkey Cup (WAS: Apparation and Sirius' vault) In-Reply-To: <20040818143515.9126.qmail@webmail9.rediffmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110474 > Amey: > But as for the Cup, > "I offered to carry the Triwizard Cup into the maze before dinner," > whispered Barty Crouch. "Turned it into a Portkey. My master's plan > worked. He is returned to power and I will be honored by him beyond > the dreams of wizards." (GoF) > So, I am not sure the Cup was already a portkey, it could be but > then what Crouch did was not add a stop, but change the destination > completely. Excuse Steve - we've been through the discussion of the portkey!cup before, and he didn't go into detail - it is a very much accepted theory that, nonetheless, does have a few holes. But then, prior to it, the story had a whole many more holes. Lets assume that the cup wasn't a portkey, and that Jr. turned it into one. What would've been the situation if he *hadn't* meddled? The winner of the TriWizard Tournament would've grabbed the cup, only to discover he had to once again find his way through the labyrinth, only this time trying to find the exit. With all those creatures still around, and two other competitors perfectly willing to do whatever it takes to win (remember, cheating has always been part of the TWT). That hardly seems fair, or logical, when you have a spell that can take you directly out of the maze, and to the entrance, where everyone can see the winner. Also, there is that little problem of why would Crouch Jr. put *two* stops in the portkey, one to the graveyard and the other back to the school. Several hypothesis were discussed back in the day, like maybe a way to have Voldemort and the Death Eaters penetrate Hogwarts, in a surprise attack. Unfortunately, that would've been stupid since a huge amount of wizards would be waiting (although not for them, but still, many of them) at the other end. Voldemort might be powerul, but he's not *that* powerful. Another hypothesis is that they intended to send Harry's dead body back, but that wouldn't be too intelligent - it would've been a senseless proof of his return, which Voldemort was trying to keep quiet. I'm sure there must have been other theories, but none were particularly satisfactory (then again, maybe I'm bias). On the other hand, we have the theory that the cup was a portkey, and Jr. only added another stop, which acted like a LIFO queue (aka pile): the last stop added is the first one used (as in wrappers - the last wrapper used is the first one opened). Of course, there is that quote where Jr. states that *he* turned the cup into a portkey, but that can be explained. While Jr, posing as Madeye, was in charge of Hogwarts security that year, he wasn't actually in charge of the Tournament - the MoM was. And we know that the MoM was deeply suspicious of Madeye (for the wrong reasons), so they wouldn't have told him about the cup's transformation into a Portkey (and when you think about it, it is a minor detail that he needn't be told - only Dumbledore, so he would authorise it/enchant it/whatever). The fact that Jr. states that he did it doesn't imply that no-one else had done it before, only that he didn't know about it. And as stated before, it makes sense that it would've been turned into a portkey, to finish the tournament once it was found and not after the winner had fought his or her way back through the maze. It is particularly telling that the second jump took Harry to the *entrance* of the maze. And if Jr. had changed the destination completely, he would've deleted the original jump (to the entrance of the maze), instead of simply adding an extra one. Hope that helps, Grey Wolf From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 15:20:29 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 15:20:29 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110475 SSSusan asked : "Do we know what he did or didn't learn about morality in the orphanage? In what way does power provide a life of relative *peace* within an orphanage?" Del replies : We don't know, I agree, but we can guess a few things. First, we know that Tom never loved. That seems to indicate that he was never loved either as a little boy. Little kids are hungry for affection ; smiling at them is sometimes enough to earn their unfailing devotion. Second : Tom doesn't seem to have had any kind of morality as a teenager. So either he wasn't taught it, or he didn't internalise it. I'd go for the latter, and I'd even dare to say that it didn't sink in because the discrepancy between what he was taught verbally and by example was too great. It's all nice and good to tell kids to love their neighbour, but they won't learn that if they see the grown-ups authorising nasty behaviour. We can guess that the orphanage was not a nice place to be at, if Tom was so desperate to stay at Hogwarts over the holidays. There must have been quite a lot of nasty behaviour occuring there. Not conducive to learning about good and evil. As for power bringing peace, my answer is : pecking order. The higher up you are, the less you are bullied yourself and the more you bully others and get it your way. SSSusan wrote : "On the other hand, Hogwarts is a lot about comradeship, as well. Kids working together on projects, studying together in their common rooms, forming Quidditch teams & clubs. I think Hogwarts DID afford Tom a chance to reach out to others, had he chosen to do so. He managed to become a house & school leader, so I doubt he was totally isolated or not respected." Del replies : Let's take Draco as an example. He's got friends, he's respected, he's a leader. But has he learned *anything* about love and comradeship ? Nope. Because he's respected and valued for the *wrong* reasons : his dad's powerful influence, his money, his sweets, his sharp tongue, and so on. Draco might have many friends and followers, but I'd bet all my Galleons that he's intensely alone inside and that he doesn't love any of his friends nor does he feel loved by any of them. Tom did reach out to others : he had friends. That doesn't mean he loved them or felt loved by them. SSSusan wrote : "What about HARRY, then? Some of these same feelings factor in for him, too." (snip) "Why doesn't HARRY go right along with the nasty kids? Alternately, why doesn't Harry strut about as "Savior of the Wizarding World", being an arrogant berk? Because he chose not to. " Del replies : There is a *huge* difference between Harry and Tom. Harry discovered that his parents were heroes who died fighting evil and defending him personally. He also discovered that *he* is a hero, worshipped by the entire WW (well, almost) for having rid the world of the greatest evil wizard of the century. Everyone assumes that he is good and nice, like his parents. In other words : Harry was firmly entrenched in the Good and Light side before he even knew it, and he was *loved* by all the nice people. Tom, on the other hand, discovered that he was the Heir of a powerful but very *disliked* wizard. Slytherin was driven out of Hogwarts by the other 3 founders. His ideas are supported by a minority in the WW, and many of the rest outright fight them. Slytherin was associated with the Dark Arts, he was a Parselmouth, and so is Tom. So Tom discovered that a majority of the WW was *not* going to like him for being the Heir of Slytherin : he was going to be hated and despised because of the path Slytherin's legacy had put him on. After all, just look at the way people reacted in CoS when they thought Harry was the Heir of Slytherin. Both Tom and Harry arrived at Hogwarts feeling bad about themselves and angry about the world. But when one discovered that most people had a hugely positive preconception of him, the other one discovered that his legacy was a dark and terrible one. Huge difference. As an example, take a look at how Sirius reacts to different members of his family. He's quick to point out that Tonks is his cousin's daughter, because he knows Harry likes Tonks. But if Harry hadn't discovered on his own that Bella was Sirius's cousin, would Sirius have pointed that out ? And when Harry does discover it, Sirius very quickly says that he's not proud of it. Just like he's not proud of his parents, and so never mentioned them before. Preconceived ideas and their power. And by the way, Harry did come close to strutting around. During the summer in OoP, he does repeat to himself that *he* did all those things, so how do his friends *dare* keep him in the dark. As for Tom, he never made it widely known that he is the Heir of Slytherin. It's still a secret up to this day. He's made a name for himself, he didn't just bask in Slytherin's glory reflected on him. SSSusan wrote : "if we see Harry choosing to fight the impulses for revenge, hate & cruelty, why CAN'T we expect Tom to choose to fight them, too, once he's at Hogwarts? " Del replies : Harry doesn't fight them very well, does he ? He did spare Peter's life, but he wasn't feeling any hate or anger at that time. But he sure was feeling a lot of anger when he attempted to Crucio Bella... As for why we can't expect the same things from Tom and Harry, the answer is simple : because Harry knows better. Harry knows love, he knows how good it feels to do the right thing, he believes in good and evil. Tom doesn't know love, he doesn't believe in good and evil. Tom is barely a toddler when it comes to good and evil : that's where his stunted emotional development comes into play. He's stuck in the "I" phase : I want this or that, I like this or that, I, I, I. He's completely inconsiderate of others' needs and feelings, just like very young children, because he never grew up emotionally. Harry did, even though it's kind of a miracle that he did, considering his circumstances. SSSusan wrote : "I doubt Tom found out about the Heir of Slytherin thing right away-- you've suggested a year or two into his time there." Del replies : I don't have CoS with me, but I seem to remember that it took Tom several years to find the Chamber, after he discovered he was the Heir of Slytherin. Since he was 15 (if I'm not mistaken) when he opened the chamber, I don't think I'm too much off the mark when I say he must have been 12 or 13 when he discovered who he was. And before that, he also had to deal with discovering that his father was a Muggle who had abandoned his witch mother because of what she was. Tough. Harry was 15 when he discovered that his dad had been a bit of a jerk in his youth, and he took it badly enough. Imagine how he would have felt if he'd discovered right away in his first year that his dad was as despicable as, say, Snape. SSSusan wrote : "Harry chose how to act after a horrible childhood & facing all kinds of temptations; Tom did, too--they were just different choices than Harry's." Del replies : Before he even reached school, Harry had already experienced an exchange of affection with Ron. Harry had a true friend, someone whom he knew liked him for who he was, not what he was, before he even set foot in Hogwarts. Tom didn't even know what liking and being liked was. Del From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com Wed Aug 18 15:24:37 2004 From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 15:24:37 -0000 Subject: Apparation and Sirius' vault In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110476 > HunterGreen: > If it was just a two-way portkey, why didn't it bring Harry back to > the center of the maze? In fact, when you think about it, there is no canon for two-way portkeys anyway. Looking it over, we have seen a few uses of portkeys in the books, but none that were used to go to a place and then be returned to the starting position (do excuse me if I am wrong - my canon is very rusty). The closest things I can think of are the Cup, which led Harry to a close by place, but not the same, and the portkeys used to go and return from the QWC - which unfortunately were two different portkeys. Then we have Hagrid's probable use of a couple of them in PS (that we never get to see, so it could've been kestrels or other spells) and a few others scattered here and there that, nonetheless, don't appear to be two-wayed. Hope that helps, Grey Wolf From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 15:35:53 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 15:35:53 -0000 Subject: Easy vs Right (was LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110477 JKR said : "What's very important for me is when Dumbledore says that you have to choose between what is right and what is easy. This is the setup for the next three books. All of them are going to have to choose, because what is easy is often not right. " SSSusan commented : "*My* take would be that JKR intends for Voldy to be included in the "all will make choices" and all "have to choose" between right & easy. Others' thoughts??" Del replies : Indeed Pippin, thanks for the quote ! Now SSSusan, I tend to agree with you : LV is included, in my idea. BUT (you knew that was coming, didn't you ? ;-) I think we should first ask ourselves : what is right and what is easy *in LV's idea* ?? Which is a very interesting question, since LV believes that there is *no* right and wrong, only power. So how could he choose what is right over what is easy or anything else for that matter ? What do you think, SSSusan ? Del From JLaming263 at hotmail.com Wed Aug 18 15:48:07 2004 From: JLaming263 at hotmail.com (jimlaming) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 15:48:07 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110478 SSSusan wrote: "It is possible that these children can show no attachment, empathy or bond to another whatsoever. BUT, I'd like to go back to what I said in my first response to your first post in this thread. Here's what I said then: "*I* took what JKR said as meaning that Tom, once capable/old enough/able to choose, never *chose* to love another."" Del replies: But if Tom never experienced love, then how could he ever become capable of choosing to love ?? Imagine an 11-year-old boy who's only been given fries all his life. Fries are the only food he knows to eat when he's hungry. So now you're walking through town with him and lunch hour comes. The kid is hungry. You tell him that he can choose between a serving of fries at the stand 3 feet away, or vegetables and cookies in the shop on the other side of the big busy street. What is the kid going to choose? Fries, right? Now, how fair would it be to scold him for not choosing to cross the street to go and get vegetables and cookies?? *Why*would he choose to do that?? If Tom truly never loved, then he was *never* able to choose to love. He would have needed *a lot* of care and attention and teaching, to learn that love is something worth looking for, and *how* to get to experience it. But knowing the WW as we do, I doubt anyone took the time and effort to do that. Tom was on his own, and he just didn't grasp the concept of love, nor could he see the point of it. Even decades later, he still thought that Lily was just being *silly* for risking her life in order to save her baby: that shows how much he's alien to the whole concept of love. I wish JKR hadn't answered that question so thoroughly. A nice little no would have been enough, and nowhere so disturbing. Jim adds: I love this thread. I am intrigued at the nuances of each posters belief systems or background, which cling to different elements of the discussion. Academic, abused, loved, redeemed Thanks to all! I am of the redeemable belief system, meaning, I believe that agency is at work in all but the most damaged of personalities. And that there is always a path to love. You may be in a dark place and only make a miniscule step, but it is a step towards love or away from it. Tom MAY be damaged enough to be missing the fundamental agency to choose love. I rather think DD may have tried to influence him and failed. There is an interesting dynamic between them, which seems somewhat sad for DD and arrogant for LV. This is what I hear a hint of when DD reminds LV there are things worse than death. IMHO, Draco is not that damaged. In SS/PS, he exhibits a somewhat normal desire to meet a fellow student in the robe shop. His approach is somewhat crude but he does attempt to befriend an unknown student. I think that encounter is genuine. Later when he knows the identity of that student, his background plays into the interaction. He makes a choice, however slight, to follow a darker path. The fries analogy is too simple. Devoid of any other stimulus, the choice is 95 percent clear. But Draco sees many other choices and the consequences of the choices around him at school. He has seen a variety of options. The relationship of H/H/R vs. his relationship with C/G for example. The interaction of Snape and Harry vs. the interaction of Hagrid and Harry. Other student with their parents. I guess my point is: I'd like to think there are always options. Jim Laming From JLaming263 at hotmail.com Wed Aug 18 16:48:08 2004 From: JLaming263 at hotmail.com (jimlaming) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 16:48:08 -0000 Subject: Choices, was: (LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110479 > I guess my point is: I'd like to think there are always options. > > Jim Laming Is it arrogant to reply ones own comments? Don't answer that LOL at me! I was thinking about choices and when you loose the ability to return from a given path. Here's the analogy I think applies: If you are swimming up stream in a fast flowing river, you have to choose to swim. If you choose to swim half-heartedly you loose ground and creep down stream (away from love). If you don't swim at all you are swept downstream. If you choose to swim down stream (into the darkness), your progress is swift and sure in the direction of your choosing. Can you return from the downstream path? Well, given enough time, determination and swimming ability, yes. In mortality, the time factor may limit your progress but with immortality there is no limit to the ability to return EXCEPT desire or choice. Is Draco redeemable? I expect so. Is it Likely? Only JKR knows for sure. Is LV redeemable. Is it Likely? Thats a bet even Bagman wouldn't take... In my belief system there is the wild card of repentance and redemption. I have not seen direct reference to this in the WW but would like it to exist there too. Jim From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Aug 18 16:59:31 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 16:59:31 -0000 Subject: Easy vs Right (was LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110480 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > JKR said : > "What's very important for me is when Dumbledore says that you have to > choose between what is right and what is easy. This is the setup for > the next three books. All of them are going to have to choose, because > what is easy is often not right. " > > SSSusan commented : > "*My* take would be that JKR intends for Voldy to be included in the > "all will make choices" and all "have to choose" between right & > easy. Others' thoughts??" > > Del replies : > Indeed Pippin, thanks for the quote ! You're welcome! > > Now SSSusan, I tend to agree with you : LV is included, in my idea. > > BUT (you knew that was coming, didn't you ? ;-) I think we should first ask ourselves : what is right and what is easy *in LV's idea* ?? > Which is a very interesting question, since LV believes that there is *no* right and wrong, only power. So how could he choose what is right over what is easy or anything else for that matter ?< Pippin: found another quote: http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/tv_film/newsid_2353000/235 3529.stm (you may have to copy and paste the URL into your browser) ------ Well I think it is often the case that the biggest bullies take what they know to be their own defects, as they see it, and they put them right on someone else and then they try and destroy the other and that's what Voldemort does. And that was very conscious - I wanted to create a villain, where you could understand the workings of that person's mind. And Harry, as you know, from book four, is starting to come to terms with what makes a person turn that way. Because they took wrong choices, and Voldemort took wrong choices from a very early age - he decided young what he wanted to be. -------- I think what we will find is that Voldemort may not have much choice about having a personality disorder, but he did have a choice as to how he dealt with the rage--he could have decided to consider it a weakness, as Snape apparently does. Instead Voldemort decided to become the most powerful wizard, so that he could vent his rage unchecked. Pippin From jlawlor at gmail.com Wed Aug 18 17:18:09 2004 From: jlawlor at gmail.com (James Lawlor) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 12:18:09 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Gringotts: Sirius' Vault & Harry's Inheritance In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <96773c880408181018301dbf79@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110481 Steve/b_boymn (was asian_lovr2): > I'm a strong supporter of this belief that Harry has some degree of > access to Sirius's vault, and you made a very important connection > that I had never see before, despite the fact that I have analysed > that letter and posted extensive speculations about it. > > One additional note, that vault probably represent Sirius's personal > fortune and is not tied or encumbered by the Black Family Estate. It > will be a lot easier for Harry to inherit Sirius's personal estate, > than it will be for him to inherit the Black Family Estate. I forsee a > nice conflict between Harry and Draco over the Family Estate. > James: That sounds quite likely to me, but I have to wonder- why? I could see the Black Family Estate being important, as the headquarters of the Order could be in question - but as for Sirius's vault... Harry has plenty of money, we've known this since his first step into the WW, so I can't see how Harry realizing he has access to Sirius's vault is going to be particularly important. Although, if it is a top-security vault like vault 713, perhaps there's something else hidden in it. Any thoughts on what important magical artifact could have been in the possession of Sirius? (And why he wouldn't have already given it to Dumbledore, for that matter). - James Lawlor jlawlor at gmail.com From yahoogroups at catbirdco.us Wed Aug 18 17:29:40 2004 From: yahoogroups at catbirdco.us (Michal) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 10:29:40 -0700 Subject: stoat=weasel=hermine coincidence OR? Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040818094936.03b90620@mail.catbirdco.us> No: HPFGUIDX 110482 Michal here: While rereading SS/PS yesterday I was inspired to look up "stoat." I'd always figured it was some unusual edible typical to Hagrid Cuisine and had no significance. Should have known better! Finding no references on the net or in the fraction of the HP4G archives I searched (grrrr! is there an easier way?), here's what I found. stoat noun: the ermine in its brown summer coat with black-tipped tail ermine noun: 1. small northern weasel: a small northern weasel, with dark fur, whose silky winter coat is white except for a black-tipped tail. Latin name Mustela erminea. [12th century. From Old French (h)ermine , probably from medieval Latin (mus) Armenius "Armenian (mouse)."] Second etymology from another source: [OF. ermine, F. hermine, prob. of German origin; cf. OHG. harmo, G. hermelin, akin to Lith. szarm?, szarmonys, weasel, cf. AS. hearma; but cf. also LL. armelinus, armellina, hermellina, and pellis Armenia, the fur of the Armenian rat, mus Armenius, the animal being found also in Armenia.] I was struck by the similarities to "Weasley" and "Hermione." Of course, the leap from Weasley to weasel has already been made in our story, but not the connection between Hermione and this little animal. With JKR's expertise in French, it's not unlikely she's made the connection herself. The mouse/rat connection might be interesting, too. In playful extrapolation, might we have: 1. Weasley sandwiches instead of stoat sandwiches? Well, Ron's sandwiches on the HE were as unappetizing as Hagrid's. 2. If Ron and Hermione wed, she'll be Hermione Weasley aka "stoat stoat" provided we overlook the addition of the lowercase "o." 3. BTW, my web search for "hermine" revealed that at least one HP video game misspells H's name; coincidence? error? Who knows...... If this is old info, could you point me to the original? TIA. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 18 17:47:07 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 17:47:07 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110483 SSSusan asked : > > "Do we know what he did or didn't learn about morality in the > > orphanage? Del replies : > We don't know, I agree, but we can guess a few things. > > First, we know that Tom never loved. That seems to indicate that he > was never loved either as a little boy. Little kids are hungry for > affection ; smiling at them is sometimes enough to earn their > unfailing devotion. > Before he even reached school, Harry had already experienced an > exchange of affection with Ron. SSSusan: Yes, on the train there. And it happened because Harry WANTED to make friends; he was OPEN to exchanging affection. He did not see affection as a weakness. I think you believe Tom was *incapable* of such openness, but I don't agree. Ack! I shouldn't have gotten myself into this thread, because I can't keep up with your postings, Del! :-| I'm at work and I just can't justify any more "break time"! And I don't think you & I will ever agree on this. Whether JKR meant "never" as in Tom's whole life, from birth 'til now, OR since he became a cognizant individual, is one big difference we're working from. Also, no matter what I say, I don't think you're going to believe that a child who was SHOWN no love will be able to in turn SHOW love. I, on the other hand, believe that it is possible *and* that JKR clearly expects him to have done so--or at LEAST to have chosen the difficult, "good" choices over the ones he did choose. In other words, was Tom "immoral" because he couldn't help himself, or was he "immoral" because he CHOSE not to buy into the prevailing system of morality. *I* think JKR's leaning towards that interpretation, along w/ his CHOOSING not to give in to the "weakness" that he considered love to be. His background, as I've said before, makes these choices more understandable, but I hold to the idea of a greater ability to choose in Tom than you do. And I think we'll never agree on the details because we don't agree on that base. Ah, well. :-| Siriusly Snapey Susan, who's fully aware that this sounds like a cop- out post, but who can't help it. If others want to join in, please do!!!!! From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 17:49:38 2004 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 17:49:38 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110484 > As an aside : can one truly *choose* hate and evil if they've never > experienced love and goodness ? > And : wouldn't the fact that Tom never cared for anyone indicate a > major mental disease (not unexpected considering the circumstances) ? > > Del I am looking at the diagnostic criteria for Antisocial Personality Disrder, a.k.a."sociopath" or "psychopath" in the DSM-IV, and TR/LV certainly meets the criterial. It has been hypothesized in research involving psychopathy that these folks do lack the ability to love, have empathy, show remorse, etc. I know that at a treatment program where I worked, we screened for psychopathy and would not admit them in certain group therapies because it simply made them "better psychopaths." Some have described folks like this as being born without a conscience. This certainly seems to describe Tom. Furthermore, Axis II disorders (the personality disorders) are considered serious psychological disorders. Julie -- who knows the DSM-IV is not JKR's canon by hopes the list elves think this adds to character discussion From yahoogroups at catbirdco.us Wed Aug 18 17:53:29 2004 From: yahoogroups at catbirdco.us (Michal) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 10:53:29 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Is JKR about to reveal? (NotASquib!Petunia) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040818104835.03b5e490@mail.catbirdco.us> No: HPFGUIDX 110485 At 01:02 PM 8/17/04, you wrote: >Hmmm.... Could Petunia have had relations with a wizard resulting in >the Half-Blood Prince, which Vernon Dursley knows nothing about? >Perhaps her hatred of magic is a face she puts on to hide dirty >little secrets in her past.... and it would help explain how she >already seems to know a few facts about the wizarding world. > >Orly around the bend Michal: Could Petunia have been married to a wizard? A resulting "prince" would be raised by his father. I strongly doubt JKR would feature any born-out-of-wedlock characters. I was going to type "bastards," but in another sense of the word our story already has many. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 18 18:05:07 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 18:05:07 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110486 SSSusan: Jeepers, I can't stop myself. I've decided to peel a bit of this subject off into its own thread, and then I shall try to refrain from posting all afternoon and getting fired. SSSusan wrote previously: >> What about HARRY, then? Some of these same feelings factor in for him, too. (snip) Why doesn't HARRY go right along with the nasty kids? Alternately,why doesn't Harry strut about as "Savior of the Wizarding World", being an arrogant berk? Because he chose not to.<< Del replied : > There is a *huge* difference between Harry and Tom. > Tom, on the other hand, discovered that he was the Heir of a > powerful but very *disliked* wizard. Slytherin was driven out of > Hogwarts by the other 3 founders. His ideas are supported by a > minority in the WW, and many of the rest outright fight them. > Slytherin was associated with the Dark Arts, he was a Parselmouth, > and so is Tom. So Tom discovered that a majority of the WW was > *not* going to like him for being the Heir of Slytherin : he was > going to be hated and despised because of the path Slytherin's > legacy had put him on. SSSusan again: So why didn't he *choose* to deny that? He did not *have* to follow Slytherin's path. Harry learned that he could've done great things in Slytherin House, but he *begged* not to be put there. Voldy tempted him to join him, grab the power, which is all that matters, and he *chose* not to. Yes, Harry knew his parents had been White Hats, so perhaps his choice was somewhat easier, but I still don't see Tom's choice to follow SS's path as *predetermined*. Del: > And by the way, Harry did come close to strutting around. During the > summer in OoP, he does repeat to himself that *he* did all those > things, so how do his friends *dare* keep him in the dark. SSSusan: I absolutely disagree that this was strutting. This, imho, was frustration hitting the boiling point. He wanted to know what was going on; he knew other people--possibly Ron & Hermione included-- knew what was happening, while he was in the dark, and he didn't *understand* that. The only way to make the point that he doesn't think that's fair is to point out that *he* had taken on Voldy, not the others. I saw that as righteous indignation, not as strutting. SSSusan wrote previously: >> if we see Harry choosing to fight the impulses for revenge, hate & cruelty, why CAN'T we expect Tom to choose to fight them, too, once he's at Hogwarts?<< Del replied: > Harry doesn't fight them very well, does he ? He did spare Peter's > life, but he wasn't feeling any hate or anger at that time. But he > sure was feeling a lot of anger when he attempted to Crucio Bella... SSSusan: I don't see it that way at all. He chose to spare Peter when the easier thing to do would have been to allow him to be killed. He also spared Sirius in order to hear the full story. He **couldn't** summon enough hatred to Crucio Bella, which again speaks to his fighting impulses very well--even better than he wants to at the moment, I would say. Del: > As for why we can't expect the same things from Tom and Harry, the > answer is simple : because Harry knows better. Harry knows love, he > knows how good it feels to do the right thing, he believes in good > and evil. Tom doesn't know love, he doesn't believe in good and > evil. Tom is barely a toddler when it comes to good and evil : > that's where his stunted emotional development comes into play. > He's stuck in the "I" phase : I want this or that, I like this or > that, I, I, I. He's completely inconsiderate of others' needs and > feelings, just like very young children, because he never grew up > emotionally. Harry did, even though it's kind of a miracle that he > did, considering his circumstances. SSSusan: I absolutely agree that Tom is *all* Id, whereas Harry has a quite hefty Superego (and both have a problem with Ego = reality in this model, NOT self-conceit). But if Tom was able to act the part of law- abiding citizen, responsible young adult, so well as to attain Prefect & HB status, then he DOES understand right vs. wrong!! He is choosing to do what he wants; he isn't fighting those "id" impulses at all. And I think, given that it was quite some time before he discovered the Heir of Slytherin stuff, that there was ample time for some of this Superego & Ego stuff to have developed. I can't prove it, but my belief is that DD did show a great interest in Tom and tried to help him along. Siriusly Snapey Susan From kandbmom at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 18:23:32 2004 From: kandbmom at yahoo.com (Lisa) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 18:23:32 -0000 Subject: Hide the animals! was Re: The Clue Behind the Door In-Reply-To: <4E867298-F0D2-11D8-8A33-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110487 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, caesian wrote: > On Aug 17, 2004, at 8:12 PM, minervakab wrote: > > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lisa" wrote: > > > As the elves pointed out this morning, the Do Not Disturb sign has > > > come down off the door at JKR's website, and there's an > > interesting > > > clue inside. > > > > > > I won't post the clue here, as I'm sure some would like to check > > it > > > all out themselves. Could this be a hint to the identity of the > > Half > > > Blood Prince himself? <...snip...> kandbmom: I think the person JKR is describing sounds an awful lot like a Griffindor founder?! Could be possibly be Godric Griffindor returning as the founderand possibly the HBP to help defeat the heir of Slytherin? I mean the whole lion-like description seems a little strange when you consider that Godric picked a lion as the Griffindor mascot. From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Aug 18 18:40:56 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 18:40:56 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110488 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: Siriusly Snapey Susan: > I doubt Tom found out about the Heir of Slytherin thing right away-- > you've suggested a year or two into his time there. I do believe he > had opportunities during this time to reach out to others, to choose > differently than he did. Geoff: Tom himself suggests (by implication) that he found out about the Heir of Slytherin thing almost immediately.... "I thought someone must realise that Hagrid couldn't possibly be the heir of Slytherin. It had taken /me/ five whole years to discover everything I could about the Chamber of Secrets and discover the hidden entrance...." COS "The Heir of Slytherin" p.230 UK edition) Since we know that Tom was towards the end of the Fifth Year when this happened, he must have started looking for information to find the Chamber early in the First Year. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 19:56:32 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 19:56:32 -0000 Subject: "A" Teacher's Personality WAS: Lovely Snape In-Reply-To: <20040818120048.8274.qmail@web12210.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110489 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, An'nai Jiriki wrote: > In conclusion, Snape is sadistic and misuses his > powers. However, he only 'lets go' around Harry, and > is tempered in the rest of his classes. Alla: Well, yes it is entirely possible that he only "lets go around Harry" (I would still include Neville in that statement), but that is what I find the most upsetting and despicable. If he was equally hard at all students, oh well. Strict disciplinarian teachers could teach you something. But he specifically picks on one child, because he is on revenge quest against his dead father. Grrrr :o) From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 20:06:09 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 20:06:09 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110490 SSSusan wrote : "it happened because Harry WANTED to make friends; he was OPEN to exchanging affection. He did not see affection as a weakness. I think you believe Tom was *incapable* of such openness, but I don't agree. " Del replies : There's a rule in human nature : you lose what you don't use. Take languages for example. When kids are born, they have an innate capacity to learn several languages perfectly and easily. But as time goes by, if the brain is not stimulated by several languages, it loses this ability. I, for example, grew up speaking only one language. I learned English only at the age of 18. As a result, I still have a strong accent and it's very very hard for me to learn other languages. My husband, on the other hand, grew up bilingual, and he's got an amazing ability to learn additional languages. When he came to my country, it took him very little time to learn my language. He also is very good at catching original accents : when I met him, I would have sworn he was American, when in fact he's from South Central Europe. And now we've moved to his country with our 20-month-old son, and we can see that babies really are different. It took our son less than a month to start to understand his grandparents, while I still struggle with the basics after 2 months. I believe something similar might have happened to Tom. He received no or very little love as a kid, and was not prompted to love back. As a result, he might have lost both his ability to love and his sensitivity to receive love sent his way. Asking him to choose to love would be like asking me to choose to speak only my husband's tongue at home with him : I couldn't, even if I wanted to. SSSusan wrote : "Ack! I shouldn't have gotten myself into this thread, because I can't keep up with your postings, Del! :-| I'm at work and I just can't justify any more "break time"! " Del replies : You don't have to keep up ! You can answer only one post a day if you want, it's fine with me. SSSusan wrote : "I don't think you're going to believe that a child who was SHOWN no love will be able to in turn SHOW love." Del replies : There are studies that confirm my beliefs, unfortunately. Yes, some children will be able to love even though they weren't loved, but some others won't. SSSusan wrote : "I, on the other hand, believe that it is possible *and* that JKR clearly expects him to have done so--or at LEAST to have chosen the difficult, "good" choices over the ones he did choose. " Del replies : She calls him a raging psychopath and says that he's insensitive to other people, or something of that effect. SSSusan wrote : "In other words, was Tom "immoral" because he couldn't help himself, or was he "immoral" because he CHOSE not to buy into the prevailing system of morality. *I* think JKR's leaning towards that interpretation, along w/ his CHOOSING not to give in to the "weakness" that he considered love to be." Del replies : If he doesn't believe in the system, then he can't be wrong according to it. Telling a non-Christian, for example, that it's wrong to use the name of God while swearing and that God will punish them for it, is not going to make them change their habit. You can explain to them that it hurts you and ask them to please not do it in your presence, but that's about it. Unless you live in a theocracy, and there's a legal law against swearing : then you can sue that person. But otherwise, if they don't buy into your system of beliefs, they won't agree with you when you tell them they're wrong, and they'll keep on their path. 2 questions for you : 1. What makes you say that JKR agrees with you ? I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong, I'm just asking for proof. 2. Why would anyone choose to give into a weakness ??? Especially someone who believe in power over anything else. Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 20:15:16 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 20:15:16 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110491 > SSSusan wrote : > "In other words, was Tom "immoral" because he couldn't help himself, > or was he "immoral" because he CHOSE not to buy into the prevailing > system of morality. *I* think JKR's leaning towards that > interpretation, along w/ his CHOOSING not to give in to the "weakness" > that he considered love to be." > > Del replies : > If he doesn't believe in the system, then he can't be wrong according > to it. Alla: Voldemort is long passed the stage where he cannot be hold accountable for non-conforming to the morality system he does not believe in, are we agreeing on this one, Del? His beliefs turned into actions. When non-cristian uses the name G-d in a wrong way (from your POV), he/she only hurts herself. That is not the case here Del: > 2. Why would anyone choose to give into a weakness ??? Especially > someone who believe in power over anything else. Alla: But that is the problem. Tom has it backwards. Love is not weakness, affection is not weakness. Unfortunately nobody taught him that From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 20:19:37 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 20:19:37 -0000 Subject: Easy vs Right (was LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110492 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > I think what we will find is that Voldemort may not have much > choice about having a personality disorder, but he did have a > choice as to how he dealt with the rage--he could have decided > to consider it a weakness, as Snape apparently does. Instead > Voldemort decided to become the most powerful wizard, so that > he could vent his rage unchecked. > Alla: Pippin , I am in awe of your ability to make such an interesting, unexpected and strong canon references. But I would like to know where do you get that Snape considers rage to be a weakness? I may be wrong, but I thought that in his Occlumency rant he only mentioned positive emotions as weakness. Thanks From jferer at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 20:36:04 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 20:36:04 -0000 Subject: The Madness of Voldemort - was Voldemort never loved anyone Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110493 We see over and over, from the Tom Riddle days, Lord Voldemort pursuing his goals without any regard for others. He never shows any remorse, any sense of a human contract, nothing. He doesn't care about his Death Eaters, either; they are his tools, rewarded only as far as needed to keep them working towards his goals. Of course Voldemort doesn't love; it's almost a defining symptom of the evil that fills him that he has no notion of love at all. Like many before him, Tom Riddle/Lord Voldemort is a sociopath (psychopath). Here is a list of sociopathic traits from http://faculty.ncwc.edu/toconnor/428/428lect16.htm <> We don't know about many of these, but every one we've been able to observe sounds just like our Dark Lord, doesn't it? Sociopaths have "glib, superficial charm" [Tom: "I've always been able to charm the people I needed to"]- got it - "Grandiose sense of self-worth" - oh yeah - "callousness and lack of empathy" - good night, nurse! Specifically, LV is an "organized" sociopath (see FBI profile on the page linked above), comparable to Hitler or Stalin, as opposed to an "unorganized," more obviously lunatic one. The description of the "charismatic" subtype could have been taken out of the biography of Voldemort that Hermione will probably write some day: "CHARISMATIC PSYCHOPATHS are charming, attractive liars. They are usually gifted at some talent or another, and they use it to their advantage in manipulating others. They are usually fast-talkers, and possess an almost demonic ability to persuade others out of everything they own, even their lives. Leaders of religious sects or cults, for example, might be psychopaths if they lead their followers to their deaths. This subtype often comes to believe in their own fictions. They are irresistible." [also sounds like Gilderoy, too, doesn't it?] LV's early life is tailor-made to produce him. "Some 70% of sociopaths come from fatherless homes. " (ibid.) Without love-bonding from the earliest age, he never learned about or knew what love is. So Voldemort is about his choices in many ways, but no one starts from zero. Harry wasn't a blank slate when he sat under the Sorting Hat, and Voldemort wasn't a blank slate when he started down the road he's on now. Jim Ferer From rhinobabies at hotmail.com Wed Aug 18 15:12:16 2004 From: rhinobabies at hotmail.com (coderaspberry77) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 15:12:16 -0000 Subject: Petunia not a squib but... In-Reply-To: <1E151264-F114-11D8-AC56-000393BA8C1A@glue.umd.edu> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110494 Maria said: > So here is my Theory: > > Part 1 - Squibs that are born of Muggle parents are not called Squibs, > but something else. Let us call them Mibs for now. We can change that > later. They are a closer to muggles than to Squibs. They might never > know they have a bit of magical blood, but could be aware of strange > things happening to them "as if by magic". However, if in contact with > a magical person, they might reach some understanding of what the > strange things happening are and realize their condition of Mibs. Like > Squibs, they might be able to interact with Kneazles, do some very > simple magic (KwikSpell) or see Dementors. However, most of them do > not know what these are, unless they are aware of the wizarding world. > > Part 2 - Petunia is a Mib. This might explain why JK Rowling said that > Petunia is not a Squib but... If Squibs are rare, Mibs are even rarer. > They are basically Muggles. She would have lived completely unaware of > magic if it wasn't because her sister was fully magical. It gives her a > big reason to be bitter at Lily. Also explains why she knows about > Dementors... she could have seen them, not only heard about them. > > Now, anyone ones to give their point of view on this pet theory of mine? No matter how accurate this turns out to be, I like this theory a lot. To expand a little, what if Dumbledore told Petunia he knows what she is, and that by taking Harry in, he'll promise to keep it under wraps? Perhaps Mibs are looked even more unkindly upon than Squibs, and perhaps Dumbledore hinted that Petunia could potentially face a lot of...problems...should it come out in the WW. Also, it's pretty much a given that she'd want to keep her Mib status from Vernon and the neighbors. Granted, this makes Dumbledore a bit of a blackmailer (not sure how someone is a BIT of a blackmailer, but there you go), which I don't like, but I think we've seen Dumbledore was wise enough to have a little leverage/collateral, as the Howler indicated, so that Petunia wouldn't suddenly decide, as Vernon had in OotP, that she wanted no magic whatsoever in her life anymore. Whatever Petunia DOES turn out to be, I'm quite sure it's not going to be something that drastically alters the story - just something like the above that makes us go "Oh...well, that explains a bit". coderaspberry From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 18 20:47:35 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 20:47:35 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110495 SSSusan wrote : > "it happened because Harry WANTED to make friends; he was OPEN to > exchanging affection. He did not see affection as a weakness. I > think you believe Tom was *incapable* of such openness, but I don't > agree. " Del replies : > There's a rule in human nature : you lose what you don't use. Take > languages for example. When kids are born, they have an innate > capacity to learn several languages perfectly and easily. But as > time goes by, if the brain is not stimulated by several languages, > it loses this ability. My husband, on the other hand, grew up > bilingual, and he's got an amazing ability to learn additional > languages. When he came to my country, it took him very little time > to learn my language. I believe something similar might have > happened to Tom. He received no or very little love as a kid, and > was not prompted to love back. As a result, he might have lost both > his ability to love and his sensitivity to receive love sent his > way. Asking him to choose to love would be like asking me to choose > to speak only my husband's tongue at home with him : I couldn't, > even if I wanted to. SSSusan: But much of what we all learn--including language acquisition--is done through *modeling*. There *IS* an age at which learning in general, languages in particular, is quicker: in childhood. But one can learn at any age, and modeling is one of the chief ways of doing so. Especially once he was at Hogwarts, affection, friendship, loving relationships were likely all around Tom, being modeled for him. I don't think comparing learning to love to learning languages is necessarily a good correllary, but even if it is, I'd say the opportunity was still there for Tom, just as I can learn German at age 42 if I choose. SSSusan wrote : > "I don't think you're going to believe that a child who was SHOWN no > love will be able to in turn SHOW love." Del replies : > There are studies that confirm my beliefs, unfortunately. Yes, some > children will be able to love even though they weren't loved, but > some others won't. SSSusan: Precisely. And as yet, we do not know into which of these categories Tom falls. Given what Pippin provided awhile ago from JKR--about how Tom chose his path--I'd wager a guess that she thinks he's in the *former* category. All imho, of course. SSSusan wrote : > "In other words, was Tom "immoral" because he couldn't help > himself, or was he "immoral" because he CHOSE not to buy into the > prevailing system of morality. *I* think JKR's leaning towards > that interpretation, along w/ his CHOOSING not to give in to > the "weakness" that he considered love to be." Del replies : > If he doesn't believe in the system, then he can't be wrong > according to it. Telling a non-Christian, for example, that it's > wrong to use the name of God while swearing and that God will > punish them for it, is not going to make them change their habit. SSSusan: I've seen this argument here before, and I'm just not buying it. *Saying* no one has to behave according to "the system" doesn't mean it's so--or else society breaks down and there is anarchy. There is room for discord or dissention, to quite varying degrees, in different systems, but when we're talking about a society as a whole-- not one particular religious take on things--there are typically rules which must be abided by/mores which must be accepted or there will be consequences. TOM IS NOT STUPID [forgive the yelling :-)]. I truly believe that by the time he was a teenager, if not before, he understood the mores, the values; saw the modeling of love, devotion & friendship; and chose his own path. These comments of JKR's that Pippin provided support that, *I* think: 1) "What's very important for me is when Dumbledore says that you have to choose between what is right and what is easy." 2) "Voldemort took wrong choices from a very early age - he decided young what he wanted to be." Del: > 1. What makes you say that JKR agrees with you ? I'm not saying > you're necessarily wrong, I'm just asking for proof. SSSusan: I didn't say she agrees with me. I've repeatedly said *if* my interpretation or take on her words is right. But the comments I just provided, above, about choice make me feel I'm on the right track. Del: > 2. Why would anyone choose to give into a weakness ??? Especially > someone who believe in power over anything else. SSSusan: To me it's his faulty logic which sees love as a weakness. Most people either don't see it as a weakness or see it as one they're willing to give into because of the joys it provides. As you note, Tom/Voldy apparently saw [yes, understandably] power as the more important "virtue" and chose to ignore love. It's all just my $.02, really, but I do think the two quotes from JKR are helpful in understanding her view of Tom as having or not having choice. Siriusly Snapey Susan From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 20:52:22 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 20:52:22 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110496 I, Del, wrote : "he was going to be hated and despised because of the path Slytherin's legacy had put him on." SSSusan replied : "So why didn't he *choose* to deny that? He did not *have* to follow Slytherin's path." Del answers : Deny it in exchange for *what* ??? Tom was the epitome of the Nobody when he arrived at Hogwarts. He had no family, no home, no history. All he had was a name. He had no *identity*. And then suddenly he discovers that he is Someone. Not just anyone, but the Heir of the legendary Slytherin himself !! This is like offering food to a starved person : they won't say no, even if the food tastes a bit weird. Moreover, Tom himself had no problem with Slytherin's path : Slytherin's values already coincided very much with his own. A lust for power and recognition, a disdain of morality, a hatred of Muggles : Tom already had all of those, more or less developed. He knew many *other people* had a problem with those values, but he'd never cared before, so why should he start caring now ? Tom's path to follow Slytherin might not have been predetermined, but the temptation was too overwhelming for a severely unbalanced teenager : alone, he had no chance of making the right decision and choosing to go back to being Nobody. SSSusan wrote : "He **couldn't** summon enough hatred to Crucio Bella, which again speaks to his fighting impulses very well--even better than he wants to at the moment, I would say." Del replies : I disagree. His Crucio didn't work, but Harry did try it. He failed at controlling his impulse to use an Unforgivable. If we get in a fight and I get the impulse to stab you *and I try to do it*, you're not going to consider it irrelevant, even if I fail at hurting you. You're going to make it very clear that you expect me to control my impulses better than that. Harry was mad and hurting, and he got that impulse to use a curse he knew was strictly forbidden, to try and make Bella hurt as much as he did. He couldn't control that impulse and Cruciod Bella. Now imagine someone who would be hurting emotionally as much as Harry *most of the time*. Imagine a raging psychopath, someone who is constantly full of rage and hatred, someone who cannot find any solace in any loving feeling because they cannot feel love, someone who honestly believe that the only person that counts is themselves and who couldn't care less about others' feelings because they cannot in any way relate to others or feel compassion. Do you *really* expect such a person to control their impulses for the sake of others ? I don't. As someone else explained it, the *only* reason they might control their impulses is their *own* sake. SSSusan wrote : "if Tom was able to act the part of law-abiding citizen, responsible young adult, so well as to attain Prefect & HB status, then he DOES understand right vs. wrong!! He is choosing to do what he wants; he isn't fighting those "id" impulses at all. And I think, given that it was quite some time before he discovered the Heir of Slytherin stuff, that there was ample time for some of this Superego & Ego stuff to have developed. I can't prove it, but my belief is that DD did show a great interest in Tom and tried to help him along." Del replies : I couldn't disagree more with your first sentence. Tom was able to act the part of the good kid because he was intelligent, not because of any moral belief. Dogs can be trained to bring a stick back just by giving them food when they do it, but they never grasp the concept of being a good obedient dog : they do it to satisfy their own greed, not because of any kind of morality. Similarly, Tom discovered that acting in certain ways brought interesting responses from people, so he acted that way. Being a Prefect would be interesting in his quest for the Chamber of Secrets, so he made sure he acted the part of the good student in order to be made Prefect. But that doesn't mean he ever grasped the concept of being a good person. He did it to serve his own selfish interest, not because he believed he should be a good person. It was always "I, I, I" all along. And as soon as he was able to get away from his role of the good student, he did it : he left the known WW right after graduation. He'd taken all he could out of the official WW, and now he was going to look for what he was missing in the underground WW. Look at it this way : an actor doesn't have to live his character's life in order to portray him with credibility. An actor doesn't have to *think* like a psychopath to act the part of a psychopath. Otherwise, I'd be worried for whoever crosses the path of Anthony Hopkins, for example... I agree that DD might have tried to help him. But Tom would have resented this help very much, both because he was a teenager (even Harry refuses DD's help more often than not) and because he was a psychopath. DD's talk of love and relationships (or whatever) would have made no sense to Tom. And please Susan, don't get into troubles at your workplace because of this discussion ! It's not worth it !! Del From sarita.rosen at verizon.net Wed Aug 18 15:31:33 2004 From: sarita.rosen at verizon.net (Sarita Rosen) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 15:31:33 -0000 Subject: Apparation and Sirius' vault In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110497 > > HunterGreen: > > If it was just a two-way portkey, why didn't it bring Harry back to > > the center of the maze? > "Grey Wolf" : > > In fact, when you think about it, there is no canon for two-way > portkeys anyway. Looking it over, we have seen a few uses of portkeys > in the books, but none that were used to go to a place and then be > returned to the starting position (do excuse me if I am wrong - my > canon is very rusty). The closest things I can think of are the Cup, > which led Harry to a close by place, but not the same, and the portkeys > used to go and return from the QWC - which unfortunately were two > different portkeys. Then we have Hagrid's probable use of a couple of > them in PS (that we never get to see, so it could've been kestrels or > other spells) and a few others scattered here and there that, > nonetheless, don't appear to be two-wayed. > > Hope that helps, If I remember correctly, James tells Harry to go back to the portkey. Could he have turned it into a portkey even though he's not alive? Sarita From rhinobabies at hotmail.com Wed Aug 18 15:35:53 2004 From: rhinobabies at hotmail.com (coderaspberry77) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 15:35:53 -0000 Subject: Apparation and Sirius' vault In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110498 > HunterGreen: > But then why did the portkey return Harry to Hogwarts? While that > quote seems to suggest that Barty changed the cup into a portkey, > there's another that suggests that it was one already: > If it was just a two-way portkey, why didn't it bring Harry back to > the center of the maze? Well, there's a theory that Crouch turned the cup into a Portkey that would first go to the Graveyard, then back to Hogwarts - so that the DEs could launch a surprise attack, right then and there. That'd make outside the maze a good place, since starting an assault inside a maze is, frankly, the stupidest tactic ever. I don't buy that theory, because I don't think LV was quite ready to start a war just then and there. So, then the question becomes "Why did Crouch make the portkey two-way in the first place?" Is there no option to make it a one-way, like a common plane ticket? Somehow I doubt that, so then why make it two way, and risk Harry just grabbing it again and getting back to the school before Wormtail could grab him? Maybe someone was going to come back as Polyjuiced!Harry? Crazy theory, but hey, they already had one impostor inside Hogwarts - why not have another with close, personal access to Dumbledore? Now THAT would be a good way to take him out when he least expected it. That'd still make the two-way Portkey a risk, but I think it'd be one LV was willing to take. As for why it ended up outside the maze - well, that's a good indication that the cup was meant to work that way all along - otherwise, wouldn't the champion, once getting the cup, have to make their way back OUT of the maze as well? That seems like overkill, and no mention of it is made when the rules are laid out. In short (after explaining it all in rather LONG), I agree that Crouch added a stop - he was supposed to make it a Portkey (maybe it was his own suggestion, even, and the judges liked it), but just made it go somewhere ELSE first, with the intent of returning another impostor to Hogwarts to spy on/assassinate Dumbledore. Or maybe just returning Harry's body to gloat. Whatever. coderaspberry From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Aug 18 21:05:41 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 21:05:41 -0000 Subject: Easy vs Right (was LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110499 > Alla: But I would like to know where do you get that Snape considers rage to be a weakness? I may be wrong, but I thought that in his Occlumency rant he only mentioned positive emotions as weakness. > The whole passage starting on page 535 US hardcover is too long to quote but Harry's anger is mentioned numerous times: ==== "I'm trying," said Harry angrily, "but you're not telling me how!" [...] "Clear your mind, Potter," said Snape's cold voice. "Let go of all emotion...." But Harry's anger at Snape continued to pound through his veins like venom. Let go of his anger? He could as easily detach his legs.... [...] Snape looked paler than usual and angrier, though not nearly as angry as Harry was. "I--am--making--an--effort," [Harry] said through clenched teeth. "I told you to empty yourself of emotion!" "Yeah? Well, I'm finding that hard to do at the moment, " Harry snarled. [Snape rant about fools who wallow in sad memories] "I am not weak," said Harry in a low voice, fury now pumping through him so that he thought he might attack Snape in a moment. "Then prove it! Master yourself!" spat Snape. "Control your anger, discipline your mind! [...]" === IMO, Snape definitely considers anger a weakness, and wallowing in sadness a mistake when it provokes anger. The passage also emphasizes that letting go of anger is not easy. The phrase " he could as easily detach his legs" might reference the Christian teaching "if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off " Matthew 18:18 Pippin From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 21:07:46 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 21:07:46 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110500 Alla wrote : "Voldemort is long passed the stage where he cannot be hold accountable for non-conforming to the morality system he does not believe in, are we agreeing on this one, Del?" Del replies : Yes and no. He can be held accountable for not respecting the *law* of his country, but not for not believing in the same right and wrong as most other people do. For example, he can be judged for killing Muggles, because this is forbidden by law. But he cannot be judged for *believing* that Muggles should all be killed. Alla wrote : "Tom has it backwards. Love is not weakness, affection is not weakness. Unfortunately nobody taught him that" Del replies : Exactly !! Tom has got it completely backwards, so how can we expect him to go forward ? From his point of view, we're asking him to go backwards, which of course doesn't make any sense. Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 21:07:29 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 21:07:29 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110501 > SSSusan wrote : > "He **couldn't** summon enough hatred to Crucio Bella, which again > speaks to his fighting impulses very well--even better than he wants > to at the moment, I would say." Alla: Exactly, Susan. > Del replies : > I disagree. His Crucio didn't work, but Harry did try it. He failed at > controlling his impulse to use an Unforgivable. If we get in a fight > and I get the impulse to stab you *and I try to do it*, you're not > going to consider it irrelevant, even if I fail at hurting you. You're > going to make it very clear that you expect me to control my impulses > better than that. Alla: Actually, Del, I hope never to get into fight with you :o), but I won't expect you to control your impulses when your loved one was just killed in front of you. (May such thing never ever happen to you). I will not even expect even Tom to do so at the heat of the moment. I expect him to control his rages when he calmed down. And yes, I agree with Susan the fact that Harry did not have enough hate even at such moment to crucio Bella speaks volumes to me. His Crucio did not work for a reason, you know, not by accident. Del: Imagine a raging psychopath, someone who is constantly full of > rage and hatred, someone who cannot find any solace in any loving > feeling because they cannot feel love, someone who honestly believe > that the only person that counts is themselves and who couldn't care > less about others' feelings because they cannot in any way relate to > others or feel compassion. Alla: Well, such person as you describe should be put into psychiatric clinic and never EVER allowed to leave it, IMO. Of course such person cannot control anything. From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com Wed Aug 18 21:09:32 2004 From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 21:09:32 -0000 Subject: Apparation and Sirius' vault In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110502 Sarita Rosen wrote: > If I remember correctly, James tells Harry to go back to the portkey. > C= ould he have turned it into a portkey even though he's not alive? > > Sarita This was seriously considered way back. In absense of canon, there really is very little we can say about how those soul images knew the cup was still a portkey. Let me see if I can remember the posibilities: ? The soul image creates the portkey: this is rather unlikely, unfortunately, since if ghosts have little power, how could a soul image have the kind of power that a portkey requires? Also, notice the Crouch Jr. had to take the cup himself to cast the spell that turned it/added the extra stop - he couldn't do it from a distance. By all accounts, the final duel and gold cage where quite far from the cup. If those ghosts had so much power, they could've blasted Voldemort into smitherins, instead of just holding him back. On the other hand, they did seem to have enough power to do just that, so they weren't completely devoid of power. Hows and whys abound here. ? Crouch Jr. added two stops: the most pressing question here is "why?". While the original theory, due to his own confession in the books, it does lack weight in the light of reasoning. I do remember that originally MD was a proponent of this, and Pip herself explained it away through Voldemort's fear of Harry, not wanting to turn the GG (Graveyard Gathering) into a "to death" fight if it turned out that he was incapable of destroying Harry. By having the way back, if Voldemort realised that destroying Harry wouldn't be that easy, he could heard him to the portkey with the help of the DE. MD has since abandoned this hypothesis, though, IIRC (excuse me, it *has* been over a year - I'll try to dig up my notes, but can't promise anything). The ghost could know about this due to some kind of psychic connection between the wand and wand user - thus anything Voldemort knew the ghost would know, sort of. ? Crouch Jr. added one stop on top of the original: I explained the reasons for this in my previous post - it's more logical, given the destination of the second jump, etc but does present a problem of how the ghosts would know. Maybe being magical energy creatures (rather than real ghosts, this are the result of the brother wands effect) they can tell that the cup is still magically charged and, since it was a portkey to start with, that would mean it would still have a jump left. Or something. I won't lie to you - there simply isn't enough canon to decide. As far as I can see, this are really the three main options. Beyond that, it's up to everyone to choose. I prefer the third one, but since MD works with both second and third (and probably could be spinned to work with the first, but we haven't botheres), it is really of little relevance. Hope that helps, Grey Wolf, who wishes to remind anyone wondering what "MD" might be that they can look up for a short description in Fantastical Posts From claphamsubwarden at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 17:19:10 2004 From: claphamsubwarden at yahoo.com (Chris) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 17:19:10 -0000 Subject: How old were Lily and James? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110503 Hey everyone! I was just writing the prologue to my next fanfic and I realized that I could not remember any canon concerning Lily and James' ages. Now I have been long in the belief that they were 21 when they died and I am now not sure why. Although Barb's fanfic may have something to do with it, I am sure I thought they were that young before I ever read the PS Trilogy as I remember thinking that the actors in the PS/SS film were too old. Am I wrong with 21 or if I am right, where is the canon for it? I also realized from chapter one of PS/SS that the Potter's were obviously well liked, especially with the Weasley parents and Hagrid that I am now not so sure. Someone please put me out of my misery!! ChrisT Schnoogle ID: C.J.Tebb http://groups.yahoo.com/group/merlin_legacy From claphamsubwarden at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 17:38:46 2004 From: claphamsubwarden at yahoo.com (Chris) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 17:38:46 -0000 Subject: Petunia not a squib but... In-Reply-To: <1E151264-F114-11D8-AC56-000393BA8C1A@glue.umd.edu> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110504 Maria wrote: "Part 2 - Petunia is a Mib. This might explain why JK Rowling said that Petunia is not a Squib but... If Squibs are rare, Mibs are even rarer. They are basically Muggles. She would have lived completely unaware of magic if it wasn't because her sister was fully magical. It gives her a big reason to be bitter at Lily. Also explains why she knows about Dementors... she could have seen them, not only heard about them." I did not know that JKR had said anything about this subject but it does cloud the issue even more. It also brings back to light a question I had about Muggleborns, which I have raised once already. Why was Lily a witch and not Petunia? I think most people believe Lily to be the younger sister and so why is Petunia not a witch? I thought it might have something to do with belief but Petunia would have known that magic was possible once Lily was accepted to HSWW yet Harry does not and still manages to perform wandless magic, i think Petunia's hatred of magic came from the fact that she was not able to attend HSWW (not every wizard/witch must otherwise the wizarding population must be really small but that is another controversial topic) This would make he a witch of the same social/ability standing of Stan Shunpike or Tom perhaps? These two whilst obviously part of the magical world have obvious skills that do not tally with most HSWW pupils. Tom's memory or Stan's sense of direction(this is a guess). Petunia is obviously very good at cleaning and eavesdropping and becasue the books only focus on what Harry sees and hears, she could probably keep it a secret. It is a shame that she was not around to see the Dementors otherwise we might no one way or the other. ChrisT From slgazit at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 18 21:15:40 2004 From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 21:15:40 -0000 Subject: "A" Teacher's Personality WAS: Lovely Snape In-Reply-To: <20040818120048.8274.qmail@web12210.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110505 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, An'nai Jiriki wrote: > It is also possible that DD (who I believe is ESE) > gave Snape the power, however directly or indirectly, > to abuse his classes like that. JKR once said that DD (who I don't believe is ESE) wants the students to experience different kinds of teachers, including unpleasant ones, and that that is one of the many reasons he keeps Snape. Sorry I don't remember where she said it. > We also don't know if > it is only Harry's class: > > Example: In PS/SS, when Percy tells Harry about Snape, > he never says anything about his personality, only > that he is into Dark Arts. Regarding the above example, in PS/SS Ron also tells Harry that Snape "always" takes off points from the twins (well, this may be understandable... :-)). We know that he tends to favor the Slytherins in the classes that Harry attends (ignores infractions, inflates grades - e.g. Goyle) and is very mean to at least two Gryffindor students (Harry and Neville) and occasionally to Hermione, despite her being an exceptional student. Of course, he also shows clear favoritism towards a Slytheron student (Malfoy). In the Quidditch match he judged (in SS/PS) he gave unfair penalties to Gryffindor as well. So there is plenty of circumstantial evidence here to show a pattern of bias against Gryffindor students, not just Harry. > Also, I do believe that Harry saw an abnormal amount > of inspections during Umbridge's reign. It could be > passed off as she was inspecting NEWT classes, or she > was after Harry, but I do not think this is the case. > I think she inspected every year and Harry saw some of > the first inspections (McGonnagal & Trelawney). Umbridge's task was to get rid of teachers who were appointed by/loyal to DD and replace them (using the regulation based on which she was appointed that allowed the ministry to appoint teachers) by teachers loyal to herself and Fudge. For that reason she was livid when DD appointed a divination teacher himself after she fired Trelawny. Another goal was to get Harry expelled. She began by setting off the dementors on him, then serving on the tribunal in his hearing, and later on by deliberately provoking him and monitoring all his actions (e.g. mail, Hogsmead meeting, etc.). All of that (with the possible exception of the dementors) was almost certainly on Fudge's orders. > As evil as Umbridge was, I do not think she would have > let a bad of a teacher as Snape is to Harry > continuously harass the students in every class. It > would be devastating to the Ministry she is so > attached to; no potion lovers exiting Hogwarts, no > potion masters/experts entering the Ministry. This > case would be a selfish 'saving our own neck' > scenario. I don't think that academic accomplishments mattered to her at all, otherwise she would have made an effort to teach the students something worthwhile in her own classes... Salit From baphythegoat at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 17:54:16 2004 From: baphythegoat at yahoo.com (baphythegoat) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 17:54:16 -0000 Subject: Petunia not a squib but... In-Reply-To: <1E151264-F114-11D8-AC56-000393BA8C1A@glue.umd.edu> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110506 Maria: > Petunia is not a Squib but... If Squibs are rare, Mibs are even > rarer. HA HA! I love the "mib" concept! Yeah, Petunia COULD have just enough juice in her to see dementors and so on, but not enough to do magic. What if she and Lily were adopted? Hmmm? I wonder if a scant few magical people reject the Wizarding World outright... Hmm... Have you ever noticed that even "muggle lovers" like Arthur Weasely don't really go out of their way to socialize with them? I know there are all the laws in relation to secrecy, but do any of them expressly say that a Wizard cannot socialize with a muggle with non-magical offspring on muggle turf.... Baphy From phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk Wed Aug 18 16:42:49 2004 From: phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk (Kate Harding) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 17:42:49 +0100 Subject: Draco's nature In-Reply-To: References: <6.1.2.0.0.20040818094710.01c15088@pop3.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040818173657.01c7b5c0@pop3.demon.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 110507 SSSusan: I think you may have reversed 2 & 3 in your explanation here? That is, it's 2 that shows she's a snob and 3 that might be more promising? If I've got that right--well, whatever, for the "she wants him close" item--it seems at least as fair an assumption that it means she loves him as that she merely wants to control him. It's definitely not a "given" that it's evidence Draco isn't loved. Now psyche: You're quite right, I did indeed reverse 2 & 3! Should have proof read more carefully. You're also right that the above isn't evidence that she doesn't love him. My point was that it's not evidence that she does. Stalemate at best on no.3! (it is 3 this time, isn't it?) SSSusan: Yes, your assumptions about life w/ the Malfoys is exactly what I speculated originally--that Draco is frightened of his father yet spoiled by them both. And I may be walking a fine line here, but I wasn't looking for whether or not Draco had been shown "healthy parental love"; I just said I wanted to see, in canon, where we can see that Draco's life has been "loveless." It still seems a big leap, to me, to say he's not been loved. Now psyche: Fair dos. It seems we have different definitions of love, and there's not much further we can go given that. However, in defence of my view I would like to offer this quote from Jo, which I noticed in caesian's excellent post about Petunia's secret: 16 November 2000 Dateline Harry Pottermania in Vancouver, with J.K. Rowling `I like torturing them,` said Rowling. `You should keep an eye on Dudley. It's probably too late for Aunt Petunia and Uncle Vernon. I feel sorry for Dudley. I might joke about him, but I feel truly sorry for him because I see him as just as abused as Harry. Though, in possibly a less obvious way. What they are doing to him is inept, really. I think children recognize that. Poor Dudley. He's not being prepared for the world at all, in any reasonable or compassionate way, so I feel sorry for him. But there's something funny about him, also. The pig's tail was irresistible.` I agree with Jo: that kind of doting is more abuse than love. psyche ---------- --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.726 / Virus Database: 481 - Release Date: 22/07/2004 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk Wed Aug 18 17:12:16 2004 From: phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk (Kate Harding) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 18:12:16 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Draco and Lucius In-Reply-To: References: <6.1.2.0.0.20040818094710.01c15088@pop3.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040818174319.01ca7988@pop3.demon.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 110508 Thanks, Geoff, for reposting that discussion - I found it really fascinating. Thoughts follow. Geoff: He obviously wanted, for some reason or another, to befriend Harry right at the beginning but managed to mess this up in no uncertain terms because of his arrogant approach and that has coloured their relationship ever since. I've known people who have wanted to make friends with someone who hasn't responded and it can produce all sorts of mixed reactions which leads me to my next thought.. psyche: I completely agree. My interpretation was that Draco has been so cruel to Harry largely because of this incident - because it really kicked him where it hurts (for Draco). My impression of Draco is that he has no sense of self worth beyond what others say about him - the result of conflicting messages and lack of real affirmation from his parents. In his mind, he's only as valuable as Lucius (in particular, but insert other names here) thinks. His pride is overblown because of this, and he would naturally take rejection unusually badly. I think he genuinely wanted to befriend Harry: partly because he thinks that as a Malfoy, the most famous kid in the world should naturally be his best friend, and partly because Harry's friendship would make him feel valuable. He just hadn't grasped that Malfoy-stylee sneering wasn't the best way to make friends, most of the time. It seems to me that he's not equipped to deal with the pain of rejection, so tried to convince himself and everyone else that it wasn't a rejection, because Potter's not worthy of his friendship anyway. I'm waffling now, I think, and perhaps I've read too much Draco/Harry slash. Berit: On pages 749-751 (British Version) Harry bumps into Draco in the Entrance Hall. To me this little incident describes a "new" Draco, a much more dangerous Draco. But the most significant sign of Draco's change of attitude is the way he talks about his father. In the previous books he has always referred to him using the more formal "Father", but now he even calls him "Dad". Now, that's significant if you ask me :-) My two knuts: Harry's in deep trouble. Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus... psyche: Wow. That's really interesting. I hadn't noticed the use of 'dad'. It sounds part 'this time it's personal' and part 'I want my daddy' - an interesting combination. I guess the removal of Lucius from the picture could both force Draco to take an adult role, try to fill the gap in the family, if you like, and perhaps reveal some of what he really thinks and feels instead of the Malfoy party line, which I would love to see. This scene gave me hope that we might get something more interesting out of Draco than mudslinging and cringing, and now I'm even more hopeful. Up until now, all Harry's significant enemies have been adults, and very mighty ones at that. Draco has been way under the radar. I would love to see him go on to be a real factor in Harry's life, instead of the mosquito-level annoyance he has been a lot of the time. psyche ---------- --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.726 / Virus Database: 481 - Release Date: 22/07/2004 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From melaniertay at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 18:54:10 2004 From: melaniertay at yahoo.com (Mel) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 18:54:10 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110509 > Jim adds: >> The fries analogy is too simple. Devoid of any other stimulus, the > choice is 95 percent clear. I agree. The analogy shows there's something else to eat WAY across the street. This is highly unlikely and eventually impossible. A child will have seen ice cream, by a certain age. You don't have to tell them they'll like it: they know they will. Tom Riddle had a horrible childhood and we should feel sorry for that. He has never loved anyone, that is also sad. I believe it is possible to have never loved. These events along with a genetic predisposition to mental illness probably created some of what he is today. The question is now, is that an excuse? At what point does someone become dispicable, irregardless? Tom Riddle never loved, that doesn't mean he's incapable of realizing that other people do. As a matter of fact, he probably used this weekness against other people (as Dumbledore states). He has an intellectual idea of what it is and has chosen not to even attempt to get to know the feeling more personally. (whether or not he would have failed is unknown). Tom Riddle was also well aware of the laws and strictures of his society and then chose to go out and kill his own family. At this point he made a choice to make the standard "weak" person (in his mind) turn against him. He knew that would happen and he did it anyway. I believe that was the choice. Had he loved he wouldn't have made it, but it's irrelevent that he didn't love. The decision was still made and the choice still matters. Mel From tonks_op at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 19:49:55 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 19:49:55 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110510 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Grey Wolf" wrote: (snip)... When JKR says that LV has never loved anyone, we all assume (correctly, > IMNSHO) she means love for someone other than himself. After all, > although we use the word "love" when we talk about someone loving only > himself, it is a slightly different kind of love - but in fact quite > the opposite, since the love for other people usually involves > selflessness, love for oneself involves selfishness. However, she > *didn't* specify that "but himself" bit, which (knowing JKR, and > knowing this group, particularly our flying hedgehog section), could be > taken as a hidden clue. Conclussion: JKR's statement, I feel, doesn't > specify if Voldemort loves himself or not. Usually, her statement is > taken to mean that he only loved himself, but in a broader sense, she > could've meant he didn't even love himself....(snip) > > Grey Wolf --------------------------- reply to Grey Wolf: If Tom Riddle/LV is the extreme example of the consequences of a unloving childhood, and I think that he is, then if he was never loved, he can not love anyone, not even himself. Grandiosity is not self love. Tonks_op From tonks_op at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 19:14:19 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 19:14:19 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110511 >Susan said in response to Del: > (snip)...And I don't think you & I will ever agree on this. Whether JKR > meant "never" as in Tom's whole life, from birth 'til now, OR since > he became a cognizant individual, is one big difference we're working > from. Also, no matter what I say, I don't think you're going to > believe that a child who was SHOWN no love will be able to in turn > SHOW love. I, on the other hand, believe that it is possible *and* > that JKR clearly expects him to have done so--or at LEAST to have > chosen the difficult, "good" choices over the ones he did choose. > In other words, was Tom "immoral" because he couldn't help himself, > or was he "immoral" because he CHOSE not to buy into the prevailing > system of morality. *I* think JKR's leaning towards that > interpretation, along w/ his CHOOSING not to give in to > the "weakness" that he considered love to be. > > His background, as I've said before, makes these choices more > understandable, but I hold to the idea of a greater ability to choose > in Tom than you do. And I think we'll never agree on the details > because we don't agree on that base. ----------------------------- Tonks_op responds to both: I agree with Del. As I said before, Tom does not have the ability to love because of his early childhood. And if you do not have an ability no amount of wishing or choosing will make it so. But here is an additional thought.. As some have said there is a difference between Tom and Voldemort. Tom became Voldemort of his own choice. We can understand, given his background, why that would be such an easy choice. So does that mean that Tom/LV is doomed forever? I would like to think that there is a "deeper magic" that is there within each of us before our birth that will enable us, on a cosmic level, perhaps at our death, to overcome whatever hell we had in our earthly life. And maybe for Tom, it is not hopeless.. I do hope that this is true.. although it is like asking "can the devil be redeemed". Tonks_op From ctcasares at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 18 20:11:47 2004 From: ctcasares at sbcglobal.net (tylerswaxlion) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 20:11:47 -0000 Subject: Draco's nature, LV's abiliity to love, Dudders and Harry, etc. (long) In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040818094710.01c15088@pop3.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110512 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kate Harding >He is missing all the signs of a child who has received healthy >parental love. Instead I get the impression of a child who has been >alternately spoilt and blamed, until he has no idea which way is >morally up. >psyche I think the whole issue of love is far more complex than all these threads seem to imply. While I agree that Draco, Dudley and Tom Riddle have never experienced a "healthy" parental love, I doubt that the parents in question would agree. People who have had abusive relationships with their parents don't tend to have healthy relationships with their own children. Abuse, physical and emotional, continues generation to generation. But that doesn't mean that the abusers don't love their children or believe that they love them. They just don't know how to show it. I think Narcissa and Lucius believe they love Draco. They've probably never *thought* about it. If questioned, they'd probably be offended, b/c of course they love their son. But just as they've never questioned their love, they've never questioned their actions. Lucius is cold. He's not a touchy-feely parent. That doesn't mean he's a bad parent (although I don't think he's a great one) or that he doesn't love Draco. He humiliates Draco in front of strangers, but he may really feel that being "tough on the boy" and embarrassing him may cause him to "fly straight" and work harder. Bad strategy? Probably Loveless? Not necessarily. It's even clearer with Dudley. Vernon is so thrilled that Dudders is going to Smeltings. Petunia would have a fit if anyone suggested she didn't love her Duddy-kins. They are awful people and rotten parents, but *in their way* they love Dudley. Now poor Tom Riddle, I always imagine him like Oliver Twist--mom shows up outside the workhouse/orphanage, lives long enough to give him his name, then dies. Tom's then raised by a rotating staff that don't ever give him any love--they are completely indifferent. Riddle really *doesn't* experience love at all, and by the time he's old enough to earn the respect of teachers in the Muggle-world or impress wizards at Hogwarts, he no longer has the ability to recognize love. He sees it as an illogical, exploitable weakness. He values loyalty in his DEs, but he doesn't understand it, nor does he feel it for them--that's why he tortures them. He understands fear and self-preservation. Experiencing and understanding love, even in a twisted, disfuncitonal manner, makes Draco and Dudley capable of redemption (though I doubt they will ever take those steps.) Now Harry has experienced "true love"--selfless, self-sacrificing love. His parents died to save him. His godfather broke out of Azkaban to save him and died trying to save him. His best friends have willingly risked their lives for him again and again. They act not only out of fear, or self-preservation, but also (and sometimes *only*) to protect Harry. Dumbledore admits his "mistake" of not revealing all he knew to Harry was due to his love and wanting to protect Harry from more emotional pain for just a little while longer--disfunctional love here, but love nonetheless. Most importantly, Harry recognizes this unconditional love. And he returns it. He tries to downplay his scar hurting in GoF to protect Sirius. He refuses to open the package with the 2-way mirror to protect Sirius Though, ironically, if he'd discovered the mirror earlier, he *would* have protected Sirius--he wouldn't have needed to contact him through Umbridge's fire and wouldn't have been deceived by Kreacher. I believe learning to accept others self-sacrificing love will play a crucial part in the next 2 books. My mom's always said that hate is not the opposite of love, indifference is. When you hate someone, you still care--you care quite a bit. No one cared for Tom Riddle, and he grew into Voldemort, who cares for no one. "tylerswaxlion" From ctcasares at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 18 21:20:54 2004 From: ctcasares at sbcglobal.net (tylerswaxlion) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 21:20:54 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110513 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > SSSusan wrote : > > "it happened because Harry WANTED to make friends; he was OPEN to > > exchanging affection. He did not see affection as a weakness. I > > think you believe Tom was *incapable* of such openness, but I > > don't agree. " snip > But much of what we all learn--including language acquisition--is > done through *modeling*. There *IS* an age at which learning in > general, languages in particular, is quicker: in childhood. But > one can learn at any age, and modeling is one of the chief ways of > doing so. Actually, when it comes to language, there is only a specific period of time when you can learn it. If a child has never been spoken to in early childhood, that child will never learn to speak at all--any language. http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Papers/Py104/pinker.langacq.html "The chapter by Newport and Gleitman shows how sheer age seems to play an important role. Successful acquisition of language typically happens by 4 (as we shall see in the next section), is guaranteed for children up to the age of six, is steadily compromised from then until shortly after puberty, and is rare thereafter. Maturational changes in the brain, such as the decline in metabolic rate and number of neurons during the early school age years, and the bottoming out of the number of synapses and metabolic rate around puberty, are plausible causes. Thus, there may be a neurologically- determined "critical period" for successful language acquisition, analogous to the critical periods documented in visual development in mammals and in the acquisition of songs by some birds." It happens with songbirds as well. If a bird isn't taught it's native "song" in a specific time period, it will NEVER be able to sing the "correct" song. So while you can learn an additional language at any age, albeit with difficulty, if you haven't learned the *concept* of language in infancy/early childhood, you never will. The infant and child Tom Riddle was capable of love. The adult--and probably the teen--Voldemort is not. Tyler's Lion From candlekicks at yahoo.ca Wed Aug 18 16:34:28 2004 From: candlekicks at yahoo.ca (candlekicks) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 16:34:28 -0000 Subject: Apparation and Sirius' vault In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110514 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Grey Wolf" wrote: > > HunterGreen: > > If it was just a two-way portkey, why didn't it bring Harry back to > > the center of the maze? > > In fact, when you think about it, there is no canon for two-way > portkeys anyway. Looking it over, we have seen a few uses of portkeys > in the books, but none that were used to go to a place and then be > returned to the starting position (do excuse me if I am wrong - my > canon is very rusty). The closest things I can think of are the Cup, > which led Harry to a close by place, but not the same, and the portkeys > used to go and return from the QWC - which unfortunately were two > different portkeys. Then we have Hagrid's probable use of a couple of > them in PS (that we never get to see, so it could've been kestrels or > other spells) and a few others scattered here and there that, > nonetheless, don't appear to be two-wayed. > > Hope that helps, > > Grey Wolf Linda: What do you think of the theory that the cup being made a portkey to return Harry to school occurred after the priori incantatem? Perhaps it was Fawkes or James or Lily that made it a portkey home... Lily tells him that it will take him home and that they can give him a few seconds to get to the cup to escape, there isn't any indication before she says this that Harry has any way to get home at all. This solution solves the problem with having two destinations on a portkey, which doesn't seem plausible. When the Weasley's went to the Quiddich World Cup, the portkey was thrown away into a pile when they got there with other used portkeys. When they wanted to leave, they had to wait to have another portkey made for them to return. If having two destinations were possible, why not have the return trip already on the portkey to allow less congestion after the World Cup? Linda From skater314159 at yahoo.co.uk Wed Aug 18 20:31:00 2004 From: skater314159 at yahoo.co.uk (Megan) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 20:31:00 -0000 Subject: The book 6 Excerpt... -- Crookshanks? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110515 I was wondering when I was reading it at the site (and I've visited the site in German (Deutsch) and the sign was still there!) I thought of Crookshanks! Could this be another of the Scabbers/Pettigrew incidents? I know Crookshanks is part Kneazle - but could it be that someone is turning into a Kneazle/Cat? "Megan" From ctcasares at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 18 16:07:33 2004 From: ctcasares at sbcglobal.net (tylerswaxlion) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 16:07:33 -0000 Subject: Draco's nature, LV's abiliity to love, Dudders and Harry, etc. (long) In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040818094710.01c15088@pop3.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110516 Kate Harding >He is missing all the signs of a child who has received healthy >parental love. Instead I get the impression of a child who has been >alternately spoilt and blamed, until he has no idea which way is >morally up. >psyche I think the whole issue of love is far more complex than all these threads seem to imply. While I agree that Draco, Dudley and Tom Riddle have never experienced a "healthy" parental love, I doubt that the parents in question would agree. People who have had abusive relationships with their parents don't tend to have healthy relationships with their own children. Abuse, physical and emotional, continues generation to generation. But that doesn't mean that the abusers don't love their children or believe that they love them. They just don't know how to show it. I think Narcissa and Lucius believe they love Draco. They've probably never *thought* about it. If questioned, they'd probably be offended, b/c of course they love their son. But just as they've never questioned their love, they've never questioned their actions. Lucius is cold. He's not a touchy-feely parent. That doesn't mean he's a bad parent (although I don't think he's a great one) or that he doesn't love Draco. He humiliates Draco in front of strangers, but he may really feel that being "tough on the boy" and embarrassing him may cause him to "fly straight" and work harder. Bad strategy? Probably Loveless? Not necessarily. It's even clearer with Dudley. Vernon is so thrilled that Dudders is going to Smeltings. Petunia would have a fit if anyone suggested she didn't love her Duddy-kins. They are awful people and rotten parents, but *in their way* they love Dudley. Now poor Tom Riddle, I always imagine him like Oliver Twist--mom shows up outside the workhouse/orphanage, lives long enough to give him his name, then dies. Tom's then raised by a rotating staff that don't ever give him any love--they are completely indifferent. Riddle really *doesn't* experience love at all, and by the time he's old enough to earn the respect of teachers in the Muggle-world or impress wizards at Hogwarts, he no longer has the ability to recognize love. He sees it as an illogical, exploitable weakness. He values loyalty in his DEs, but he doesn't understand it, nor does he feel it for them--that's why he tortures them. He understands fear and self-preservation. Experiencing and understanding love, even in a twisted, disfunctional manner, makes Draco and Dudley capable of redemption (though I doubt they will ever take those steps.) Now Harry has experienced "true love"--selfless, self-sacrificing love. His parents died to save him. His godfather broke out of Azkaban to save him and died trying to save him. His best friends have willingly risked their lives for him again and again. They act not only out of fear, or self-preservation, but also (and sometimes *only*) to protect Harry. Dumbledore admits his "mistake" of not revealing all he knew to Harry was due to his love and wanting to protect Harry from more emotional pain for just a little while longer--disfunctional love here, but love nonetheless. Most importantly, Harry recognizes this unconditional love. And he returns it. He tries to downplay his scar hurting in GoF to protect Sirius. He refuses to open the package with the 2-way mirror to protect Sirius Though, ironically, if he'd discovered the mirror earlier, he *would* have protected Sirius--he wouldn't have needed to contact him through Umbridge's fire and wouldn't have been deceived by Kreacher. I believe learning to accept others self-sacrificing love will play a crucial part in the next 2 books. My mom's always said that hate is not the opposite of love, indifference is. When you hate someone, you still care--you care quite a bit. No one cared for Tom Riddle, and he grew into Voldemort, who cares for no one. tylerswaxlion From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 18 21:53:38 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 21:53:38 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110517 SSSusan earlier : > "So why didn't he *choose* to deny that? He did not *have* to > follow Slytherin's path." Del answers : > Deny it in exchange for *what* ??? > Tom was the epitome of the Nobody when he arrived at Hogwarts. He > had no family, no home, no history. All he had was a name. He had > no *identity*. And then suddenly he discovers that he is Someone. > Not just anyone, but the Heir of the legendary Slytherin > himself !! SSSusan: He's also learning that he could be Someone in the context of "normal Hogwarts school life" too. A respected student, a leader. There's power in THAT, too. Del: > Now imagine someone who would be hurting emotionally as much as > Harry *most of the time*. SSSusan: But, see, at the point of entry to Hogwarts, I think Harry WAS hurting most of the time. He had no memory of his parents at that time; he had no input about what they were like. The Dursleys hated & resented him, treated him like a servant or worse. He WAS hurting most of the time. SSSusan earlier: > "if Tom was able to act the part of law-abiding citizen, > responsible young adult, so well as to attain Prefect & HB status, > then he DOES understand right vs. wrong!! He is choosing to do > what he wants; he isn't fighting those "id" impulses at all. Del replied : > I couldn't disagree more with your first sentence. Tom was able to > act the part of the good kid because he was intelligent, not > because of any moral belief. ... > Look at it this way : an actor doesn't have to live his character's > life in order to portray him with credibility. SSSusan: I didn't say moral belief; I said moral *understanding*. The actor would have to *understand* in order to credibly play the role, and imo full understanding IS enough to mean choice is present. It's still your prerogative to disagree with me, of course. We're not GETTING anywhere in the convincing department with this, are we? At this point I'm merely attempting to clarify my position. Del: > I agree that DD might have tried to help him. But Tom would have > resented this help very much, both because he was a teenager (even > Harry refuses DD's help more often than not) and because he was a > psychopath. DD's talk of love and relationships (or whatever) would > have made no sense to Tom. SSSusan: That seems like a *bit* of a stretch. If Tom encountered someone who finally took an interest in him, he'd resent it? While Harry was thrilled? I don't see that that's a given, though it's possible. Del: > And please Susan, don't get into troubles at your workplace > because of this discussion ! It's not worth it !! SSSusan: :-) Thanks. Tomorrow I pledge to be a more faithful, upstanding worker! Siriusly Snapey Susan From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 21:56:56 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 21:56:56 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110518 SSSusan wrote : "Especially once he was at Hogwarts, affection, friendship, loving relationships were likely all around Tom, being modeled for him." Del replies : Do you really think so ??? Look around Harry in PS/SS : what loving relationships do you see ?? Percy and the Twins are constantly fighting, and they keep berating Ron in between their rows, Hermione is constantly bossing other people around, Ron always agrees with everyone to avoid trouble. What would Tom have learned from them ? From Percy, the Twins and Hermione, he would have learned that loving people is forcing them to be what you want them to be, and from Ron he would have learned that loving someone means always agreeing with them. Contradictory, and most importantly WRONG, terribly wrong. Because combined to his lust for power, Tom would have applied this in 2 ways : I love you so I'll force you to do what I want, and if you love me you'll agree with me. And after all, look at how Harry's relationship with his 2 best friends really started. Ron became his friend after Harry showed compassion on him, and Hermione became their friend after the boys risked their lives to save hers. 2 things that Tom simply wouldn't have known to do. It's a vicious cycle : he would not have known how to make real friends because he didn't know how to love, which in turn would have prevented him from learning about real love from his true friends. SSSusan wrote : "I don't think comparing learning to love to learning languages is necessarily a good correllary, but even if it is, I'd say the opportunity was still there for Tom, just as I can learn German at age 42 if I choose." Del replies : Yes, but if you'd never heard anyone talking and you'd never talked yourself until you turned 11, chances are that you'd have a *really* hard time understanding people when they talk, and it would be near impossible for you to ever learn to talk properly. I, Del, wrote : "some children will be able to love even though they weren't loved, but some others won't." SSSusan answered : "Precisely. And as yet, we do not know into which of these categories Tom falls." Del replies : We do have a hint : Tom never loved. If love is there, it will always find an object to love. But Tom never loved. SSSusan wrote : "*Saying* no one has to behave according to "the system" doesn't mean it's so--or else society breaks down and there is anarchy." Del replies : There's a big difference between believing and behaving. Yes Tom must behave between the limits of the law. Note that I didn't say the limits of morality, only the limits of the law. But he does *not* have to believe in the general morality. SSSusan wrote : "I truly believe that by the time he was a teenager, if not before, he understood the mores, the values; saw the modeling of love, devotion & friendship; and chose his own path. " Del replies : Not necessarily. He might just have seen the laws that regulate human behaviour. "If I do something for him, he will have to do something for me." "If I pretend to agree with her, she will grant me favours." "If I let stupid little Ginny tell me all of her stupid little problems and I pretend to be interested, she'll pour more and more of her soul into me and I'll get more and more powerful." Ginny mistook for friendship and compassion what was cold, cruel, criminally selfish behaviour. Harry mistook for help and valuable information what was just a trap and a lie. Tom never cared about anyone : not Hagrid, not Ginny, not Harry, but he was able to masterfully pretend to care for them in order to serve his own purposes. Tom perfectly understood the "hows" of human relationships, but he never even began to understand the "why" : love. SSSusan wrote, quoting JKR : "Voldemort took wrong choices from a very early age - he decided young what he wanted to be." Del replies : Interesting quote indeed. Do you think Tom as a kid decided to be evil when he grew up ? I don't think so. He decided to be powerful and immortal. Becoming evil just happened to be a means and a consequence on the way to his real goals : power and immortality. SSSusan wrote : "To me it's his faulty logic which sees love as a weakness. Most people either don't see it as a weakness or see it as one they're willing to give into because of the joys it provides. As you note, Tom/Voldy apparently saw [yes, understandably] power as the more important "virtue" and chose to ignore love." Del replies : And his choice makes perfect sense to me. I made the same when I was 9 or 10. I would become the best in something, so that people would have to admire me and nobody could look down on me (I would be Someone), and I would never love anyone again apart from my mom and my sister because it hurts too much when the people you love leave you or abuse you, and because it's a burden when people love you so you have to make sure you don't hurt them. I wanted to be STRONG above everything else, and I rejected anything I saw as a potential weakness. But I wasn't a fully-fledged psychopath, so I broke down after a few months. Mind you, I got half my wish regarding love at least : you don't feel loved anymore when you come down with depression. But Tom was a real psychopath, and he got help from Slytherin on the way, so I'm not surprised he never looked back on his initial choice. Del From b_boymn at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 21:59:01 2004 From: b_boymn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 21:59:01 -0000 Subject: the lion discription In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110519 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "snow15145" wrote: > Did anyone else notice that there is an owl in the very first book, > page 2, that was unnoticed by the Dursleys? > > [None of them noticed a large, tawny owl flutter past the window.] > > This is right before Vernon heads off to work. > > Thought I would mention it because of the discription of tawny. > > Snow b_boymn: Well, the owl is easy to explain. It's Dumbledore's owl coming to Mrs. Figg telling her to keep an eye on Harry after Dumbledore delivers him to the Dursleys. Can't prove that but it does seem odd that JKR would mention that specific owl at that specific time. There are already references to odd owl behavior in the beginning of PS/SS. So, if we start by assuming it was unique and specific owl was a Post Owl, then the only person in that area that would be receiveing Post Owls is Mrs. Figg. As fas as 'tawny', Eloise is right, a TAWNY OWL is a specific species of owls (Strix aluco) that may be of "two basic colour types ..., one being rich chestnut-brown, the other having greys instead of deep browns. Intermediate birds are variously tawny-buff, buff-brown or greyish-brown in coloration." http://www.owlpages.com/species/strix/aluco/Default.htm In a sense, 'tawny' as a color is much like 'auburn'; auburn is brown with red highlights, and tawny is brown with orangish to yellowish highlights. To that point, I don't think there is a connection between the 'tawny' lion-man and that owl. Tawny owls, I believe, are mentioned several other times in the books, and are just one of the many assorted varieties. Just a thought. Steve/b_boymn From tonks_op at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 20:12:09 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 20:12:09 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110520 Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: > I absolutely agree that Tom is *all* Id, whereas Harry has a quite > hefty Superego (and both have a problem with Ego = reality in this > model, NOT self-conceit). But if Tom was able to act the part of > law- abiding citizen, responsible young adult, so well as to attain > Prefect & HB status, then he DOES understand right vs. wrong!! -------------------------------- Hello: Knowing intellectually the difference between right and wrong is not the same as having a superego. Tom/LV knows by observation of others and by reading the rules. He does not opperate with a internalized sense of right and wrong like Harry does. Tonks_op From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 22:13:21 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:13:21 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110521 Alla wrote : "Actually, Del, I hope never to get into fight with you :o), but I won't expect you to control your impulses when your loved one was just killed in front of you. (May such thing never ever happen to you)." Del wrote : As a matter of fact, you'd be better off getting in a fight with me than with many other people, precisely because I've learned a long time ago (age 9) that I had very strong destructive impulses when I got mad, so I've been learning to control them ever since. It's *real hard* to enrage me. Though it could still happen if someone touched my husband or my baby, I guess. Alla wrote : "I will not even expect even Tom to do so at the heat of the moment. I expect him to control his rages when he calmed down." Del replies : The problem with psychopaths is that they don't necessarily ever calm down. Or else their anger might abate for a while, but not necessarily their hatred. Alla wrote : "And yes, I agree with Susan the fact that Harry did not have enough hate even at such moment to crucio Bella speaks volumes to me. His Crucio did not work for a reason, you know, not by accident." Del replies : Oh, I agree completely that Harry did not (thankfully) have what it takes to make the Cruciatus curse work. But it doesn't change the fact that he did not master his impulse to use an Unforgivable, which was my original point. His impulse was wrong, though understandable, and yet Harry didn't control it. A very human thing to do, especially at age 15. Alla wrote : "Well, such person as you describe should be put into psychiatric clinic and never EVER allowed to leave it, IMO. Of course such person cannot control anything." Del replies : Exactly ! Tom should NEVER have been allowed to go to Hogwarts. He was already a psychopath in urgent need of heavy psychiatric help by the age of 11, and Hogwarts only provided him with bigger and better guns than he could ever have dreamed of. Add to that the highly explosive discovery of his inheritance from Slytherin, and the whole mixture was BOUND to explode. Del From slgazit at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 18 22:18:26 2004 From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:18:26 -0000 Subject: Draco's nature, LV's abiliity to love, Dudders and Harry, etc. (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110522 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tylerswaxlion" wrote: > Now poor Tom Riddle, I always imagine him like Oliver Twist--mom > shows up outside the workhouse/orphanage, lives long enough to give > him his name, then dies. Tom's then raised by a rotating staff that > don't ever give him any love--they are completely indifferent. > Riddle really *doesn't* experience love at all, and by the time he's > old enough to earn the respect of teachers in the Muggle-world or > impress wizards at Hogwarts, he no longer has the ability to > recognize love. He sees it as an illogical, exploitable weakness. This explanation does not accound for the thousands of people raised in orphanages or by abusive families who manage to grow up to be law abiding functional citizens, rather than serial killers. While the environment that Riddle grew in was certainly unpleasant, I believe that he has become Voldemort through inherent personality defects, not because of upbringing. Whether a different, more caring environment might have prevented that is open to question. Noone is a perfect parent. The Unabomber came from a loving family who tried (too much perhaps) to nurture his gifts, and yet threw away a professor position at Berkeley to live in a Montana cabin and send letter bombs to people he disliked. He even had a brother who is a complete opposite of him morally and socially. I think there was something inherently unstable if not outright evil in Riddle to start with. This is not unheard of, especially with geniuses (which he was without a doubt). Riddle is certainly an appropriate name... > Experiencing and understanding love, even in a twisted, > disfuncitonal manner, makes Draco and Dudley capable of redemption > (though I doubt they will ever take those steps.) I believe that Dudley will be redeemed. He is not spoiled by his school, and the fright he had facing the dementors, not to mention living a less privileged life with ordinary (if unpleasant) parents, and with a sort-of brother (Harry), who is much smarter than him, makes him more likely to become a decent person (even Vernon Dursley has at least one positive quality - he was willing to raise Harry after all). There is nothing in Draco's environment to improve him however. His is probably a lost cause. > Now Harry has experienced "true love"--selfless, self-sacrificing > love. His parents died to save him. However, that happened at 15 months of age. The next 10 years were spent in a loveless abusive environment. > His godfather broke out of > Azkaban to save him and died trying to save him. This happened at 13 - after his personality was already defined. > My mom's always said that hate is not the opposite of love, > indifference is. When you hate someone, you still care--you care > quite a bit. No one cared for Tom Riddle, and he grew into > Voldemort, who cares for no one. Except for the first 15 months of his life and up till he started Hogwarts, no one (to Harry's knowledge) cared about him either. A bad upbringing is no explanation for Riddle's transformation. He was rotten to start with... Salit From candlekicks at yahoo.ca Wed Aug 18 16:19:05 2004 From: candlekicks at yahoo.ca (candlekicks) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 16:19:05 -0000 Subject: The Portkey Cup (WAS: Apparation and Sirius' vault) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110523 > > Amey: > > But as for the Cup, > > "I offered to carry the Triwizard Cup into the maze before > > dinner," whispered Barty Crouch. "Turned it into a Portkey. > > My master's plan worked. He is returned to power and I will > > be honored by him beyond the dreams of wizards." (GoF) > > > > So, I am not sure the Cup was already a portkey, it could be > > but then what Crouch did was not add a stop, but change the > > destination completely. > Grey Wolf: > we've been through the discussion of the portkey!cup before, and > he didn't go into detail - it is a very much accepted theory that, > nonetheless, does have a few holes. But then, prior to it, the > story had a whole many more holes. > And if Jr. had changed the destination completely, he would've > deleted the original jump (to the entrance of the maze), instead > of simply adding an extra one. Linda: I have always thought that DD or the MoM made the TWcup a Portkey to return the winner to the entrance to the maze. It seems to me that it wouldn't have been common knowledge. The portkey could have been magicked to only transfer one of the four champions, thus not having an effect on the fake Moody. The only other solution that I can think of is that the champions were supposed to send up sparks when they reached the cup to have someone from the outside come and get them, but I haven't seen anything in the books to support that. They were only told to send up sparks if they were in trouble.... Unless that falls into the red sparks/green sparks thing that seems to work it's way into the book regularly??? Any thoughts? Linda From PrincessLycaea at RealVamp.zzn.com Wed Aug 18 19:24:50 2004 From: PrincessLycaea at RealVamp.zzn.com (Lycaea) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 19:24:50 -0000 Subject: Hagrid's parents Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110524 Hi everyone. I'm new. Yup. Me and my friend were discussing Hagrid and his parents the other day, and the one thing we want to know is: how the hell did they have sex? A giantess and a man? It must have been like waving a pencil in a cave for one thing, but also, the technique would have to be used? Can't get this out of our heads. Damn. What do you people reckon? **L From tonks_op at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 19:31:12 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 19:31:12 -0000 Subject: Choices, was: (LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110525 Jim wrote in #110479: > If you choose to swim down stream (into the darkness), your > progress is swift and sure in the direction of your choosing. > > Can you return from the downstream path? Well, given enough time, > determination and swimming ability, yes. In mortality, the time > factor may limit your progress but with immortality there is no > limit to the ability to return EXCEPT desire or choice. Is Draco > redeemable? I expect so. Is it Likely? Only JKR knows for > sure. Is LV redeemable. Is it Likely? That's a bet even Bagman > wouldn't > take... > > In my belief system there is the wild card of repentance and > redemption. I have not seen direct reference to this in the WW > but would like it to exist there too. ---------------------------- Tonks_op replies: Thank you for that thought. It helped me to remember something important to this discussion. In Christianity the only real sin from which we can not recover is the choice to go against God. People don't get "possessed" like in the movies. They choose that path and the choosing in not a one time thing, but a progression over time. At the end of their life a person who ALWAYS makes the choice to go towards the darkness will show very little, if any of the original light that was in them at their birth. They would become, as Tom has, some very ugly thing that is half snake. I also thing that Draco is not like Tom, he will be ok in the end. Tonks_op From misty_december at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 22:19:06 2004 From: misty_december at yahoo.com (misty_december) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:19:06 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110526 "pcaehill2" Pam wrote: > > I still can't get away from Dumbledore's statement re: it is the > *choices* we make that define us, not destiny (or predestination, > for that matter). This is why I don't believe that bloodlines > (whether ancestor or descendant) will be a determining factor of > major heroism in this story; nor do I believe that (in this world or > JKR's world) anyone is predetermined genetically OR by their > experience during infancy to be ESE! ****************************************** Misty: I was actually not talking about genetic bloodlines, but rather the lack of bonding that made Tom what he was. ******************************************** Pam again: > Along these lines, it's a serious mistake to do "black/white" > thinking -- there are so many factors involved in childhood > development (temperament, physical hardiness, etc.) and the > interaction between choice/predilection/awareness/unconscious is a > lifelong struggle. > > AND it is also important to realize that, even with psych. > diagnoses, there is always a *spectrum* of frequency and severity of > symptoms. I have met folks with symptoms of antisocial personality > disorder at various stages/degrees of exhibiting such symptoms -- > this is why not everyone with antisocial symptoms is a gang member > or serial killer (for this reason, I always avoid saying "folks with > xyz disorder", I think it's best to say they show xyz symptoms). > > Back to canon: Voldemort had a choice, somewhere along the line, to > progress in his evil ways rather than do battle with his lower > nature. We all do. *************************************************** Misty: Yes, I agree there is a spectrum, which is why I said in my original post that it is not a universal, across-the-board thing. There is no black and white in personality - but we are born with certain predispositions toward certain behaviors. Our experiences make us behave in certain ways. One can say, "well, Tom had a choice of whether to love someone or not", but in actuality, if he is not capable of it, if it had never been demonstrated to him, he will most likely not go that way. He has a skewed idea of right and wrong. What is wrong in a moral sense defined by society, he believes is right. What is "right" in society, he looks upon as weakness. These ideas were formed in his brain from very early on because of his inability to bond brought on by the lack of love he experienced. I am sure we have all seen children who grow up to be criminals, but never really understand what they did wrong. They never admit wrongdoing because to them it is "right". These are people without consciences. If Tom were like Raskolnikov, for example, he would eventually become so guilt-ridden that he would desist, but he is not. He is simply a person with *no* idea of right or wrong. From ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 22:48:11 2004 From: ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com (A.J.) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:48:11 -0000 Subject: Draco's nature, LV's abiliity to love, Dudders and Harry, etc. (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110527 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "slgazit" wrote: >While the > environment that Riddle grew in was certainly unpleasant, I believe > that he has become Voldemort through inherent personality defects, not > because of upbringing. The Unabomber came from a loving family who tried (too much > perhaps) to nurture his gifts, and yet threw away a professor position > at Berkeley to live in a Montana cabin and send letter bombs to people > he disliked. He even had a brother who is a complete opposite of him > morally and socially. Thought I must mention, when he was caught, I remember reading that the young Kaczynski (sp?) had been a baby with a 'happy, bubbly' personality, then he got sick with a bad virus and was quarantined alone for some length of time, after which his personality seemed to go 'flat.' So said the article. I had to mention that in light of the discussion of the critical period in early childhood when Tom Riddle was in an orphanage instead of nurtured. (But maybe the virus and other factors also helped make T.K. into the Unabomber.) I still wonder if this will tie in with TT and 'you can't hurt a baby' and the potential of young TR, somehow. <:\ A.J. From marmys at bellsouth.net Wed Aug 18 22:21:13 2004 From: marmys at bellsouth.net (cybermarmy) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:21:13 -0000 Subject: Petunia not a squib but... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110528 Baphy wrote: > Have you ever noticed that even "muggle lovers" like Arthur Weasley > don't really go out of their way to socialize with them? I know > there are all the laws in relation to secrecy, but do any of them > expressly say that a Wizard cannot socialize with a muggle with > non-magical offspring on muggle turf.... Marmy replies: How do wizards marry muggles if they don't socialize with them? It seems that witches marry muggles more than wizards, but somehow they need to get together and date before getting married. I would assume. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 22:50:01 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:50:01 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110529 SSSusan wrote : "He's also learning that he could be Someone in the context of "normal Hogwarts school life" too. A respected student, a leader. There's power in THAT, too." Del replies : Hola ! Dangerous waters :-) First, what's power without a goal ? Tom had a goal : becoming the most powerful wizard ever, and immortal too (I guess he hadn't thought of what he would do once he accomplished that goal). Being a leader at school was not going to get him any closer to his goal, especially because there would always be someone over him. But being Slytherin's Heir might indeed bring him more power. And second, being a respected student and a leader is NOT getting an *identity*. We've seen someone else make just that mistake and ending up on the wrong side because of it : Percy. SSSusan wrote : "But, see, at the point of entry to Hogwarts, I think Harry WAS hurting most of the time. He had no memory of his parents at that time; he had no input about what they were like. The Dursleys hated & resented him, treated him like a servant or worse. He WAS hurting most of the time." Del replies : Yes, Harry was hurting of course, but not in a rageful, hateful way. He had clearly identified the Dursleys as being the only ones responsible for his misery, and he wasn't trying to make the whole world pay for his pain. Tom, on the other hand, was apparently already sufficiently full of hatred and anger at age 11 that Slytherin's ideas about the Muggles didn't bother him. SSSusan wrote : "I didn't say moral belief; I said moral *understanding*. The actor would have to *understand* in order to credibly play the role, and imo full understanding IS enough to mean choice is present." Del replies : Oh sure, Tom *intellectually* understood what people considered as right and wrong. He knew that setting a Basilisk to kill Muggle-born students would not be appreciated by the Headmaster, no matter how noble Tom considered the act to be. He understood intellectually how other people thought and acted, but he didn't understand them *emotionally*. He was an *alien*, unable to *relate* to the people around him, to *share* their emotions and beliefs. There are actors who do remarkable impersonifications of people they simply don't understand emotionally. SSSusan wrote : "It's still your prerogative to disagree with me, of course. We're not GETTING anywhere in the convincing department with this, are we? " Del wonders : Are we supposed to ;-) ? Discussing shouldn't be geared exclusively towards convincing the other, should it ? If I do manage to convince you, it's great. But it's just as good if I manage to make you understand me, even if you still disagree. And vice versa of course. SSSusan wrote : "That seems like a *bit* of a stretch. If Tom encountered someone who finally took an interest in him, he'd resent it? While Harry was thrilled? I don't see that that's a given, though it's possible. " Del replies : I believe it was too late for Tom. Harry wanted a *family*, he wanted parental love, so of course he was thrilled whenever someone showed genuine interest in him. But Tom was past that. He wanted belonging, yes, but only if his new-found family supported him in his goal. Slytherin did, DD didn't. Del From ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 22:51:03 2004 From: ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com (A.J.) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:51:03 -0000 Subject: Hagrid's parents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110530 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lycaea" wrote: > Hi everyone. I'm new. Yup. > > Me and my friend were discussing Hagrid and his parents the other day, > and the one thing we want to know is: how the hell did they have sex? Uh. Well. Um. I think most people assume magic that would enable the two people to grow or shrink to the same size temporarily, such as an engorgement charm or Kevin's slug at the World Cup.. ? After all, it is make believe! A.J. From tiggersong at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 23:14:57 2004 From: tiggersong at yahoo.com (tiggersong) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 23:14:57 -0000 Subject: Wormtail and the Mark Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110531 I can't, for the life of me, figure out if Wormtail has taken the Mark. I would think that LV would insist on it, but wouldn't it ... well ... give Peter away to the Order? Or are they invisible until LV touches his? I know they darken when he's stronger, but I don't know if they're true "tattoos" or if they're just magical pagers, so to speak. What do you guys think? Does Wormy have the Mark? Tiggersong From caesian at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 23:18:01 2004 From: caesian at yahoo.com (caesian) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 16:18:01 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Two Words - Magic Wand was Re:Hagrid's parents In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110533 On Aug 18, 2004, at 12:24 PM, Lycaea wrote: > Hi everyone. I'm new. Yup. > > Me and my friend were discussing Hagrid and his parents the other day, > and the one thing we want to know is: how the hell did they have sex? > A giantess and a man? It must have been like waving a pencil in a cave > for one thing, but also, the technique would have to be used? > > Can't get this out of our heads. Damn. > > What do you people reckon? > > **L > First of all, let me just say you must have balls bigger than Golgomath's to post this, either that or less self-restraint than Peeves. Who's your list elf junior? Second, I cannot believe I am going to venture to answer, which will certainly get me a Parental Warning label, no matter what I say. But hey, who hasn't wondered? Let's just get right to it then. The guy was a WIZARD. Ever heard that Frank Sinatra Song, "It's Magic"? Enough said. I mean, really people - stop sniggering. I have to read all of the same SEEMINGLY INNOCENT passages you all have, and I kept a straight face. What am I talking about? Has this one ever given any of you pause: "He didn't stop to think. Plunging a hand down the neck of his robes, he whipped out his wand and roared, 'Expecto patronum!" Something silver white, something enormous, erupted from the end of his wand. He knew it had shot directly ... OK, enough? No? Not enough prurient speculation (God heavens it's only Wednesday!)? OK - time to get out the big guns - and I don't mean Canon. This post from the vault of archives will surely vanquish your perseveration: From:? "Mike & Susan Gray" Date:? Fri?Aug?25,?2000? 5:49 am Subject:? RE: [HPforGrownups] Re: McGonagall's Age & Dumbledore's Triumphant Look <> EUREKA!!!! OK, I've got it: If McGonogall is actually Lady Chatterly, then Dumbledore must be Clifford--ergo, Dumbledore is impotent. Now: why is Dumbledore impotent? Easy: in his desperate battle with the evil wizard something-or-other back in 1945, Dumbledore, once a broom rider and wand waver of shocking vigor, released the very essence of his natural powers into that which this group has already identified as the magical symbol of a wizard's natural potency: his wand. This monumental sacrifice saved the world, but it also consigned Dumbledore to spinsterhood. The Triumph: But as Harry began his story at the end of GoF, Dumbledore had already guessed why the big V. couldn't sizzle Harry: priori incatatem. And suddenly, he saw the light: if only he can find someone whose wand shares the same magical bits as his, they could have a duel and Dumbledore's wand would be forced to release its burgeoning powers. Dumbledore jumped up to look at Harry's arm because he was so excited he couldn't sit still. In fact, he didn't even pick up the fact that the big V. had managed to gain through Harry's blood. The REAL Plot: So the true battle will pitch Hagrid's size & relative youth against Dumbledore's skill and craft, while the big V. realizes that he needs more than Harry's blood to get himself up to speed! Title of the next Book: Harry Potter and the Dirty Old Wizards Tsch?sslis! Caesian's last word: And what the heck is Butterbeer? From juli17 at aol.com Wed Aug 18 23:32:28 2004 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17ptf) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 23:32:28 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110534 > > SSSusan wrote : > "I didn't say moral belief; I said moral *understanding*. The actor > would have to *understand* in order to credibly play the role, and > imo full understanding IS enough to mean choice is present." > > Del replies : > Oh sure, Tom *intellectually* understood what people considered as > right and wrong. He knew that setting a Basilisk to kill Muggle-born > students would not be appreciated by the Headmaster, no matter how > noble Tom considered the act to be. He understood intellectually how > other people thought and acted, but he didn't understand them > *emotionally*. He was an *alien*, unable to *relate* to the people > around him, to *share* their emotions and beliefs. There are actors > who do remarkable impersonifications of people they simply don't > understand emotionally. Julie sez: The pivotal question to me is whether Tom/Voldemort is a pyschopath/sociopath. I believe JKR says he is. He is also intelligent, and like other pyschopaths he can intellectually distinguish between right and wrong (what is morally acceptable to society and what is not). The problem is, a psychopath just doesn't CARE. He has no conscience. He can't feel sympathy, compassion, or love, so he can't feel good or bad about his behavior. His only compass for his behavior is doing that which gives him some sort of gain, be it power, money, etc. We know Voldemort is clearly missing something integral, though we can't say whether it is inborn (nature) or environmentally influenced (nurture), though it's likely a combination of both. Human beings are extremely complex, and, at least for the moment, we're nowhere close to understanding how genes, inborn personality traits, and environmental influences (affection, poverty, nutrition, chemicals, ad infintum) mix to affect each individual. One thing I would ask is, if Voldemort is a psychopath, and has been one since Tom Riddle was very young, did he really *have* a choice? Once a small boy's brain/personality turns psychopathic, can that be undone? In the most technical sense, Tom/Voldemort could have decided at any point to start behaving morally, even without being able to care about others. But is there any reasonable expectation that a person with the twisted logic of a psychopath can really see or fully understand that choice, or perceive any value in it as a normal human being would? Julie From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 18 23:43:32 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 23:43:32 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110536 Tyler's Lion: > So while you can learn an additional language at any age, albeit > with difficulty, if you haven't learned the *concept* of language > in infancy/early childhood, you never will. > > The infant and child Tom Riddle was capable of love. The adult-- > and probably the teen--Voldemort is not. SSSusan: And are you certain that learning to love and learning language are the SAME cognitive mechanisms? I'm not. The concept of language and the concept of love aren't the same. One revolves around emotion, whereas the other revolves around cognition. And I'll take that "probably" re: teen Tom! :-) Siriusly Snapey Susan From tookishgirl_111 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 00:01:05 2004 From: tookishgirl_111 at yahoo.com (tookishgirl_111) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 00:01:05 -0000 Subject: The book 6 Excerpt... -- Crookshanks? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110537 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Megan" wrote: > I was wondering when I was reading it at the site (and I've visited > the site in German (Deutsch) and the sign was still there!) I > thought of Crookshanks! Could this be another of the > Scabbers/Pettigrew incidents? I know Crookshanks is part Kneazle - > but could it be that someone is turning into a Kneazle/Cat? > > "Megan" I considered this as well, and I suppose it is a possibility. And if one wishes to go in the direction of cats, Mrs. Norris (who has yellow eyes as the description suggests) is also a possbility. As she's female it's not likely unless there is a Mr. Norris - assuming that there is one and Filch hasn't actually married his cat (ha ha). Tooks - who thinks it's actually a description of GG who may or may not be the HBP. From b_boymn at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 00:01:11 2004 From: b_boymn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 00:01:11 -0000 Subject: Portkeys - Tri-wiz/Garveyard, and World Cup In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110538 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "candlekicks" wrote: > > Linda: > What do you think of the theory that the cup being made a portkey to > return Harry to school occurred after the priori incantatem? Perhaps > it was Fawkes or James or Lily that made it a portkey home... > ...edited... This solution solves the problem with having two > destinations on a portkey, which doesn't seem plausible. > > When the Weasley's went to the Quiddich World Cup, the portkey was > thrown away into a pile when they got there with other used > portkeys. When they wanted to leave, they had to wait to have > another portkey made for them to return. If having two destinations > were possible, why not have the return trip already on the portkey > to allow less congestion after the World Cup? > > Linda B_Boymn: I think I'm going to have to go with Grey_Wolf on this one. The 'shadows' come out of the wand cognizant and knowledgable, but generally powerless; of course, we are all speculating. They are not mere shadow and vapor, Harry remarks that they almost seem solid but are smokey in color and texture. But they 'know', they are self-aware and generally aware, they speak, they logic, and they plan, so they are intelligent, and given the knowledge and awareness of the situation they display, I think their knowledge and awareness go far deeper than which they can merely observe at the moment. In a sense, they are or seems all-knowing, but only in the context of the immediate situation. If the 'shadows' or echoes are powerful enough to enchant a portkey, then, as Grey_Wolf suggested, why don't they use their magical power against Voldemort or the Death Eaters? One last point on this aspect, in the past discussions we have come up with two likely (but speculative) reasons why the portkey had a return trip attached. One, as I have suggested and is my preferred method, is that the cup was already a key to the edge of the maze, and Barty!Moody added a new enchantment on top of that. The first enchantment was used to take Harry to the graveyard, and the remaining and original was used to take him back. The fact that Barty!Moody claims to have enchanted the portkey doesn't prevent another portkey charm from already existing. What Barty!Moody says is his view of the world as he knows it, and not the author's absolute statement of fact. The alternate is that Barty!Moody added both 'stops', the first to take Harry to the graveyard, and the second to take Harry's dead body back to Hogwarts as Voldemort's way of flipping the middle finger to Dumbledore. Now on to the nature of the World Cup Portkeys. When Harry and friends arrive, the portkeys are all thrown into a big pile, and therein lies the problem of having two-way/return-trip portkeys. When it came time for the Weasleys and Harry to return, would it be easier to dig through a huge pile of old portkeys looking for one specific manky old boot, or to just grab the first object they could lay their hands on and charm it to take them to Stoadshead Hill? Personally, I vote for grab the first available object and charm it. I have speculated in the past that one of the reasons the Portkey charm is so carefully regulated and controlled is because it is a difficult and dangerous spell, and that many wizards are not up to safely appling it. Therefore, the Ministry strickly controls it's use. But, for an expert experienced wizard, it is a relatively fast spell to perform as we see from Dumbledore's example in OotP. Conclusion, once again, is that the Ministry portkey experts can grab a random object and charm it faster than they can search out a specific 'return trip' object. Just one man's opinion. Steve/B_Boymn (was asian_lovr2) From claphamsubwarden at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 23:33:16 2004 From: claphamsubwarden at yahoo.com (Chris) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 23:33:16 -0000 Subject: Wormtail and the Mark In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110539 Yep Ch 33 pp559-560 Goblet of Fire I guess it is hidden otherwise it would be too easy to identify Death Eaters, especially with Moody around. ChrisT From macfotuk at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 00:05:48 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 00:05:48 -0000 Subject: Trelawney Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110540 If this is an old theory excuse my not crediting earlier posts. I re-read OotP and it occurred to me that Sybil Trelawney's very near ousting from Hogwarts by Umbridge was an ideal way to put Trelawney out into the world so that LV or the DE's could get their hands on her. With the prophecy unavailable or (as it is now) smashed, why not go straight to the horse's mouth? - might require some memory interrogation magic (veritaserum?) since Sybil probably isn't even aware of the prediction's precise wording herself - any more than she was/is about the Pettigrew prediction made in PoA. I believe that this is why DD took her on and defends her despite not rating her as a teacher - to keep her safe from LV. Umbridge's part in this, and her allegiance to Fudge just adds weight to my own view (I do not doubt not unique) that Cornelius is either under the imperius curse (Lucius Malfoy?) or else genuinely ESE of his own accord - there's been so much evidence of this - he isn't simply bumbling or trying to hang on to power. From misty_december at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 23:07:23 2004 From: misty_december at yahoo.com (misty_december) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 23:07:23 -0000 Subject: Why Harry will Live Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110541 I believe, in the end, that Harry will kill Voldemort, but that Harry will survive. I was thinking about the last part of the prophecy today and decided to approach it logically. I am horrible at logic, so maybe someone will blow some holes in it and relieve me! "And either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives" OP pg.841 I look at it this way: "Either must die at the hand of the other" == Harry must take an active role in vanquishing LV, or LV must take an active role in killing Harry (i.e. at the hand of). "Neither can live while the other survives" == One *must* survive this duel, or else neither one will die. The only way one dies is if the *other* survives. Harry can't live if V survives, but he *can* live if V dies (vanquished forever). Likewise, V can't live if Harry survives, but he *can* live (take on a body in full life) if Harry dies. If both die, neither one has survived, so both will live. Sounds strange but I think that is true. In what way both will live, I don't know. I think Harry will survive and V will die. I look at it this way: Harry = good, V = evil. Good will triumph over evil. Misty From neisha_saxena at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 00:02:15 2004 From: neisha_saxena at yahoo.com (Neisha Saxena) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 17:02:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Harry and Tom In-Reply-To: <1092868770.13465.91262.m23@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20040819000215.44718.qmail@web50901.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110542 This has been an extremely interesting discussion. But, it causes me to wonder not so much how Tom went bad, but what is it about Harry that causes him to have such a clearly defined sense of good? He isn't just conventionally decent in an average sort of way. He has that whole "saving people" thing that is completely self-sacrificing. Or, looking at it through the eyes of Lucius Malfoy a "weakness for heroics." Given that his childhood after the first 15 months was just as lousy as Voldemort/Riddle's, it seems that Harry has chosen the opposite extreme. It's almost as though he an Voldemort are mirror images. Almost a super-hero/super-villian dichotomy. Could it have something to do with the back-fired curse? Is there a more conventional muggleish psychological explanation for Harry's "saving people thing"? Being a newbie, I pose these questions to the experts, some of whom appear to be actual psychologists. Neisha __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From tookishgirl_111 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 00:18:06 2004 From: tookishgirl_111 at yahoo.com (tookishgirl_111) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 00:18:06 -0000 Subject: Wormtail and the Mark In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110543 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tiggersong" wrote: > I can't, for the life of me, figure out if Wormtail has taken the > Mark. I would think that LV would insist on it, but wouldn't it ... > well ... give Peter away to the Order? > > Or are they invisible until LV touches his? I know they darken when > he's stronger, but I don't know if they're true "tattoos" or if > they're just magical pagers, so to speak. > > What do you guys think? Does Wormy have the Mark? > > Tiggersong My guess is that, yes, he does - my guess is the Mark is something LV insists his followers receive. If Peter intends to be LV's "most loyal follower" something tells me he couldn't get out off having the Mark even if he wanted to. It might not have been as hard to hide as would seem. First of all, it's pretty clear that no one within the Order (or WW for that matter) suspected Peter of being a LV follower so it's unlikely anyone ever asked him to roll up his sleeve and show them him left inner arm. Naturally, I'm sure that after Peter initially received it he had to wear long-sleeve shirts/robes in front of others as I imagine it burns pretty clearly when you first get it, but after a while it most likely would dull some. Also, remember, even if it was a proper "tattoo" under the robes wizards and witches wear it would be easy to hide - Snape was able to hide his from Harry and others who didn't already know his DE history for about 4 years without any trouble at all. I also think that the Dark mark most likely works as a scar (there are a lot in these books, aren't there?) that "reopens" as a burn as LV gains greater strength. So what might have been a pale, barely noticeable mark would deepen and glow as LV becomes stronger and calls for his follower. Tooks - who never thought so much about the Dark Mark and head is now spinning From eeyore6771 at comcast.net Thu Aug 19 00:27:38 2004 From: eeyore6771 at comcast.net (Pat) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 00:27:38 -0000 Subject: Is JkR about to reveal? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110544 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Eustace_Scrubb" wrote: > Eustace_Scrubb: > > >snipped< > > Can DD have given her the ability to tap into some > > recessive magic gene in a case of dire emergency?... > > Maybe she doesn't turn out to be a full-fledged witch. > > Then Snow theorized: > > > I believe so with a big emphasis on believe. > > > > Dumbledore and Petunia formally or informally made a pact by doing > > something together or something for each other. Does that sound > > about right? > > > > I'm going to harp again on > > Petunia's surgically clean kitchen announced in most of the books. > > This one is a far leap but could Petunia have asked Dumbledore for > > Lily's wand and possibly a bit of magic to go with it? [more snips] > Eustace_Scrubb again: > Well, that's most interesting! So you think Petunia's been doing > magic but sweeping the evidence under the rug (or just scourgifying > it, rather)? > > It could make sense. And then something really bad happens and she > ends up doing some really powerful DADA in dire circumstances? [snips] > > Cheers, > > Eustace_Scrubb Pat here: While I tend to agree that she is strongly hinting that Petunia is a witch, I don't see how she (Petunia) could have been doing magic all these years, unnoticed by the Ministry of Magic. They pounce on Harry anytime there is anything at Privet Drive. And they question Mrs. Figg being a squib because they have no record of her--of course, that's because she CAN'T do any magic, as she explains to them. But if Petunia were routinely doing magic, why would they get all in a dither over the dessert disaster (caused by Dobby) or the whole thing with Aunt Marge (well, I can see why that would set them off), and then with Harry and the Patronus because of the dementors. They would just assume it was Petunia. But, knowing that Harry is a wizard, anything magical that happens is attibuted to him, not to Petunia. I do think, though, that there is a lot of merit to the idea that Petunia has magical powers, and that it's possible that it's because of some sort of pact she made with Dumbledore. The other thing to support that idea is that Professor McGonagall didn't seem to know what was going on and that's why she was waiting for DD--she found out that Hagrid would be meeting him there. That has always bothered me, as much as the missing 24 hours. And it makes sense that DD would meet face to face with Petunia, to make sure that she would take Harry in when he was left on the doorstep. After all, what was DD planning to do if she didn't take him in, or called the police and turned him over to them? Have you ever noticed that every time JKR answers questions, we then have 10 more to take their place? She's brilliant--gives us little nuggets of information, making us think we've gotten huge answers, when really she's just leading us along, and we're still in the dark. I love it. Pat From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Aug 19 00:43:33 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 00:43:33 -0000 Subject: Wormtail and the Mark In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110545 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tiggersong" wrote: > I can't, for the life of me, figure out if Wormtail has taken the > Mark. I would think that LV would insist on it, but wouldn't it ... > well ... give Peter away to the Order? > > Or are they invisible until LV touches his? I know they darken when > he's stronger, but I don't know if they're true "tattoos" or if > they're just magical pagers, so to speak. > > What do you guys think? Does Wormy have the Mark? Canon says so. "Voldemort bent down, and pulled out Wormtail's left arm; he forced the sleeve of Wormtail's robes up past his elbow, and Harry saw something upon the skin there, something like a vivid red tatoo -- a skull with a snake protruding from its mouth -- the same image that had appeared in the sky at the Quidditch World Cup: the Dark Mark." -- GoF 32 It wouldn't be much use if it couldn't be concealed from Aurors, so I suspect it is invisible unless either the bearer or Voldemort wishes to reveal it. We know from Snape and Karkaroff that their marks were becoming more visible during year four, but whether this applies to all the Death Eaters, we don't know. It might be that Voldemort wanted to send a reminder to just those two, letting them know their days were numbered. There's the question of how the DE's at the QWC knew one another, but I suspect that of that group only Malfoy and a few of his associates were marked members of the inner circle. The rest were probably hangers-on, witches or wizards who weren't marked DE's but thought that Voldemort had the right idea, or had been bewitched or bullied by Malfoy, Crabbe and Goyle, Srs. According to Karkaroff, the Mark served as a way that Death Eaters could identify one another. Possibly one Death Eater could use it to signal another and this is what *really* happened on the stairs in GoF when Snape clutched his arm. Snape seems to think his own weakness is responsible. Perhaps the mark burns when he thinks of it. Hermione thinks the absence of the mark would prove one isn't a Death Eater, but it has to be more complicated than that. It's like Sirius said, she has a lot to learn. Pippin From profwildflower at mindspring.com Thu Aug 19 00:48:47 2004 From: profwildflower at mindspring.com (whimsyflower) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 00:48:47 -0000 Subject: Wormtail and the Mark Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110546 In message # 110531 Tiggersong asks, " Does Wormy have the Mark?" In Chapter 33, "The Death Eaters," of GOF (p. 559, British Edition) one finds: "Voldermort bent down, and pulled out Wormtail's left arm; he forced the sleeve of Wormtail's robes up past his elbow, and Harry saw something upon the skin there, something like a vivid red tattoo -- a skull, with a snake protruding from its mouth -- the same image that had appeared in the sky at the Quidditch World Cup: the Dark Mark. Voldermort examined it carefully, ignoring Wormtail's uncontrollable weeping. "'It is back,' he said softly, 'they will all have noticed it. . .and now, we shall see. . .now we shall know. . .' "He pressed his long, white forefinger to the brand on Wormtail's arm." Shot directly out of the canon, as it were. I hope that answers your question, Tiggersong. Whimsy From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Aug 19 01:03:32 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 01:03:32 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110547 > Alla wrote Re: Pyschopath!Tom prognosis: > "Well, such person as you describe should be put into psychiatric > clinic and never EVER allowed to leave it, IMO. Of course such > person cannot control anything." > > Del replies : > Exactly ! Tom should NEVER have been allowed to go to Hogwarts. He > was already a psychopath in urgent need of heavy psychiatric help > by the age of 11, and Hogwarts only provided him with bigger and > better guns than he could ever have dreamed of. Add to that the > highly explosive discovery of his inheritance from Slytherin, and > the whole mixture was BOUND to explode. > > Del Hi Del, Good to see you back and challenging the school of thought on the baddies, as always. :D My reply to what you say here: This is *exactly* why we can't assume that Tom was already mentally non compus pre age 11. If impending canon entirely manages to remove responsibility for choice from the hands of eleven year old Tom then *Harry's* choices mean *nothing*. In fact I would go as far as to say that LV *is* compus mentis even now and is /not/ psychopathic. *Even* as far as to say that the intellectual standards held by psychoanalysis are /created/ to remove choice from the hands of the psychotic and replace it with blamelessness. _And_ challenging such notions *is* the emotive reasoning of the HP story period. If LV's character attacks the belief that environment and circumstance dominates the power of ones ability to reason and love, then so be it. I think its a better message anyway. Valky From patientx3 at aol.com Thu Aug 19 01:05:36 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 01:05:36 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110548 Del wrote: > As an aside : can one truly *choose* hate and evil if they've never > experienced love and goodness ? > And : wouldn't the fact that Tom never cared for anyone indicate a > major mental disease (not unexpected considering the > circumstances) ? Julie replied: >>I am looking at the diagnostic criteria for Antisocial Personality Disrder, a.k.a."sociopath" or "psychopath" in the DSM-IV, and TR/LV certainly meets the criterial. It has been hypothesized in research involving psychopathy that these folks do lack the ability to love, have empathy, show remorse, etc. [snip] Some have described folks like this as being born without a conscience. This certainly seems to describe Tom.<< HunterGreen: Just to clarify, psychopath and sociopath are not the same thing. A psychopath is someone who doesn't understand the difference between right and wrong, and a sociopath does, but doesn't care. I think sociopath would definitely describe Tom, as he is intelligent enough to understand that he is breaking rules, but lacks the empathy and compassion (and indeed a conscience) to care. His actions as a teenager reflect that. The basilisk was wrecking havoc on the school (I assume although only one person died, and that was more an accident than anything else) and he only stops it when it becomes an inconveinence for him. He doesn't care about someone dying or other students being afraid. He's aware that its wrong, but he doesn't care until it affects HIM in a negative way. From patientx3 at aol.com Thu Aug 19 01:27:31 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 01:27:31 -0000 Subject: Apparation and Sirius' vault In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110550 I'm responding to my own post because I think I was misunderstood here (and people have stepped in to explain the theory that I was already supporting). When I asked: >>If it was just a two-way portkey, why didn't it bring Harry back to the center of the maze?<< I was being rhetorical, obviously it WASN'T a two-way portkey. As Grey Wolf pointed out, we don't even know if those exist. If you look at the beginning of chapter 35 (of GoF of course), there's evidence that the trophy had indeed been charmed to bring the winner to the edge of the maze, as that's where Harry ends up. I quoted it upthread. From marugg at fibertel.com.ar Thu Aug 19 01:28:34 2004 From: marugg at fibertel.com.ar (marugg at fibertel.com.ar) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:28:34 -0300 Subject: Hagrid's parents Message-ID: <40E9A7570001B221@mta3.fibertel.com.ar> No: HPFGUIDX 110551 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110552 SSSusan wrote, quoting JKR : > "Voldemort took wrong choices from a very early age - he decided > young what he wanted to be." Del replied : > Interesting quote indeed. Do you think Tom as a kid decided to be > evil when he grew up ? I don't think so. He decided to be powerful > and immortal. Becoming evil just happened to be a means and a > consequence on the way to his real goals : power and immortality. SSSusan: Only have time & energy for this part. These are JKR's words, and the fact that she used the words--about TOM specifically--"choices" and "wrong" seems highly significant. No, I doubt he said, "I want to be evil when I grow up" but that was never my argument. He had CHOICES and he made WRONG ones, per JKR. That's been my point: choices. Del, you went on to discuss your situation as a 9 or 10 year old. I am positive that your experiences are playing into your vehemence about Tom's situation, and I understand that. Since I can't speak from the same experience, I'm going on my gut, my training, and JKR's words. Stalemate?? :-) Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 19 01:56:33 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 01:56:33 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110553 Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: > > I absolutely agree that Tom is *all* Id, whereas Harry has a quite hefty Superego (and both have a problem with Ego = reality in this model, NOT self-conceit). But if Tom was able to act the part of law- abiding citizen, responsible young adult, so well as to attain Prefect & HB status, then he DOES understand right vs. wrong!! > > -------------------------------- tonks_op: > Knowing intellectually the difference between right and wrong is > not the same as having a superego. Tom/LV knows by observation of > others and by reading the rules. He does not opperate with a > internalized sense of right and wrong like Harry does. SSSusan: No, and I never said that Tom did; I said that Harry did. I said that Tom understands right & wrong. I think he does, intellectually. I totally agree that that DOESN'T automatically translate into behavior nor a moral compass or superego. But it's an important step that he's aware of right & wrong because it speaks to choice, imo. Siriusly Snapey Susan From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Thu Aug 19 01:57:51 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 01:57:51 -0000 Subject: Why Harry will Live In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110554 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "misty_december" wrote: > II was thinking about the last part of the prophecy > today and decided to approach it logically. I am horrible at logic, so maybe someone will blow some holes in it and relieve me! > > "And either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live > while the other survives" OP pg.841 > > "Neither can live while the other survives" == One *must* survive > this duel, or else neither one will die. The only way one dies is > if the *other* survives. What you are attempting is to find the contrapositive... the glass- half-opposite truth of any statement... for example, given the statement that "all apples are fruit", the contrapositive is "no non- fruit are apples" ... it's the negative-reverse, or to apply DeMorgan's Law in Boolean Algebra, Not(A or B) = Not A and Not B. Unfortunately, there are no happy contrapositives in this prophesy. Except for the "at the hand of", both parts say essentially the same thing... The One and the Dark Lord will be irresistably drawn into battle with each other until the combination no longer exists... i.e. at least one of them is dead. "one must die" does not mean that "one must live" but that "both cannot live". "neither can live" by itself would be that "both must die" except that the "while the other survives" means that the death of one MAY exempt the other from this requirement... i.e. it IS possible that the final battle may yield a survivor, but there are no guarantees. Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Thu Aug 19 02:06:20 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 02:06:20 -0000 Subject: How is Harry good? [Re: Harry and Tom] In-Reply-To: <20040819000215.44718.qmail@web50901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110555 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Neisha Saxena wrote: > This has been an extremely interesting discussion. > > But, it causes me to wonder not so much how Tom went > bad, but what is it about Harry that causes him to > have such a clearly defined sense of good? Let me take you back to PS/SS at the end... when DD is explaining things to Harry: "Your mother died to save you. If there is one thing Voldemort cannot understand, it is love. He didn't realize 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 forever. 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." In other words... his mother's love is not only something that serves as a basis for Harry's protection... it is a built-in thing. He's stuck with it. I think the 'magical' inference we are supposed to draw is that Harry literally survived on his mother's love... just just through LV's AK, but also the next 9 5/6 years of his life. Yes... if Harry had been attacked on Nov 31, we would have had an interesting tie to 9 3/4, but I digress... Hmm... looking back at PS/SS leads me to my next post... Josh From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 19 02:07:42 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 02:07:42 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110556 Julie: > We know Voldemort is clearly missing something integral, though we > can't say whether it is inborn (nature) or environmentally influenced > (nurture), though it's likely a combination of both. Human beings are > extremely complex, and, at least for the moment, we're nowhere close > to understanding how genes, inborn personality traits, and > environmental influences (affection, poverty, nutrition, chemicals, ad > infintum) mix to affect each individual. > > One thing I would ask is, if Voldemort is a psychopath, and has been > one since Tom Riddle was very young, did he really *have* a choice? SSSusan: One more on this, before I pack it in. This may well be the crux of it, Julie. Since JKR called him a psychopath, then the question is whether JKR's use of "psychopath" coincides with the clinical view...and if it does, then why did she also say he made the "wrong choices"?? Siriusly Snapey Susan From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Thu Aug 19 02:08:33 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 02:08:33 -0000 Subject: Going back to DD knowing all Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110557 While researching my previous post, I did find something interesting in PS/SS: "[Dumbledore] just said, 'Harry's gone after him, hasn't he?' and hurtled off to the third floor." "D'you think he meant you to do it?" said Ron. "Sending you your father's cloak and everything?" "Well, " Hermione exploded, "if he did -- I mean to say that's terrible -- you could have been killed." "No, it isn't," said Harry thoughtfully. "He's a funny man, Dumbledore. I think he sort of wanted to give me a chance. I think he knows more or less everything that goes on here, you know. I reckon he had a pretty good idea we were going to try, and instead of stopping us, he just taught us enough to help. I don't think it was an accident he let me find out how the mirror worked. It's almost like he thought I had the right to face Voldemort if I could...." Does anyone else find that to be a VERY interesting conversation in retrospect? Josh From garybec101 at comcast.net Thu Aug 19 03:37:25 2004 From: garybec101 at comcast.net (garybec) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 03:37:25 -0000 Subject: Hagrid's parents In-Reply-To: <40E9A7570001B221@mta3.fibertel.com.ar> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110558 Lycaea wrote: Me and my friend were discussing Hagrid and his parents the other day, and the one thing we want to know is: how the hell did they have sex? A giantess and a man? It must have been like waving a pencil in a cave for one thing. Becki's thoughts on the subject; I always wondered about this one too, but more-so of the attraction involved. With the discription of Grawp, how would a normal wizzard even be interested or attracted to a giantess? Harry discription of Grawp: (from "Grawp,693 Oop, AM). Unlike Hagrid, who simply looked like a very oversized human, Grawp looked strangely misshapen. What Harry had taken to be a vast mossy boulder to the left of the great earthen mound he now recognized as Grawp's head. It was much larger in proportion to the body than a human head, almost perfectly round and covered with tightly curling, close growing hair the color of bracken. Now I am assuming that giantess' are just female versions of male giants, like Grawp. After all, she was his mother, he must have gotten some of her genes. She must have resembled him in some way. Which brings me back to my original question, what the heck did he see in her? Becki From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Aug 19 03:52:35 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 03:52:35 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110559 > SSSusan: > One more on this, before I pack it in. This may well be the crux of it, Julie. Since JKR called him a psychopath, then the question is whether JKR's use of "psychopath" coincides with the clinical view...and if it does, then why did she also say he made the "wrong choices"?? > There may be a distinction between Quirrell, who let himself be persuaded that there is no good and evil, only power, and Voldemort, who tells the DE's that Quirrell was "young, foolish, gullible." Voldemort may well be incapable of internalizing good and evil, but I think he knows perfectly well what his society considers good and evil. He has chosen evil because he believes it is *stronger* -- "Let's match the powers of Lord Voldemort, Heir of Salazar Slytherin, against famous Harry Potter and the best weapons Dumbledore can give him...." CoS ch 17 and that will turn out to be the wrong choice because, in JKR's world, at least, it's not stronger. Pippin From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 19 03:57:39 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 03:57:39 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110560 SSSusan: > > One more on this, before I pack it in. This may well be the > crux of it, Julie. Since JKR called him a psychopath, then the > question is whether JKR's use of "psychopath" coincides with > the clinical view...and if it does, then why did she also say he > made the "wrong choices"?? Pippin: > There may be a distinction between Quirrell, who let himself be > persuaded that there is no good and evil, only power, and > Voldemort, who tells the DE's that Quirrell was "young, foolish, > gullible." Voldemort may well be incapable of internalizing good > and evil, but I think he knows perfectly well what his society > considers good and evil. He has chosen evil because he > believes it is *stronger* -- > > "Let's match the powers of Lord Voldemort, Heir of Salazar > Slytherin, against famous Harry Potter and the best weapons > Dumbledore can give him...." CoS ch 17 > > and that will turn out to be the wrong choice because, in JKR's > world, at least, it's not stronger. SSSusan: Do you mean JKR may have meant that his choice was not so much *morally* wrong as *tactically* wrong? Siriusly Snapey Susan From susanadacunha at gmx.net Wed Aug 18 22:48:33 2004 From: susanadacunha at gmx.net (Susana da Cunha) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 23:48:33 +0100 Subject: Harry Survives (Interpretation of the Prophecy - long) References: <1092577408.10935.21773.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <007901c48575$99fd03e0$0b2f0dd4@taxi> No: HPFGUIDX 110561 ". and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives ." --------Trelawney, OoP "[Harry] will survive to book seven, [...] but I am not going to say whether he grows any older than that" -------- JKR, Edinburgh "Both Madam Trelawney and I worded the prophecy extremely carefully" -------- JKR, Official Site After reading OoP, the thing that most stick on my mind was the prophecy. I lie awake at night trying to figure it out and I recently joined HPfGU looking for clues. As I found them, it's only fair that I post my interpretation. First I must say that I'm new to the list (very first post here) and that I will never find the time to read on previous posts (I probably won't find time to read the present posts!) but I did run a search on the prophecy subject and I might have a contribution. I will first focus on the following part of the prophecy: "and either must die at the hand of the other" Now, first I must pause and explain myself: English is not my native language; I'm Portuguese. Portuguese is not as flexible as English when it comes to interpretations. Each word has usually only one specific meaning and can only mean something else as a figure of speech. The word either is an excellent example of that. When I read this bit of the prophecy I immediately asked myself: does it mean 'one or the other' or 'one and the other'? (In Portuguese there would never be any confusion because we have different word for those meanings.) So, does this mean that 'one will die at the hand of the other' or that 'both will die at the hand of the other'? Before we answer that, let's look at the bit 'at the hand of the other'. Who is 'the other'? Josh put it brilliantly: >Prophecy is delivered in verbal form... there would be no way to >deliniate between the two versions of "the other". That 'the' is >mighty important, as it pins down an identity. It's not 'an-other'. >The only way 'the other' could mean a third person if it is used in a >proper noun sense, "the Other", which is somewhat possible... but >then the second other would have to be so as well. Otherwise, >different terminology would be required. >There is no way to construct the more popular 2-person reading the >prophecy without the word 'other' except to get totally redundant, >or use 'vice-versa'. However if a 3rd party were indicated, it would >be indicated by using 'both', as the 'neither' wouldn't be required >to keep it as a singular reference... as both would be doomed lest >the Other were felled. Personally, I dismiss the possibility that is someone either than Harry or Voldemort on the grounds that it would be like a muggle prophecy: 'Here is Harry, here is Voldie, one will die at the hand of the other' - CRASH! - Harry gets hit by a bus: the other is the bus driver! (I would accept Pettigrew's silver hand as Steve/asian_lovr2 suggested, but reluctantly.) No. The other must be Harry or Voldemort. But which? The possibilities are: HypA: one will die at the hand of the other HypA1: Harry will die at the hand of Voldemort HypA2: Voldemort will die at the hand of Harry. HypB: both will die at the hand of the other HypB1: Harry and Voldemort take turns in dying at the hand of Voldemort HypB2: Harry and Voldemort take turns in dying at the hand of Harry. HypB3: Harry and Voldemort die at the same time at the hand of Voldemort. HypB4: Harry and Voldemort die at the same time at the hand of Harry. Given HypB1/B2, we should ask: Has Voldemort died when he failed to kill Harry and is now 'reborn'? Or maybe he's still dead as M.Clifford suggested, and he's ghost possesses the 'potion engineered' body. My trouble believing this is not whether ghost can possess bodies or not (live long enough and you'll see everything!); but the sequence of the prophecy: the dying comes after the marking. It seems to me like a different event. But to eliminate hypothesis, I suggest the analysis of the last part of the prophecy: "for neither can live while the other survives" I always thought this bit had the solution for the whole thing. You see, I never bought 'neither can live' as meaning 'neither can tolerate'. I took it literally: 'neither can be alive'. I was sure both Voldemort and Harry would die at the end of book seven: Neither (both) can live while the other (one of them) survives. So if one of them is surviving, both will have to be dead, and the possibility of one of them surviving is reduced to the absurd! I was never convinced by my own arguments and thus why I kept myself awake at night (1. it was too far fetched. Brilliant is simple, JKR is brilliant, so this must be simple. 2. JKR doesn't seem much of a maths lover). But then I read JKR's statement that Harry would survive to book seven. but she's not saying if he grows older! Is surviving the same as living?... Of course, not! You live when you exercise life; you survive when you aren't dead. Voldemort spent 14 years in a state that can be described as surviving - He was certainly not exercising live! (This is supported by canon: Voldemort says to Harry "see what I have to do to survive" in PS/SS.) Surviving must be a completely different state than life and death for wizards; a third dimension. If surviving is a completely different thing than living, then maybe we can do the following interpretation: For (because) neither (not any) can live (stay in the state of exercising life) while (whereas) the other (who's hand is mentioned) survives (doesn't die). That is: . because both can't stay in the state of life, but one will survive. Now we should look at the hypothesis above. HypB is false because one of them survives (doesn't die). HypA1 differs from HypA2 by whose hand is used: Voldemot's or Harry's. As we know Harry is the one who survives, follows that is his hand. Therefore HypA1 is false. Joining HypA2 with the last bit, we conclude: Voldemort will die at Harry's hand, neither will stay alive, but Harry will survive. (either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives) But. wait: JKR is not saying whether he grows any older than that. Will Pettigrew tell him how to make a potion engineered body? Will he give his other arm to repay his life debt? Or will Harry 'choose' to 'move on' and die? Stay tuned for more episodes of... Sorry, folks. I'm with the list Elves on this: Interpret the facts, interpret the clues, interpret the characters and their actions. Wild speculation on parallel lists. Note: I interpreted 'the other' as the same 'the other' as before because it seems the logical thing to me; but as I said, English is not my native language. Be sure to correct me if I'm wrong. (if I am: Voldemort will die at he's own hand, neither will stay alive, but Harry will survive.) Best Regards, Susana From sad1199 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 04:04:42 2004 From: sad1199 at yahoo.com (sad1199) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 04:04:42 -0000 Subject: Why Harry will Live In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110562 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "misty_december" wrote: > I believe, in the end, that Harry will kill Voldemort, but that Harry > will survive. I was thinking about the last part of the prophecy > today and decided to approach it logically. I am horrible at logic, > so maybe someone will blow some holes in it and relieve me! > > "And either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live > while the other survives" OP pg.841 > > > I think Harry will survive and V will die. I look at it this way: > Harry = good, V = evil. Good will triumph over evil. > > Misty sad1199 replies: I agree that Harry will live through the end of the seventh book but for a slightly different reason. Yes good will triumph over evil. That is what makes stories readable. Why would we want to read a story where the bad guy wins? Most books are out there for our enjoyment. And also how many heroes die at the end of a story? It just doesn't happen, especially since children are reading these books (whether the books were written for children or a general audience is beside the point) I just CANNOT see JKR having Harry die at the end. If that happened I would probably burn my Harry Potter books and JKR would get MANY scathing letters from myself and other furious fans. It's just not worth it to her to have him die at the end. Have a Happy Love Filled Day! sad1199 From ctcasares at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 18 23:15:15 2004 From: ctcasares at sbcglobal.net (tylerswaxlion) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 23:15:15 -0000 Subject: Draco's nature, LV's abiliity to love, Dudders and Harry, etc. (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110563 > > Tyler's Lion wrote in 110512: > > Now poor Tom Riddle, I always imagine him like Oliver Twist--mom > > shows up outside the workhouse/orphanage, lives long enough to > > give him his name, then dies. Tom's then raised by a rotating staff > > that don't ever give him any love--they are completely indifferent. > > Riddle really *doesn't* experience love at all, and by the time > > he's old enough to earn the respect of teachers in the Muggle-world > > or impress wizards at Hogwarts, he no longer has the ability to > > recognize love. He sees it as an illogical, exploitable > > weakness. > Salit wrote in 110522: > This explanation does not accound for the thousands of people raised > in orphanages or by abusive families who manage to grow up to be law > abiding functional citizens, rather than serial killers. Tyler's Lion: But I'm not talking about all orphanages or all orphans. I'm talking about a specific instance--we've been told Tom was raised in an orphanage, and he would rather have stayed at Hogwarts than to return to the orphanage--my inference is that he didn't like it there. His mother died after naming him--he never experienced her love. Most importantly, JKR just said that LV has never loved anyone--which leads to my assumption that he was raised *indifferently*. No one loved him at the orphanage, but they weren't necessarily cruel either. They *didn't* care, and that early indifference caused the damage, namely Riddle's inability to love. Don't forget how long ago Tom was in an orphanage, as well. Now, we know that it is important just to *touch* babies, especially premies. Infants in intensive care who are caressed and feel skin- to-skin contact grow faster than those who aren't touched. Babies suffer, even if they are fed and cleaned, if they aren't *loved*. I'm positing that Tom was treated in this manner--fed, clothed, cleaned, efficiently and indifferently. > Salit: > I think there was something inherently unstable if not outright > evil in Riddle to start with. This is not unheard of, especially > with geniuses (which he was without a doubt). Riddle is certainly > an appropriate name... I agree with the name part...;^) we're probably just always going to disagree about the "outright evil" possiblities of an infant. snip > > Tyler's Lion: > > Now Harry has experienced "true love"--selfless, self- > > sacrificing love. His parents died to save him. > Salit: > However, that happened at 15 months of age. The next 10 years were > spent in a loveless abusive environment. 1. I think those first 15 months matter, b/c while he has no conscious memory of them, I believe there is a "crucial window" for developing emotional attachments, just as there is for developing language acquisition. 2. Harry wasn't raised in an indifferent environment--his relatives actively dislike him. Hate and Love are opposite sides of the same coin--that of caring about another. He saw Dudley receive love-- although I will agree with others that it is a disfunctional love that has done Dudley little good in becoming a "healthy" functional individual. Dudders is spoilt rotten. > > Tyler's Lion: > > His godfather broke out of Azkaban to save him and died trying > > to save him. > Salit: > This happened at 13 - after his personality was already defined. Yeah, but he understands that it was love for him. I don't think Voldemort is capable of understanding that kind of love. Fear and self-preservation are his motivators. > Salit: > Except for the first 15 months of his life and up till he started > Hogwarts, no one (to Harry's knowledge) cared about him either. A > bad upbringing is no explanation for Riddle's transformation. He > was rotten to start with... Again, Harry's relatives did and do care--they dislike him and resent him. Plus, Harry could see his aunt and uncle's love (such as it is) for Duddykins. It makes a difference in that Harry is exposed to emotional attachments, both positive and negative. He understands "caring." In the orphanage I infer for Riddle, not only was he treated efficiently but emotionlessly, but so were all the other orphans. He wasn't loved or hated, and neither were his compatriots. Indifference damaged Riddle far more than the Dursley's dislike could have. Riddle had no model of emotional attachment at all, and therefore never "learned" it, especially during any infancy/early childhood window. By the time he gets to Hogwarts, he can't understand "love" except as a intellectual concept and as a way to manipulate others. I believe Baby Tom had the capacity to love. YMMV. Tyler's Lion From anthyroserain at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 04:22:57 2004 From: anthyroserain at yahoo.com (anthyroserain) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 04:22:57 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110564 Julie: > The pivotal question to me is whether Tom/Voldemort is a > pyschopath/sociopath. I believe JKR says he is. He is also > intelligent, and like other pyschopaths he can intellectually > distinguish between right and wrong (what is morally acceptable to > society and what is not). The problem is, a psychopath just doesn't > CARE. He has no conscience. He can't feel sympathy, compassion, or > love, so he can't feel good or bad about his behavior. His only > compass for his behavior is doing that which gives him some sort of > gain, be it power, money, etc... [snip] > One thing I would ask is, if Voldemort is a psychopath, and has been > one since Tom Riddle was very young, did he really *have* a choice? > Once a small boy's brain/personality turns psychopathic, can that be > undone? In the most technical sense, Tom/Voldemort could have decided > at any point to start behaving morally, even without being able to > care about others. But is there any reasonable expectation that a > person with the twisted logic of a psychopath can really see or fully > understand that choice, or perceive any value in it as a normal human > being would? Katie, now: Hi, I'm coming out from lurkdom because this discussion intrigues me. As I've read so many excellent responses from those well versed in psychology, I thought I'd approach this from a legal viewpoint. Hopefully y'all don't think I'm being completely redundant here :) Something that is important to this discussion is that the fact of mental illness (or, even less so, personality disorder) does NOT excuse one from fault for criminal activity. It may act as a mitigating factor, but it is not a blanket excuse. The American justice system in particular usually considers antisocial personality disorder categorically insufficient to justify lack of guilt, because almost anyone who would commit gross crimes against humanity could be said to suffer from it. It recalls the archaic term "morally insane". I would second the first part of what Julie says above. Sociopaths do know the difference between right or wrong, and we are speaking intellectually here. You can't evaluate on a legal basis someone's moral impulses, but you can evaluate his intellectual understanding. Voldemort/Riddle certainly has a basic grasp of morality. He doesn't care; in fact, he has contempt for it. We have to remember that Tom Riddle was brought up in an orphanage. An uncaring, loveless orphanage, probably, but he was not brought up in a solitary, isolated hole in the ground. If he read books and had some contact with people who weren't completely despicable, he cannot be said to be brought up without any understanding of right and wrong. At some point he must be judged responsible for his actions. Voldemort is an *adult*, not a ten-year-old boy. To Del and all others who think V. cannot be held responsible for his actions: how far would you carry this justification? Can all of us, no matter how uncaring or cognizant of our actions, claim to be pure products of our upbringing and not responsible for our behavior? Can the "Riddle defense" be sufficient for any murderer who was chronically abused or neglected as a child? When does the abuse/neglect become insufficient to explain the crimes? - Katie who loves the giant-sex conversation, by the way From claphamsubwarden at yahoo.com Wed Aug 18 23:38:28 2004 From: claphamsubwarden at yahoo.com (Chris) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 23:38:28 -0000 Subject: FF: Re: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110565 For an interesting take on this read Alex's I am Lord Voldemort fan fiction, it is good and does explain alot, it will be interesting to see how close this fic is when JKR finally reveals all in the next two books! http://www.pineapplegirl.net/thebelljar/ialv/ ChrisT From nearlyheadlessryan at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 00:23:14 2004 From: nearlyheadlessryan at yahoo.com (nearlyheadlessryan) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 00:23:14 -0000 Subject: Why didn't the Longbottoms go into hiding? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110566 I was reading OOP for the fifth time and as I got near the end of the book, right around Harry's attempt to go and rescue Sirius, and it hit me: After Proffessor Trelawny's prediction in the Hog's Head, why did only the Potter's go into hiding and not also the Longbottoms? At this point Dumbledore would have only been able to deduce that it was EITHER Harry or Neville and would not have known that it was definetly Harry. So I will ask it again: Why, then, didn't Frank and Alice Longbottom not go into hiding as well? Were they not warned for some reason as, clearly, the Potters were? Maybe then Frank and Alice wouldn't be veggies. Anyone that has any Ideas I would love to hear them. -Thanks in advance!!! =nearlyheadlessRyan= From nearlyheadlessryan at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 00:36:37 2004 From: nearlyheadlessryan at yahoo.com (nearlyheadlessryan) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 00:36:37 -0000 Subject: Is JKR about to reveal? (Petunia) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110567 Eustace_Scrubb wrote: > >snipped< > > Can DD have given her the ability to tap into some > > recessive magic gene in a case of dire emergency?... > > Maybe she doesn't turn out to be a full-fledged witch. Personally, I think Auntie Petunia has no powers but was threatened by DD. I think that A P knew who DD was and how powerful he is from when her sister was going to Hogwarts. I think that whatever was in the letter that DD left w/ baby Harry was a threat and AP believed that he would carry through with whatever he was threatening and that is why the Dursleys kept Harry. Remember, when Vernon was kicking Harry out, a howler came with the warning for his Aunt: "Remember my last!!!" whatever his last was, I am betting that it was a big old threat! thanks for listening, =nearlyheadlessRyan= From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Thu Aug 19 04:29:26 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 04:29:26 -0000 Subject: Hagrid's parents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110568 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "garybec" wrote: > Lycaea wrote: > Me and my friend were discussing Hagrid and his parents the other > day, and the one thing we want to know is: how the hell did they > have sex? > > Becki's thoughts on the subject; > I always wondered about this one too, but more-so of the attraction > involved. > Which brings me back to my original question, what the heck did he > see in her? Where are the list elves when you need them? *sigh* This is an adult group, I guess... :-) I'll admit to having considered _both_ topics way too often, but I'm surprised the womenfolk didn't consider the implications of Hagrid's querying Madame Maxime about _which_ of her parents was the giant! This evidently worse both ways people! Forget the pencils... I guess in Grawp's case, we can only hope he had one ugly father. We do have a rather singular example of the giants in canon, so it might not be fair to make too many assumptions. However, I do seem to recall Grawp being the runt of the litter. *gulp* Add _that_ to your musings! Josh, who still doesn't want to know what charm was used on the goat From terpnurse at qwest.net Thu Aug 19 01:53:19 2004 From: terpnurse at qwest.net (Steven Spencer) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 18:53:19 -0700 Subject: Hagrid's parents In-Reply-To: <40E9A7570001B221@mta3.fibertel.com.ar> References: <40E9A7570001B221@mta3.fibertel.com.ar> Message-ID: <8B766C69-F182-11D8-AFBD-0003930C168E@qwest.net> No: HPFGUIDX 110569 Mariana wrote: > Considering a human (male) and a giantess, is it anatomically > impossible for them to have sex? I would say no, even without > using an Engorgement (sp?) Charm. I don't have my books with me, > but if I recall correctly, Hagrid's father was indeed a wizard, > so an Engorgement Charm would be a possibility. > I know this is all speculation, but bearing in mind that these > books are meant for children, I don't think JKR is ever going to > share with us the details of Hagrid's conception. > > My last thought is that I can't even begin to imagine what would > it be like if the "entercourse" involved a witch and a giant. Terpnurse: Hmmmm...using an engorgement charm in that way gives new life to Alice in Wonderland's personal growth charm labeled "eat me." That observation aside (and please do forgive us, list-elves!), while the intended audience of these books are indeed teenagers, I do think that JKR throws in little bits of Literary Thestrals (Thank you, Magda, for that phrase!) for us adult readers. For example, the wand weighing scene in GoF. Ollivander comments on how clean Cedric's wand is and he grins slyly, saying "I polished it last night!" Then Harry proceeds to surreptitiously polish his own wand in his lap, spewing out a few spurts of sparks while he does so. Innocent, pre-teen children wouldn't see anything amiss with that entire scene, but older teens and adults can sure see the parallels! From sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com Thu Aug 19 04:35:04 2004 From: sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com (Amey Chinchorkar) Date: 19 Aug 2004 04:35:04 -0000 Subject: Wormtail and the Mark Message-ID: <20040819043504.2761.qmail@webmail31.rediffmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110570 - Tiggersong - I can't, for the life of me, figure out if Wormtail has taken the - Mark. I would think that LV would insist on it, but wouldn't it ... - well ... give Peter away to the Order? - Or are they invisible until LV touches his? I know they darken when - he's stronger, but I don't know if they're true "tattoos" or if - they're just magical pagers, so to speak. - What do you guys think? Does Wormy have the Mark? - - Pippin - Canon says so. - "Voldemort bent down, and pulled out Wormtail's left arm; he - forced the sleeve of Wormtail's robes up past his elbow, and - Harry saw something upon the skin there, something like a vivid - red tatoo -- a skull with a snake protruding from its mouth -- the - same image that had appeared in the sky at the Quidditch World - Cup: the Dark Mark." -- GoF 32 - It wouldn't be much use if it couldn't be concealed from Aurors, - so I suspect it is invisible unless either the bearer or Voldemort - wishes to reveal it. We know from Snape and Karkaroff that their - marks were becoming more visible during year four, but whether - this applies to all the Death Eaters, we don't know. It might be - that Voldemort wanted to send a reminder to just those two, - letting them know their days were numbered. Amey: Aahh Pippin, you are faster than me at pulling out this piece of canon. So I think instead of plowing on and reposting it, I will post my theory. For one, I think the Mark has tendency to appear and disappear as per the powers of Voldemort. When he is gaining strength through the potion, it is returning back (as Karkoff and Snape notice), but before that it is almost invisible (I think even to Moody) when he was *barely alive*. So in these 15 years, the Mark is not at all a reliable mark of a DE. As for wormtail, I think he didn?t receive the Mark the first time around. He was a spy, and could not carry anything which might give him up, Snape would have noticed it easily. Which makes me wonder if Dumbledore knows about it from Snape? Ok, back to wormtail, he returned to Voldemort after his escape in PoA, and then he could not go back, had nothing to lose. Also, Voldmeort needed someone to summon all the DEs to the Graveyard after he was reborn. So he marked wormtail. Crouch could not be used here because he was not there and also, in his polyjuiced form (IMO) he didn?t have the Mark. And as we know, Voldemort had to press somebody?s mark to summon all. I doubt he would have a Mark on himself. I mena, he is not a simple rank and file DE, right? Amey [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bccissell at hotmail.com Thu Aug 19 02:17:39 2004 From: bccissell at hotmail.com (bciss1) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 02:17:39 -0000 Subject: Trelawney / Incompetent teachers at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110571 macfotuk at y... wrote: > I re-read OotP and it occurred to me that Sybil Trelawney's very > near ousting from Hogwarts by Umbridge was an ideal way to put > Trelawney out into the world so that LV or the DE's could get > their hands on her. With the prophecy unavailable or (as it is now) > smashed, why not go straight to the horse's mouth? - might require > some memory interrogation magic (veritaserum?) since Sybil > probably isn't even aware of the prediction's precise wording herself > - any more than she was/is about the Pettigrew prediction made in PoA. > > I believe that this is why DD took her on and defends her despite > not rating her as a teacher - to keep her safe from LV. > >snip I think I have seen this before (I don't remember where) and I like it, but I don't think we really need a reason for DD to keep her as a teacher. I think it is fairly well established that good (or even competent) teaching skills are not required for a position at Hogwarts --regardless of all the talk of its being a highly respected school (maybe it is the only one in the UK?). Trelawney--obviously incompetent and teaching a subject which few wizards (according to McGonagle) have respect for. Professor Binns--all that he ever does is read from a history book- not exactly what I would call teaching. He pays little, if any, attention to his students and regularly puts them to sleep. Quirrel--I am basing my assumption that he is not a 1st year teacher in PS/SS on the fact that Fred and George know quite a bit about him. He is obviously afraid of just about everything--a very bad quality in teacher who is supposed to teach students to handle danger. Lockhart--I know, he was only there for one year and DADA is a difficult position to fill; but, but, but---ok I have no good argument for this one but he is just an idiot. Hagrid--I love Hagrid, he is one of my favorite characters, but he is NOT a teacher. Snape--many people may argue this one, but his behaviour borders on abusive to several of his students and occasionally crosses that border. Although I will concede that it is possible that this behaviour did not start until Harry came to school. So, maybe DD kept Trelawny to keep her safe from the DE; maybe he is just extremely soft-hearted and loves to take in strays; or maybe he doesn't think Divination is a useful subject and so who cares if the teacher is any good?. "bciss1" From misty_december at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 03:00:45 2004 From: misty_december at yahoo.com (misty_december) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 03:00:45 -0000 Subject: Why Harry will Live In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110572 Josh: > Unfortunately, there are no happy contrapositives in this prophecy. > Except for the "at the hand of", both parts say essentially the > same thing... The One and the Dark Lord will be irresistably drawn > into battle with each other until the combination no longer exists... > i.e. at least one of them is dead. "one must die" does not mean > that "one must live" but that "both cannot live". "Neither can live" > by itself would be that "both must die" except that the "while the > other survives" means that the death of one MAY exempt the other from > this requirement... i.e. it IS possible that the final battle may > yield a survivor, but there are no guarantees. ****************************************************** So that would mean that they must both die at the same instant. Otherwise, one is going to survive. This survival would mean the certain death of the other. I remember JKR saying that the prophecy was "worded very carefully", so I started to look at each word and how it related to the others. To me it comes out: Either (Harry or V) must die at the hand of the other(Harry must kill V or V must kill Harry) because neither Harry nor V can (is able to) live while the other survives the duel (or whatever). So I guess I just assumed that the fact that Harry survives is what kills V. I knew I was terrible at logic. LoL! Thanks. Misty From misty_december at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 03:13:30 2004 From: misty_december at yahoo.com (misty_december) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 03:13:30 -0000 Subject: How is Harry good? [Re: Harry and Tom] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110573 Josh: > In other words... his mother's love is not only something that > serves as a basis for Harry's protection... it is a built-in > thing. He's stuck with it. I think the 'magical' inference we > are supposed to draw is that Harry literally survived on his > mother's love... just through LV's AK, but also the next 9 5/6 > years of his life. > > Yes... if Harry had been attacked on Nov 31, we would have had > an interesting tie to 9 3/4, but I digress... **************************************************** Nov. 31? Just kidding. LoL I still have to repeat that I am new to the books - only read them all for the first time a few weeks ago. Does this mean that Harry's mother's love protection is no longer with him? Was this only a one- time thing to protect Harry against Voldemort's initial attack? Misty :-) (who can't remember everything in the books, having only read them once!) From soulbrotha at mikaelmartin.com Thu Aug 19 04:38:48 2004 From: soulbrotha at mikaelmartin.com (rockstar064) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 04:38:48 -0000 Subject: The Protection in Harry's Blood Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110574 I have been pondering something for awhile, and it's really irritating, because I can't ever find a good explanation. I just don't understand why Harry's protection from the Avada Kedavra curse was lifted when his blood was used to resurrect Voldemort. In GOF, Voldemort said that he would now have the same protection that is in Harry's blood; however, in my mind, that doesn't mean Harry LOSES his protection. I've reread parts in the book over and over, and I still don't see it. Wouldn't the curse still rebound off Harry even if it didn't do any harm to Voldemort? I would greatly appreciate it if someone could try to explain this to me. Thanks Michael From navarro198 at hotmail.com Thu Aug 19 05:04:53 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 05:04:53 -0000 Subject: Why didn't the Longbottoms go into hiding? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110575 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nearlyheadlessryan" wrote: > I was reading OOP for the fifth time and as I got near the end of the > book, right around Harry's attempt to go and rescue Sirius, and it > hit me: After Proffessor Trelawny's prediction in the Hog's Head, why > did only the Potter's go into hiding and not also the Longbottoms? Bookworm: IMO, they did. They were tortured several weeks *after* Voldemort disappeared by Bellatrix and company - who thought the Longbottoms knew where Voldemort was - at a time when everyone was just starting to relax and believe that the war was over. (GoF, The Pensieve) Both the Potters and Longbottoms went into hiding around the same time. Voldemort found the Potters first because of Pettigrew. After Voldemort disappeared the Longbottoms could come out of hiding. Ravenclaw Bookworm From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Thu Aug 19 05:07:47 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 05:07:47 -0000 Subject: Why didn't the Longbottoms go into hiding? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110576 >>> NHR wrote: > After Proffessor Trelawny's prediction in the Hog's Head, why > did only the Potter's go into hiding and not also the Longbottoms? <<< Brenda: Well we don't know for certain whether the Longbottoms went into hiding or not, do we? We only know that Frank and Alice were tortured by Bella & co after Voldemort's disappearance. Why they were tortured bothers me though. I think the explanation we are given in the book was that they were tortured for information related to Voldemort's whereabout or some nonsense like that. No, I personally think they had Neville in protection and that's why Frank and Alice were tortured -- DEs wanted to find Neville in the hopes to use the other prophecy boy to restore Voldemort. I don't think permanently driving them to insanity was in Bella's agenda, it wouldn't have done them any good. I can think of a scenario where Frank and Alice egged them on ('did you know, your Dark Lord has been vanquished by an infant boy') and Bella finally lost it there. Brenda From ctcasares at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 19 00:29:48 2004 From: ctcasares at sbcglobal.net (tylerswaxlion) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 00:29:48 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110577 > > Tyler's Lion: > > So while you can learn an additional language at any age, albeit > > with difficulty, if you haven't learned the *concept* of language > > in infancy/early childhood, you never will. > > > > The infant and child Tom Riddle was capable of love. The adult-- > > and probably the teen--Voldemort is not. > SSSusan wrote: > And are you certain that learning to love and learning language > are the SAME cognitive mechanisms? I don't think anyone is *certain*, it's science, not faith. Behavior is a product of nature and nurture, and there's no one correct theory. However, most studies seem to bear out that both senses and complex cognitive skills seem to have a "crucial window" for exposure during infancy. If this crucial window is missed, the ability to use the sense/skill is lost forever, despite any later exposure. If no one ever loved Tom Riddle as an infant, if no one around Baby! Tom was ever shown love, if he were raised in such an antiseptic, completely unemotional environment, I believe it is perfectly logical to assume he'd have no clue about love and emotional attachment. And that, later in life, he would be incapable of understanding it as more than an intellectual concept, i.e., as a weakness to exploit in others. And I can see the indifference in the orphanage of the time as coming from the idea that they didn't want the orphans to become attached to the employees--just to their adoptive parents. Studies showing the benefit of touch/caress/*kindness* to infants wouldn't appear for decades. Which makes it even sadder and more ironic to me: poor Baby Tom ignored for his own good! > SSSusan: > The concept of language and the concept of love aren't the same. > One revolves around emotion, whereas the other revolves around > cognition. And Tom doesn't feel that emotion per JKR. And never has. Why would emotion be so very different from language or sight? Don't you believe emotion occurs in the brain? How do you suppose Tom was to learn it? > SSSusan: > And I'll take that "probably" re: teen Tom! :-) Our mileage does vary! ;^) His behavior in CoS seems to me to show someone who has already been emotionally damaged. He doesn't *care* the way he should, and with JKR stating that he never has loved, I think the emotional indifference of his childhood warped him to the point that he never will. I don't think it *excuses* his evil acts, but I think it explains why he's *capable* of them. He's a psychopath. But I wonder why Baby!Tom wasn't adopted? He was cute and smart (DD calls him a good-looking boy, so he couldn't have been a hideous infant could he?) Especially since he was conceivably at the orphanage from day 1. Tyler's Lion From ctcasares at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 19 00:35:29 2004 From: ctcasares at sbcglobal.net (tylerswaxlion) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 00:35:29 -0000 Subject: Trelawney In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110578 macfotuk at y... wrote: snip > I believe that this is why DD took her on and defends her despite > not rating her as a teacher - to keep her safe from LV. There's also the fact that she DID give a prophecy. As much as she's a faker most of the time, DD knows of 2 instances where she DID prophesy. True seers are rare, and Sybil is a true seer--just not nearly as often as she'd like to be. Good to have one on staff. ;^) Tyler's Lion From ctcasares at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 19 00:48:41 2004 From: ctcasares at sbcglobal.net (tylerswaxlion) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 00:48:41 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110579 Pam wrote: > We shape our choices, and our choices shape us. Even if one is > raised without love, the loveless choices one makes (and continues > to make) or refrains from doing (and continues to refrain from > doing) also shape us. I believe that these lifelong choices are > what distinguishes Harry from Voldemort, more than their infant > experiences. I agree that their choices matter. Even though I believe Voldemort is a psychopath, that doesn't excuse his behavior or his choices. It doesn't exempt him from his due punishment. It just explains why he would make those choices. I am a big believer in free will. Although, I have to wonder if messing around with all those ESE! immortality spells/charms created a point of no return. I can imagine the possibility of a Tom Riddle/Voldemort who out of fear and self-preservation (not a feeling of morality/good/evil) "redeems" himself--not that *I* would trust him! But I don't think that Voldemort is wholly human anymore, and if he's not human, does he still have free will? Tyler's Lion--who's falling more and more into the Changeling! Harry/twinned souls camp. From generation2004 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 02:56:32 2004 From: generation2004 at yahoo.com (Martha) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 02:56:32 -0000 Subject: Going back to DD knowing all In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110580 Josh wrote: > > "No, it isn't," said Harry thoughtfully. "He's a funny man, > Dumbledore. I think he sort of wanted to give me a chance. I > think he knows more or less everything that goes on here, you > know. I reckon he had a pretty good idea we were going to try, > and instead of stopping us, he just taught us enough to help. > I don't think it was an accident he let me find out how the > mirror worked. It's almost like he thought I had the right to > face Voldemort if I could...." > > Does anyone else find that to be a VERY interesting conversation > in retrospect? Martha writes: That's true, it is a very interesting conversation. I think that DD is indirectly teaching or preparing Harry on how to defend himself, since he knows what "fate" is waiting for him in the future (the show down at the OK Corral with Voldy). Although I don't know to what extent it could go. Does any one have any suggestions, please? Martha From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Thu Aug 19 05:24:33 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 05:24:33 -0000 Subject: Trelawney / Incompetent teachers at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110581 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bciss1" wrote: > macfotuk at y... wrote: > So, maybe DD kept Trelawny to keep her safe from the DE; maybe he > is just extremely soft-hearted and loves to take in strays; or > maybe he doesn't think Divination is a useful subject and so who > cares if the teacher is any good?. Actually, Dumbledore admits to as much in OotP when describing the interview. He didn't want to hire a teacher for Divination, but granted the interview as a courtesy to the woman's true-Seer ancestory. The Prophesy made him want to keep Trewalny safe and under his eye, so that if there were any additional prophesies, he might have access to them and better prevent their content from eavesdroppers. McGonnigal, Flitwick, Sprout, and other background teachers do know their stuff at least... It is very tough to explain away why Binns and Hagrid are left on/hired, but perhaps it has something to do with a lack of applicants, or who the other applicants were? The rest are easily explained. The DADA position is impossible to fill. Lockhart was the only applicant for CoS, Lupin and Moody were special requests, and Umbridge got appointed because DD couldn't find _anybody_ willing to take the job. Trewalny and Snape (latter knows his stuff, too) are tolerated for anti-LV reasons. Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Thu Aug 19 05:32:04 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 05:32:04 -0000 Subject: Why Harry will Live In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110582 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "misty_december" wrote: > Josh: > > > it IS possible that the final battle may > > yield a survivor, but there are no guarantees. > > ****************************************************** > So that would mean that they must both die at the same instant. > Otherwise, one is going to survive Not at all... one must die, the other *may* die... perhaps at the same time, perhaps 5 days later, perhaps at some unrelated time far in the future... but 'at least' one will die in battle... or the battle will be refought. > I knew I was terrible at logic. LoL! :) So are 99% of everybody else. :) jk! It can be very hard to apply strict logic... especially when you are simultaneously stretching your imagination. Then you get into how tricky the English language can get, and how often it is used by 99.44% of its speakers, and you see the problem... :) Josh, who is having a lot of fun with the prophesy tonight! From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Thu Aug 19 05:45:58 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 05:45:58 -0000 Subject: The Protection in Harry's Blood In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110583 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "rockstar064" wrote: > I just don't understand why Harry's protection from the Avada > Kedavra curse was lifted when his blood was used to resurrect > Voldemort. In GOF, Voldemort said that he would now have the same > protection that is in Harry's blood I theorize that the 'protection' was a one time thing... else before that point DD would not have had to work for Harry's safety; after the initial AK rebound, Harry is not just a better-dipped Achilles... he is vunerable. However, as my earlier post tonight (ok, one of them) reflected, Lily's love is metaphysically present in Harry's skin, blood, etc. It is this physical love that burns Quirrel!Mort, not the protection itself. When LV takes the blood into himself, his is physically no longer a being without love of any type... so now the love in Harry's flesh is not longer a danger. This is not true of LV's mind, however, as we discover at the end of OotP. Am I making sense, or am I going downhill as I approach 2 am? Josh From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Aug 19 07:03:18 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 07:03:18 -0000 Subject: Going back to DD knowing all In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110584 > > Martha writes: > That's true, it is a very interesting conversation. > I think that DD is indirectly teaching or preparing > Harry on how to defend himself, since he knows what > "fate" is waiting for him in the future (the show down > at the OK Corral with Voldy). Although I don't know to > what extent it could go. Does any one have any > suggestions, please? > Valky: Hi Martha.. I couldn't really think of how to answer Josh's question but as to what extent HPFGU finds and has found canon that proves DD knows *everything* I recommend the "Fantastics Posts and where to find them." site you can access through the HPFGU portkey. Look up MAGIC DISHWASHER , its a very very very long acronym for DD knows everything and *is* puppetmaster. I am posting this onlist for the benefit of others as well who would be interested in discussing Dumbledores control over Harry's fate. Keep in mind that it is a pre OotP thread and enjoy. Best to All Valky From patientx3 at aol.com Thu Aug 19 07:21:36 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 07:21:36 -0000 Subject: Trelawney / Incompetent teachers at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110585 "bciss1" wrote: >>Hagrid--I love Hagrid, he is one of my favorite characters, but he is NOT a teacher.<< HunterGreen: Far be it for me to defend Hagrid (since he is NOT one of my favorite characters at all), but I think he *could* have been a good teacher if not for the whole Draco/Buckbeak disaster. His first lesson was well organized and appropriate. After that he just lost his nerve. He did flobberworms for most (all?) of the year which certainly taught them nothing (assuming there's not more to flobberworms than we've been told), and then in his second year of teaching, he got his nerve back, but didn't use it to organize appropriate subjects. Rather, he spent his time using the students to raise an illegal animal (its strange than everyone was so worried about him being fired over the buckbeak thing, and he was put on probation for almost nothing in OotP, but in GoF he probably DESERVED to be fired, and it wasn't a concern). Anyway, that aside, I think he has it in him to be a good COMC teacher--he certainly knows the subject--he just first lost his confidence, and then after that he needed someone to help him with his lesson plans. Not from Hermione, its not her place but Dumbledore should have stepped in if only to give advice, Hagrid is after all a new teacher, and if he was expelled in third year he barely took the class himself, needing a little bit of help is understandable, if not expected. "bciss1": >>Snape--many people may argue this one, but his behaviour borders on abusive to several of his students and occasionally crosses that border. Although I will concede that it is possible that this behaviour did not start until Harry came to school.<< HunterGreen: I shouldn't even touch this one (I don't want the Snape debate to start up again...I really don't). I'll just say this, that at least his students are learning (as evidenced by Umbridge's comment about them being 'advanced' in OotP). That's more than you can say for Binns or Lockhart. "bciss1" >>So, maybe DD kept Trelawny to keep her safe from the DE; maybe he is just extremely soft-hearted and loves to take in strays; or maybe he doesn't think Divination is a useful subject and so who cares if the teacher is any good?.<< HunterGreen: He did say he had planned on dropping the subject altogether. I don't think its so much that divination is a stupid subject, just that its worthless to about 99.9% of the students who take it, since they aren't seers. If a real seer comes along, arranging private lessons would be better than teaching a class which requires students to lie and exaggerate to pass. I think he definitely kept her around in OotP because of the prophecy...Voldemort is surely bright enough to realize that if he captured her he could get the original memory from her head. Before that maybe he just kept her around at first because of the prophecy and then because he both couldn't fire her out of the blue, and in case she made another one (like she did in PoA, although it was less important). From karen.lyall at blueyonder.co.uk Thu Aug 19 06:38:07 2004 From: karen.lyall at blueyonder.co.uk (karenlyall666) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 06:38:07 -0000 Subject: Hagrid's parents In-Reply-To: <8B766C69-F182-11D8-AFBD-0003930C168E@qwest.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110586 I have ventured out of lurkdom twice in three days - that's pretty good doing. I must admit that my question regarding the subject of Hagrid's Parents is rather tame and innocent, compared to some of the comments that have been thrown around lately. A previous poster (I'm at work just now and don't have a lot of time so the fact that I'm not crediting the past posters please accept my apologies) asked "What did his dad see in his mother?". My question is what on earth did his mother see in his father? We know, from the photo scene in GOF that Mr Hagrid Snr was "a tiny man", and if I remember correctly there was no qualification of "compared to Hagrid." We also learned that "size is everything" to giants in OOTP. How would a giantess hope to produce a child of acceptable size when the father was a tiny little wizard? A slightly more innocent spin on the subject from Karen From musicofsilence at hotmail.com Thu Aug 19 08:00:51 2004 From: musicofsilence at hotmail.com (lifeavantgarde) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 08:00:51 -0000 Subject: Trelawney / Incompetent teachers/Binns theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110587 >>>macfotuk at y... wrote: I re-read OotP and it occurred to me that Sybil Trelawney's very near ousting from Hogwarts by Umbridge was an ideal way to put Trelawney out into the world so that LV or the DE's could get their hands on her. I believe that this is why DD took her on and defends her despite not rating her as a teacher - to keep her safe from LV.<<< Stefanie: HERE HERE! I posted on this a while back (in relation to Snape actually) and I still remain convinced. JKR made an effort to let us know certain teachers' years of employment in OotP and from those numbers, you have Trelawney being hired directly after her prophecy and Snape being hired in the same year Dumbledore reveals him as a spy. At the end of OotP, Dumbledore never goes into what he did with Trelawney after the prophecy, or the reasoning thereof. DD seems to have faith in hereditary divination skills, but judging from his tone, he doesn't have faith that they can be taught. I don't think one quite accidental prophecy would change his mind about that. (Trelawney hadn't shown him any ability at *teaching* in her whole interview). It's been smashed down our throats that Hogwarts is the safest place to be...why wouldn't DD bring the speaker of an overheard prophecy back there under the rather unremarkable guise of continuing the post? Then we have Snape, who does indeed know his stuff, but really shows no signs of wanting to do what he's doing. Surprise, surprise, Snape was hired right around when Dumbledore revealed his spy hood at Karkaroff's trial with, not only DE Karkaroff present, but many others as well. It's not that far-fetched (especially with the example of Trelawney) to think that Dumbledore would've hired Snape to keep him safe from any revenge-seekers after his rather large secret was spilled. If one is going to look at things this way, then going down the list of teachers (save the DADA post, as it's notoriously hard to fill), those others that seem pointless to have on staff are Binns and Hagrid. While we definitely know when Hagrid was taken on, we don't know when Binns was hired (he died of old age, but he may've been quite old when hired). As we've seen two positions that were empty near the end of the first war, and quite possibly three, since Snape was keen for the DADA position (a Professor Potter being another of my favorite theories), perhaps we're seeing backlash from the killings that were quite thick at the time. Also, perhaps the History of Magic position was one of these vacated posts. What if Binns were hired around the same time as Trelawney and Snape also to be kept safe? Of course, now he's dead, but we saw in CoS how ghosts can be affected by magic (Nick's petrification)...perhaps even ghosts' memories can be pilfered and Dumbledore is keeping on the ineffectual Binns to prevent just that? Stefanie Who isn't sure she believes the Binns bit, but enjoys speculating at 4AM :o) From tonks_op at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 06:04:27 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 06:04:27 -0000 Subject: Why Harry will Live In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110588 > > > Josh: > > > it IS possible that the final battle may > > > yield a survivor, but there are no guarantees. > > Misty: > > So that would mean that they must both die at the same instant. > > Otherwise, one is going to survive > Josh: > Not at all... one must die, the other *may* die... perhaps at the > same time, perhaps 5 days later, perhaps at some unrelated time > far in the future... but 'at least' one will die in battle... or > the battle will be refought. ------------------------------------------------------- Tonks_op reply: I think that we must look at the whole prophecy. "He will mark him as his equal". Equal to what? What does LV have that could possibly be of help to Harry? Equal in power? We know that Harry has a power that LV does not know so that can't be it. As to who dies and who lives.. I am not any more sure of that than anyone else, except that I think Harry will die, and something ?? happens to LV. It is possible that JKR is talking about the ying/yang of good vs. evil. That neither one can fully be 100% in power as long as the other is still around. If we say that Harry is love and Voldemort is evil, then neither one will have full power until the other is gone. They both have to be present in order to prevent the other from coming into full power. I am not sure where I am going with this. Will have to ponder some more. Tonks_op From tonks_op at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 06:13:51 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 06:13:51 -0000 Subject: The Protection in Harry's Blood In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110589 Josh wrote: > (snip) > When LV takes the blood into himself, he is physically no longer > a being without love of any type... so now the love in Harry's > flesh is no longer a danger. This is not true of LV's mind, > however, as we discover at the end of OotP. ============================================= Tonks_op replies: I like the sound of this. Yes, maybe that is why DD has a smile.. Voldemort is no longer without love.. it is transmitted to him in Harry's blood.. maybe there is hope for Voldy after all. He would have to turn from his evil ways.. I don't think that he will, but maybe DD has more faith in him that I do. Can Harry's blood save Tom Riddle? Tonks_op From lordxn at yahoo.com.au Thu Aug 19 07:12:48 2004 From: lordxn at yahoo.com.au (lordxn) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 07:12:48 -0000 Subject: Sirius Black Death Poll Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110590 Having just chosen the last option i.e. do something substantially different, I should post my vague idea of what might happen here. I feel that Harry will survive at the end but will choose to join the 'Unspeakables' who study the Death Room and Death. He will be so motivated to find out what, as Dumbledore has said is "To the organised mind death is the last great adventure", happens when one moves through The Veil. Up until that point he will not so much as have accepted Sirius' death but learned to live with the loss. "lordxn" From greatraven at hotmail.com Thu Aug 19 08:52:01 2004 From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 08:52:01 -0000 Subject: Trelawney / Incompetent teachers/Binns theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110591 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lifeavantgarde" wrote: (Snip) While we definitely know when Hagrid was taken on, we don't > know when Binns was hired (he died of old age, but he may've been > quite old when hired). > > As we've seen two positions that were empty near the end of the > first war, and quite possibly three, since Snape was keen for the > DADA position (a Professor Potter being another of my favorite > theories), perhaps we're seeing backlash from the killings that were > quite thick at the time. Also, perhaps the History of Magic position > was one of these vacated posts. What if Binns were hired around the > same time as Trelawney and Snape also to be kept safe? Of course, > now he's dead, but we saw in CoS how ghosts can be affected by magic > (Nick's petrification)...perhaps even ghosts' memories can be > pilfered and Dumbledore is keeping on the ineffectual Binns to > prevent just that? > > Stefanie > Who isn't sure she believes the Binns bit, but enjoys speculating at > 4AM :o) Sue: Er - exactly how do you fire a teacher who's dead? Exorcise him? Tell him to go off and play with the other ghosts? :-)And personally, I think he was hired long, long ago and just never bothered to change his teaching methods, then died and kept right on teaching - a wonderful send-up of the kind of teachers who lurk around expensive private schools, doing the same thing every year for thirty years and being the joke between parents and children - "Oh, do you have Binns for History? Useless, isn't he? We had him too." I have often wondered, anyway, just how Professor Binns marks all those essays he gives his students, without being able to touch anything. I also wonder how come we're constantly being told that the DADA post is hard to fill - it isn't. Snape wants it. DD doesn't want him in the job. He'd rather give it to that idiot Lockhart. But it's still wanted by more than one applicant. Ah, questions, questions! (g) From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Aug 19 08:52:44 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 08:52:44 -0000 Subject: Trelawney / Incompetent teachers/Binns theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110592 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lifeavantgarde" wrote: > >>>macfotuk at y... wrote: > I re-read OotP and it occurred to me that Sybil Trelawney's very > near ousting from Hogwarts by Umbridge was an ideal way to put > Trelawney out into the world so that LV or the DE's could get their hands on her. > Stefanie: > HERE HERE! Valky: Ditto... and I think we may have overlooked that this makes dear Madame Trelawney, as ineffectual she as a teacher, something far more important *a weapon*. In OotP, was LV after, not just her prophecy from the past, but also her prophecies of the future? If so it implicates Umbridge as a party to LV's plans. However, I don't see that supported by canon Umbridge *is* a nasty hideous character but all in all shes nothing more /really/ than DE- FIE ESE Fudge's pawn. Why do I think so? Because it's canon. 1.Umbridge set the Dementors on little whinging. To shut Harry up, for the good of the WW 'according to Fudge' hence in her servitude to her master Cornelius Fudge. 2.She went to Hogwarts to discredit and oust DD and sack *Hagrid and Trelawney* it's a given that she always intended to. *She* did this because Fudge is scared of DD; Trelawney(Prophecy) is a powerful weapon of war in DD's hands and so is Hagrid(Giants), in Hogwarts walls under DD they are protected and untouchable. Fudge whispers in Umbridge's ear that it would *also* be good for the WW if 'the WW childrens' education were not in the hands of Half giants and fakes. So Umbridge runs along like a good girl to serve her master and his will be done. I DE-FIE, who can disprove? From romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 08:45:03 2004 From: romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com (romuluslupin1) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 08:45:03 -0000 Subject: Always Monday/Dudley's tail In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110593 > Romulus Lupin: > > One more thing that's bugged me for a while. Why do lessons always > > start on September 2nd? Isn't term supposed to start on September > > 1st? > Geoff: > Another difference between Hogwarts and other schools seems to be the > start date. Traditionally, UK schools have started several days into > September and private schools tended to start even later than state > schools. Romulus Lupin now: Thanks for your answer, Geoff. From reading previous posts on the subject I had the impression that UK schools started on September 1st and I couldn't reconcile the discrepancies. I thought it was just one of those things I couldn't get as a non English. Now I only have to wonder what's the deal with Dudley's tail. I still don't get why the Dursleys waited a full month to have it removed. I mean, it must have been painful when sitting (which is what Dudley does for most of the time) and I guess hiding it beneath his trousers couldn't be all that comfortable either. Romulus Lupin From spoonmerlin at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 07:31:02 2004 From: spoonmerlin at yahoo.com (Brent) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 07:31:02 -0000 Subject: Is JKR about to reveal? (Petunia) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110594 > nearlyheadlessryan wrote: > Personally, I think Auntie Petunia has no powers but was threatened > by DD. I think that A P knew who DD was and how powerful he is from > when her sister was going to Hogwarts. I think that whatever was in > the letter that DD left w/ baby Harry was a threat and AP believed > that he would carry through with whatever he was threatening and > that is why the Dursleys kept Harry. Remember, when Vernon was kicking > Harry out, a howler came with the warning for his Aunt: "Remember > my last!!!" whatever his last was, I am betting that it was a big old > threat! I agree. If anything it would seem more likely he threatened to give her powers with the way she and Vernon acts towards magic. If she was hiding some magic abilities, or purposely not using them. Maybe she was trying to leave a normal non-magic life due to LV. Then maybe she was blackmailed or had them removed as part of the deal. JKR did say she is a muggle and so I think the "deal" she made was not about magic and was about something else. She seemed scared when she thought about the deal so there has to be some kind of threat involved. "Brent" From tonks_op at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 06:31:06 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 06:31:06 -0000 Subject: Is JKR about to reveal? (Petunia) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110595 nearlyheadlessryan wrote: > > Personally, I think Auntie Petunia has no powers but was > threatened by DD. I think that A P knew who DD was and how > powerful he is from when her sister was going to Hogwarts. > I think that whatever was in the letter that DD left w/ baby > Harry was a threat and AP believed that he would carry through > with whatever he was threatening and that is why the Dursleys > kept Harry. (snip) -------------------------------- Tonks_op replies: I disagree. I don't think that Dumbledore threatens people. I think that Petunia is a moral woman. Harry is her sister's son. She feels a responsibility to keep him safe. Dumbledore probably explained the fact that Harry was only safe at their home... I forgot how he put it.. the place where the blood of his mother resides or something like that. Petunia know that Harry is in danger anywhere else, that is why she says "He has to stay". She is not going to be responsible for his death. She is doing the right thing, not the easy thing.. just as Dumbledore tells us all to do. Tonks_op From patientx3 at aol.com Thu Aug 19 08:56:13 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 08:56:13 -0000 Subject: Butterbeer (was: Two Words - Magic Wand was Re:Hagrid's parents) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110596 Caesian's last word: >>And what the heck is Butterbeer?<< HunterGreen: I respectfully have 'no comment' on Hagrid's parents (although it is something I wondered about). However, I have wondered about butterbeer myself, or I did when I first read the books. Fortunately there are enough people onlist who know more about beverage making than I do. After a fun trip into the archives I found a butterbeer thread starting with: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/51715 In the thread Steve (b_boymn) wrote: >>any beverage that is fremented is going to contain some alcohol. In Britian you are allowed to have 0.5% in a beverage, and you can still consider it a soft drink and sell it with out restriction.<< And Jim Ferer added: >>I also have brewed root beer by old fashioned natural processes. The carbonation is added by a second fermentation (in the case of beer) or a small amount of yeast added for a slight "first" fermentation; that's how drinks got fizzy before CO2 was injected into them. If butterbeer was made that way, there would be a slight alcohol content, insignificant to humans.<< I suppose then, that Butterbeer is a butterscotch flavored soft-drink with a tiny amount of alcohol in it. Sort of makes me wonder what it would taste like (although I'd guess you'd have to be under a certain age to appreciate it, I'd probably choke from the sugar). From katiebug1233 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 07:46:25 2004 From: katiebug1233 at yahoo.com (Kate) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 07:46:25 -0000 Subject: Trelawney / Incompetent teachers at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110597 Josh said: > McGonagall, Flitwick, Sprout, and other background teachers do > know their stuff at least... It is very tough to explain away > why Binns and Hagrid are left on/hired, but perhaps it has > something to do with a lack of applicants, or who the other > applicants were? The rest are easily explained. The DADA > position is impossible to fill. Lockhart was the only applicant > for CoS, Lupin and Moody were special requests, and Umbridge got > appointed because DD couldn't find _anybody_ willing to take the > job. Trelawney and Snape (latter knows his stuff, too) are > tolerated for anti-LV reasons. Katie says: I think that Trelawney is terrible BUT I think that you are being too harsh on Binns and Hagrid. Binns may be boring but that doesn't mean he is a bad teacher. It isn't his job to entertain the children, just pass on the information. I think that is a "you get what you put into the class" situation. (And I am sure that someone will say he isn't as effective because he is so boring but when you are teaching a history class how can you compete with wand waving and spell casting?) If you look back on Hagrid's lessons I think he succeeds more than you think. He is very knowledgable on his subject and it seems that getting flustered while having to deal with Draco and the Slytherins is his only problem... I would like to see him teach the Ravenclaws/Hufflepuffs. I have a feeling those classes may go a bit better. The Nifflers were a fantastic lesson. He would have done fine with the Hippogriffs if Draco wasn't such a git. I think that after seeing Grubby-Plank's methodology he is coming around. He did a great job picking up on her unicorn lesson. I think that with a little trial and error and some confidence Hagrid is going to join the ranks of Sprout, Snape and McGonagall. -Katie, whose mother is starting a teaching job tomorrow morning after 22 years of not working and is seeing a Hagrid situation in poor mom's future.... From spoonmerlin at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 07:55:47 2004 From: spoonmerlin at yahoo.com (Brent) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 07:55:47 -0000 Subject: Portkeys - Tri-wiz/Garveyard, and World Cup In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110598 B_Boymn: > One last point on this aspect, in the past discussions we have come up > with two likely (but speculative) reasons why the portkey had a return > trip attached. > > One, as I have suggested and is my preferred method, is that the cup > was already a key to the edge of the maze, and Barty!Moody added a new > enchantment on top of that. The first enchantment was used to take > Harry to the graveyard, and the remaining and original was used to > take him back. > > The fact that Barty!Moody claims to have enchanted the portkey doesn't > prevent another portkey charm from already existing. What Barty! Moody > says is his view of the world as he knows it, and not the author's > absolute statement of fact. > > The alternate is that Barty!Moody added both 'stops', the first to > take Harry to the graveyard, and the second to take Harry's dead body > back to Hogwarts as Voldemort's way of flipping the middle finger to > Dumbledore. Another reason Harry had to go back is because then nobody is looking for him or LV. If Harry alive or dead is just gone then DD is going to find out what happened. This would be the last thing LV would want. The other clues of the dark mark would not be solid proof if Harry was dead. It could be any DE or something else but they would be left guessing. If you want to gain strength and not draw suspicion then you'd send Harry's body back to look like something in the maze got him and then LV can come back on his own terms. Or LV could have used a polyjuice Potion to become Harry and sneak attack DD. The first seem to go with what happens in the other books but it could have been the backup plan as they would need someone close to DD to be able to defeat him. You have to remember LV was planning his comeback for months. He doesn't want to come back and then have a war with the WW the next day. He needs troops and plans. He isn't stupid enough to take on DD without some firepower. From pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 19 09:15:29 2004 From: pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net (pcaehill2) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 09:15:29 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110599 tyler's lion wrote: [snip] > I am a big believer in free will. > > Although, I have to wonder if messing around with all those ESE! > immortality spells/charms created a point of no return. I have to agree here, I do think that at some point, our choices can lead us to a "point of no return", that is, a place where we have to live with what we've done and what we've done leaves an indelible impression on us. And I really don't believe in cheap redemption (hence my belief that Darth Vader's deathbed conversion was faked!)...but I still take issue with your (previously posted) argument that cognitively acquired skills such as language are equivalent to emotional development. Windows of opportunity in infancy abound, and I've heard the language argument before, and read the research re: feral kids, etc. (which is not considered extremely convincing, however, due to the small sample). But emotional development depends on much more than cognition -- I've worked with mentally retarded kids and adults who are extremely wise emotionally and socially!!! Pam, who once had a client who created the bumper sticker: F*** DOOM!!! I heartily concur. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Aug 19 09:23:56 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 09:23:56 -0000 Subject: Is JKR about to reveal? (Petunia) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110600 wrote: > > Personally, I think Auntie Petunia has no powers but was > > threatened by DD. I think that A P knew who DD was and how > > powerful he is from when her sister was going to Hogwarts. > > I think that whatever was in the letter that DD left w/ baby > > Harry was a threat and AP believed that he would carry through > > with whatever he was threatening and that is why the Dursleys > > kept Harry. (snip) > > -------------------------------- > Tonks_op replies: > > I disagree. I don't think that Dumbledore threatens people. > I think that Petunia is a moral woman. Harry is her sister's > son. She feels a responsibility to keep him safe. Dumbledore > probably explained the fact that Harry was only safe at their > home... Petunia know that Harry is in danger anywhere else, that > is why she says "He has to stay". She is not going to be > responsible for his death. She is doing the right thing, not the > easy thing.. just as Dumbledore tells us all to do. > Valky: I am inclined to agree with Tonks the most, although I *am* interested in the thread pursuing Ever-so-Clean-Hence-Magical- Petunia-X-Dudleys-Worst-Memory theory. I agree, in that, I doubt DD would use bargaining, threats or bribery to appeal to Petunias mercy. I would like to believe that DD is above such things, too noble for them. I also agree that Petunia allows Harry to stay because; '*She* is not going to be responsible for his death' *and* that she is a moral woman. But, I do not agree that she decided 'She is not going to be responsible for Harry's death' *because* she is a moral woman. Firstly as moral as she is she is not *actually* killing him by sending him away. There are places he can go, there are others who care about him. He *has* options if his physical safety is *all* that Petunia was concerned about. Unless we pitch ourselves firmly in the 'Petunia has a very soft spot for Harry' camp it just falls down. Secondly Remember my Last... *If* 'My Last' simply said "Harry is *only* safe with you Petunia" how could such words effect her in OotP in light of the previous years events. In PS/SS Harry goes to Hogwarts /not with Petunia/ in CoS he goes to The Burrow /not with Petunia/, in POA to London /not with Petunia/ and so on to the QWC... So couldn't then Petunia simply say to DD's Howler under her breath 'Tripe Dumbledore! He keeps coming back here safe and well, so I /don't/ believe you!' Certainly 'My Last' said something else about Harry, something far more compelling for Petunia and the acreage of wiggle room we have for that theory is so far only dotted with hazy figures..... From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 09:43:28 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 09:43:28 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110601 Valky wrote : "This is *exactly* why we can't assume that Tom was already mentally non compus pre age 11. If impending canon entirely manages to remove responsibility for choice from the hands of eleven year old Tom then *Harry's* choices mean *nothing*. " Del replies : Hum, Valky, you should know by now that I don't take well that kind of argument. I do NOT believe that making the baddies less bad (or less responsible or whatever) takes anything away from the good guys' goodness. And in a more general way, I do not believe that admitting that someone is a special case takes away anything from someone else's accomplishments. Valky wrote : "In fact I would go as far as to say that LV *is* compus mentis even now and is /not/ psychopathic." Del replies : Except that JKR said that Tom never loved, and that if he had he could not have become LV. This IS a very psychopathic trait. Someone who can't love, who can't feel compassion, simply *cannot* be called a normal human being. Valky wrote : "*Even* as far as to say that the intellectual standards held by psychoanalysis are /created/ to remove choice from the hands of the psychotic and replace it with blamelessness." Del replies : I'm not saying psychiatry holds the complete and ultimate truth, but it *does* have a measure of truth. I hate to ask you that, Valky, but do you know anyone who is psychotic, schizophrenic, or even simply clinically depressed ? I do. And I can tell you that those people have indeed lost a measure of their free agency, sometimes a very great measure. I believe in God-given free agency, but I also believe that not everyone is given the same measure of free agency in every area of life. Many people find their free agency limited by one thing or the other : physical or mental impairments, emotional disorders, ignorance, social pressure, and so on. Blaming those people for not making the decisions we think they should make is a very non-compassionate thing to do. Valky wrote : "_And_ challenging such notions *is* the emotive reasoning of the HP story period. If LV's character attacks the belief that environment and circumstance dominates the power of ones ability to reason and love, then so be it. I think its a better message anyway." Del replies : I personally don't see that the books particularly hold that message. In fact, JKR saying that Tom never loved actually holds exactly the opposite message for me : that there are things that happen that people can't do anything about. I disliked DD's speech about choices defining who we are right from the first time because I know from personal experience that it is not that simple. For example, I decided as a kid that I would *not* have a problem with my biological father deserting my mother before I was born. I would *not* be one of those troubled kids. I'd be strong, I'd be emotionally whole and sane. It would not affect *me* ! It was a choice I made very consciously and it did shape me. But you know what ? First that choice was in itself based on a deep insecurity born out of a terrible feeling of abandonment due to my father's leaving. And second it shaped me in a catastrophic way in that this decision led straight to my breaking down and developing depression. I became exactly the *opposite* of what I meant to become, precisely because I refused to face my emotional and psychological issues. So yes everyone has a measure of free agency. But assuming that this measure is the same for everyone and that nothing can block it is a terrible mistake to make. Del From dzeytoun at cox.net Thu Aug 19 09:48:33 2004 From: dzeytoun at cox.net (dzeytoun) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 09:48:33 -0000 Subject: Going back to DD knowing all In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110602 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Martha" I think that DD > is indirectly teaching or preparing Harry on how to defend himself, > since he knows what "fate" is waiting for him in the future (the > show down at the OK Corral with Voldy). Although I don't know to > what extent it could go. Does any one have any suggestions, please? > > Martha Well, JKR has addressed this in the Royal Albert Hall interview. She said (paraphrase): "Dumbledore is a very wise man. He knows Harry needs to learn fast in order to be prepared for what might be coming, so he allows Harry privileges he would never allow another student. The tradeoff for that is he also, unwillingly, has to allow Harry to face dangers and problems from which he would rather protect him." I think it's clear that Dumbledore allows Harry, Ron, and Hermione to make their own choices, and to an extent enables them to do so. I don't think, however, that he knows everything, and I don't think he is actively manipulative in the way so many people see him. For instance he provided Harry with the invisibility cloak. However, if Harry had chosen *not* to use the cloak to pursue the Stone I don't think DD would have tried to trick or push Harry into doing so. And DD implies in his conversation at the end of OOTP that Harry has several times gone much farther than Dumbledore ever expected. Dzeytoun From pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 19 09:51:43 2004 From: pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net (pcaehill2) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 09:51:43 -0000 Subject: Is JKR about to reveal? (Petunia) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110603 > Valky wrote: [snip] > I also agree that Petunia allows Harry to stay because; > '*She* is not going to be responsible for his death' > *and* that she is a moral woman. But, I do not agree that > she decided 'She is not going to be responsible for Harry's > death' *because* she is a moral woman. Pam sighs: Well, almost agree with you here--I think Petunia's morality is the morality of the herd: as long as the neighbors approve, it's moral. And as I've posted (way earlier), I don't think Petunia would do anything for *any* wizard (Harry or DD) if something wasn't in it for her: namely, protection for Dudley. I think her reaction to the Harry's news that LV is back supports this, at least somewhat: "??? 'Back?' whispered Aunt Petunia. ??? She was looking at Harry as she had never looked at him before. And all of a sudden, for the very first time in his life, Harry fully appreciated that Aunt Petunia was his mother's sister. He could not have said why this hit him so very powerfully at this moment. 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. Aunt Petunia had never in her life looked at him like that before. Her large, pale eyes (so unlike her sisters) were not narrowed in dislike or anger, they were wide and fearful." (OotP, Chapter Two) Is Petunia fearful for herself? (possibly) Or for humanity in general? (not likely) Or for her family, namely Dudley? (who seems to be her only hobby, barring house-cleaning) And her reaction to DD's howler seems too emotional to be just a moral decision, at least to me. Pam From pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 19 09:58:50 2004 From: pcaehill2 at sbcglobal.net (pcaehill2) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 09:58:50 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110604 Del wrote: > So yes everyone has a measure of free agency. But assuming > that this measure is the same for everyone and that nothing > can block it is a terrible mistake to make. Pam responds: Can't argue with this one, it seems pretty accurate that life is not a level playing field. (I made a similar choice to yours when I was 8 years old--but had to address the stuff that made me vulnerable, as well, later in life.) But I still think there's more value to our lives due to our choices than to predestination. However, I really think that (whether we ever agree on the concept of degrees of moral responsibility in real life) in the books, for LV to be a great master criminal/truly diabolical villain, he has to be seen as having *chosen* his path. Otherwise, he's just pathetic and pitiable, and just not nasty enough for this type of fantasy literature. Pam From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 10:01:47 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:01:47 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110605 SSSusan wrote : "These are JKR's words, and the fact that she used the words--about TOM specifically--"choices" and "wrong" seems highly significant. No, I doubt he said, "I want to be evil when I grow up" but that was never my argument. He had CHOICES and he made WRONG ones, per JKR. That's been my point: choices." Del replies : But don't you believe that people, especially kids, can make wrong decisions without realising they are wrong ? I just explained in another post that I made a terribly wrong decision at about age 9, a decision that would dramatically change my life for the worst for years to come. But when I made that decision, it seemed absolutely *right* to me ! It seemed like the *best* thing to do. Only an adult, with more experience than I had, could have seen that I was headed straight for disaster. Luckily for society, I was the introvert type, so I blamed only myself and went into a self-destruct mode. Tom was a sociopath, so he blamed everyone else and went into a murderous mode. SSSusan wrote : "I'm going on my gut, my training, and JKR's words." Del replies : Don't we all :-) ? Whether our gut is based on personal experience is the only difference. And yes I'm quite vehement about Tom because JKR's statement that he never loved deeply shocked me. I know what abandonment can do to a child, so I already could relate to Tom before that. But to read that he was so damaged that he never was able to love brought a whole new dimension to the story, at least in my eyes. In fact, I truly hope that she didn't mean things that simply, that she just made an over-statement, and that Tom was not that damaged. Or else I hope it will all come to play a part in the end, in relation with Harry's love and compassion. Because otherwise I would feel that it in fact unnecessarily takes away from LV's evilness. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 10:15:40 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:15:40 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110606 SSSusan wrote : "I said that Tom understands right & wrong. I think he does, intellectually. I totally agree that that DOESN'T automatically translate into behavior nor a moral compass or superego. But it's an important step that he's aware of right & wrong because it speaks to choice, imo." Del replies : I don't think it can speak of choice. What Tom understands is what other people *call* right and wrong, not what *is* right and wrong. It's a bit like colours for blind people : they know that other people see colours and make choices based on them, but they don't see those colours themselves. They can learn the rules of their society concerning colours (women wear a white dress on their wedding day, people wear black at funerals, you don't wear red shoes with a black robe, or whatever) so that they will be able to conform to them if needs be, but it doesn't change the fact that they don't *know* what colours are. If they had it their own way, colours wouldn't matter at all. (I'm over-simplifying, I know, please nobody be mad at me.) Similarly, Tom knows that other people hold those concepts of right and wrong, and of love too, and that they make decisions based on those concepts. He also knows that he is expected to make similar decisions and so he does as long as he can't escape. But that doesn't mean that he knows what right, wrong and love are. If he had it his own way, those things wouldn't matter. Del From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 19 10:18:04 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 06:18:04 -0400 Subject: Draco's nature Message-ID: <002e01c485d5$d1598650$31c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 110607 psyche/Kate: "I think Draco's excuses are just as good as LV's. He's had a neglectful, loveless, abusive upbringing by a Death Eater. It's clear that his father has left huge scars on him. . Even his loathing of Harry seems to me mostly rooted in wounded pride and jealously, maintained by the impulse to agree with his father rather than a simple rejection of Harry's personal qualities." Then DuffyPoo said: "I've never seen Draco in this light at all. I think he comes from a very priviledge background. A loving, wealthy family as pure-blood as they come and gets away with everything (quite like Dudley) with perhaps a little scolding for being indiscreet." Now psyche: "Wow! I'm definitely in the minority on this one. I'd better argue my case!" DuffyPoo again: I apologize if you thought I was attacking your interpretation of Draco's character. I was not. I was only stating that mine was quite different. My first opinion of Draco was formed when reading the incident in Madam Malkin's robe shop and the following incident on the train. Neither of Draco's parents was near to hear what he had to say. He had no reason to spout the party-line in either situation if he didn't believe it wholeheartedly himself. There is also the statement that Draco made, "Then I'm going to drag them off to look at racing brooms. I don't see why first years can't have their own. I think 'I'll bully father' into getting me one and I'll smuggle it in somehow.' I don't think there would be too much bullying of dad going on if Lucius were abusive in any way. There are all kinds of ways to love just as there are all kinds of dysfunction in a family. Simply because someone is not loved in a traditional sense, does not mean they have been raised in a loveless home. Love comes in all different disguises. Because a parent is strict with a child, even overly strict some might think, doesn't mean that parent is abusive or unloving. Until I see proof in canon that indicates otherwise I'll stick to my own interpretation. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Aug 19 10:18:36 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:18:36 -0000 Subject: Always Monday/Dudley's tail In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110608 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romuluslupin1" wrote: Romulus Lupin: > > Thanks for your answer, Geoff. > Now I only have to wonder what's the deal with Dudley's tail. I still > don't get why the Dursleys waited a full month to have it removed. I > mean, it must have been painful when sitting (which is what Dudley > does for most of the time) and I guess hiding it beneath his trousers > couldn't be all that comfortable either. Geoff: Knowing the UK system, he would probably have to see his GP who would then refer him to a consultant who would then arrange the treatment. Under the NHS, this could take ages; I suspect the Dursleys did it privately, possibly using a medical insurance..... From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 10:20:30 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:20:30 -0000 Subject: Why didn't the Longbottoms go into hiding? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110609 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "scoutmom21113" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nearlyheadlessryan" > wrote: > > After Proffessor Trelawny's prediction in the Hog's Head, > why > > did only the Potter's go into hiding and not also the Longbottoms? > > Bookworm: > IMO, they did. They were tortured several weeks *after* Voldemort > disappeared by Bellatrix and company - who thought the Longbottoms > knew where Voldemort was - at a time when everyone was just starting > to relax and believe that the war was over. (GoF, The Pensieve) > > Both the Potters and Longbottoms went into hiding around the same > time. Voldemort found the Potters first because of Pettigrew. > After Voldemort disappeared the Longbottoms could come out of > hiding. mhbobbin now: I suspect that the Longbottoms were likely in hiding and discovered only when they came out of hiding after the disappearance of LV as well. There is no textual evidence. However, this question has only come up because we learned about the prophecy at the end of OotP. So perhaps it will soon be revealed, and we still have so much to learn about what happened to the Longbottoms. I believe that we'll find out that Bellatrix and gang tortured them specifically to get the final wording of the prophecy in hopes of finding LV. (And as the Longbottoms were insane, how did anyone know who had tortured them-- we don't really know about Crouch Junior's involvement but we certainly know that Bellatrix was rightfully convicted.) But this all raises another question about the Potters' hiding. Why weren't the Potters in hiding before the Fidelius Charm? The Potters were only under the Fidelius Charm for less than a week before Pettigrew betrayed them. Fudge (in his PoA exposition) explains that one of DD's spies had alerted DD (Snape Perhaps?) that LV was looking for the Potters. Fudge also explained that the Potters knew someone was keeping LV aware of their movements for some time prior to that. (Sirius had suspected Lupin.) As there was over a year between the Prophecy / Birth of HP and the Potters sealing their fate with Pettigrew, what protections were the Potters taking before this? This does possibly support the idea that the Potters were living at Hogwarts, possibly as teachers and that their movements out of Hogwarts were all that mattered. They also may have constantly been on the move or taking other precautions. Assuming DD told both the Longbottoms and the Potters of the Prophecy --and as they were all in the Order of the Phoenix I would expect that he did--what precautions were the Potters taking prior to the Fidelius Charm--as they knew that LV was aware of their movements? Or possibly the question is why weren't they taking precautions for an entire year prior to their deaths? mhbobbin From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Thu Aug 19 09:25:05 2004 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 09:25:05 -0000 Subject: Going back to DD knowing all In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110610 > Martha writes: > I think that DD is indirectly teaching or preparing Harry on how > to defend himself, since he knows what "fate" is waiting for him > in the future (the show down at the OK Corral with Voldy). Although > I don't know to what extent it could go. Does any one have any > suggestions, please? It's clear that DD is preparing Harry to face Voldy. This must mean that DD knows that Harry must, at some point, face Voldy alone. A lot has been made of this 'connection' between them. Clearly, Voldy can possess Harry now, which is why DD and the whole of the OOTP want him to learn Occlumency. I think Harry will master Occlumency and then in the end it will come down to Harry intentionally possessing Voldy. This is the only situation I can imagine where Harry will be completely beyond DDs help. Harry will have to focus on his love for his parents/Sirius etc which will ultimately destroy Voldy. What will happen to Harry at this point I do not know. But it seems possible from Nick's comments at the end of OOTP that Voldy will become a ghost. As for DD knowing all, he has not let Harry hear the whole prophecy. Compare the two prophecies from the books and you will see the discrepancies! Chris From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Thu Aug 19 09:35:05 2004 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 09:35:05 -0000 Subject: Why Harry will Live In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110611 > Tonks_op: > > I think that we must look at the whole prophecy. "He will mark him > as his equal". Equal to what? What does LV have that could > possibly be of help to Harry? Equal in power? We know that Harry > has a power that LV does not know so that can't be it. As to who > dies and who lives.. I am not any more sure of that than anyone else, > except that I think Harry will die, and something ?? happens to LV. I think that it is dangerous to try and decipher the prophecy too much because we have not heard the whole prophecy. If you compare the prophecy Harry heard first hand with the prophecy DD 'allowed' him to hear you will find discrepancies. The prophecy Harry heard first hand is a complete paragraph, with complete sentences. The Prophecy that DD showed Harry contained breaks between sentences (indicating that sections were missing) and the middle section contained three 'ands' in one sentence. JKR was an English teacher, and if there is one thing English teachers hate, it's bad grammar!! As for canon, I can't remember the exact quote, but DD was talking as if 'each word cost him a great effort'. You might explain this as DD finding it hard to finally tell Harry the truth. However, I would explain it as DD finding it hard to have to deceive Harry once again! Chris From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 10:38:01 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:38:01 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110612 Katie wrote : "To Del and all others who think V. cannot be held responsible for his actions: how far would you carry this justification? Can all of us, no matter how uncaring or cognizant of our actions, claim to be pure products of our upbringing and not responsible for our behavior? Can the "Riddle defense" be sufficient for any murderer who was chronically abused or neglected as a child? When does the abuse/neglect become insufficient to explain the crimes?" Del replies : It's not that simple IMO. I make a difference between moral and legal responsibility. I believe LV cannot be held *morally* responsible for his actions, if he is indeed a sociopath, because he does not have a *conscience*. However, I do believe he can be held *legally* responsible for his actions, because he understands that society disapproves of them. He knows he will be punished if he steals or kills, even if he can't figure out what's bothering people about stealing or killing. So if he indeed steals or kills and he's caught, then yes I believe he can be held responsible. Even though to him it will look as unfair and tyrannical as when I punished my baby yesterday for climbing on the window-sill of the open window again after I told him not to : he cannot figure out why I'm upset. If he obeys me today, it will not be because he's learned that climbing on the window-sill is dangerous, it will only be because he doesn't want to be punished again : he won't have internalised my teaching that what he did was terribly dangerous. Does that help clarifying my position ? Del From humantupperware1 at yahoo.com.au Thu Aug 19 10:10:57 2004 From: humantupperware1 at yahoo.com.au (humantupperware1) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:10:57 -0000 Subject: Why didn't the Longbottoms go into hiding? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110613 nearlyheadlessryan wrote: > After Professor Trelawney's prediction in the Hog's Head, why did > only the Potters go into hiding and not also the Longbottoms? At > this point Dumbledore would have only been able to deduce that it > was EITHER Harry or Neville and would not have known that it was > definitely Harry. So I will ask it again: Why, then, didn't Frank > and Alice Longbottom not go into hiding as well? Were they not > warned for some reason as, clearly, the Potters were? Maybe then > Frank and Alice wouldn't be veggies. Anyone that has any ideas I > would love to hear them. HumanTupperware: This is an interesting point for me for two reasons........first, do we know for sure that Frank and Alice didn't go into hiding? We don't know that much about Neville's history, and I get the feeling that we'll hear more about that to come in the new books.......What we do know though, is that it was the Lestranges who tortured the Longbottoms, which begs the questions: Why weren't Frank and Alice killed? And why did Neville escape unharmed? And if Voldy knew that it was one boy or the other that was to prove his downfall, why send deatheaters to the Longbottoms and go to the Potters himself? Or did the Lestranges only go to the Longbottoms after Voldy was vanquished, which might mean that Voldy was going to go and kill Neville after he had killed Harry, but never made it there? Sorry to answer your question with more questions, but I think all of this comes under the myterious missing 24 hours, which I assume will be explained further in the new books......nevertheless, I am curious..... hmmmmm? HumanTupperware From finwitch at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 10:34:09 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:34:09 -0000 Subject: Trelawney / Incompetent teachers/Binns theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110614 > Sue: > > Er - exactly how do you fire a teacher who's dead? Exorcise him? > Tell him to go off and play with the other ghosts? :-)And > personally, I think he was hired long, long ago and just never > bothered to change his teaching methods, then died and kept right on > teaching - a wonderful send-up of the kind of teachers who lurk > around expensive private schools, doing the same thing every year > for thirty years and being the joke between parents and children - > "Oh, do you have Binns for History? Useless, isn't he? We had him > too." Finwitch: Yes, and as it's history - Binns lived during times considered history. Besides, it's possible that Binns was hired before Dumbledore was headmaster - hmm... by Phineas Nigellus, perhaps? And well, Dumbledore's not the sort to fire people (because doing so, he'd had to 1) find a new teacher and 2) tolerate selected comments of the former headmasters... I don't think he wants to do that!) Sue: > I have often wondered, anyway, just how Professor Binns marks all > those essays he gives his students, without being able to touch > anything. Finwitch: Well, maybe he has someone else do it for him? A prefect maybe, another teacher (like Trelawney who rarely (never, they say, but she DID come down for christmas dinner) leaves her tower, but seems to know quite a LOT about things), Dumbledore, Peeves? And then again, there's magic. Maybe the exam papers magically mark themselves, or there's some checking Quill? (Really, if they have Quills charmed against cheating, Quick Quotes Quill that writes nice gossip out of 'Er', and that horrible Blood Quill, why not teacher's help like that?) Sue: > I also wonder how come we're constantly being told that the DADA > post is hard to fill - it isn't. Snape wants it. DD doesn't want him > in the job. He'd rather give it to that idiot Lockhart. But it's > still wanted by more than one applicant. > Finwitch: I think there are reasons for not hiring Snape for the DADA post. 1) Snape is a Potions' master, and is good enough in that. I suppose it'd be difficult for Dumbledore to find someone teach Potions. 2) It is possible that the DADA post IS sort of jinxed. Anyone who has taught DADA has had his darkest secret revealed; incompetent/evil ones get themselves hurt. Dumbledore would NOT want Snape's Dark Mark leak into the public... 3) Severus Snape knew more curses than most learn till their seventh year (which is a small credit to James&Sirius IMO, picking on a challenge rather than a weakling), he was a DE... I think Severus is/was a Dark Arts addict, possibly before his Hogwarts years, and as such, he must NOT take post as DADA teacher. (he knows Dark Arts in and out, but I don't know how well he *defends* himself against them...). No more than for alcoholic to be in charge of a bar or something... I only wonder who's going to be the next one. We don't necessarily know the new professor, but as I think it's a bit too late for any new characters to be introduced, maybe... Andromeda or Nymphadora Tonks? Aberforth Dumbledore and Things You Cannot Learn Out Of Books, and Beware Of the Cursed Books? The real Moody and the lessons of 1) Elementary Wand Safety 2)Poisons and how to avoid them 3)disguises and invisibility (Some use to Invisible Book of Invisibility and the Invisibility Section of Hogwarts Library)? Finwitch From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Aug 19 10:49:59 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:49:59 -0000 Subject: Is JKR about to reveal? (Petunia) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110615 > > Valky wrote: > [snip] > > I also agree that Petunia allows Harry to stay because; > > '*She* is not going to be responsible for his death' > > *and* that she is a moral woman. But, I do not agree that > > she decided 'She is not going to be responsible for Harry's > > death' *because* she is a moral woman. > > Pam sighs: > > Well, almost agree with you here--I think Petunia's morality is the morality of the herd: as long as the neighbors approve, it's moral. > And as I've posted (way earlier), I don't think Petunia would do > anything for *any* wizard (Harry or DD) if something wasn't in it > for her: namely, protection for Dudley. > And her reaction to DD's howler seems too emotional to be just a > moral decision, at least to me. > > Valky: Yes, My oops Pam ... My post *should* read: ------------------------------------------------------------- I also agree that: 1 Petunia allows Harry to stay because '*She* is not going to be responsible for his death'; *and* 2 that she is a moral woman; But, I do not agree that she decided 'She is not going to be responsible for Harry's death' *because* she is a moral woman. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Now, although Dudleys safety seems the most likely and logical explanation for Petunia's emotional reaction to the Howler I am reserving my bid for the moment because Petunia doesn't exactly appear to panic about venturing out into the world /without/ Harry after she reads the Howler, and she continues to allow Dudley to live fairly normally, apparently not grounding him from his daily bullying... (Note: /No/ tantrums per Dudley reverberating through the house in chapter 3 of OotP is my proof of that.) Valky From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Aug 19 11:00:23 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:00:23 -0000 Subject: Trelawney / Incompetent teachers/Binns theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110616 Finwitch wrote: > 2) It is possible that the DADA post IS sort of jinxed. Anyone who > has taught DADA has had his darkest secret revealed; incompetent or evil ones get themselves hurt. Dumbledore would NOT want Snape's Dark Mark leak into the public... > Valky: I had a funny thought while reading this post.... Recently some members here have been putting forward that James might have once been a DADA teacher at Hogwarts. Now if he was..... and if.... since the position was made vacant it *has* been jinxed........ Big If's but its funny when you put it all together. The kind of Jinxes you are speculating here sort of seem like the irreverent kind of troublemaking that James might leave as a legacy "I woz ere" I think. I'd go further now that I am having fun and say it's probably a simple spell to undo but DD is finding it useful and like the swamp he keeps it anyway as a tribute to the man *James* whom he admires for his bravery in life.... From earendil_fr at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 11:34:37 2004 From: earendil_fr at yahoo.com (earendil_fr) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:34:37 -0000 Subject: "A" Teacher's Personality WAS: Lovely Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110617 > Salit wrote: > We know that [Snape] tends to favor the Slytherins > in the classes that Harry attends (ignores infractions, inflates > grades - e.g. Goyle) and is very mean to at least two Gryffindor > students (Harry and Neville) and occasionally to Hermione, despite her > being an exceptional student. Of course, he also shows clear > favoritism towards a Slytheron student (Malfoy). In the Quidditch > match he judged (in SS/PS) he gave unfair penalties to Gryffindor as > well. So there is plenty of circumstantial evidence here to show a > pattern of bias against Gryffindor students, not just Harry. Earendil: The problem with this is that, as you said, Snape clearly shows favoritism towards Slytherin. Potions lessons are always doubled, and we have never seen a Gryffindor-only Potions lesson (as far as I can remember anyway) As for the Quidditch game, the penalties to Gryffindor could be considered as a way to favor Slytherin (as opposed to a bias against Gryffindor). I guess he very well might have done the same if it had been, say, a Ravenclaw Vs Slytherin match. I'm not saying I think Snape has no bias against Gryffindor, actually I think he has, and he of course has a strong dislike of Harry. But do we have any comment about Snape comming from a Hufflepuff or a Ravenclaw student? (who may have an opinion unbiased by Snape's Slytherin/Gryffindor preference) On another note, I wanted to add something about teachers picking on students. I used to have this teacher who picked on students. Well, he didn't exactly *pick* on them. He just did some jokes/funny comments about some of them, most of the time managing to link it to the ongoing lesson. Those he picked on were either potential troublemakers or those with personalities strong enough to not feel offended by his remarks. And those were always the same, all year long. Everyone thought he was just so cool, so funny and such a great teacher. I was one of those he picked on - and I didn't think he was a great teacher at all. To come back on topic, I don't think Snape works the same way, but close enough, my point being: we have seen Snape picks specifically on *some* students, not all of them. Apart from Neville, I don't think we ever see him pick on a shy, calm student. He picks on those who stand up to him, threatening his authority over the others. I'd love to get deeper into this but I'm late for work now... I might add some points to this later. Earendil From caesian at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 11:46:02 2004 From: caesian at yahoo.com (caesian) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 04:46:02 -0700 Subject: Gryffindor Passwords Message-ID: <58CDFF4E-F1D5-11D8-B85A-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110618 Here follows an (over-) analysis of the passwords to Gryffindor Tower, in the order in which they appear. For each password, the episode in which it occurs is recounted, and then possible meanings and allusions are discussed. You might be surprised to discover that each and every password seems to have meaning to the story, some with broad implications for a particular book or the series, others incidental to a particular situation near in time to when the password is mentioned - with one exception. Caput Draconis Mentioned only once (PS7, The Sorting Hat) it is the first password given to the Gryffindor Common room. Literally translated from the latin, caput draconis means the dragon's head. In Astrological Geomancy (a method of divination, as are runes and numerology - a.k.a. arithmancy, which is based in both astrology and alchemy) Caput Draconis often suggests entering or beginning something new and positive (1), such as Harry's career at Hogwarts, Harry's time in Gryffindor house, or Percy's new role as Prefect. Pig Snout A disapproving and interfering Hermione confronts Harry and Ron as they leave the common room (PS9, The Midnight Duel). Immediately after she discovers she cannot return through the portrait hole, they find Neville: 'Thank goodness you found me! I've been out here for hours. I couldn't remember the password to get in to bed.' 'Keep your voice down, Neville. The password's "Pig Snout" but it won't help you now, the Fat Lady's gone off somewhere.' This password may refer to Proverbs 11:22: "Like a gold ring in a pig's snout is a beautiful woman without good judgment." In this scene, Hermione's beauty - her concern for what is right, her intelligence and her courage - are as useless as a gold ring in a pig's snout while she shows a serious lack of discretion in confronting Harry and Ron in the way that she does. To be fair, the boys also show a serious lack of discretion in their nighttime wanderings. Wattlebird Harry and Ron arrive at the Gryffindor common room (after having crashed the flying Ford Anglia into the Whomping Willow) to be given this password by Hermione. This is the only password used in Chamber of Secrets. The wattlebird, or Australian brush turkey, is more commonly referred to as a honeyeater. Honey-Eater is another name for Otso, the bear god in Finnish mythology. Tales of Otso are told in the Kalevala, Finland's national epic. This work, drawn from the oral tradition, has influenced many writers including J. R. R. Tolkein. (2) The Kalevala is divided into more than 50 poems, called Runes. Rune 46, entitled Otso the Honey-Eater (3), tells the story of how Louhi, a wicked enchantress and Queen of the land of the dead, sends diseases to destroy the people of Kalevala, but V?in?m?inen, the wise shaman, cures the sick. Louhi then sends a bear, but V?in?m?inen slays the bear. The people of Kalevala organize a bear-killing feast. Several parallels between the tale of Otso the Honey-Eater and Chamber of Secrets can be drawn. Ginny, the wicked enchantress (when she is possessed by Tom Riddle and thus Queen of the Chamber of Secrets) sends a plague of petrification to destroy the Muggleborn students, but Dumbledore, the wise headmaster, cures the sick. Ginny then sends the Basilisk, but Harry, with the help of Dumbledore's pheonix Fawkes, slays the basilisk. The people of Hogwarts organize a basilisk-killing feast. V?in?m?inen, the wise shaman, is an interesting character, a ladies man but unlucky with ladies, a wizard, and an advisor in the manufacture of the Sampo, or magic mill. The Sampo "is the ultimate source of prosperity, a kind of primitive Philosophers's Stone" (4). Another character to appear in the Kalevala is the guardian of hidden treasures. This important office is filled by, among others, a hideous old deity named Mammelainen, whom Renwall, the Finnish lexicographer, describes as "femina maligna, matrix serpentis, divitiarum subterranearum custos," a malignant woman, the mother of the snake, and the guardian of subterranean treasures. From this conception it is evident that the idea of a kinship between serpents and hidden treasures frequently met with in the myths of the Hungarians, Germans, and Slavs, is not foreign to the Finns. Fortuna Major (PA5) The first password given in Prisoner of Azkaban by the newly appointed Head Boy, Percy Weasley. In Astrology, Jupiter, one of the good planets, is known as Fortuna Major (5). In the divination method of geomancy, Fortuna Major signifies success, good luck, great fortune, celebration, property and possessions. Honour and respect. A figure of power and success, favorable in any conflict or contest (6). We learn later that Gryffindor Prefects may be able to influence the choice of password. Here, Percy may have chosen this password to honor his ascent to Head Boy. Scurvy Cur A password chosen by Sir Cadogan (PoA, The Firebolt). 'Merry - hic - Christmas! Password?' 'Scruvy cur,' said Ron. 'And the same to you, sir!" roared Sir Cadogan, ... This password may refer to the quotation "the honorable gentleman is a scurvy cur," from The Man in the Iron Mask by Alexander Dumas (7). The armored knight Sir Cadogan is, of course, a man in an iron mask. The phrase is repeated by Ambrose Bierce in the Devil's Dictionary, under the entry for Honorable, as follows: "adj. Afflicted with an impediment in one's reach. In legislative bodies it is customary to mention all members as honorable; as, 'the honorable gentleman is a scurvy cur.'" (8) While Sir Cadogan is afflicted during this exchange by a flagon of mead, Ron and Harry are impeded by him until they give the password. Oddsbodkins Another password chosen by Sir Cadogan, this archaic interjection (although evidently still in use by folks from Edinburgh - 10) is evidently related to the similar, if even more obscure Gadsbodikins. It is used once, in the chapter 'The Patronus': 'They [Harry and Ron] turned into the corridor to Gryffindor Tower and saw Neville Longbottom, pleading with Sir Cadogan, who seemed to be refusing him entrance. 'I wrote them down,' Neville was saying tearfully, 'but I must've dropped them somewhere!" 'A likely tale!' roared Sir Cadogan. Then, spotting Harry and Ron, 'Good even, my fine young yoemen! Come clap this loon in irons, he is trying to force entry to the chambers within!" 'Oh shut up,' said Ron, as he and Harry drew level with Neville. 'I've lost the passwords!' Neville told them miserably. 'I made him tell me what passwords he was going to use this week, because he keeps changing them, and now I don't know what I've done with them!' "Oddsbodikins,' said Harry to Sir Cadogan, who looked extremely disappointed and reluctantly swung forward to let them into the common room." Oddsbodikins is also used by the sergeant of police in Mister Toad, from The Wind in the Willows by Kenneth Grahame. Perhaps Sir Cadogan has daydreams of inflicting something like the following on Neville (who is, of course, Mr. Toad). "Then the brutal minions of the law fell upon the hapless Toad; loaded him with chains, and dragged him from the Court House, shrieking, praying, protesting; across the market-place, where the playful populace, always as severe upon detected crime as they are sympathetic and helpful when one is merely 'wanted', assailed him with jeers, carrots, and popular catchwords; past hooting school children, their innocent faces lit up with the pleasure they ever derive from the sight of a gentleman in difficulties; across the hollow-sounding drawbridge, below the spiky portcullis, under the frowning archway of the grim old castle, whose ancient towers soared high overhead; past guardrooms full of grinning soldiery off duty, past sentries who coughed in a horrid sarcastic way, because that is as much as a sentry on his post dare do to show his contempt and abhorrence of crime; up time-worn winding stairs, past men-at-arms in casquet and corselet of steel, darting threatening looks through their vizards; across courtyards, where mastiffs strained at their leash and pawed the air to get at him; past ancient warders, their halberds leant against the wall, dozing over a pasty and a flagon of brown ale; on and on, past the rack-chamber and the thumbscrew- room, past the turning that led to the private scaffold, till they reached the door of the grimmest dungeon that lay in the heart of the innermost keep. There at last they paused, where an ancient gaoler sat fingering a bunch of mighty keys. "Oddsbodikins!" said the sergeant of police, taking off his helmet and wiping his forehead. "Rouse thee, old loon, and take over from us this vile Toad, a criminal of deepest guilt and matchless artfulness and resource. Watch and ward him with all thy skill; and mark thee well, grey-beard, should aught untoward befall, thy old head shall answer for his - and a murrain on both of them!" The gaoler nodded grimly, laying his withered hand on the shoulder of the miserable Toad. The rusty key creaked in the lock, the great door clanged behind them; and Toad was a helpless prisoner in the remotest dungeon of the best-guarded keep of the stoutest castle in all the length and breadth of Merry England." (9) Flibbertigibbet The Fat Lady once again guards the portrait hole when Harry and Ron enter Gryffindor Tower looking for Hermione (PoA, The Quidditch Final). Upset by the Malfoy-slapping incident and overworked, she has forgotten to go to Charms. Derived from the Middle English flepergebet, a flibbertigibbit is a silly flighty person. Hermione is acting flibbertigibbity (yes, that is a word) by missing charms. Balderdash This password is used twice in Goblet of Fire. In the first instance, a prefect has told George the password at the welcoming feast (The TriWizard Tournament). The boys are discussing whether they could cheat their way across Dumbledore's age line while Hermione fumes about house elves. In the second instance, Harry is returning alone from having been named the fourth champion (The Goblet of Fire). " Well, well, well,' said the Fat Lady, 'Violet's just told me everything. Who's just been chosen as school champion, then?' 'Balderdash,' said Harry dully. 'It most certainly isn't!' said the pale witch indignantly. 'No, no Vi, it's the password,' said the Fat Lady soothingly, and she swung forward on her hinges to let Harry into the common room." The word balderdash is an invective raised against senseless or misleading talk. "It?s often reserved for circumstances in which common-or-garden invective would be thought inadequate. This has been so for two centuries. Here is the grandly-named Victorian historian Thomas Babington Macaulay, writing in a footnote in his History of England from James II: 'I am almost ashamed to quote such nauseous balderdash'." (11) In this case, the talk about Harry having entered himself into the tournament turns out to be balderdash. Fairy Lights Harry dully gives this password to the Fat Lady after he is turned down by Cho Chang, who he has just asked to the Yule Ball. He enters the Gryffindor Common room to find Ron, distraught by own his rejection with Fleur Delacour and being comforted by Ginny. Hermione soon arrives, and is forced to reveal that she cannot go to the ball with Ron because she is already going with someone else. The Yule Ball is held on Christmas, and 'fairy lights' is a term commonly used outside the USA for the small electrical lights that adorn Christmas trees (12). "Fairy light" may also refer to the passage "The fairy light that kiss'd her golden hair And long'd to rest, yet could but sparkle there !" from Poems by Edgar Allen Poe (13), which is reminiscent of Fleur. Finally, fairy lights are associated with A Midsummer Night's Dream, by William Shakespeare (- or shall I say Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford! [14] ). Hermione's character is named after Hermia, the rebellious maiden who, in this play, spurns her doting and devoted suitor Demetrius in favor of Lysander. Hermia is bold in her defiant love for Lysander, and 'though she be but little, she is fierce' (Act 3, Scene 2, line 325). When angered, she can be very juvenile and physical with her temperament. She also believes strongly in loyalty, chastity, and faith. Although she gets her man in the end, Puck?s sentiment, ?Lord, what fools these mortals be!? pervades the comedy. Mimbulus mimbletonia Finally, in OotP (The Sorting Hat's New Song), a password that Neville can remember. It seems clear from the appearance of this particular password, that the prefects, in this case probably Hermione, can set the password if they choose. Undoubtedly Percy, who recommended Divination to Ron and Harry, chose Caput Draconis for his first year as a Prefect and Fortuna Major when he was appointed Head Boy. There remains one password that seems immune to over-analysis: banana fritters This password, given by Ron to the Fat Lady when Harry sneaks out to use the Prefect's bathroom (The Egg and the Eye), seems to indicate that the author had a mad craving for banana fritters. Who can blame her! (15) Preparation time less than 30 mins, Cooking time?less than 10 mins Ingredients 2 bananas, cut lengthways oil for deep fat frying For the batter 75g/3oz self-raising flour chilled water, enough to make a batter 1 waffle 30g/1oz walnut pieces Icing sugar to dust For the chocolate sauce 55g/2oz chocolate 55ml/2fl oz double cream Method 1. For the batter - put the flour in a bowl and slowly add water, beating all the time until a batter is formed. 2. Put the waffle and walnuts in a mini food processor and blitz until breadcrumb sized pieces are formed. 3. Stir this into the batter. 4. Dip the banana halves in the batter and deep fry for 2-3 minutes until golden. 5. Break up the chocolate and put into a heatproof dish over a pan of simmering water. Ensure the bowl is not touching the water. 6. Once the chocolate has melted stir in the cream. 7. Serve the banana fritters with the chocolate sauce and sprinkle with icing sugar. Cheers, Caesian - who is now heading for the banana fritters. (1) http://www.princeton.edu/~ezb/geomancy/agrippa.html http://www.adula.com/Geomancy/Geomantic_Figures/Caput_Dragonis/ caput_dragonis.htm (2) http://www.northvegr.org/lore/kalevala/intro003.php (3) http://altreligion.about.com/library/texts/kalevala/bl_46.htm (4) http://www.godchecker.com/pantheon/finnish-mythology.php? deity=VAINAMOINEN (5) http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02018e.htm (6) http://www.adula.com/Geomancy/Geomantic_Figures/Fortuna_Major/ fortuna_major.htm (7) http://www.thefreelibrary.com/bs.asp?ss=text&s=Scurvy (8) http://www.numeraire.com/quotes/ghi.htm (9) http://www.geocities.com/davidvwilliamson/toad.html (10) http://www.silklantern.com/viewtopic.php?topic=7970&forum=1&0 (11) http://www.worldwidewords.org/weirdwords/ww-bal1.htm (12) http://www.oldchristmaslights.com/1950s_lights_page_2.htm (13) http://poe.thefreelibrary.com/Poems/4-3#fairy%20light (14) http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shakespeare/debates/ ogburnarticle.html (15) http://www.bbc.co.uk/food/recipes/database/bananafritters_70854.shtml From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Aug 19 12:04:39 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 12:04:39 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110619 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > Valky wrote : remove responsibility for choice from the hands of eleven year old Tom then *Harry's* choices mean *nothing*. " > > Del replies : > Hum, Valky, you should know by now that I don't take well that kind of argument. Valky now: Hi Ho, I Know Del.. :D And as you know ..... I can only say It's not *that* poor really. Harry *chooses* what he becomes. That much is clear. I argue that we cannot *assume* that _canon_will_reveal_ an already forsaken 11 year old Tom. My argument is plot related: Tom Riddle *will* have choice when he gets to Hogwarts, because he can't very well *not* have; otherwise he should never even go to Hogwarts at age 11 he should be institutionalised and counselled. = Plothole; so lets not assume it. > Valky wrote : > "*Even* as far as to say that the intellectual standards held by > psychoanalysis are /created/ to remove choice from the hands of the > psychotic and replace it with blamelessness." > > Del replies : > > I hate to ask you that, Valky, but do you know anyone who is > psychotic, schizophrenic, or even simply clinically depressed ? I do. And I can tell you that those people have indeed lost a measure of their free agency, sometimes a very great measure. > Blaming those people for not making the decisions we think they should make is a very non-compassionate thing to do. > Valky: Yes. But, I suppose being not quite as open as yourself, I cannot tell you exactly how close to home that is. I can however give you a pretty long answer to the question. My experience is profound probably a lot more profound than your expecting.... To start with, mostly you argue that what you cannot prevent you cannot overcome. This is not true, and precisely why I think that a better message is sent in the, albeit controversial, Choice Supposition. Science does give us the environment variables that engender the spiralling down effect that inturn results in symptoms of mental illness, that much is true and I respectfully aquiesce to that. However free agency is *not* limited to what choices one has *before* they hit the bottom but also what choices they make while they are there. You argue that it's not compassionate to say that someone 'not exercising their free agency at this time', is to blame for that mistake. You argue that it is compassionate to excuse them from blame because they have *less* free agency. I argue that they *are* exercising their free agency at this time and blame doesn't come into it, from me. It's *their* duty to themselves to consider their part in blame for the pain or damage caused by their condition. This is a choice available to them, however hard it might be to make as a result of the detachment in their condition. Most importantly I argue that removing blame from them because of their condition is *not* giving them choice it is taking one away. Therefore it is *not* compassionate it is _disabling_ and inadvertantly cruel. Now for personal accounts of those who have experienced a spiralling down I would like to make the examples of Professor John Nash Nobel Laureate and JKR herself. If you are familiar with the movie 'a Beautiful Mind' you will know that what I say is true in real life. Someone deeply affected and almost lost to the anomaly of his mind _made_a_choice_ somewhere deep in the abyss that we throw our careless compassion into hoping against hope that it saves. He, alone, through his *own choice* overcame the unbeatable, with the courage in his own heart he rose above the helplessness, self pity, and rage that his isolation created in his life. Compassion didnt save him. Love did, and it came in an entirely different form to compassion. JkR is different, but not so different. She had been through the grinder too when Harry came to her. Harry a (imaginary) boy with a story to tell about choice and fighting against the odds, not hating and not succumbing to the dark feelings that happen when our environment throws us to the wolves. These are exactly the kind of things you are saying we should *never* tell someone in JkR's position. They can't help what has happened to them, so we musn't tell them that they can. But if that were true would JkR be the wonderful successful and happy woman she is now? From JLaming263 at hotmail.com Thu Aug 19 12:15:32 2004 From: JLaming263 at hotmail.com (jimlaming) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 12:15:32 -0000 Subject: Apparation and Sirius' vault In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110620 Grey Wolf wrote: This was seriously considered way back. In absence of canon, there really is very little we can say about how those soul images knew the cup was still a portkey. Let me see if I can remember the possibilities: I won't lie to you - there simply isn't enough canon to decide. As far as I can see, this are really the three main options. Beyond that, it's up to everyone to choose. I prefer the third one, but since MD works with both second and third (and probably could be spinned to work with the first, but we haven't bothers), it is really of little relevance. Jim comes back with: I am of the opinion that the cup was already programmed to be a port key and Crouch!Moody just "added a stop to it." You're right that we do not have enough canon to solve this one, however, I think we do have canon to indicate how the wand images knew it was still an active portkey. In GOF, on the way to the QWC, Arthur tells the kids to look for the port key. Mr. Diggery calls out that he had already found it. How? It is suppose to look innocuous. It seems logical from this exchange that the portkey emits some aura that an enlightened wizard can detect. Jim Laming From drliss at comcast.net Thu Aug 19 12:44:54 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (drliss at comcast.net) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 12:44:54 +0000 Subject: Incompetent Teachers Message-ID: <081920041244.13338.4124A0C5000E72C30000341A22007623029C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 110621 Josh said: > McGonagall, Flitwick, Sprout, and other background teachers do > know their stuff at least... It is very tough to explain away > why Binns and Hagrid are left on/hired, but perhaps it has > something to do with a lack of applicants, or who the other > applicants were? The rest are easily explained. The DADA > position is impossible to fill. Lockhart was the only applicant > for CoS, Lupin and Moody were special requests, and Umbridge got > appointed because DD couldn't find _anybody_ willing to take the > job. Trelawney and Snape (latter knows his stuff, too) are > tolerated for anti-LV reasons. Lissa: Having spent all but seven years of my life in school, I definitely have thoughts on this one! I think teachers like Lupin are incredibly, incredibly rare. I can think of maybe two teachers I had- in my entire career- that I would put on Lupin's level. I'd say he's arguably the best teacher in the books- someone who not only knows his subject matter, but can truly communicate it to the students and cares for his students. However, he's not the only good teacher in the books. I agree that McGonagall, while not seeming the natural mentor-ish teacher that Lupin is, is an excellent teacher. She's more stand-off-ish, but she's certainly not incompetent! Same with Flitwick and Sprout, and I assume since we hear very little about them Sinastra, Vector, and whoever else are decent. But think about your own academic careers. How many teachers did you have that just should not have been teachers? I love the character of Binns as a teacher, because he falls into the "it's funny because it's true" category. I've had WAY too many professors like Binns. Unfortunately, I can see some of them dying and not noticing and just getting up to teach class the next day. I've had a few like Trelwany as well, although perhaps not quite so melodramatic. (The one I had that was truly dramatic is actually one of the few I'd put in the Lupin category. Granted, he taught "Literature of American Musical Theater." He was allowed to be dramatic.) As much as there may be several people out there who want to teach, they aren't always necessarily good teachers. And good teachers don't always teach. I think Bill would make an AWESOME DADA prof based on the little whe know about him, and would take a class from him any day (if I was younger than him), but would he ever be happy in an academic career? Possibly not. Anyway, I never questioned why there's some pretty bad teachers at Hogwarts, cause Lord knows I've found enough of them in 23 years of schooling!!!!!! Lissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From rhinobabies at hotmail.com Thu Aug 19 13:05:29 2004 From: rhinobabies at hotmail.com (coderaspberry77) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 13:05:29 -0000 Subject: Trelawney / Incompetent teachers/Binns theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110622 Valky: > I had a funny thought while reading this post.... Recently some > members here have been putting forward that James might have once > been a DADA teacher at Hogwarts. Now if he was..... and if.... since > the position was made vacant it *has* been jinxed........ > > Big If's but its funny when you put it all together. > > The kind of Jinxes you are speculating here sort of seem like the > irreverent kind of troublemaking that James might leave as a > legacy "I woz ere" I think. > > I'd go further now that I am having fun and say it's probably a > simple spell to undo but DD is finding it useful and like the swamp > he keeps it anyway as a tribute to the man *James* whom he admires > for his bravery in life.... I too think the Dark Arts position actually suffers from a real, honest to goodness "jinx", but I can't believe that James put it there, even had he been the DA teacher, which I find suspect (I think Lily is more likely, having a good wand for charm work, since charms are often useful in fighting - Shield, Wingardium, etc.). Also, I think if Dumbledore knew about it, he'd remove it - I mean, would he really have wanted his teachers, especially friends like Lupin and (he thought) Moody who'd been having a bit of trouble in their lives already, to come to the school and be jinxed? I seriously doubt it. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that DADA is actually jinxed in some way, and the most likely culprit, imo, is Snape. Heck, enough people get chased away, the job HAS to be his sooner or later, right? coderaspberry From phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk Thu Aug 19 11:55:30 2004 From: phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk (Kate Harding) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:55:30 -0000 Subject: Draco's nature (was also LV's abiliity to love, Dudders and Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110623 I thought tylerswaxlion's was a really well thought out post, and I wouldn't argue with most of it! But I want to reply to a couple of points about Draco, just to clarify my interpretation. tylerswaxlion: > People who have had abusive relationships with their parents don't > tend to have healthy relationships with their own children. Abuse, > physical and emotional, continues generation to generation. psyche: Very true, and this is certainly very much how I see the Malfoys working, with each boy being squished into the abusive image of his abusive father. Perhaps disfunctional is a better word than abusive, since I've seen that in this thread we have very different ideas about what constitutes abuse, and as Duffypoo points out, we have no concrete proof either way in canon. tylerswaxlion: > I think Narcissa and Lucius believe they love Draco. They've > probably never *thought* about it. psyche: I think Narcissa probably thinks she does. I doubt Lucius thinks about it at all. If he thinks about Draco, I imagine it's as a nuisance or a disappointment. However, that is purely my interpretation. tylerswaxlion: > Bad strategy? Probably. Loveless? Not necessarily. psyche: I still think loveless is a fair description. To me, the important point is not so much whether Lucius loves Draco, as whether he shows love. I don't believe he does. I believe Draco's experience of his father is loveless. psyche From finwitch at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 13:16:29 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 13:16:29 -0000 Subject: Harry Survives (Interpretation of the Prophecy - long) In-Reply-To: <007901c48575$99fd03e0$0b2f0dd4@taxi> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110624 Susana: > Note: I interpreted 'the other' as the same 'the other' as before because it > seems the logical thing to me; but as I said, English is not my native > language. Be sure to correct me if I'm wrong. (if I am: Voldemort will die > at he's own hand, neither will stay alive, but Harry will survive.) Finwitch: Come to think of that - Peter's silver hand, made by Voldemort's magic - (as reward for the right hand PP gave to restore Voldemort) - is, in a way, Voldemort's hand. (Because he created it). Also, it says "At the hand of the other", not "at the hands of the other" as the usual phrase is. I think it's significant that the prophecy speaks of a single hand. --*-- The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord will be born as the seventh month dies (Near the end of July, think both Dumbledore and Voldemort) to those who have thrice defied him (Him meaning Voldemort, the Dark Lord.) This lead to Neville/Harry- interpretation, by just about everyone. Simple enough - Longbottoms and Potters *had* defied the Dark Lord thrice - but um... maybe there are others, or the phrase means something else...;). However, it IS possible that 'as the seventh month dies' means something else than the last of July. For example, last of September (from Latin origin Septum, seventh) the "seventh month" by name to this day, and by ancient Roman Calendar. OR the seventh time moon goes 'dark' - also, dies - counting from the time the prophecy was made. (Hermione's birthday is in September, though early of the month, not near the end) That would put the seventh month between February and April, assuming Dumbledore had the interview during summer... (Ron's born in March). ---*--- And then there's 'and he shall mark him as his equal'. Supposedly when Voldemort gave Harry the scar. (And, this does NOT mean Harry and the 'Dark Lord' need BE equal, only that Voldemort, at the time at least, believes it so) ... but he shall have a power the Dark Lord knows not. (Mother's love, which vanquished Voldemort that night?) Then again, that, too, might be misinterpretation, and the 'mark' is something else! --*-- (and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives). ..*.. Now, to interpret this to be between Harry & Voldemort - Harry's surviving at Dursleys I would not call living. Nor Voldemort's stay in Albania, less than a ghost. I wonder if this means Pettigrew will kill one of them - (back to it being a choice), that Harry will kill Voldemort (or Voldemort him). --*-- We need more information! Finwitch. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 19 13:18:44 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 13:18:44 -0000 Subject: Draco's nature, LV's abiliity to love, Dudders and Harry, etc. (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110625 Tyler's Lion: > In the orphanage I infer for Riddle, not only was he treated > efficiently but emotionlessly, but so were all the other orphans. > He wasn't loved or hated, and neither were his compatriots. > Indifference damaged Riddle far more than the Dursley's dislike > could have. Riddle had no model of emotional attachment at all, > and therefore never "learned" it, especially during any > infancy/early childhood window. By the time he gets to Hogwarts, > he can't understand "love" except as a intellectual concept and as > a way to manipulate others. SSSusan: I'm glad you said "infer" because we just don't know the details of this particular orphanage...but the consensus around here does seem to be that the orphanage staff was indifferent at best. We've certainly not been TOLD of anyone who showed an interest in Tom.... Anyway, I felt a jolt when you mentioned your assumed treatment of Tom in the context of "so were all the other orphans." Does this make anyone else curious about the moral & emotional development of all the others??? Surely we don't assume that if there were 20 or 80 or whatever orphans in this orphanage that we ended up with 20 or 80 or whatever psychopaths or severely damaged individuals, do we? (Or *do* some of you?) I don't...and for me that's why I still keep coming back to a degree of choice for Tom. Siriusly Snapey Susan From JLaming263 at hotmail.com Thu Aug 19 13:29:08 2004 From: JLaming263 at hotmail.com (jimlaming) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 13:29:08 -0000 Subject: the lion discription In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110626 b_boymn: Well, the owl is easy to explain. It's Dumbledore's owl coming to Mrs. Figg telling her to keep an eye on Harry after Dumbledore delivers him to the Dursleys. Can't prove that but it does seem odd that JKR would mention that specific owl at that specific time. There are already references to odd owl behavior in the beginning of PS/SS. So, if we start by assuming it was unique and specific owl was a Post Owl, then the only person in that area that would be receiving Post Owls is Mrs. Figg. Jim questions: That seems very reasonable. But, if the Owl Post is for Mrs. Figg, why was she there. Is this her choice of a place to live? Is it a coincidence that she is living within shouting distance to the Dursleys? Or was she already on assignment to watch them? And if so, why? Is there more to the Evans bloodline that deserves careful watching, magical or not? I wonder . Jim Laming From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 19 13:32:57 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 13:32:57 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110627 Tyler's Lion: > If no one ever loved Tom Riddle as an infant, if no one around Baby! > Tom was ever shown love, if he were raised in such an antiseptic, > completely unemotional environment, I believe it is perfectly > logical to assume he'd have no clue about love and emotional > attachment. And that, later in life, he would be incapable of > understanding it as more than an intellectual concept, i.e., as a > weakness to exploit in others. SSSusan: Why assume it's a completely antiseptic & unemotional environment? It's not just Tom & a [possibly] indifferent staff living there. It's Tom and some additional number of orphans and a [possibly] indifferent staff. We don't know the rules for admittance--infants only? orphans of any age? Unless it's the former, we've got some additional factors to consider. Let's say some children, like Baby Harry at 15 mths., had been placed in this orphanage with others who'd been there since birth. Would the children-who-once-knew-love be any kind of influence on their peers as they grew up? Or those children who had a different "makeup" than Tom did, who managed to learn the capacity for emotional attachment? I think it's quite reasonable to assume there were influences such as these present, and I think there's no reason to suspect that NONE of these children in the orphanage learned to make attachments. Perhaps those attachments weren't with staff but were with each other. Tom would've had those relationships available to him or to model. > > SSSusan: > > The concept of language and the concept of love aren't the same. > > One revolves around emotion, whereas the other revolves around > > cognition. Tyler's Lion: > And Tom doesn't feel that emotion per JKR. And never has. > Why would emotion be so very different from language or sight? > Don't you believe emotion occurs in the brain? How do you suppose > Tom was to learn it? SSSusan: Absolutely I believe that different parts of the brain work in different ways. As for how Tom was to learn it, please look to my paragraphs above. Siriusly Snapey Susan From phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk Thu Aug 19 11:44:29 2004 From: phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk (Kate Harding) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:44:29 -0000 Subject: Draco's nature In-Reply-To: <002e01c485d5$d1598650$31c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110628 DuffyPoo: I apologize if you thought I was attacking your interpretation of Draco's character. psyche: No, don't worry, I didn't at all. Duffypoo: My first opinion of Draco was formed when reading the incident in Madam Malkin's robe shop and the following incident on the train. Neither of Draco's parents was near to hear what he had to say. He had no reason to spout the party-line in either situation if he didn't believe it wholeheartedly himself. psyche: I think he *does* believe it. He has internalised all his father's opinions because the message his environment has given him is that dad is god and Draco is nothing. That he's only right when he agrees with Dad. This is a mindset I understand, because when I was a child, my mother was god. (And she adored me!) It took me 30 years to really *understand* in my *gut* that I didn't have to do what she wanted, and I'm still discovering things that I have believed for years because she said them which, on reflection, are patently false! I still find it frightening to state an opinion (though you may not have got that impression :) ) and I still have trouble knowing what I want and like, even down to what I feel like eating. And I was an unusually independent minded child, so god help those who aren't. Duffypoo: There is also the statement that Draco made, "Then I'm going to drag them off to look at racing brooms. I don't see why first years can't have their own. I think 'I'll bully father' into getting me one and I'll smuggle it in somehow.' I don't think there would be too much bullying of dad going on if Lucius were abusive in any way. psyche: A good point. And I think you're probably right, but it's worth remembering that, as you say, there was noone around to hear that statement. I doubt Draco would have said it if he thought it was likely to get back to Lucius. He may simply have been showing off. Teenagers tend to boast about how their parents can't tell them what to do, but usually the reality is very different. In fact, the ones who are getting the hardest time have the best reason to pretend otherwise. Duffypoo: There are all kinds of ways to love just as there are all kinds of dysfunction in a family. Simply because someone is not loved in a traditional sense, does not mean they have been raised in a loveless home. Love comes in all different disguises. Because a parent is strict with a child, even overly strict some might think, doesn't mean that parent is abusive or unloving. psyche: You're right. I think perhaps my terms were stronger than I intended when I first posted about this. And I had forgotten the Narcissa factor, and reading these posts has made me think that she probably does dote in him, although I still wouldn't call it love, because I think self-obsession is incompatible with selfless love. That's a question of semantics, really - your idea of love and mine are different. But I still feel that 'loveless' is a fair description of Draco's relationship with Lucius. I don't believe Lucius loves. He's too cold. Perhaps it would be more accurate, and less controversial, to call the relationship "affectionless". Because what I'm getting at is that Draco has had no signs of affection from Lucius - whether or not he thinks he's doing his best for the boy, if his best consists of distant criticism and discipline that veers towards the Victorian ('never did me any harm'), then I would call that loveless, because that will have been Draco's experience of it. Duffypoo: Until I see proof in canon that indicates otherwise I'll stick to my own interpretation. psyche: Quite right too! And so will I. psyche From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 19 13:54:29 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 13:54:29 -0000 Subject: Going back to DD knowing all In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110629 Martha wrote: > > I think that DD is indirectly teaching or preparing Harry on how > > to defend himself, since he knows what "fate" is waiting for him > > in the future (the show down at the OK Corral with Voldy). > > Although I don't know to what extent it could go. Does any one > > have any suggestions, please? Dzeytoun: > Well, JKR has addressed this in the Royal Albert Hall interview. > She said (paraphrase): "Dumbledore is a very wise man. He knows > Harry needs to learn fast in order to be prepared for what might be > coming, so he allows Harry privileges he would never allow another > student. The tradeoff for that is he also, unwillingly, has to > allow Harry to face dangers and problems from which he would rather > protect him." > > I think it's clear that Dumbledore allows Harry, Ron, and Hermione > to make their own choices, and to an extent enables them to do so. > I don't think, however, that he knows everything, and I don't think > he is actively manipulative in the way so many people see him. For > instance he provided Harry with the invisibility cloak. However, > if Harry had chosen *not* to use the cloak to pursue the Stone I > don't think DD would have tried to trick or push Harry into doing > so. And DD implies in his conversation at the end of OOTP that > Harry has several times gone much farther than Dumbledore ever > expected. SSSusan: I agree totally with what Dzeytoun has said about DD with the invisibilitiy cloak example. A couple of us here feel quite strongly that DD (and staff, with DD's instruction) set up the SS/PS "obstacle course" specifically with Harry (or, alternately, H/R/H) in mind. For me, I believe it was a test of Harry's mettle, both in terms of what kinds of skills he possesses, but also of his *willingness* and drive--in terms of taking risks and, especially, in terms of commitment to "The Good Side." In other words, I think Dzeytoun is right that DD would never have PUSHED Harry to go after the stone, but that he, well, set things about as it were [invisibility cloak, Mirror of Erised, etc.] and sat back to see what Harry would do with it, if anything. Josh included this quote at the top of this thread, and it's key to my belief in this: "No, it isn't," said Harry thoughtfully. "He's a funny man, Dumbledore. I think he sort of wanted to give me a chance. I think he knows more or less everything that goes on here, you know. I reckon he had a pretty good idea we were going to try, and instead of stopping us, he just taught us enough to help. I don't think it was an accident he let me find out how the mirror worked. It's almost like he thought I had the right to face Voldemort if I could...." Siriusly Snapey Susan From quigonginger at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 14:26:24 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:26:24 -0000 Subject: define love Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110630 I have been following with great interest the "LV never loved" thread. Thanks to all who provided input and especially to those who added the psych stuff (that was my minor, but that was a long time ago). I have to wonder, though, are we defining love the same? Are we defining it correctly? I went back and reread the original question which was "Has Voldemort or Tom Riddle ever cared for or loved anyone?" Now if I replaced LV/TR with my name, I could honestly answer "no, I haven't." Or I could say "Well, yeah, some." Or I could say "Yes, many, many people". All with the same degree of honesty. Would anyone care to join me in an exercise? Think of 5 people that you love that you met when neither you nor they were an infant. Got them? Now ask yourself at what point you started loving them. I bet it wasn't instant. I would bet that there was cordiality, acquaintanceship, friendship, and then love. Your experiences may vary, of course, but if it was a relationship with someone you had not met as a baby, how could you love them right off the bat? The way I understood the question and answer was that Tom had never gotten to the point of love. He may have been cordial, and possibly even friends, but not to a great degree. Similar to a relationship one may have with someone at work, but with whom one doesn't socialize outside of the workplace. Comfortable, but not loving. Where I see Tom's choice in the matter is to not allow it to continue to a deeper level. Back to your 5 people. If one is a spouse/significant other, then you have loved in a way I have not. (as my first answer). If some of the others are best friends, then I can relate to that (my second). Remember the days of Storge'? Did I even spell that right? We went on about the different types of love for days! It would be my guess that "cared for or loved" would mean a deep love, like with a spouse/SO, OR a very deep friendship, or possibly both. I don't think it means that he never had positive feelings towards anyone on a basic level. My reasoning is that those base feelings are far more easily turned off, especially as he reached the tumult of teenhood, than a deeper love. He may have told himself he was illogical or, as others have suggested, weak. A deeper love would have been much harder to nullify. It fits in with JKR's "choices". Had he never been capable of feeling even basic positive feelings towards anyone, he would have had no choice. Del has pointed this out admirably. So, in summary, I think that the type of love in question is a deep love, the type that takes time to cultivate. A lesser love can be halted mid-growth should the relationship sour. I don't think she means this sort of love. Tom, of course, would never have known familial love. As to my last answer above (yes, many), it is a part of my religious beliefs (and those of many other religions) to love all people. This is not nearly the love I have for my friends and family, but I wish no harm and only the best for everyone. Tom never had this either, that we know of. I don't think he could have become what he did if he had. Any thoughts on this? Ginger, who usually doesn't announce to over 11000 people that she loves them (blush) From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 19 14:42:28 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:42:28 -0000 Subject: Hopefully it's not that simple (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110631 SSSusan wrote : >>> "These are JKR's words, and the fact that she used the words-- about TOM specifically--"choices" and "wrong" seems highly significant. No, I doubt he said, "I want to be evil when I grow up" but that was never my argument. He had CHOICES and he made WRONG ones, per JKR. That's been my point: choices." I'm going on my gut, my training, and JKR's words.<<< Del replied : > But don't you believe that people, especially kids, can make wrong > decisions without realising they are wrong ? SSSusan: Yes, I do think that can happen. But at this point, I think that what *I* think doesn't matter much. Let's move on to your next comment so I can clarify.... Del: > And yes I'm quite vehement about Tom because JKR's statement that he > never loved deeply shocked me. I know what abandonment can do to a > child, so I already could relate to Tom before that. But to read > that he was so damaged that he never was able to love brought a > whole new dimension to the story, at least in my eyes. In fact, I > truly hope that she didn't mean things that simply, that she just > made an over-statement, and that Tom was not that damaged. Or else > I hope it will all come to play a part in the end, in relation with > Harry's love and compassion. Because otherwise I would feel that it > in fact unnecessarily takes away from LV's evilness. SSSusan: NOW we're getting somewhere, Del!! Yes, we both want there to be MUCH MORE to what JKR has told us about Tom & Voldy, because if there isn't, it doesn't yet make total sense. Psychopath... evil... never loved anyone... possibly never knew love... wrong choices [tactical or moral, thank you Pippin].... While intriguing, it's hard to put *all* these pieces together into a complete, sensible package that satisfies people's understandings of psychopathology, emotional & moral development, and free will. Here's what Pam recently said: >>However, I really think that (whether we ever agree on the concept of degrees of moral responsibility in real life) in the books, for LV to be a great master criminal/truly diabolical villain, he has to be seen as having *chosen* his path. Otherwise, he's just pathetic and pitiable, and just not nasty enough for this type of fantasy literature.<< SSSusan again: FINALLY, I think we're at the point where we've found common ground in this. What Del said about hoping JKR didn't mean things that simply, and what Pam said about Tom/Voldy *having* to be seen as having chosen his path or else he's just pitiable and not diabolical are actually in agreement, I think. We need more explanation from JKR so that this all fits with what we know about emotional development, moral judgment, psychopathology, etc. And here's the kicker for me: I *trust* JKR to be able to do this. So far she's done precious little with the books to disappoint me, and I'm going to move merrily along on my way, believing that Tom did CHOOSE to some degree, because I think it's *not* as simple as the things JKR has fed us so far and that she will fill in the gaps to make it understandable. (Please!!) Siriusly Snapey Susan From caesian at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 14:50:15 2004 From: caesian at yahoo.com (caesian) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 07:50:15 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The DADA Jinx (was Re: Trelawney / Incompetent teachers/Binns theory) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <14AEEB88-F1EF-11D8-B85A-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110632 On Aug 19, 2004, at 3:34 AM, finwitch wrote: > > 2) It is possible that the DADA post IS sort of jinxed. Anyone who > has taught DADA has had his darkest secret revealed; incompetent/evil > ones get themselves hurt. Dumbledore would NOT want Snape's Dark Mark > leak into the public... Caesian: Oh - my - gosh. This is exactly right. It also makes perfect sense - who wants a DADA teacher with terrible dark secrets? To review: Quirrell - everyone now knows he was two-faced. Lockhart - everyone knows he is a fake. Lupin - everyone knows he is a werewolf. Imposter!Moody - everyone knows he was Barty Crouch Jr. Umbridge - everyone knows she was incompetent, lawbreaking and is now out of power If Snape took the DADA post, everyone would know ... ? Obviously something Dumbledore does not want revealed (- although Snape applies for the position anyway. Maybe he is unaware of the nature of the jinx?) Caesian [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 19 15:13:00 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 15:13:00 -0000 Subject: define love In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110633 Ginger wrote: > I have to wonder, though, are we defining love the same? Are we > defining it correctly? I went back and reread the original > question which was "Has Voldemort or Tom Riddle ever cared for or > loved anyone?" > > Would anyone care to join me in an exercise? Think of 5 people > that you love that you met when neither you nor they were an > infant. Got them? > > Now ask yourself at what point you started loving them. I bet it > wasn't instant. I would bet that there was cordiality, > acquaintanceship, friendship, and then love. Your experiences may > vary, of course, but if it was a relationship with someone you had > not met as a baby, how could you love them right off the bat? > > The way I understood the question and answer was that Tom had never > gotten to the point of love. He may have been cordial, and > possibly even friends, but not to a great degree. Similar to a > relationship one may have with someone at work, but with whom one > doesn't socialize outside of the workplace. Comfortable, but not > loving. > > Where I see Tom's choice in the matter is to not allow it to > continue to a deeper level. > > Remember the days of Storge'? We went on about the different types > of love for days! It would be my guess that "cared for or loved" > would mean a deep love, like with a spouse/SO, OR a very deep > friendship, or possibly both. I don't think it means that he never > had positive feelings towards anyone on a basic level. > > My reasoning is that those base feelings are far more easily turned > off, especially as he reached the tumult of teenhood, than a deeper > love. He may have told himself he was illogical or, as others have > suggested, weak. A deeper love would have been much harder to > nullify. It fits in with JKR's "choices". Had he never been > capable of feeling even basic positive feelings towards anyone, he > would have had no choice. Del has pointed this out admirably. > > Any thoughts on this? > Ginger, who usually doesn't announce to over 11000 people that she > loves them (blush) SSSusan: I couldn't let Ginger sit out there, blushing, and wondering if anyone agrees with her. My response, Ginger? This is *brilliant.* Your points about depth of positive relationships and time in development of them are extremely important! I know I had not considered that at all, yet it can make a huge difference in how "distressing" JKR's comments are. *This* idea softens the seeming finality of her comments about "never loved" and "psychopath" and allow room for the choice element that so many of us want in order to truly find Voldy evil & diabolical and not just pitiable. Noting that Tom likely did have positive relationships with others also allows room for something I just posted about--the potential influence of his peers in the orphanage, all of whom I do NOT believe had led totally loveless lives. With your thoughts in mind, I can much more easily see Tom being friendly enough to become HB and respected by peers & teachers--we just have to include this component of simply CUTTING SHORT the relationship before it deepens to love. (And, I might add, the older he got and farther along his path toward full power & immortality, he likely would cut those positive relationships to almost nothing.) Siriusly Snapey Susan From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 15:14:29 2004 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 15:14:29 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110634 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" wrote: > Del wrote: > > As an aside : can one truly *choose* hate and evil if they've never > > experienced love and goodness ? > > And : wouldn't the fact that Tom never cared for anyone indicate a > > major mental disease (not unexpected considering the > > circumstances) ? > > Julie replied: > >>I am looking at the diagnostic criteria for Antisocial Personality > Disrder, a.k.a."sociopath" or "psychopath" in the DSM-IV, and TR/LV > certainly meets the criterial. It has been hypothesized in research > involving psychopathy that these folks do lack the ability to love, > have empathy, show remorse, etc. [snip] Some have described folks > like this as being born without a conscience. This certainly seems to > describe Tom.<< > > HunterGreen: > Just to clarify, psychopath and sociopath are not the same thing. A > psychopath is someone who doesn't understand the difference between > right and wrong, and a sociopath does, but doesn't care. I think > sociopath would definitely describe Tom, as he is intelligent enough > to understand that he is breaking rules, but lacks the empathy and > compassion (and indeed a conscience) to care. His actions as a > teenager reflect that. The basilisk was wrecking havoc on the school > (I assume although only one person died, and that was more an > accident than anything else) and he only stops it when it becomes an > inconveinence for him. He doesn't care about someone dying or other > students being afraid. He's aware that its wrong, but he doesn't care > until it affects HIM in a negative way. We use the terms interchangeably, mainly because we deal with impact on others. And in all actuality, neither are used diagnostically anymore. It is all under "Antisocial Personality Disorder." That was the point of my post, that Tom Riddle fit the profile of a person with Antisocial Personality Disorder. I didn't want to use simply "antisocial" because many people misuse this term when they really mean "asocial." That's why I mentioned the other terms, to clarify I meant the disorder, following up on the previous post. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 15:48:57 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 15:48:57 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110635 Valky wrote : "My argument is plot related: Tom Riddle *will* have choice when he gets to Hogwarts, because he can't very well *not* have; otherwise he should never even go to Hogwarts at age 11 he should be institutionalised and counselled. = Plothole; so lets not assume it." Del replies : Well, actually, I dearly hope you're right. As I said in another post, it would take away from LV's evilness if it was revealed that he was already so sociopathic by the time he came to Hogwarts that he didn't have a chance to fight the big Slytherin Temptation. I'm just bothered by this "Tom never loved" quote. An 11-year-old boy who never loved *is* IMO too much of a sociopath to be sent to a normal school. He *should* be sent into an institution. Valky wrote : "However free agency is *not* limited to what choices one has *before* they hit the bottom but also what choices they make while they are there. " Del replies : I agree. I made the decision at 13 to live through Hell on Earth, partly because I knew my mother and sister wouldn't take my suicide well, and partly because I believed in life after death, and I believed I would be condemning myself to *eternal* Hell if I killed myself. I chose what I saw as the least of 2 evils. Valky wrote : "I argue that they *are* exercising their free agency at this time and blame doesn't come into it, from me. It's *their* duty to themselves to consider their part in blame for the pain or damage caused by their condition. This is a choice available to them, however hard it might be to make as a result of the detachment in their condition. Most importantly I argue that removing blame from them because of their condition is *not* giving them choice it is taking one away. Therefore it is *not* compassionate it is _disabling_ and inadvertantly cruel." Del replies : I'm afraid you lost me there. I don't really understand what you mean. If you have time, could you try to rephrase it please ? What I do know about blame though, is that I was able to take the first steps out of my depression only *after* I stopped giving into the blame that others laid on me for being depressed. For more than 10 years, I believed people who told me that I had no reason to feel bad, that I should just pull myself up, that it was my own decision to make to get better. That was *wrong* and it *prevented* me from feeling better. It's only when my then-boyfriend told me that those people were wrong and that I wasn't responsible for being depressed that I became able to work on getting better. As long as people were blaming me for exhibiting the *symptoms* of depression, I was paralysed and couldn't start to work on the *cause* of it. Valky wrote : "If you are familiar with the movie 'a Beautiful Mind' you will know that what I say is true in real life. Someone deeply affected and almost lost to the anomaly of his mind _made_a_choice_ somewhere deep in the abyss that we throw our careless compassion into hoping against hope that it saves. He, alone, through his *own choice* overcame the unbeatable, with the courage in his own heart he rose above the helplessness, self pity, and rage that his isolation created in his life. Compassion didnt save him. Love did, and it came in an entirely different form to compassion. " Del replies : I haven't seen the movie yet, but it's high on my wish list. I agree that most people will be able *at some time* to make a conscious decision to get out of their pit. *However* it most often takes *years* before they reach that point. Moreover there's a big difference between the 2 examples you gave and me or Tom : both your examples (if I'm not mistaken) concern people who fell down the pit as *adults*. Tom and I, on the other hand, fell in it as kids or teenagers, and *stayed* there for a long while. It means that a whole part of our development was tainted by our problems. We grew up thinking that the way we were was *normal*, just unlucky. It took me more than 10 years to start to realise that maybe I was depressed ! I thought I was perfectly normal, just different. And obviously Tom also thought of himself as *different*, not as having a problem to cure. If someone at age 15 had told me I was depressed, I'm not sure I would have believed them : depression is an illness, and I wasn't sick. My husband, on the other hand, developed depression as an adult, and he knew right away that something was wrong. He knew how he used to feel and react, and he could measure the difference with the way he now felt and reacted. He knew that his new behaviour was not healthy. He knew that normal people don't suffer so much and don't feel that bad. I didn't know that. When he told me, it was a revelation. I was 27, and it was a revelation for me to learn that I did not *have* to hate myself, that normal people love themselves. It was a revelation to be told that I did not *have* to be perfect, that I could make mistakes and still be satisfied with myself. I didn't know those things, because I had grown up thinking differently. That's why I don't expect a 13-year-old sociopath who doesn't know anything about love to go and look for it, for example. I know I'm biased, but if I wasn't, who would be :-) ? Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 15:56:53 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 15:56:53 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110636 SSSusan wrote : "I think it's quite reasonable to assume there were influences such as these present, and I think there's no reason to suspect that NONE of these children in the orphanage learned to make attachments. Perhaps those attachments weren't with staff but were with each other. Tom would've had those relationships available to him or to model." Del replies : I agree with you that some of those influences must have been there. But the problem is : they didn't work on Tom. If JKR's statement is to be taken literally, those influences did *not* teach Tom how to love. They weren't enough. And I really don't think we can blame a little kid for failing to learn how to love, even if it is taught to him, can we ? And once Tom became big enough to make conscious decisions about his life (usually around 8), it was most probably already too late for him to learn how to love, especially if nobody told him he should or was there to guide him on the way. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 16:08:10 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 16:08:10 -0000 Subject: Hopefully it's not that simple (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110637 SSSusan wrote : "I'm going to move merrily along on my way, believing that Tom did CHOOSE to some degree, because I think it's *not* as simple as the things JKR has fed us so far and that she will fill in the gaps to make it understandable. (Please!!)" Del replies : I'm actually going to move along on my way too quite soon, though not necessarily merrily :-) But what JKR said shocked me so much because of the terrible implication that Tom was not necessarily morally responsible for what he did, that I just *had* to come and discuss it on the list. Moreover, I *do* see a way for what she said to be the plain truth, and still be OK. If Harry in the end vanquishes LV by invading him and filling him with love, which would destroy LV according to JKR, then it would teach a most powerful lesson : that loving others is the most important thing we can do, because it can prevent a lot of evil things from happening. Power doesn't matter, fame doesn't matter, talent doesn't matter, immortality doesn't matter, even revenge and justice don't matter to a degree : it's true, selfless love that matters. I think we'd both be happy with that kind of ending, don't you think ? Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 16:36:43 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 16:36:43 -0000 Subject: define love In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110638 Ginger wrote : "The way I understood the question and answer was that Tom had never gotten to the point of love. He may have been cordial, and possibly even friends, but not to a great degree. Similar to a relationship one may have with someone at work, but with whom one doesn't socialize outside of the workplace. Comfortable, but not loving. Where I see Tom's choice in the matter is to not allow it to continue to a deeper level. " (snip) "I don't think it means that he never had positive feelings towards anyone on a basic level. My reasoning is that those base feelings are far more easily turned off, especially as he reached the tumult of teenhood, than a deeper love. He may have told himself he was illogical or, as others have suggested, weak." Del replies : Great post Ginger ! It makes sense. Tom could have indeed made the wrong choice of cutting any relationship that seemed to go into too warm waters. Unfortunately, I understand only too well why someone in Tom's position would choose to do that. I have the very same tendency. I enjoy comradeship, but I have an automatic reaction to back up when people try to get any closer. Apparently this has to do with my feeling of abandonment by my biological father. I expect Tom would feel even more so. Even Harry is like that. He was the one that initiated their friendship with Ron, but I have a feeling that if Ron had then left him to go with someone else, Harry would not have tried to keep him back. And Hermione quite forcefully imposed her company on the 2 boys at first. And apart from those 2, Sirius is the only one who managed to break through Harry's barriers, and that's because he's the only *family* he's got (apart from the Dursleys). Harry keeps *everybody else* at a distance : DD, Lupin, the other Weasleys (even Molly and Ginny who have made it clear that they care for him), and so on. Harry lets them come only that close, and then he backs away. And there's Neville also ! As far as we know, Neville doesn't have a best friend, he doesn't belong to any gang, he doesn't have a regular mate to hang out with. He's a real loner. In each case, we have a kid who lost one or both of his parents at a very young age, and who seems to have problems forming deep meaningful relationships. Tom isn't the only one. Oh, and there's Theo Nott, too. JKR herself described him as a loner. And we could also add Luna, of course ! So yes Ginger, you're probably right, but I'm not sure Tom can be blamed for shying away from meaningful relationships. So what, is it back to square one :-) ? Del From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Thu Aug 19 16:44:34 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 16:44:34 -0000 Subject: Gryffindor Passwords In-Reply-To: <58CDFF4E-F1D5-11D8-B85A-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110639 >>> Caesian wrote: > Caput Draconis > Pig Snout > Wattlebird > Fortuna Major (PA5) > Scurvy Cur > Oddsbodkins > Flibbertigibbet > Balderdash > Fairy Lights > Mimbulus mimbletonia > banana fritters Brenda: *In awe of Caesian's researching ability, applauds* I can't believe you went through all this trouble!!! I did think the Gryffindor passwords were rather comlicated and didn't blame Neville for not remembering them. I mean compare all those Latin and references to Dumbledore's 'Sherbert Lemon' 'Cockroch Cluster' or Slytherin's 'Pure Blood'! Now we know to look out for the passwords and ponder... >>> [Banana Fritters] > > Preparation time less than 30 mins, Cooking time?less than 10 mins > << Ingredients >> 2 bananas, cut lengthways oil for deep fat frying For the batter - 75g/3oz self-raising flour - chilled water, enough to make a batter - 1 waffle - 30g/1oz walnut pieces - Icing sugar to dust For the chocolate sauce - 55g/2oz chocolate - 55ml/2fl oz double cream << Method >> 1. For the batter - put the flour in a bowl and slowly add water, beating all the time until a batter is formed. 2. Put the waffle and walnuts in a mini food processor and blitz until breadcrumb sized pieces are formed. 3. Stir this into the batter. 4. Dip the banana halves in the batter and deep fry for 2-3 minutes until golden. 5. Break up the chocolate and put into a heatproof dish over a pan of simmering water. Ensure the bowl is not touching the water. 6. Once the chocolate has melted stir in the cream. 7. Serve the banana fritters with the chocolate sauce and sprinkle with icing sugar. Brenda: AWESOME, thank you for the convenient recipe!!! ;) Brenda, giggling From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 17:00:00 2004 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 17:00:00 -0000 Subject: The DADA Jinx (was Re: Trelawney / Incompetent teachers/Binns theory) In-Reply-To: <14AEEB88-F1EF-11D8-B85A-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110640 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, caesian wrote: > On Aug 19, 2004, at 3:34 AM, finwitch wrote: > > > > 2) It is possible that the DADA post IS sort of jinxed. Anyone who > > has taught DADA has had his darkest secret revealed; incompetent/evil > > ones get themselves hurt. Dumbledore would NOT want Snape's Dark Mark > > leak into the public... > > Caesian: > > Oh - my - gosh. This is exactly right. > > It also makes perfect sense - who wants a DADA teacher with terrible > dark secrets? > > To review: > Quirrell - everyone now knows he was two-faced. > Lockhart - everyone knows he is a fake. > Lupin - everyone knows he is a werewolf. > Imposter!Moody - everyone knows he was Barty Crouch Jr. > Umbridge - everyone knows she was incompetent, lawbreaking and is now > out of power > > If Snape took the DADA post, everyone would know ... ? > > > Obviously something Dumbledore does not want revealed (- although Snape > applies for the position anyway. Maybe he is unaware of the nature of > the jinx?) > > Caesian > Antosha: AH! That makes perfect sense! Isn't it also possible that Snape, complex creature that he is, actually WANTS his secret to be known?... We assume it's the fact that he was once a DE. But what if it's something ELSE? From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Aug 19 17:28:00 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 17:28:00 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110641 > Valky wrote : > "My argument is plot related: Tom Riddle otherwise > should never even go to Hogwarts at age 11 he should be > institutionalised and counselled. = Plothole; so lets not assume it." > > Del replies : > Well, actually, I dearly hope you're right. > I'm just bothered by this "Tom never loved" quote. > An 11-year-old boy who never loved *is* IMO too much > of a sociopath to be sent to a normal school. > He *should* be sent into an institution. > Valky: A fair enough and valid point. Provided he hadn't ever freely understood or was open to the choice he had to love people, himself, life....(Just warming up for Gingers exercise) and hence *was* a pyschopath. I agree that this point needs to be closed before the end of the series to truly satisfy LV the Villain, though I think in the end there will still be a resonance of pity for his misguided ways. > Valky wrote : > "However free agency is *not* limited to what choices one has > *before* they hit the bottom but also what choices they make while > they are there. " > > Del replies : > I agree. I made the decision at 13 to live through Hell on Earth, > partly because I knew my mother and sister wouldn't take my suicide > well, and partly because I believed in life after death, and I > believed I would be condemning myself to *eternal* Hell if I killed > myself. I chose what I saw as the least of 2 evils. > Valky: This is really heart wrenching Del. it is true that the person can suffer in their personal hell for a very long time before the entity of free agency to leave truly manifests for them. I have deep compassion for this suffering. For you, as you have said however, the entity did make manifest in your husband, he gave you the choice and you made it. Had you rejected it and were outside now looking in at yourself how would you feel about your blame for giving up your chance. Now juxtapose that Tom Riddle was given to manifest the same opportunity but chose against. It would be hard to maintain that he was entirely blameless for his continued condition. Finally I am a strong believer that love reaches out to everyone in time and I think that the message of all fairy tales is this. But I digress here and, heaven forbid, start preaching so no more about that. > Valky wrote : >snip for space> > > Del replies : > I'm afraid you lost me there. I don't really understand what you mean. If you have time, could you try to rephrase it please ? > Valky: Rephrase-- I expect that the bit that loses the reader is where I am trying to say that it is *never* the *observers* place to allocate any blame, but this does not make the sufferer blameless. On the other hand if the observer is very assertive in denying the sufferer their blame then the sufferer, who is probably dependent on their clarity, can be hence denied the choice to acknowledge their own responsibility. They become disabled by it. It is the *sufferers* place to consider their own blame, it is the conscience that the sufferer of mental affliction needs to heal in beginning their Road to Damascus. Read the 12 alcoholics anonymous steps. One is heal your conscience. Del wrote: > What I do know about blame though, is that I was able to take the > first steps out of my depression only *after* I stopped giving into > the blame that others laid on me for being depressed. For more than 10 years, I believed people who told me that I had no reason to feel bad, that I should just pull myself up, that it was my own decision to make to get better. That was *wrong* and it *prevented* me from feeling better. Valky: And you are entirely correct that this is a wrong toward you by those people. And, of course, why I advocate that a person must never be denied their blame. Yes, I am saying that these people denied you your blame. It was yours to decide and nobody elses. And when love found you that is what it told you. Despite that mental illness can take away your other free agencies it doesn't take this. Other people do. In the case of Tom Riddle, as with anyone, he lives with his conscience alone in his secret, silent to outsiders, place inside. He chooses not to be dependent on others clarity even at the tender age of 16. Assuming that he did not *become* this way between the ages of 11 and Sixteen the he came to Hogwarts much as Harry did, with the ability to choose what will affect his conscience. This has already been described in other posts using different terms such as cognitive understanding of what is morally right. Again it *not* my belief that this automatically means he is not affected by his past suffering, but it is a choice that he can freely make in moving toward a better existence in spite of his suffering. > > Valky wrote : > "If you are familiar with the movie 'a Beautiful Mind' you will know that what I say is true in real life. > > Del replies : > I haven't seen the movie yet, but it's high on my wish list. > > Moreover there's a big difference between the 2 examples you gave and me or Tom : both your examples (if I'm not mistaken) concern people who fell down the pit as *adults*. Tom and I, on the other hand, fell in it as kids or teenagers, and *stayed* there for a long while. Valky: Actually Del when you see the movie you will see that John Nash is *exactly* like you and Tom. Nash suffered delusional paranoid schizophrenia from an age so young that his doctor could never determine it. Throughout a vast period of his childhood he was unaware that he was not clearly able to differentiate between what was real and what was not in the physical world. By the time he was diagnosed he had married and obtained his Doctorate in Mathematics been a University Professor for many years and had several close acquaintances in his life that were not real people. One of them so close to him that it is impossible to imagine that it did not break his heart in a most traumatic way. He was unable to function happily on medication and eventually made a concious choice born of a deep love that he had found in his life to fight the disease on his own terms. the delusions never went away, his mind fought his heart with fierce rebuke, he had not chosen an easy path. He had been *ill* for close to 40 years. When the choice Love gave him was offered he took it and made an impressive stand for the power of the human heart. See the movie, Del I am sure you will be moved eternally by it. > > That's why I don't expect a 13-year-old sociopath who doesn't know > anything about love to go and look for it, for example. > Valky: With this I entirely agree, he will not look for it. But love is everywhere and it does find you. It found JkR when she needed it and it found you and (just a little peek at my soul) it found me. Best to You Del >From Valky From slgazit at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 19 18:09:37 2004 From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 18:09:37 -0000 Subject: Draco's nature, LV's abiliity to love, Dudders and Harry, etc. (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110642 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tylerswaxlion" wrote: > But I'm not talking about all orphanages or all orphans. I'm > talking about a specific instance--we've been told Tom was raised in > an orphanage, and he would rather have stayed at Hogwarts than to > return to the orphanage--my inference is that he didn't like it > there. True. Likewise, Harry has always preferred to stay at Hogwarts than go to Privet Drive. > His mother died after naming him--he never experienced her > love. Most importantly, JKR just said that LV has never loved > anyone--which leads to my assumption that he was raised > *indifferently*. We have no knowledge of the quality of care offered at that orphanage. It could have been really bad, indifferent, abusive, or that Voldemort had attachment problems unrelated to the environment. I am however sure that the other orphans have not all turned into megalomanian mass murderers. This means that how he turned out must have been primarily due to inherent personality flaws. As another example, take Hitler. While he had an abusive father, it is well known that he had a mother who loved him and he her. There are thousands or more children in the world growing up in similar circumstances, but only one turned out to be Hitler. You simply can't blame it all on environment. > They *didn't* care, and that > early indifference caused the damage, namely Riddle's inability to > love. Perhaps. I am not denying that the orphanage must have contributed to his disfunctionality. Only that it is not the real cause. Hitler was able to love (his mother, Eva Brown, perhaps others), but he still turned out to be a dictator responsible for tens of millions of deaths. Ditto for Stalin - and you could find several more examples. There were studies showing that serious criminals or insane people sometimes have brain scans that differ than normal people's brains. I personally know of a woman who became paranoid and delusional after the birth of her first child and is so to this day (though has never commited violence or tried to). Her ex husband thought it may have been due to chemical changes in the brain due to pregnancy hormones. Our brains are biological and are affected by the chemistry of the body, and many other factors. The factors that cause one to be a genius (as Riddle was) can also create an inherent instability that under the right conditions (and maybe always) may produce madness. > Again, Harry's relatives did and do care--they dislike him and > resent him. Plus, Harry could see his aunt and uncle's love (such > as it is) for Duddykins. It makes a difference in that Harry is > exposed to emotional attachments, both positive and negative. He > understands "caring." As a child I was fascinated with books about kids growing up in orphanages, especially abusive ones. In every such story, the kids ended up forming relationships and friendships with each other as a way to counter the hostile environment. The younger kids would turn to the older ones for protection and mothering for example. The environment was never uniform. There was usually at least one positive person among the staff, even if it were the gardener. Most kids are resilent enough to find some solutions to missing adult care, so long as they are not in complete isolation or some nightmarish conditions (as described about some of the orphanages in Romania under Choucesco (sp?), e.g. chained to bed, severe overcrowding, etc.) and even there the kids did not all or most turned out to be criminals. Voldemort was a special case. > I believe Baby Tom had the capacity to love. YMMV. Certainly he had, but being able to love does not prevent one from becoming a killer. Plenty of historical examples for that. Salit (who believes that so long as they can distinguish right from wrong, an adult should always be held responsible for their actions, even if they had a miserable childhood...) From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Aug 19 18:28:59 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 18:28:59 -0000 Subject: define love In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110643 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "quigonginger" wrote: Ginger: > I have been following with great interest the "LV never loved" > thread. Thanks to all who provided input and especially to those who > added the psych stuff (that was my minor, but that was a long time > ago). > > I have to wonder, though, are we defining love the same? Are we > defining it correctly? Geoff: I think this takes us back to the old question of what do we mean by love? The word is a catch-all. "I love you", "I love strawberries and cream", "Don't you just love the way he scores points over the other guy?" C.S.Lewis attempted to tackle this in his book "The Four Loves" when he went back to the four Greek words: eros, philos, agape and storge and shows that each reveals a different facet of the idea. This is why I objected a few days ago when someone wrote something like "That's why I don't want Harry to win by using (ugh!) love." I pointed out that real love is the sort of love demonstrated by Christ on the Cross - not love being crooned about but real, strong, deep love unyielding in its aims to care for others and to put their needs in front. "Greater love has no man...." etc. Unless we can decide what we collectively mean by love when we talk about Tom Riddle or Harry, we shall be airing our misunderstandings from now until Book 6 comes out. :-) From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 18:48:41 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 18:48:41 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110644 Valky wrote : "For you, as you have said however, the entity did make manifest in your husband, he gave you the choice and you made it. Had you rejected it and were outside now looking in at yourself how would you feel about your blame for giving up your chance. Now juxtapose that Tom Riddle was given to manifest the same opportunity but chose against. It would be hard to maintain that he was entirely blameless for his continued condition. " Del replies : I don't know. As I said in another post, I'm not sure I would have even listened if someone had told me I was depressed, back when I was a teenager. I was convinced that I was different, not sick. I thought I should change myself, not cure myself. So I really doubt I would have been open to anyone telling me that this or that negative thing was not really from me but from my illness. I would not have seen the light like I did years later, because I wasn't *ready* to see it. I first had to recognise that I was ill, that there was a monster in my head that warped my feelings and thinking, before I was able to accept that I *could* separate myself from that monster. Similarly, I don't know if Tom, as a kid or a teenager, was ready to hear that he had a personality disorder and what he could do about it. Even if someone had told him that his behaviour was straight out of a textbook, I doubt he would have accepted this diagnosis. It's not a matter of choice, it's a matter of being able to look at yourself critically. And from what we see in CoS, Tom had no problem with who he was and what he did. Thanks for rephrasing what you meant about observers and blame, it makes much more sense now. Valky wrote : "In the case of Tom Riddle, as with anyone, he lives with his conscience alone in his secret, silent to outsiders, place inside. He chooses not to be dependent on others clarity even at the tender age of 16." Del replies : First of all, if Tom is indeed a sociopath, then he doesn't have a conscience "as with anyone". Second, why should he choose to depend on anyone else if a) he doesn't realise there's anything wrong with him, and b) he thinks other people don't understand him ? After all, while kids are usually quite willing to trust adults, teenagers on the other hand have a strong tendency to believe that nobody understands them and that nobody has ever been through their problems. If that teenager is a sociopath on top of it, it's not surprising at all that he shouldn't even stop to wonder if maybe, just maybe, the person talking to them might be right. Valky wrote : "Again it *not* my belief that this automatically means he is not affected by his past suffering, but it is a choice that he can freely make in moving toward a better existence in spite of his suffering." Del replies : But he *was* moving towards a better existence, in his eyes at least ! He *was* taking steps to reach his goals. He had his own idea of what he wanted to become, and he was *actively* working towards it. He was indeed *choosing* his future. But if he was a sociopath, then he wasn't aware that this future would not be morally satisfying and that the steps he was taking on the way were morally wrong. His idea and society's idea of a better life were so widely different that he couldn't even try to begin why he should go another way. Nash's story as you summarised it presents a very interesting parallel to Sociopath!Tom's story, indeed. Both were highly dysfunctional from a very young age, unable to understand that their world was not the real world. But there seems to be a huge difference : love. Nash was able to love, and ultimately made his choice based on it. Sociopath!Tom, on the other hand, never loved, and couldn't base his decisions on that, so he had to base them on something else. Moreover, Nash apparently realised at some time that he was ill. We have no idea if LV ever came to that same conclusion. If he didn't, then he's still living in his own world and believing this is the real world. Valky wrote : "But love is everywhere and it does find you." Del replies : Could be, but maybe it hasn't found LV *yet* ? After all, once he left school, he wasn't exactly in the right kind of environment for love to find him, was he ? But now that the link between him and Harry is getting stronger, maybe love will finally find him, through Harry. Del From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 19 18:56:48 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:56:48 -0400 Subject: The DADA Jinx Message-ID: <003001c4861e$48963180$34c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 110645 Caesian: "It also makes perfect sense - who wants a DADA teacher with terrible dark secrets? To review: Quirrell - everyone now knows he was two-faced. Lockhart - everyone knows he is a fake. Lupin - everyone knows he is a werewolf. Imposter!Moody - everyone knows he was Barty Crouch Jr. Umbridge - everyone knows she was incompetent, lawbreaking and is now out of power" DuffyPoo: I guess I'm going to have to go read the books again as I don't see any of these except Lupin, possibly. The only people who know Lupin is a werewolf are families of Hogwarts students. That's not quite everybody. Apart from the teaching postion, he also has Umbridge's draft legislation working against him. Unless he lies on every job application, possible employers are going to find out. Was Quirrel two-faced? He was "a foolish young man" "full of rediculous ideas" in his own words. LV called him "young, foolish and gullible" easy to bend to his will. Impressionable and foolish but not two-faced. Everything he did (in the year we know him) he did for one purpose. I never saw loyalty to DD from him. Trying to kill a student isn't loyal to your employer. I don't think everyone knows he is a fake. Obviously, if Gladys Gudgeon is still sending weekly letters to Lockhart she is unaware. The Healer said, "He was rather well known a few years ago; we very much hope that this liking for giving autographs is a sign that his memroy might be starting to come back." Doesn't sound, to me, like she is aware he is a fraud. All they know, and probably all the public knows, is that he lost his memory in a freak accident. I don't think much can be said about Mad-Eye Moody as it wasn't really him. The worst thing that happened to him as a teacher is that he never got to teach. While we know that Umbrdige was incompetent and lawbreaking, what evidence do we have that anyone else knows? Neither Harry nor Lee, as far as we know, told a teacher about the blood-quill. She'll not be back as a teacher, one would hope, but that doesn't put her out of power with the ministry. Her plea is that she was working under Fudge's orders. She did not pass any of the Educational Decrees herself; Cornelius had to sign them all into effect. She was merely acting on his orders. As for Snape, Fudge already knows the mark exists, Snape showed it to him. There were enough DE's incarcerated that it would be safe to assume that if they had the DM, Snape would have had it as well, so anyone who was at Karkaroff's hearing would be safe in assuming it also, as DD said there that Snape had been a DE. I'd quite like to know what happened to the teachers in the position before Quirrell. Hagrid says, in CoS, that Lockhart was the only man for the DADA job, because "People aren't too keen to take it on, see. They're startin' ter think it's jinxed. No one's lasted long fer a while now." Some jinx! One teacher lasted only one year and people think the job's jinxed? There's got to be more to it that that, IMO. Who's passing the word that the job's jinxed? Snape, maybe, because he wants it? Is he interecepting the applications for the position as well? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Aug 19 18:57:33 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 18:57:33 -0000 Subject: define love In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110646 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "quigonginger" wrote: > I have to wonder, though, are we defining love the same? Hi Ginger... This is a really good question and I'd like to attempt a *little bit* of an answer before I try the exercise. I define Love as a power, as opposed to an emotion, Love has power over almost any emotion you can name, Love can turn it on; turn it up; turn it down; or turn it off. Love has it's finger on the volume control the on/off switch and if you're a bit spiritually minded you'll also understand that Loves finger is on the feedback button too. Love will never be as simple as the emotions symptomatic of it. But it has a simplicity all of its own. In history many pictures of Love have been drawn in an attempt to convey the thousand word essay required to define it. And *that* is loves' true simplicity. That it can be encompassed in an act, in a visual likeness, in a story. Its a wordless invisible sea of dancing stars that we float in both terrible and beautiful at the same time. Because it is tangible and equally intangible it is our one true proof in life of miracles. Nowhere near a closed definition but I have tried.. *blush* Ginger: Are we defining it correctly? Valky: I don't know. To me its indefinable. But how am I doing so far? Ginger: I went back and reread the original question which was "Has Voldemort or Tom Riddle ever cared for or loved anyone?" > Now if I replaced LV/TR with my name, I could honestly answer "no, I haven't." Or I could say "Well, yeah, some." Or I could say "Yes, many, many people". All with the same degree of honesty. > Valky: Replace LV/TR with my name and I would answer Yes and No. Yes because I believe in my heart that I have cared about and Loved many people. And No because I don't really know that *I* did it. The incredible surge of *everything* that I felt when I held my children for the first time and the powerful *unexplainable* that I have to feel *everything at once* for my husband I think is certainly Love but I have no ownership of it. I choose to allow it to surge thats about all of what I do. Ginger: > Would anyone care to join me in an exercise? > > Think of 5 people that you love that you met when neither you nor > they were an infant. Got them? > Valky: Yes Ginger: > Now ask yourself at what point you started loving them. I bet it > wasn't instant. I would bet that there was cordiality, > acquaintanceship, friendship, and then love. Your experiences may > vary, of course, but if it was a relationship with someone you had > not met as a baby, how could you love them right off the bat? > Valky: Very true and moreover there are people in this list that I have travelled through more stages than this with. In fact they are the ones I really feel Love for more than others. I find a link to *trust* in that which I guess supports what you are saying below. Ginger: > The way I understood the question and answer was that Tom had never gotten to the point of love. He may have been cordial, and possibly even friends, but not to a great degree. Similar to a relationship one may have with someone at work, but with whom one doesn't socialize outside of the workplace. Comfortable, but not loving. > Where I see Tom's choice in the matter is to not allow it to continue to a deeper level. > Valky: I concur, and I see that this equates more than not to his ability and courage to trust. Not that I define love as trust in any way. I would say that love is truth but not trust. Trust however is a choice. Maybe this is a very important step to come in Harry's story he needs to lay down his absolute vulnerability to someone who would love him and throw caution to the wind on the consequences. ie make the choice essentially to allow Love. Something that it is becoming rather apparent that LV could never do. Ginger: > Back to your 5 people. If one is a spouse/significant other, then > you have loved in a way I have not. (as my first answer). Valky: Its no mean feat to give Love this much of your quarter either, Ginger. But when your faith is rewarded it is rewarded better than one can imagine. I have Love in my quarter this way, it was a highly dubious notion to me at first, though. I argued with my heart for years that such a penitence is just inconceivable. But its done now and I would not like it undone. Ginger: If some of the others are best friends, then I can relate to that (my second). > Valky: I understand what you mean. Love for my best friends calls to mind a subset barrel of emotions. This and your number one are very reciprocal forms of love so the develop a closure for us, in being a definition of Love. So saying that because we are interacting with our spouse and our best friends within the context of Love a definition develops. Two definitions in fact, and two *is* a subset (or a part of) one. In terms of Harry and LV neither have the number one in their lives though the opportunity it does seem does and will exist for both, and as for number two Harry recalls a nice little cluster of emotions for his best friends whereas LV...... By this preposition, according to JkR, LV doesn't recall a set of emotions for people close to him, he doesn't preoccupy with those emotions he *might* feel. I see it as possibly given by the scene where he flees Harry's body when Harry recalls the cluster of emotions for Sirius, that LV does this very same thing with any cluster of emotion recalled to him, he casts it aside and flees for fear of his vulnerability. Ginger: > Remember the days of Storge'? Did I even spell that right? We went on about the different types of love for days! It would be my guess that "cared for or loved" would mean a deep love, like with a spouse/SO, OR a very deep friendship, or possibly both. I don't think it means that he never had positive feelings towards anyone on a basic level. > Valky: I disagree, not with what you are saying but with what you are implying. I believe that LV has felt positive emotions toward his fellow man. He has probably been reached out by someone in a way so profound that he had never felt so much emotion in his life. I think, you imply that he was OK with these emotions. I defy that. I think he was not. He banished them. He hated them because they held themselves better than his anger and bitterness. He defied them because they offered alternative to his choice to cling to his rage. Ginger: > My reasoning is that those base feelings are far more easily turned off, especially as he reached the tumult of teenhood, than a deeper love. He may have told himself he was illogical or, as others have suggested, weak. A deeper love would have been much harder to nullify. It fits in with JKR's "choices". Had he never been capable of feeling even basic positive feelings towards anyone, he would have had no choice. Del has pointed this out admirably. > Valky: I guess I don't disagree with your implication then. Not entirely. He does fight the deeper Love, I think. He does defy it and reject it while it is present inside him. He recognised it in Harry. I am sure that is an indication that he knows it personally. Ginger: > So, in summary, I think that the type of love in question is a deep love, the type that takes time to cultivate. A lesser love can be halted mid-growth should the relationship sour. I don't think she means this sort of love. Tom, of course, would never have known > familial love. > Valky: I see that you are right and I hope that my post has been of some interest to you and /not/ preachy. *blush* > As to my last answer above (yes, many), it is a part of my religious beliefs (and those of many other religions) to love all people. This is not nearly the love I have for my friends and family, but I wish no harm and only the best for everyone. Tom never had this either, that we know of. I don't think he could have become what he did if he had. > > Any thoughts on this? > > Ginger, who usually doesn't announce to over 11000 people that she > loves them (blush) Loving all people is very hard to define its not reciprocal or developed. I too believe that the Love in me is all the world's... for want of a better way to put it darn! I guess I will have to say that I love all people. Valky, not leaving Ginger all alone with her big heart. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 19:01:51 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 19:01:51 -0000 Subject: Draco's nature, LV's abiliity to love, Dudders and Harry, etc. (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110647 Salit wrote : " I am however sure that the other orphans have not all turned into megalomanian mass murderers. This means that how he turned out must have been primarily due to inherent personality flaws." Del replies : The other orphans weren't all given the opportunity, the tools and the encouragement to become mass murderers. Tom was. And JKR seemed to deny that Tom had an inherent personality flaw when she said that in her books nobody is ever born evil. Moreover, if Tom was indeed born with an inherent personality flaw, then once again it raises the question of how responsible he is for becoming LV. Salit wrote : " There are thousands or more children in the world growing up in similar circumstances, but only one turned out to be Hitler. You simply can't blame it all on environment." Del replies : Of course not. It's most often a combination of the wrong person being given the wrong opportunity at the wrong time. Salit wrote : " Voldemort was a special case." Del replies : Yes. He's the example of what happens when someone very intelligent but with very little morality is given the ability to do a lot of damage (magic) and is encouraged on the wrong path (Slytherin's legacy). An explosive mix. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 19:30:28 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 19:30:28 -0000 Subject: define love In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110648 Valky wrote : "By this preposition, according to JkR, LV doesn't recall a set of emotions for people close to him, he doesn't preoccupy with those emotions he *might* feel. I see it as possibly given by the scene where he flees Harry's body when Harry recalls the cluster of emotions for Sirius, that LV does this very same thing with any cluster of emotion recalled to him, he casts it aside and flees for fear of his vulnerability. " Del replies : Both the Prophecy and DD seem to contradict you. 1. The Prophecy says that Harry has a power that LV doesn't know. If that power is Love, then LV is not just ignoring his good feelings : he doesn't have them at all. 2. IIRC, DD says that LV fled Harry's body because it was *agony* to be in a body so filled of a power contrary to his nature. LV didn't just cast Harry's love aside, he didn't flee because he was afraid. According to DD, he fled because he *cannot* withstand Love. It wasn't a *choice*, it was self-preservation. He fled away from Love like we would flee away from fire. Valky wrote : "I believe that LV has felt positive emotions toward his fellow man. He has probably been reached out by someone in a way so profound that he had never felt so much emotion in his life. I think, you imply that he was OK with these emotions. I defy that. I think he was not. He banished them. He hated them because they held themselves better than his anger and bitterness. He defied them because they offered alternative to his choice to cling to his rage." Del replies : It would be logical, except that it doesn't hold with what we do know. - LV doesn't know Harry's power. The Prophecy doesn't say that Harry will have a power that LV despises or overlooks. It will be a power that LV doesn't *know*. - JKR said that Tom never loved, and that *he could not have become LV if he had* - we see that even after decades, LV still cannot recognise love, when he calls Lily "silly" for trying to protect Harry. Valky wrote : " He does fight the deeper Love, I think. He does defy it and reject it while it is present inside him. He recognised it in Harry. I am sure that is an indication that he knows it personally." Del replies : Again, that would contradict the Prophecy. I'm very intrigued when you say that he recognised it in Harry. What makes you say that ? The way I see it, Love burned him and he fled. Maybe he doesn't understand what happened anymore than he understood why his AK failed on Harry after it happened. Del From gregory_lynn at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 19:42:37 2004 From: gregory_lynn at yahoo.com (gregory_lynn) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 19:42:37 -0000 Subject: The DADA Jinx (was Re: Trelawney / Incompetent teachers/Binns theory) In-Reply-To: <14AEEB88-F1EF-11D8-B85A-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110649 > On Aug 19, 2004, at 3:34 AM, finwitch wrote: > To review: > Quirrell - everyone now knows he was two-faced. > Lockhart - everyone knows he is a fake. > Lupin - everyone knows he is a werewolf. > Imposter!Moody - everyone knows he was Barty Crouch Jr. > Umbridge - everyone knows she was incompetent, lawbreaking and is now > out of power Maybe that's the key to it all. The way to defend yourself against the dark evil things of the world is to confront your own demons before the dark gets a chance to. Gregory Lynn From tinainfay at msn.com Thu Aug 19 11:34:43 2004 From: tinainfay at msn.com (mrs_sonofgib) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:34:43 -0000 Subject: The Portkey Cup (WAS: Apparation and Sirius' vault) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110650 > > > Linda: > I have always thought that DD or the MoM made the TWcup a Portkey to > return the winner to the entrance to the maze. It seems to me that > it wouldn't have been common knowledge. The portkey could have been > magicked to only transfer one of the four champions, thus not having > an effect on the fake Moody. That does make sense. Once you've won the tournament, they couldn't expect you to make your way back out again - that would be stupid. (what if you ran into another competitor and there was a fight over the trophy etc). So you grab it, you've won and now you are back in front of the entire school. Perfect sense. So Moody added a stop at the graveyard. He would have thought possibly that was the only stop. OR Possibly he could have known that about it's original use (taking the winner to the front of the maze) but supposed it wouldn't matter because Harry would be dead and unable to use it. Thanks, Linda! That's my theory and I'm sticking to it! ~tina From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Aug 19 20:10:47 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 20:10:47 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110651 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > Valky wrote : > Now juxtapose that Tom Riddle was given to manifest the same > opportunity but chose against. It would be hard to maintain that he was entirely blameless for his continued condition. " > > Del replies : > I don't know. As I said in another post, I'm not sure I would have > even listened if someone had told me I was depressed, back when I was a teenager. I was convinced that I was different, not sick. I thought I should change myself, not cure myself. So I really doubt I would have been open to anyone telling me that this or that negative thing was not really from me but from my illness. I would not have seen the light like I did years later, because I wasn't *ready* to see it. > > Similarly, I don't know if Tom, as a kid or a teenager, was ready to hear that he had a personality disorder and what he could do about it. > > Thanks for rephrasing what you meant about observers and blame, it > makes much more sense now. > Valky: You're welcome and I am up *very* late lol. Your argument is fine except that Tom *was* your age *before* he started terrorising the neighbourhood so by the given of a level of maturity required to accept the offer I see no difficulty in believing that the offer could have come when he was maturely ready. Of course this does leave him quite a bit pitiable in his COS 16 year old form. > Valky wrote : > "In the case of Tom Riddle, as with anyone, he lives with his > conscience alone in his secret, silent to outsiders, place inside. He chooses not to be dependent on others clarity even at the tender age of 16." > > Del replies : > First of all, if Tom is indeed a sociopath, then he doesn't have a > conscience "as with anyone". Valky: This is a hard point. The only scientific basis for this is words from the mouth of a person who doesnt care who they hurt and ie a pathological liar. As the conscience is a private room of the human psyche accessible only by the individual to whom it belongs. Now, not caring doesn't necessarily mean that the conscience doesn't exist, it could mean that the sociopath rejects its messages in a passion such as hate, invalidates them with a subliminal affirmation or nullifies their validity offhandedly and intellectually which might be the case with Tom. Del: > Second, why should he choose to depend on anyone else if a) he doesn't realise there's anything wrong with him, and b) he thinks other people don't understand him ? > After all, while kids are usually quite willing to trust adults, > teenagers on the other hand have a strong tendency to believe that > nobody understands them and that nobody has ever been through their > problems. If that teenager is a sociopath on top of it, it's not > surprising at all that he shouldn't even stop to wonder if maybe, just maybe, the person talking to them might be right. > Valky: This is all true. But those *are* his choices. He is a small vulnerable child in pain. He thinks that is normal I see, that he hasn't been comforted in the past so to his mind no comfort exists I also see. That he has no choice I do not see. He chooses to take on board what is useful to him as a student (information), I find there that if dependence is not useful to him he will not have it. In this way he chooses an emotionless source for input and rejects one with emotion. Not unusual for a teenage boy true but nevertheless a choice. > Valky wrote : > "Again it *not* my belief that this automatically means he is not > affected by his past suffering, but it is a choice that he can freely make in moving toward a better existence in spite of his suffering." > > Del replies : > But he *was* moving towards a better existence, in his eyes at least ! He *was* taking steps to reach his goals. He had his own idea of what he wanted to become, and he was *actively* working towards it. He was indeed *choosing* his future. But if he was a sociopath, then he wasn't aware that this future would not be morally satisfying and that the steps he was taking on the way were morally wrong. > Valky: I doubt that. His steps were entrenching him in bitterness and fear. He knows that he's morally wrong also, he openly defies moral fibre to Harry. He's not after a moral outcome in his steps, he's after a victory. A victory of cold emotionless invulnerable existence, he knows entirely that that is exactly what it is. It will be proved! You heard it here first! > Del: > Nash's story as you summarised it presents a very interesting parallel to Sociopath!Tom's story, indeed. Both were highly dysfunctional from a very young age, unable to understand that their world was not the real world. But there seems to be a huge difference : love. Nash was able to love, and ultimately made his choice based on it. Sociopath!Tom, on the other hand, never loved, and couldn't base his decisions on that, so he had to base them on something else. > Valky: I personally do not extrapolate *not able to* Love from having never Loved or cared for anyone. Probably why we are debating it ;P I believe Tom was able to Love someone. He just didn't like it, or more to the point feared the consequences of Love because Love *is* a servitude. He would not lay down for any servitude, not even Love he did not want to capitulate he fights anything that would take away his ultimate blanketing power over his physical world, emotions, Love, Death...... Del: > Moreover, Nash apparently realised at some time that he was ill. We > have no idea if LV ever came to that same conclusion. If he didn't, > then he's still living in his own world and believing this is the real world. > Valky: Indeed he may never have realised this or he may have either way when he does he has a choice to rebuke all he has known and it will probably break his heart to do so. The real difference between Nash and LV is that Nash chose to give up things that meant more to him than anything ever had in order to accept that he was ill, LV has not, and probably will not if he's half the villain he is supposed to be. Well actually that makes him a lazy weak coward but who's counting...lol > Valky wrote : > "But love is everywhere and it does find you." > > Del replies : > Could be, but maybe it hasn't found LV *yet* ? After all, once he left school, he wasn't exactly in the right kind of environment for love to find him, was he ? But now that the link between him and Harry is getting stronger, maybe love will finally find him, through Harry. > > Del You could well be entirely right. It may be a Love that he cannot flee because Love comes in the right form for the recipient and a Love that LV cannot escape seems to be exactly what he needs. Actually that's a really nice ending to the story. Throw LV into the room of love and *finally* give the socio/psycho etcetec path his light at the end of his tunnel. Real Nice Del! Valky From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Aug 19 20:10:55 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 21:10:55 +0100 Subject: Why now? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110652 JKR seems to be giving us a lot of information and hints lately. I wonder why? Why now, when the sixth book is approaching completion? Haven't all the clues been placed, the red herrings waved in front of our noses and nothing but a down-hill sprint to the finish on everyone's minds? Why would she be concerned with web-sites, fan speculations and what-not at this stage? Let's face it, she's pretty busy right now - two small kids, a book to whip into shape for the publishers, a recently announced pregnancy - and yet she's engaging with the fanbase probably as closely, if not more closely than when the media first took notice of what was happening among young readers. And the intriguing aspect is the *way* she's engaging with the fans. Seems, well, a touch odd to me. It makes my suspicious, devious little mind look for reasons. Even though I've been pre-occupied with things other than HP over the past few weeks, I still send emails and receive them and there has been a level of speculation about her motives. Quite a few have expressed a sort of concern, either openly stated or as a sort of subliminal sub-text. For the first time *ever* JKR seems to be trying to *guide* our speculations. Has she ever stated before this week "...these are the questions you *should* be asking...?" Not to my knowledge. It's always been "Good question.." (usually followed by an ambiguous non-answer) or "I can't answer that.." or "You'll find out in a later book.." It's all been accepted as part of the game; she writes, we guess - usually wrongly, then we all have a good laugh and get back to the speculating. The thing is, we're in (almost) virgin territory here, in that only a couple of times in history has there been so much fervid speculation about the climax and resolution to an unfinished work. Dickens managed it; so to a lesser extent did Conan-Doyle. There's a difference of course - modern communications. We can blast our thoughts out to millions of others at our merest whim; just sit at the keyboard, type, press "send" and it's done. And we do it. Well over a 100,000 times on this site alone. Add in all the others and ...... well, it's time to boggle. But these days boggling is what we don't do much of, we take it all for granted; except (maybe) if you're on the receiving end - except (perhaps) when you're JKR. Rewind. Take it back 10 years. A teacher-in-training has an idea for a book, a series of books. The plot is pretty much complete right from the start. Fill in the background, add a few sub-plots etc. Yeah, I know it's not that simple; it's bloody hard work in fact, but I'm concentrating on the situation rather than the slog. OK, it's published. Great! Might add a nice supplement to a teachers salary - then it explodes, becomes a world-wide phenomenon. Totally unexpected, but who's going to fight it? Nobody, at least nobody who has an ounce of imagination. Then there are the flies in the ointment. Us. We just can't keep our grubby little hands off it - spouting theories, prejudices, plot arcs and character assessments from every orifice fans descend on the books like a shoal of ravening analytical piranha. That's OK; adds to the general merriment and brou-haha. Except..... The fans seem to be developing definite expectations - about this character or that; about the solution to this puzzle or that; for this resolution or that. So much so that some are getting pretty involved or even dogmatic about it. Some no longer say "I think this might happen.." they say "This will not happen" or "I experienced this, I know about this, so I'm an expert." Excuse me? Tut tut. Not on the Potterverse and it's inhabitants you ain't. Real life I won't argue about - well; not often, but extrapolating from real life to a fictional world defined solely by the author is a bit of a stretch and unlikely to be valid. And this is why I believe JKR is getting involved. A few million busy little bees have been pollinating the wrong flowers; they've come up with ideas that have now become common currency in fandom and unless JKR starts putting the brake on, starts nudging the proto-stampede in the right direction there's going to be tears before bedtime. So maybe it's time to hand out a few more clues, give the poor dears a hint or two, put 'em on track, maybe damp down some of those expectations, perhaps quietly eliminate a few theoretical off-shoots that exist nowhere except in the imagination of the fans. Because if she doesn't they may let their fevered little minds run riot and the *real* ending may be the sort of surprise no-one wants, a disappointment or an anti-climax. Remember - these books were not conceived with a fan-base in the hundreds of millions in mind and it's totally impossible for all of us to get the ending we want. Me - I'm already getting prepared. I can think of three endings that would satisfy me - and all of them have low probabilities of coming to pass. So it's likely that I'll re-read volumes 1-6 fairly frequently and pass the final one on to a Charity shop. I expect to read it just once. Unless she surprises me, of course. But I'm not very optimistic about that. Kneasy From tinainfay at msn.com Thu Aug 19 11:45:28 2004 From: tinainfay at msn.com (mrs_sonofgib) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:45:28 -0000 Subject: Hide the animals! was Re: The Clue Behind the Door In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110653 Lisa: Could this be a hint to the identity of the > > > Half > > > > Blood Prince himself? <...snip...> > > > kandbmom: I think the person JKR is describing sounds an awful > lot like a Griffindor founder?! Could be possibly be Godric > Griffindor returning as the founderand possibly the HBP to help > defeat the heir of Slytherin? I mean the whole lion-like description > seems a little strange when you consider that Godric picked a lion as > the Griffindor mascot. My first thoughts exactly but there is a problem. Spectacles. They weren't invented until 1275 or thereabouts. It can't be GG as he was at the Founding. Now it could be another glimpse of him. Who knows where JKR will take us! A quick answer to my own post, could GG have lived long enough to get spectacles? We all know DD is 150 ish + ... I'm going on the presumption that the school was founded around 1000AD. ~tina From slgazit at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 19 20:16:53 2004 From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 20:16:53 -0000 Subject: Hopefully it's not that simple (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110654 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > Del replied : > > But don't you believe that people, especially kids, can make wrong > > decisions without realising they are wrong ? There is no evidence to suggest that Riddle has made any "wrong" choices (that is, criminal actions) before deciding to set the basilisk on students. This was done at age 16 - when one should know right from wrong. At 11 he chose to join Slytherin house, but this in itself does not constitute a crime. A quarter of Hogwarts students are in Slytherin and most, I am sure, are not evil. Riddle's quest to find the Chamber of Secrets could have been due to curiosity about his famous anscestor - completely understandable. Somehow I don't believe that the sole purpose of that chamber was to hold a basilisk (the plural "Secrets" implies there was more than one mystery associated with that place). It is possible that something else that he discovered there was the final trigger to set him up on his murderous path (perhaps another prophecy?). I really hope that JKR will feature the Chamber again, so this question can be answered... > SSSusan: > NOW we're getting somewhere, Del!! Yes, we both want there to be > MUCH MORE to what JKR has told us about Tom & Voldy, because if there > isn't, it doesn't yet make total sense. Psychopath... evil... never > loved anyone... possibly never knew love... wrong choices [tactical > or moral, thank you Pippin].... While intriguing, it's hard to put > *all* these pieces together into a complete, sensible package that > satisfies people's understandings of psychopathology, emotional & > moral development, and free will. A central moral theme in the series is Dumbledore's statement to Harry in book 2 that (paraphrased) "it is not our abilities that define who we are, it is our choices". The point is that regardless of what he has been through, Riddle made the choice to become evil, he had other options at different points of his life, but he repeatedly took the evil path. In any fantasy series I have seen where there is a central conflict between the hero and some evil dark lord (why are they always "dark" I wonder... :-)), the evil person/god is incapable of love or compassion, but only cares about power. This does not diminish their stature - it makes them more scary because you cannot turn them to good nor appeal to their human side, as they lack normal human emotions. JKR appears to follow the same path in her depiction of Voldemort. > FINALLY, I think we're at the point where we've found common ground > in this. What Del said about hoping JKR didn't mean things that > simply, and what Pam said about Tom/Voldy *having* to be seen as > having chosen his path or else he's just pitiable and not diabolical > are actually in agreement, I think. We need more explanation from > JKR so that this all fits with what we know about emotional > development, moral judgment, psychopathology, etc. Of course Riddle/Voldemort chose his path. I did not see the original quote - did JKR say he "never loved" or "never experienced love"? I think it was the former. He could have been loved by someone and not been able to return back the feeling. Voldemort is aware of one very strong love that affected him directly. His mother, presumably the then last descendent of Slytherin, went against the Slytherin legacy completely: lived in a muggle village, fell in love with a muggle, then married him. Voldemort was born because of the love of his mother. Note that when he mentions her (in books 2 and 4 both), it is with respect. He saves his hatered to the father. He does not blame her for loving a muggle, does not even call her a fool for doing so. > And here's the kicker for me: I *trust* JKR to be able to do this. > So far she's done precious little with the books to disappoint me, > and I'm going to move merrily along on my way, believing that Tom did > CHOOSE to some degree, because I think it's *not* as simple as the > things JKR has fed us so far and that she will fill in the gaps to > make it understandable. (Please!!) Since choice is so central in her books, I am sure the issue will be resolved to your satisfaction... :-) Salit From orly_w at hotmail.com Thu Aug 19 13:20:20 2004 From: orly_w at hotmail.com (grebniew2004) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 13:20:20 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110655 Del wrote: > Similarly, Tom knows that other people hold those concepts of right > and wrong, and of love too, and that they make decisions based on > those concepts. He also knows that he is expected to make similar > decisions and so he does as long as he can't escape. But that doesn't mean that he knows what right, wrong and love are. If he had it his own way, those things wouldn't matter. I don't think we're giving LV enough credit here. Beyond rules and grasping philosophical concepts, there was Tom Riddle's reality. He was an extremely talented, skilled wizard who combined specific resentment in his life (against the orphanage, his birth father) with a sense of his own superiority and intelligence. Ultimately, he knowingly placed himself above wizarding laws and chose to become a law unto himself. He pursued power in a measured and crafty way, and successfully attained much of what he was after. Orly From lisdeleo at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 14:47:11 2004 From: lisdeleo at yahoo.com (lisdeleo) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:47:11 -0000 Subject: Is JKR about to reveal? (Petunia) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110656 Valky: I also agree that Petunia allows Harry to stay because; '*She* is not going to be responsible for his death' *and* that she is a moral woman. But, I do not agree that she decided 'She is not going to be responsible for Harry's death' *because* she is a moral woman. Now Lisl: I think a lot of Petunia's actions can be explained by considering the very first batch of information we learned about her - Petunia is very, very, very nosy (see PS/SS chapter 1). And in OotP, we learn that even if she professes dislike for a person, she'll still try to get all the information she can ("...as if we'd be interested in their sordid affairs" - referring to the movie stars' divorce). Keeping this in mind, I can easily picture a teenage Petunia going through any and all of her sister's magical school books, newspapers, and correspondence when Lily's back was turned. Assuming that Lily came home regularly for Christmas and summer holidays over her seven-year stint at Hogwarts, *and* taking into account her increasing activity against Voldemort, Petunia would have a great deal of information available to her about the WW. So, this theory explains why/how Petunia knows what she does about the WW (another thought: "I heard that awful boy telling her [about the Dementors]" - overheard or eavesdropping?). It can also tie in to why she took Harry in and the squib/latebloomer/witch!Petunia issues: - If Petunia has, through her spying, a fairly good picture of the terror of Voldemort's reign, it would not take too many morals to know that keeping your orphaned nephew is a must. If Petunia hadn't known as much about the WW, I think she *would* have taken him to an orphanage. - Another scenario: Spying teenager Petunia's curiosity overcomes her, and she begins attempting magic with her sister's wand - if she was ever successful, well, that wouldn't make her a Squib, but..... She's still a Muggle, but...... Lisl, who hopes her first post ever was adequate/intelligible/legal From ctcasares at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 19 15:24:57 2004 From: ctcasares at sbcglobal.net (tylerswaxlion) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 15:24:57 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110657 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pcaehill2" wrote: > I have to agree here, I do think that at some point, our choices can > lead us to a "point of no return", that is, a place where we have to > live with what we've done and what we've done leaves an indelible > impression on us. > > And I really don't believe in cheap redemption (hence my belief that > Darth Vader's deathbed conversion was faked!) Lucas lost me at "I am your father." BAH! ...but I still take > issue with your (previously posted) argument that cognitively > acquired skills such as language are equivalent to emotional > development. Windows of opportunity in infancy abound, and I've > heard the language argument before, and read the research re: feral > kids, etc. (which is not considered extremely convincing, however, > due to the small sample). It's not ethical to experiment on kids, so there are far more studies on animals, but I think I'm getting a little off-topic listing studies and such. You buy it or you don't. >But emotional development depends on much > more than cognition -- I've worked with mentally retarded kids and > adults who are extremely wise emotionally and socially!!! > OK, my younger brother has Down Syndrome, and it's really hard for me to tell people how "old" he is, b/c he doesn't talk. He CAN, though not well, but he now REFUSES to do so. When my son was born, I paid extremely close attention to his language acquisition, hoping to get clues to help my brother. But...there aren't clues. I believe much of our language acquisition *is* hard-wired, and while exposure is crucial, it's not all, b/c we've always TALKED to my brother. Emotionally, he *is* his real age. It's from him that I've learned true *unconditional* love. But again, he was always a loved child. I've seen people with Down Syndrome in some really awful institutionalized settings--and they are not emotionally mature. It's not that they aren't capable of feeling emotions; it's that neglect atrophies them. Voldemort (back to topic!) was never loved, I believe. It crippled him emotionally. He has never loved anyone (per JKR) and his actions make more sense with that knowledge (he's not just randomly violating the Evil Overlord Rules). I refuse to believe Baby!Tom was "born evil"--as I said, I'm a big believer in free will (and you CAN'T kill a BABY!) Even though he was damaged and crippled (imho) he is still responsible for his *actions*. I don't find impunity for him in "diagnosing" sociopathy. I find understanding of how he could make the choice to be ESE. Doesn't make it right, never will. It will probably make it possible for a non-genius teen to defeat a genius, super-powerful, nigh-invulnerable wizard. Whether or not we agree on love's effect in real life children, I think love has had a powerful role in the books to date and will have an even more important role in the last 2. YMMV. > Pam, who once had a client who created the bumper sticker: > > F*** DOOM!!! > > I heartily concur. Tyler From sad1199 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 20:30:11 2004 From: sad1199 at yahoo.com (sad1199) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 20:30:11 -0000 Subject: Why now? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110658 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith wrote: > JKR seems to be giving us a lot of information and hints lately. > > I wonder why? > >> > Remember - these books were not conceived with a fan-base in the > hundreds of millions in mind and it's totally impossible for all of us > to get the ending we want. Me - I'm already getting prepared. I can > think of three endings that would satisfy me - and all of them have low > probabilities of coming to pass. So it's likely that I'll re-read > volumes 1-6 fairly frequently and pass the final one on to a Charity > shop. I expect to read it just once. > Unless she surprises me, of course. > But I'm not very optimistic about that. > > Kneasy sad1199 here: What are those three endings if you don't mind? Aside from minor relationship answers and some side characters being defined in more detail, the only ending I would like to see is Harry defeating Voldemort and going on to live a happy ever after... My SHIP is R/Hr, I would like to see Harry starting a more adult relationship in book seven with maybe Luna or Ginny but my problem with the SHIPS is that 99% of high school relationships that go to marriage don't last in the real world, maybe in WW the odds are better, huh? Also, I would like to see Snape either condemned or redeemed. I am pushing for redemption but, unfortunately, do not expect that to happen. As I posted earlier I just CANNOT believe that JKR would allow Harry to die at the end. It just doesn't happen. If the public is reading for enjoyment, how many people out there want to see the hero DIE at the end of the story? I also believe that even if the books are written for a general audience, children still read them and the hero just DOES NOT die in children's minds. Again, I posted earlier if Harry dies I may just burn all of my HP books and start a long chain of furious, scathing letters to the author. Have a Happy Love Filled Day sad1199 From ejblack at rogers.com Thu Aug 19 16:03:36 2004 From: ejblack at rogers.com (jcb54me) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 16:03:36 -0000 Subject: Hagrid's parents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110659 >> Karen wrote: > My question is what on earth did his mother see in his father? We > know, from the photo scene in GOF that Mr Hagrid Snr was "a tiny > man", and if I remember correctly there was no qualification > of "compared to Hagrid." > > We also learned that "size is everything" to giants in OOTP. How > would a giantess hope to produce a child of acceptable size (snip) Perhaps neither of them had a choice; perhaps there was a lust spell gone astray or the side effect of a charm or potion not even intended for them. Jeanette From helen.martch at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 19 18:48:00 2004 From: helen.martch at sbcglobal.net (redlena2004) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 18:48:00 -0000 Subject: Paintings can talk, but not photos? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110660 Hello. I've just joined HPforGrownups because of something that suddenly struck me as odd when I was re-reading Order of the Phoenix. Has anyone ever heard an explanation why the paintings in Hogwarts can not only move but also talk while photographs, like those in the photo album that Hagrid had given Harry of his family, only move? There are various examples of people talking with the subjects of paintings... the fat lady in the Gryffindor tower entrance painting, the knight (Sir Cadogan, wasn't his name?) who was the replacement for the fat lady when her portrait had been torn, and of course, all of the former Hogwarts headmasters in their portraits in Dumbledore's office. But there are no mentions, that I can recall, of anyone ever talking to the subject of a photograph. And I'm sure Harry would have talked to his parents' photos if he could. I just wondered whether anyone was familiar with a rationale for this, or whether it was just one of those peculiarities that suit the plotting? Thanks! -- redlena2004 From phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk Thu Aug 19 18:51:39 2004 From: phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk (Kate Harding) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 18:51:39 -0000 Subject: Depression and Harry in OotP Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110661 I was interested to read Del talking about depression in recent posts about Voldemort, because I feel that depression is what Harry is suffering from for most of OotP, and have been meaning to write something about it for a while now. I knew when I read PoA onwards that Jo must have had depression at some point in her life, because her descriptions of certain feelings are so clear, so accurate, that I immediately recognised them from my own experience. (I later found, in reading interviews, that she had indeed suffered from both depression and from artist's block, both of which I have experienced and which are related for me - I had a breakdown last year triggered by events during my art foundation year). She describes those feelings so vividly, in fact, that I found some sections really quite uncomfortable to read. For example, she uses her experience in writing about the Dementors - she has said so in interview. But what I really want to look at is Harry in OotP, as I don't think I've seen a connection made elsewhere between his behaviour and depression. Please excuse any generalisations I make. Although I recognise my own experiences in Harry's, other depression sufferers will feel completely different. Depression is a complicated beastie, and no two sufferers will have the same experience. For example, although one of the common conceptions of depression is a lack of feeling, some depressions are associated with a lot of anxiety, and some with a lot of anger. Mine was the former - Harry's is clearly the latter. He is overwhelmed by feelings of injustice, and by rage. His mood swings, triggered by the tiniest events, are familiar to me - in depression, there is a heightened sensitivity to small things, which contributes to the problem that the sufferer's nearest and dearest are often baffled by their behaviour. I was up and down like a yoyo to begin with, one minute absolutely terrified, unable to remember that I had ever felt happy, the next I felt fairly normal or even happy, unable to understand why I had just felt so bad, and all swayed by such tiny things. There is a particular characteristic 'sinking feeling' which is common to depression, and brought on by small things which remind you of your perceived negative qualities or situation: 'The warm glow that had flared inside him at the sight of his two best friends was extinguished as something icy flooded the pit of his stomach. All of a sudden - after yearning to see them for a solid month - he felt he would rather Ron and Hermione left him alone.' 'Harry felt a dull, sinking sensation in his stomach and before he knew it the feeling of hopelessness which had plagued him all summer rolled over him again.' This describes so accurately the feeling that the bottom had dropped out of my world which I got when I remembered that things were bad. There are a million theories on the causes of depression, but one possible trigger which is recognised is a prolonged period of perceived failure, uselessness, helplessness, being defeated or trapped - which is why it's so common among the unemployed. No wonder Harry should succumb, then: not only did he experience an extremely traumatic event at the end of GoF, making his emotions and thoughts negative to begin with, but he then spends a hellish summer at Little Whinging, in which he's completely cut off from any positive distraction, utterly in the dark, and completely unable to be of any help. There is nothing to prevent him brooding on any feelings of failure and regret over Cedric's death, on his own powerlessness then and since: 'It was bad enough that he kept revisiting the graveyard in his nightmares, without dwelling on it in his waking moments too.' 'He had nothing to look forward to but another restless, disturbed night, because even when he escaped the nightmares about Cedric he had unsettling dreams about long dark corridors, all finishing in dead ends and locked doors, which he supposed had something to do with the trapped feeling he had when he was awake'. Of course those corridor dreams were more than they seemed, but the trapped feeling is simply that - a feeling of powerlessness - and the feeling of there being nothing to look forward to is also well known to depression sufferers. By the cognitive model, these are 'ideal' (for want of a better word) circumstances for developing depression. The theory is, roughly, that when you think about negative things, it makes you feel bad, and when you feel bad, you are more prone to thinking about negative things and remembering negative feelings - the negatives seem closer and the positives farther away - and so if you dwell on these thoughts and feelings you will quickly spiral down and down. So, Harry's long boring summer with nothing to do but remember how bad he feels and how hopeless things are makes perfect sense as a trigger for depression. When viewed in the context of depression, I believe Harry's 'irrational' behaviour during the early parts of OotP becomes understandable. Here are some common effects of depression: 1. Anger As I say, not universal - I had none - but common is enormous rage. Sufferers often feel that they must be 'bad' because they are so full of anger. Harry is alternately apathetic and filled with rage at everyone and everything. He's either very quiet and withdrawn, or he's shouting. 2. Apathy / the small things become harder. The feeling there's no point trying is common to depression. It becomes hard to do even little things, and hard to make even small efforts to help yourself. Which ties to: 3. People don't really care. When you feel that bad about yourself, you can't believe others really care about you, or if they do they are deluded and would be better off without you. 2 and 3 combine to produce the kind of behaviour we see here: 'He would not go down to dinner; he would not inflict his company on them. The feeling of being unclean intensified. It came as a slight shock when somebody hammered hard on the door a few minutes later.' These bits come from 'Christmas on the closed ward'. Harry, Fred and George have overheard speculation that Harry is being possessed by Voldemort, and Harry withdraws at supper, staying in his room until 6pm the next day when Hermione, Ginny et all make him talk to them. He goes hungry for 24 hours rather than inflict himself on others. By this point he has also become convinced that they're all talking about him and would rather be shot of him. Ginny points out that she knows that he's not possessed - something which might have occurred to Harry in other circumstances, but he didn't even try to help himself by talking it over with his friends. In his right mind, he would know that they care about him and want to help, but in his depressed mind he can't recognise this, and can't make the small effort to help himself by talking to them about it. 4. Lack of self-compassion The mistaken idea that he is a burden to his friends is also typical of depression. People who tend to depression, or who are depressed, often haven't learnt to be compassionate to themselves. They haven't developed the healthy inner voice that would tell them that they aren't bad. This makes perfect sense for Harry, because from 15 months he had no *external* compassionate voice, so how would he learn to internalise it? When something goes wrong, a depressive will berate themself - 'How could you be so stupid? You're such a failure, you always mess up, this is all your fault,' etc etc (exactly the message he's always had from the Dursleys), where a healthy person might say, 'OK, that didn't go so well, but everyone makes mistakes. That doesn't mean you're not a good person.' A similar mechanism is in play when an angry depressive thinks: 'People are always letting me down, they all hate me, they treat me so unfairly,' instead of, 'Hm, I don't like the way that person just behaved to me, but they may well have had good reasons. I'll talk to them and find out.' Sound familiar? I've written quite a lot, so should probably stop for rereading (and more importantly dinner), but I'd like to finish with a few quotes from 'Overcoming Depression' by Paul Gilbert. 'Our behaviour changes when we become depressed. We engage in much less positive activity and may withdraw socially and want to hide away. Many of the things we might have enjoyed doing before now seem like an ordeal... Our behaviour towards other people can change, too. We tend to do fewer positive things with others and are more likely to find ourselves in conflict with them... Depressed people sometimes because agitated and find it extremely difficult to relax. They feel like trapped animals and pace about, wanting to do something but not knowing what. Sometimes, the desire to escape and run away can be very strong. But where to go and what to do is unclear.' All very accurate descriptions of Harry's behaviour in OotP. And the diagnostic list of symptoms: Low mood or marked loss of pleasure Significant change in appetite and marked weight loss Sleep disturbance Agitation or feelings of being slowed down Feeling fatigued Feelings of worthlessness, low self-esteen, tendency to feel guilty Inability to concentrate Thoughts of death and suicide. Many psychologists would add feelings of hopelessness and being trapped to that list. However, this is the list by which people are medically diagnosed with depression, and for that diagnosis you must have the first of those and at least four of the others. I believe Harry meets those criteria. And although I think you have to be very careful diagnosing a fictional character with a mental illness - ultimately that depends on what the writer intended - I feel we can safely do so in this case because we know Jo has experienced this for herself. I think we can make that leap and theorise that she intended to be writing about depression when she wrote OotP Harry. psyche (btw, I'm doing much better now :) ) From eeyore6771 at comcast.net Thu Aug 19 21:01:30 2004 From: eeyore6771 at comcast.net (Pat) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 21:01:30 -0000 Subject: Why now? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110662 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sad1199" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith > wrote: > > JKR seems to be giving us a lot of information and hints lately. > > > > I wonder why? > > > >> > > Remember - these books were not conceived with a fan-base in the > > hundreds of millions in mind and it's totally impossible for all > of us > > to get the ending we want. Me - I'm already getting prepared. I > can > > think of three endings that would satisfy me - and all of them > have low > > probabilities of coming to pass. So it's likely that I'll re- read > > volumes 1-6 fairly frequently and pass the final one on to a > Charity > > shop. I expect to read it just once. > > Unless she surprises me, of course. > > But I'm not very optimistic about that. > > > > Kneasy > > sad1199 here: > >[snip} >.... the only ending I would like to see is Harry defeating > Voldemort and going on to live a happy ever after... My SHIP is > R/Hr, I would like to see Harry starting a more adult relationship > in book seven with maybe Luna or Ginny...[snip] > I would like to see Snape either condemned or redeemed.[snip] As > I posted earlier I just CANNOT believe that JKR would allow Harry to > die at the end. It just doesn't happen.[snip] Again, I posted earlier if Harry > dies I may just burn all of my HP books and start a long chain of > furious, scathing letters to the author. > > Have a Happy Love Filled Day sad1199 Pat here: You see, that is just what Kneasy is talking about. So many people have already decided on how the books should end, that they are setting themselves up for disappointment if it's anything but their vision. The problem with that is that the books are JKR's vision, and we are all just lucky enough to be spectators, with no control over the outcome. I like it that way. I love the in-depth sleuthing we all do, and the picking apart of the characters and their motivations and their histories. I love all that. There have only been a few times that I guessed right about what was coming in the next book, but I've never been disappointed with them. Why? Because they aren't my story to tell. And JKR does such a wonderful job of putting in unexpected twists and turns in the plot, that I'm fine with it--and wonder how I ever thought she'd go in my direction. There are children's books where the hero/heroine dies. Think-- Bridge to Terribithia (ooo, spelling problem there), for one. It's a very sweet story that deals with the deal of one of the characters, in a way that helps children understand it. Both my daughters read it when they were in elementary school and loved it. And I'm sure that's not the only one--it is just the one that came to mind right now. And as for liking or not liking the ending to a book, it doesn't mean that people in general will discard their books and never read them again. Gone With the Wind is one that I have read many times, (as well as watching the movie) that has the two main characters not ending up the way all the fans wanted. They survive, although some of the other important characters do not, yet they are not together, and if you read carefully--they probably will never be. Sometimes having an ending that is well written and consistent with the characters can be enough, and you don't have to have it your way. That's how I felt about Gone With the Wind--and I'm sure that's the way I will feel at the end of the 7th book. Whatever JKR does is OK by me. And when you think about it--I don't really have that choice or that control, anyway, now, do I? Nor do any of us. I see Kneasy's point that all of a sudden JKR has changed her approach to fandom. And I have also wondered about it. But it may be just as simple as her getting closer to the end, and being more comfortable with all the fans out there--that had to be very scary and intimidating when she first started and still had most of the series left to write. And maybe now that she has written so much, she is venturing onto the fan sites more and enjoying all our misguided theories. She may not have wanted to do that at the beginning because she might have worried that it would taint her own ideas about Harry's story. Whatever it is, I'm enjoying the change. She still gives us all these tidbits, and we think we have an answer, when all we really have is 10 more questions. Pat (who will be happy with whatever JKR does with Harry, because she'll make it the right thing--even if I end up in tears) From anthyroserain at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 21:03:58 2004 From: anthyroserain at yahoo.com (anthyroserain) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 21:03:58 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110663 Del: > It's not that simple IMO. I make a difference between moral and > legal responsibility. > > I believe LV cannot be held *morally* responsible for his actions, > if he is indeed a sociopath, because he does not have a > *conscience*. > > However, I do believe he can be held *legally* responsible for his > actions, because he understands that society disapproves of them. He > knows he will be punished if he steals or kills, even if he can't > figure out what's bothering people about stealing or killing. [snip] > Does that help clarifying my position ? Katie: Actually, Del, that helps a lot. I thought you were saying that he was entirely not responsible for his actions, when you were actually saying he could not be judged morally responsible for them. A fine, but important, distinction. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 21:13:53 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 21:13:53 -0000 Subject: Harry v. Tom (was: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110664 Valky wrote : " Tom *was* your age *before* he started terrorising the neighbourhood so by the given of a level of maturity required to accept the offer I see no difficulty in believing that the offer could have come when he was maturely ready." Del replies : Actually no. He killed his father and grand-parents by the age of 16. And he started immersing himself in the Dark Arts shortly after leaving school. That means that by the time I was ready to react, he would have been deep in the evil ways, too deep to have reached the same kind of understanding I had. Valky wrote : "This is all true. But those *are* his choices. He is a small vulnerable child in pain. He thinks that is normal I see, that he hasn't been comforted in the past so to his mind no comfort exists I also see. That he has no choice I do not see. He chooses to take on board what is useful to him as a student (information), I find there that if dependence is not useful to him he will not have it. In this way he chooses an emotionless source for input and rejects one with emotion. Not unusual for a teenage boy true but nevertheless a choice." Del replies : But *why* would he choose dependence ? As an orphan, he must have learned independence quite early. And from what we see in CoS, he didn't seem to suffer from it, he didn't seem to mind taking care of himself. So why would he choose a painful path that would take him away from his long-time goal and that would hold no apparent reward ?? Just because someone *told* him he should ?? I, Del, wrote : "But he *was* moving towards a better existence, in his eyes at least ! He *was* taking steps to reach his goals. He had his own idea of what he wanted to become, and he was *actively* working towards it. He was indeed *choosing* his future. But if he was a sociopath, then he wasn't aware that this future would not be morally satisfying and that the steps he was taking on the way were morally wrong." Valky answered : "I doubt that. His steps were entrenching him in bitterness and fear. He knows that he's morally wrong also, he openly defies moral fibre to Harry. He's not after a moral outcome in his steps, he's after a victory. A victory of cold emotionless invulnerable existence, he knows entirely that that is exactly what it is. It will be proved! You heard it here first!" Del replies : I seem to be missing your point, or else you're missing mine :-) First I don't believe his steps were entrenching him in bitterness and fear. They would if he was *us*, but he was not. Tom was *not* after love and acceptance, he was after power and immortality. Second there's still the issue of whether he had a conscience and actually knew that his choices were morally wrong. What do you mean by "he openly defies moral fibre to Harry" ? Third, I agree he's after a victory of cold emotionless invulnerable existence. But so what ? That's also what I wanted, not so long ago. What's morally wrong with that ? Valky wrote : "I personally do not extrapolate *not able to* Love from having never Loved or cared for anyone. Probably why we are debating it ;P I believe Tom was able to Love someone. He just didn't like it, or more to the point feared the consequences of Love because Love *is* a servitude." Del replies : But how would he know that he didn't like Love, or that he would necessarily be a slave to it ? He would have had to *try* it first, but he never did, he never loved. Valky wrote : "The real difference between Nash and LV is that Nash chose to give up things that meant more to him than anything ever had in order to accept that he was ill, LV has not, and probably will not if he's half the villain he is supposed to be." Del replies : I don't know why Nash felt he had to accept that he was ill, but I can sure understand why anyone would refuse to accept that, especially if it means giving up valuable things and even more if they are told that it's very hard to cure the illness. If Tom was indeed a sociopath, he had precious little to gain by going the nice way, and quite a lot to gain by going his own way. It's a lot to ask of any teenager to give up his dreams in the name of a greater ideal, but it's downright hopeless to do it if you have pretty much *nothing* to give in exchange and if you ask it in the name of an ideal that the teenager doesn't understand. Don't you think ? Del From marmys at bellsouth.net Thu Aug 19 15:31:46 2004 From: marmys at bellsouth.net (marmys at bellsouth.net) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:31:46 -0400 Subject: Why didn't the Longbottoms go into hiding? Message-ID: <20040819153147.VQAC1756.imf24aec.mail.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> No: HPFGUIDX 110665 nearlyheadlessryan wrote: > After Proffessor Trelawny's prediction in the Hog's Head, > why did only the Potter's go into hiding and not also the > Longbottoms? Marmy replies: I have always wondered the same thing. I think it has something to do with James and Lily. Actually I think it has to with Lily being of Muggle parentage. Tom Riddle wasn't a pure blood. The Longbottoms are purebloods. I think Voldemort chose Harry because of it. Don't forget, LV offered Lily her life. She chose to die and protect Harry. I think DD had a lot to do with it also. From ctcasares at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 19 17:56:09 2004 From: ctcasares at sbcglobal.net (tylerswaxlion) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 17:56:09 -0000 Subject: Draco's nature, LV's abiliity to love, Dudders and Harry, etc. (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110666 > SSSusan: > I'm glad you said "infer" because we just don't know the details > of this particular orphanage...but the consensus around here does > seem to be that the orphanage staff was indifferent at best. TL: All we know for sure is that Tom didn't like it and didn't want to go back. > SSS: > Anyway, I felt a jolt when you mentioned your assumed treatment of > Tom in the context of "so were all the other orphans." Does this > make anyone else curious about the moral & emotional development > of all the others??? Surely we don't assume that if there were 20 > or 80 or whatever orphans in this orphanage that we ended up with > 20 or 80 or whatever psychopaths or severely damaged individuals, > do we? (Or *do* some of you?) TL: Actually, I DO assume some degree of damage for any and all other orphans subjected to the same treatment. What I don't assume is that any of the other orphans were there from day one through year 18. I think that is unusual. Most newborns are adopted. Children also become orphans at different ages, and these other (supposed) orphans undoubtedly experienced affection (or dislike) at early stages--modelling of attachment behavior. Other newborns were adopted early enough to negate the "indifference treatment." Yet, others, like Tom, were damaged. For a fact, I know that no one's experience was identical to Tom's, because no human's experience is identical to another. Even in the same circumstances, people "experience" or rationalize events differently. What I do want to know is why a cute baby like Tom Riddle wasn't adopted? Here in the US, a healthy causcasian baby has a waiting list. Was it something in his wizarding nature that threw off potential adoptive parents? Was it something in the WW? > SSS: I don't...and for me that's why I still keep > coming back to a degree of choice for Tom. Having had the misfortune of knowing a sociopath, I know it's possible for them to survive in society. They don't HAVE to become the GREATEST EVIL WIZARD OF ALL TIME. ;^) Tom made choices that led him there, but his lack of ability to love affected why he made those choices. Again, it explains them, it doesn't excuse them. Harry's ability to love makes him different, and I think JKR is hinting that this ability is what is going to make the difference in their final confrontation. TL From baphythegoat at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 18:17:16 2004 From: baphythegoat at yahoo.com (baphythegoat) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 18:17:16 -0000 Subject: Why didn't the Longbottoms go into hiding? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110667 It is also intersting to note that while Neville and Harry are in the same year, that this does not necissarily mean that they were born weeks apart... Could Neville be a bit younger?(even up to a year?) After all, much has been made of his addled memory. Could it be possible that the curse on the Longbottoms affected their child... directly, becuase he was technically in utero? Hmmmm? I always had the notion that Neville was given by Dumbledore as an example of another boy who could have been in Harry's shoes, not necessarily that it would have to had been him OR Harry... Baphy the goat From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 22:06:00 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 22:06:00 -0000 Subject: Depression and Harry in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110668 Psyche wrote : "And the diagnostic list of symptoms: Low mood or marked loss of pleasure Significant change in appetite and marked weight loss Sleep disturbance Agitation or feelings of being slowed down Feeling fatigued Feelings of worthlessness, low self-esteen, tendency to feel guilty Inability to concentrate Thoughts of death and suicide. Many psychologists would add feelings of hopelessness and being trapped to that list. However, this is the list by which people are medically diagnosed with depression, and for that diagnosis you must have the first of those and at least four of the others." Del replies : Well then I don't think Harry was depressed in OoP. "Low mood or marked loss of pleasure" No. Harry had low times, granted, but he's not feeling low most of the time. He's feeling angry and frustrated, but not low. And he most definitely doesn't have a constant loss of pleasure, he still enjoys what he's always liked : the company of his friends (except when they start bickering or when they annoy him), Quidditch, Sirius's letters, or just being at Hogwarts. In fact, he himself makes the remark that Umbridge seems to be trying to take away everything that gives him pleasure, which implies that he still does get pleasure from those things. But then he gets his revenge by taking pleasure in teaching the DA anyway. "Significant change in appetite and marked weight loss" We haven't seen that. Except when he does have a depressive episode and starves himself for a day or two, but otherwise he's got as healthy an appetite as ever. "Sleep disturbance" Well sure his sleep is disturbed, but not by depression. "Agitation or feelings of being slowed down" One could argue that Harry feels agitated, but it would be hard to prove. "Feeling fatigued" Apart from the times where he's overworked by his detentions and his homework, Harry doesn't seem particularly tired. "Feelings of worthlessness, low self-esteen, tendency to feel guilty" Harry does have times when he feels guilty. But they are quite rare and they never last. As for feeling worthless or having a low self-esteem, I don't see that at all. Even in the middle of his hellish summer, he's still aware of everything he's accomplished. "Inability to concentrate" No, I don't think so. "Thoughts of death and suicide." I can't remember. Maybe it happened a few times, but it's nowhere as bad as it should get to be a symptom of depression. So no I don't think Harry is depressed. He has low mood episodes, when things go particularly wrong, but that's normal. He's full of anger and especially of frustration, but that's absolutely normal under the circumstances. Now of course, Harry could still become depressed, especially after the death of Sirius. Del From ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com Thu Aug 19 18:26:23 2004 From: ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com (ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:26:23 EDT Subject: LV's Abiliity To Love - Sins Of The Father Message-ID: <8a.12a177cb.2e564acf@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110669 Harry had his mother's love. I'm not talking about her warm fuzzy feelings, I mean that there was a deep magical, spiritual connection between them, that not only saved his life, but continues to protect him to this day. That has to have had some affect on his temperament. Maybe Lily cast a charm upon herself, so that Harry would have protection in the even of her death, or in the event of her dying for him. But, maybe there wasn't anything that took place before hand, and it was only natural that he would have the protection after what happened. Harry's protection might not have been the result of any protective spells, it could have been the basic nature of magic to act upon emotion. Voldemort's mother died shortly after he was born. We don't know how she felt for him. She might have loved him with all her heart, but that might not have been the way it was. A lot of women don't feel any attachment to the fetus, and it takes a few weeks for them to begin to feel anything for their baby. So, in my theory, maybe Voldemort's mother died and, she technically died *for* him because of birth complications, but it wasn't voluntarily. Yes, she carried him to term, and it may have been a high risk pregnancy, but I've been assuming that she lived in the muggle world since Voldemort's father didn't know she was a witch. She might have aborted to save herself if she could have. >From cannon, she hasn't really done anything for him except make sure he knew his heritage, and that could have been pride more than caring. So, in the mother department, Harry's coming out ahead. Lack of love isn't enough to make somebody turn out that way, not matter how screwed up they are naturally? Voldermort's mother wasn't his only parent, and a lot of people don't seem to be taking that into account. Sure, his father wasn't a wizard, but I think non-wizards have an affect of their wizard offspring as well. And muggles have an affect on wizards if they're not related. Here's an example: Creatures, humans, and animals, have been created by nature to be able to protect themselves. If you're from the nice part of town and you're walking through the bad part of town, your body will respond automatically, even if you don't consciously tell yourself to be on your guard. Maybe part of this is because you're scared; this is a dangerous place to be, but part of it could be that there's actual danger that you're not picking up on cognitively. If those boys that had chased Harry onto the roof (of his gym, I think) had only wanted to tickle him, Harry's defensive magic would have picked up on that, and even though he was scared he wouldn't have been able to make that leap. The execution of that magic was based just as much on the bullies as it was based on Harry's reaction to them. Perhaps, just was when Lily died for Harry, her death created a charm, when Voldermort's father rejected him, it created a curse. Parentage holds a legacy. Example: There are still a lot of black people who think they deserve reparations. For non-US people, back in the day, we had slaves. Our slave system was pretty racist, and they tended to be black, or part black. Then, some people said, 'Hey, slavery's not fair!" and they made laws against it. It still wasn't fair though, because the ex-slave owners were still rich, and the ex-slaves were still poor, and black (which people didn't like), and didn't know how to do anything other than be slaves. So, the government said, "Hey, let's give them (the ex-slaves) some land and a mule. That'll get them back on their feet." They never gave them the land and the livestock though, and, even though that took place back in the day (I'm *not* a history major), some black people feel that their race was crippled by this (which it probably was) and that current descendants of slave owners still owe them, because their father's father's father's ect screwed them over. Obvious, these descendants had nothing to do with it, but somebody's gotta bear the burden, and some people say it may as well be them. (This has been from the perspective of a non-black, non-white, non-historian.) There have been many instances in literature where the son's been punished for the sins of the father (I think there are some examples in the bible, but I'm not theologian), so there's obviously a link between the two of them, even though it doesn't make much sense to a person like me. To me, if my parent's had been bad, abusive parents, or if they'd left me in a dumpsite or something, I wouldn't feel that I owed them anything. There are plenty of people out there who would say, "But they're still your parents," even if they hadn't been parents to me. My point with my ranting: a lot of people think there's a bond between a son and father that begins at conception and doesn't have anything to do with their relationship. Maybe it's so in the wizarding world, and Voldermort's father's rejection of Voldemort screwed him thoroughly. "ReturnOfTheMutt" From neisha_saxena at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 19:03:03 2004 From: neisha_saxena at yahoo.com (Neisha Saxena) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 12:03:03 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Harry and Tom In-Reply-To: <1092890656.11552.13971.m4@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20040819190303.34429.qmail@web50902.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110670 > Neisha Saxena wrote: > This has been an extremely interesting discussion. > > But, it causes me to wonder not so much how Tom went > bad, but what is it about Harry that causes him to > have such a clearly defined sense of good? Josh: > > ... his mother's love is not only something that serves > as a basis for Harry's protection... it is a built-in > thing. He's stuck with it. I think the 'magical' inference > we are supposed to draw is that Harry literally survived > on his mother's love... just just through LV's AK, but also > the next 9 5/6 years of his life. Oh dear. You seem to have snipped out my real question. So, I'll ask it again in hopes of a response. What is it with Harry and his "saving people thing"? This is just as extreme, IMHO, as LV's reaction to his very similar childhood. There is a super-hero/super-villan dichotomy between Harry and Voldemort that is extremely interesting. They are mirror images of each other. I have two theories as to why Harry is so hell-bent on saving people (or "heroics" as Lucius Malfoy put it): 1) When LV's AK curse went all wrong whatever was left of his own sense of good went into Harry, along with Lily's sacrifice, love and protection, and this created a sort of super-heroism in Harry. Not sure how any of it would work, just throwing it out there. 2) This is some sort of deep-seated psychological reaction to being an orphan and being raised by the Dursleys, although, not being a psychologist, I'm not sure how it would work. It does however, seem to mirror what many of you are suggesting is a deep-seated psychological reaction that LV had to his childhood. What we do know is that Harry had it all along, he became friends with Ron by trying to save him from some unappetizing sandwiches, for goodness sakes! Anyway, I would love some responses on this, especially from the psychologists among you, because I think the question of good is just as interesting as the question of evil. Neisha Saxena From ctcasares at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 19 19:34:01 2004 From: ctcasares at sbcglobal.net (tylerswaxlion) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 19:34:01 -0000 Subject: LV never loved anyone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110671 > SSSusan: > Why assume it's a completely antiseptic & unemotional environment? Because Tom never learned to love. JKR says he never loved anyone. I want to believe that Baby!Tom was a normal human (well, wizard) capable of love--babies aren't evil. Children want to be loved. Yet Tom never loved anyone. They may have been abusive, but I'd rather not imagine people being cruel to infants. snip > Would the children-who-once-knew-love be any kind of influence on > their peers as they grew up? Or those children who had a different > "makeup" than Tom did, who managed to learn the capacity for > emotional attachment? This is exactly what I suggest in the other post for why there may or may not be more emotionally damaged orphans from the same facility. > I think it's quite reasonable to assume there were influences > such as these present, and I think there's no reason to suspect > that NONE of these children in the orphanage learned to make > attachments. Perhaps those attachments weren't with staff but > were with each other. > > Tom would've had those relationships available to him or to model. If they were available, he didn't take advantage of these opportunities because HE NEVER LOVED ANYONE. He didn't have those attachments, if they were available. He didn't learn love from his peers b/c we know HE NEVER LOVED ANYONE. He didn't learn it in primary school, either. I condemn the orphanage b/c it had him as an infant, and infants can't do anything. They are completely dependent on others. I don't think you can hold a baby responsible for forming a relationship. Babies WANT to love people, and it's not hard to get them to love you. To be honest, I don't really care about the orphanage; it's details are not important and only guesses anyway. JKR has written and told us that Riddle never loved anyone. Harry, on the other hand, was loved. I think that's going to make all the difference. Tyler's Lion From terpnurse at qwest.net Thu Aug 19 21:37:41 2004 From: terpnurse at qwest.net (Steven Spencer) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:37:41 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Paintings can talk, but not photos? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110672 > Redlena wrote: > There are various examples of people talking with the subjects > of paintings... the fat lady in the Gryffindor tower entrance > painting, the knight (Sir Cadogan, wasn't his name?) who was > the replacement for the fat lady when her portrait had been torn, > and of course, all of the former Hogwarts headmasters in their > portraits in Dumbledore's office. But there are no mentions, that > I can recall, of anyone ever talking to the subject of a photograph. > And I'm sure Harry would have talked to his parents' photos if he > could. > Terpnurse: I've wondered about that myself, but there *is* one instance that I can recall off the top of my head of a photograph making noice at least. That was when Sirius and company were cleaning 12 GP. Sirius threw an old photo (which was later rescued by Kreacher) and the glass shattered, causing the photo's subject to make high-pitched screams. I might be off with the details, but I do remember the photo screaming. It struck me as being 'off' to my concept of paintings vs. photographs. From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Thu Aug 19 21:01:22 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 17:01:22 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why now? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040819210122.94109.qmail@web52002.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110673 Kneasy wrote: snip: "Seems, well, a touch odd to me. It makes my suspicious, devious little mind look for reasons." Luckdragon surmises: It doesn't bode well for those of us who hope for a happy ending. When the author "guides" our questioning me thinks guilt is in the air. JKR felt bad at killing off Sirius(she had to do it)and fans really reacted to this. Whenever before has an author had to deal with this kind of fan reaction while in the midst of writing her novels? She knows we will not be happy and she is trying to prepare our minds for what is coming. She has already joked about having to go into hiding when she has revealed things the fan base was dreading. I still cannot believe she will kill off Harry(I won't til the last word of the 7th book); but there will be deaths and many of us will be furious. We'll still Love you JKR! . --------------------------------- Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dicentra at xmission.com Thu Aug 19 22:29:54 2004 From: dicentra at xmission.com (Dicentra spectabilis) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 22:29:54 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Sirius/Remus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110674 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: > As for the relationship ... dogs are promiscuous, but wolves mate for > life. I imagine that, in those days, Sirius viewed it as 'fooling > around' with a friend, and Remus viewed it as True Love, but Remus > would never have been the first to say so: too much fear of being > rebuffed. I know that it's common to cite the canid connection between the wolf and the dog as a suggestion that the two were or could have been sexually involved. But this is the thing: Sirius's animagus form is a dog because it corresponds with his personality and character traits. But Remus's werewolf form is NOT an animagus form. He doesn't transform into a werewolf because it corresponds to his nature -- he had the CURSE thrust upon him. Werewolves are also not really wolves, not really canines, not really the ancestors of the domestic dog. They don't possess the nature of a real wolf, just the outward form. Furthermore, Remus as human is not more wolf-like than he would have been sans the bite. Is there any canon evidence to show that he's wolf-like as a human? Sirius has a dog-like bark, the shaggy black hair, and the protector-of-the-pack instincts in real life. Remus isn't described in wolf-like terms at all. It doesn't appear that his werewolf form bleeds into his human personality the way Sirius's dog form seems to. I don't know what form Remus's animagus would take (I doubt he'd trouble himself to learn the charm), but wolf probably isn't it. --Dicentra From skater314159 at yahoo.co.uk Thu Aug 19 22:21:11 2004 From: skater314159 at yahoo.co.uk (Megan) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 22:21:11 -0000 Subject: a question... (Vampyres in HP) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110675 I joined this group because I like how people discuss the books and share theories for one another - but one thing I have a problem with is keeping up with reading all of the postings! I dont have the time and energy to go through all of the current ones, and the archives hold sooooo many good posts; I hope this hasnt already been discussed to death - but if it has, please point me to the postings. This is only my second post, and I have many questions - but am afraid to post - but here I go! I was reading OotP for yet another time (in English) and when, in the beginning of the book, Harry is dealing with Ms. Figg, the term 'batty' describes her most every time.... p.19: " Mrs. Figg, their *batty* old neighbor, came panting into sight..." p.20:" The revelation that his *batty* old cat-obsessed neighbor knew what dementors were was almost as big a shock to Harry as meeting two of them down the alleyway.'You're - youre a witch?' 'I'm a _squib_, as Mundungus knows full well..." I added the emphasis to show the use of batty... I think this relates definitely to her as a character, Aunt Petunia, and even Snape... My theory is that just as in the WW there are Werewolves like Lupin, Giants like Gwarp and Half-Giants like Hagrid and Maxine, there are most likely Vampyres and Half-Vampyres. Is it possible that someone could be Half-Wizard and Half-Vampyre? This would explain Snape quite well, I think. Could Aunt Petunia (like Mrs. Figg know what she does about the wizard world because she is a magickal creature - a Vampyre? In the Fantastic Beasts (forgive me if I am wrong, I don't own a copy of it, I only read it inside Barnes and Noble when I am hanging out there) I think the picture that is given is of Vampyres being kinda like Centaurs, Hags, and Werewolves - a sort of limbolike category that is probably like being a minority or 'undesirable person' within the WW. One question I have is, how does one become a Vampyre in the WW? Is it like what common mythology says happens to become one? How does Snape's potions ability fit in here? Can he make an elixir to help deal with the less-than-appealing Vampyre characteristics (like their photo-sensitivity and thirst for human blood?) Could a potion to help non-Wizard/Squib/non-Muggle/Vampyre Mrs. Figg deal with her Vampyre symptoms be why her house smells like an Apothecary? I always thought there was something odd about her - esp after the tent incident in Book4 at the Quidditch (sp?) World Cup... Is it possible that there could be the following types of Vampyres?: 1. Muggle-born Vampyres (born normal, get bit, show symptoms) 2. Wizards who become Vampyres (same as above) 3. descendants of Vampyres (how would this work?!?!) I love Vampyre stories and legends, so maybe I'm just hoping that Vampyres will be in HP! Megan From tinainfay at msn.com Thu Aug 19 22:30:28 2004 From: tinainfay at msn.com (mrs_sonofgib) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 22:30:28 -0000 Subject: Portkey, Polyjuiced!Harry, No Women DEs at Graveyard? (Re: Apparation and Sirius' vault) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110676 coderaspberry: > Well, there's a theory that Crouch turned the cup into a Portkey > that would first go to the Graveyard, then back to Hogwarts - so > that the DEs could launch a surprise attack, right then and > there. That'd make outside the maze a good place, since starting > an assault inside a maze is, frankly, the stupidest tactic ever. Tina says: Too funny! That would have to be Wormtail's idea! > Maybe someone was going to come back as Polyjuiced!Harry? Crazy > theory, but hey, they already had one impostor inside Hogwarts - > why not have another with close, personal access to Dumbledore? > Now THAT would be a good way to take him out when he least expected > it. Tina says: Wouldn't Lucius Malfoy make a terrific Polyjuiced! Harry. That would have been fantastic (for laughs, not for the school). Quite an internal struggle going on there... Does the Polyjuice potion work if the person (being copied) is dead? How newly dead would still work (sorry, that is rather brazen). Needless to say, I'm glad it worked out the way it did. One slightly related question regarding this chapter in GoF, where are all the women? Are there any women DE's besides Bellatrix? What about Narcissa? She was (implied) to be having fun torturing muggles at the QWC but she wasn't in the circle. So aside from pureblood mania are the DEs also anti-woman or ... Does JKR use this to make us (the readers) dislike them more? I noticed that it does seem to trickle down - Slytherin has no female quidditch players either. ~tina, who's not particularly a feminist but was wondering From slgazit at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 19 22:49:01 2004 From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 22:49:01 -0000 Subject: Why now? In-Reply-To: <20040819210122.94109.qmail@web52002.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110677 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bee Chase wrote: > Whenever before has an author had to deal with this kind of fan reaction while in the midst of writing her novels? She knows we will not be happy and she is trying to prepare our minds for what is coming. She has already joked about having to go into hiding when she has revealed things the fan base was dreading. I still cannot believe she will kill off Harry(I won't til the last word of the 7th book); but there will be deaths and many of us will be furious. A well known example from British literature - when Arthur Conan Doyle killed Sherlock Holmes (having got bored writing novels about him), he was met with such overwhelming readers rage that he ended up bringing him back from the dead. Somehow I don't think JKR will sink that low though... Actually quite a few heros die or disappear at the end of fantasy series, including those aimed at children. In the "Lord of the Rings" Frodo Baggins effectively disappears from the world of the living; the Narnia human heros conveniently die in a train accident, and there are other examples ("Wheel of Time", "Chronicles of Amber"). After having the hero reach the pinnacle of achievement and save the world, it is hard for the author to figure out how to let them go on with life. Anything else seems small and petty. I have always wondered if the Mirror of Erised scene in the first book may not have been a prediction where both characters gain their heart's desire at the end of the series. Ron gets the fame and fortune he has always longed for (and probably realizes they don't mean as much to him anymore) and Harry reunites with his parents (which can only happen in death). Salit (who hopes that Harry will survive nevertheless) From squeakinby at tds.net Thu Aug 19 22:54:05 2004 From: squeakinby at tds.net (squeakinby) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 18:54:05 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why now? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41252F8D.80105@tds.net> No: HPFGUIDX 110678 slgazit wrote: >I have always wondered if the Mirror of Erised scene in the first book >may not have been a prediction where both characters gain their >heart's desire at the end of the series. Ron gets the fame and fortune >he has always longed for (and probably realizes they don't mean as >much to him anymore) and Harry reunites with his parents (which can >only happen in death). > > I saw that sequence with the mirror as Harry desiring a family not specifically uniting with his parents. All he has to do is marry Ginny and he gets a family, one that already loves him quite a lot, brothers-in-law who are already very much brothers-in-arms, if not faux bros. now. Quite well planned out, that, I'd say. Jem From sixsunflowers at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 22:47:00 2004 From: sixsunflowers at yahoo.com (Bill and Diana Sowers) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 22:47:00 -0000 Subject: Harry and Tom In-Reply-To: <20040819190303.34429.qmail@web50902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110679 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Neisha Saxena wrote: > 2) This is some sort of deep-seated psychological > reaction to being an orphan and being raised by the > Dursleys, although, not being a psychologist, I'm not > sure how it would work. It does however, seem to > mirror what many of you are suggesting is a > deep-seated psychological reaction that LV had to his > childhood. While you're waiting for Book Six to come out read "David Copperfield" or "Oliver Twist" by Charles Dickens. It's a common thread in literature. > What we do know is that Harry had it all along, he > became friends with Ron by trying to save him from > some unappetizing sandwiches, for goodness sakes! Harry understands what it's like to go without. Harry stands up for Neville because he knows what it's like to be picked on and left til last when chosing teams. Harry gets angry at Snape's bullying because he knows what it's like to be bullied. I'm reading a book right now, "The Wisdom of Harry Potter," by Edmund Kern. Kern discusses what he believes to be the reasons behind Harry Potter's "heroic" choices. I would say that he breaks Harry's choices down to decency learned from hardship. In Charles Dickens' "Oliver" the young hero is much loved by his mother who dies while he is young. She implants this love on her son and it stays with him throughout the story. I think Harry has this love implanted on him as well. I would guess that J.K. Rowling thought a lot of her mother and all she gave to her and this comes out in these stories... just a guess. The fantastic nature of the books, something that makes them appealing, and Harry's risking life and limb to save others is part of this fantastic setting. I would guess that there are Harry Potter's (and Harriet Potter's) on playgrounds standing up to bullies, sharing their lunches and picking kids for teams/friends who might otherwise be left out. To me Harry just represents a larger than life view of this kind of decency. Bill Sowers From misty_december at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 22:54:51 2004 From: misty_december at yahoo.com (misty_december) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 22:54:51 -0000 Subject: Why Harry will Live In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110680 Chris: > I think that it is dangerous to try and decipher the prophecy too > much because we have not heard the whole prophecy. If you compare > the prophecy Harry heard first hand with the prophecy DD 'allowed' > him to hear you will find discrepancies. The prophecy Harry heard > first hand is a complete paragraph, with complete sentences. The > Prophecy that DD showed Harry contained breaks between sentences > (indicating that sections were missing) and the middle section > contained three 'ands' in one sentence. ********************************************** Didn't JKR say one time - I can't remember where I read it, but I did somewhere - that all the clues have been given to figure out the final ending of the series? If so, then the prophecy is complete enough to figure it out without additional clues, but I am she will add some more clues in the next book. C. From HxM_fan at hotmail.com Thu Aug 19 18:49:11 2004 From: HxM_fan at hotmail.com (Val?rie Brabon) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 20:49:11 +0200 Subject: The DADA Jinx (was Re: Trelawney / Incompetent teachers/Binns theory) References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110681 > > finwitch wrote: > > > > 2) It is possible that the DADA post IS sort of jinxed. Anyone who > > has taught DADA has had his darkest secret revealed; incompetent/evil > > ones get themselves hurt. Dumbledore would NOT want Snape's Dark Mark > > leak into the public... > Caesian: > > Oh - my - gosh. This is exactly right. It also makes perfect sense - > who wants a DADA teacher with terrible dark secrets? > If Snape took the DADA post, everyone would know ... ? > > Obviously something Dumbledore does not want revealed (- although Snape > applies for the position anyway. Maybe he is unaware of the nature of > the jinx?) Yes, this is very probable. But not sure. Also, remember's JKR's words: "Dumbledore thinks it would bring the worst in Snape." Maybe his dark mark? Or maybe something else? When he taught DADA, he made a class on werewolves, and we all know Lupin is a werewolf. (No, I wont come up with a vampire theory, lol.) BUT maybe... Since Lupin changes himself into a werewolf, maybe he wanted to say Snape was an bat animagus? Who knows? Since he reminds of a bat, and bats are often associated with... vampires, maybe he was using subtility? (Here we go... lol.) There's some bats that feed themselves with animal blood, but maybe Snape changes himself into a bat, and instead of sucking blood, he "sucks informations"? Okay, this is a very stupid theory among those coming out from my wacked brain, but maybe that...? Anyway, we'll see. ^_^ Valy. ========================== "Under your clothes, I'm sure you're nude!" http://www.livejournal.com/users/valy http://www.fanfiction.net/~valy http://www.fanfiction.net/~youpla http://valy.deviantart.com From carodave92 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 23:09:09 2004 From: carodave92 at yahoo.com (carodave92) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 23:09:09 -0000 Subject: Why didn't the Longbottoms go into hiding? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110682 nearlyheadlessryan wrote: > I was reading OOP for the fifth time and as I got near the end of the > book, right around Harry's attempt to go and rescue Sirius, and it > hit me: After Proffessor Trelawny's prediction in the Hog's Head, why > did only the Potter's go into hiding and not also the Longbottoms? Maybe the Longbottoms didn't go into hiding because, as Aurors, they were actively hunting for LV (prior to the night in Godric's Hollow) and then DEs (following that night). Neville could have been in hiding with his Gran or someone else. However, just as a policeman wouldn't hide from a felon who threatened his life, the Longbottoms probably couldn't fade from the scene because of a threat. carodave From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Thu Aug 19 23:18:28 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 19:18:28 -0400 (EDT) Subject: a question... (Vampyres in HP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040819231828.77167.qmail@web52004.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110683 Megan wrote: >> My theory is that just as in the WW there are Werewolves like Lupin, Giants like Gwarp and Half-Giants like Hagrid and Maxine, there are most likely Vampyres and Half-Vampyres. Is it possible that someone could be Half-Wizard and Half-Vampyre? << Luckdragon: Get ready for the onslaught! Welcome Megan...there are in fact many posts in regards to this theory and I myself am of the unpopular opinion that Snape is in someway related to vampires, or at the very least a bat animagus. Happy reading. From chinaskinotes at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 19 21:14:49 2004 From: chinaskinotes at sbcglobal.net (chinaskisnotes) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 21:14:49 -0000 Subject: Why now? (other books / series) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110684 > > sad1199: > > As I posted earlier I just CANNOT believe that JKR would allow Harry > > to die at the end. It just doesn't happen.[snip] > > > > Again, I posted earlier if Harry dies I may just burn all of my HP > > books and start a long chain of furious, scathing letters to the > > author. > Pat here: > There are children's books where the hero/heroine dies. Think-- > Bridge to Terribithia (ooo, spelling problem there), for one. It's > a very sweet story that deals with the deal of one of the > characters, in a way that helps children understand it. Both my > daughters read it when they were in elementary school and loved it. > And I'm sure that's not the only one--it is just the one that came > to mind right now. Temporarily de-lurking myself, I'd like to add that ALL of the main characters in the Chronicles of Narnia die at the end of the series, but they live on in "the shadowlands", if you will. Death is not always *death*, if that makes sense. More often the hero dies rather than attain the "happily ever after". According to Joseph Campbell, the last part of the hero's journey is Return, or Resurrection and it is through that return that the hero achieves freedom from the fear of death. Other notable heroes that have died at the end? King Arthur, Achilles, Gilgamesh and Christ, just to name a few. I'm just along for the ride. Chinaski From anthyroserain at yahoo.com Thu Aug 19 23:40:51 2004 From: anthyroserain at yahoo.com (anthyroserain) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 23:40:51 -0000 Subject: Depression and Harry in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110685 Psyche: > "And the diagnostic list of symptoms: > Low mood or marked loss of pleasure > Significant change in appetite and marked weight loss > Sleep disturbance > Agitation or feelings of being slowed down > Feeling fatigued > Feelings of worthlessness, low self-esteen, tendency to feel guilty > Inability to concentrate > Thoughts of death and suicide. Del: > Well then I don't think Harry was depressed in OoP. [snip] > So no I don't think Harry is depressed. He has low mood episodes, when > things go particularly wrong, but that's normal. He's full of anger > and especially of frustration, but that's absolutely normal under the > circumstances. Katie, now: I agree with Del here. Harry is under so much stress (an unbelievable amount, especially for a kid!) in OOTP that it's bound to affect his mood, but he doesn't seem to suffer from these symptoms most of the time. He's a normal teenager in extraordinary circumstances. Harry's mood is so unusually level most of the time that I'd guess he probably isn't chemically predisposed to depression at all. (Funny, saying that about a fictional character...) However, I stand by my previous supposition (if anybody remembers it) that Sirius does seem to be clinically depressed in OOTP. I also think it partially explains some of his reckless behavior. -Katie From melaniertay at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 01:02:37 2004 From: melaniertay at yahoo.com (Mel) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 01:02:37 -0000 Subject: Depression and Harry in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110687 > Katie: > > He's a normal teenager in extraordinary circumstances. Harry's > mood is so unusually level most of the time that I'd guess he > probably isn't chemically predisposed to depression at all. (Funny, > saying that about a fictional character...) I believe it's possible he's suffering from "reactive depression" which is very common in teenagers. JK has said that "Harry has to constantly fight depression" in Time Magazine. Certainly it's not "clinical depression" or "bi-polar disorder" which would be far more noticeable and show constant symptoms. Not all depression does (post partum, seasonal effective disorder, etc.). Plus I believe it's almost normal for teenagers to suffer mild depression. From mongo62aa at yahoo.ca Fri Aug 20 01:03:38 2004 From: mongo62aa at yahoo.ca (mongo62aa) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 01:03:38 -0000 Subject: How old were Lily and James? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110688 Chris: I was just writing the prologue to my next fanfic and I realized that I could not remember any canon concerning Lily and James' ages. Now I have been long in the belief that they were 21 when they died and I am now not sure why. Although Barb's fanfic may have something to do with it, I am sure I thought they were that young before I ever read the PS Trilogy as I remember thinking that the actors in the PS/SS film were too old. Am I wrong with 21 or if I am right, where is the canon for it? Me: JKR has stated in an interview that Snape was 35 or 36 in GoF--in other words, he started the Hogwarts year as a 35-year-old, but had a birthday at some point in the book. He, James, Sirius, Remus, and (almost certainly) Lily were all in the same year at Hogwarts. Since Harry was 14 in Gof, James and (probably) Lily would have started the Hogwarts year 21 years older than him, and hence were probably 22 when they died (as Harry was a one-year-old at the time). Bill From anita_hillin at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 01:57:57 2004 From: anita_hillin at yahoo.com (AnitaKH) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 18:57:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry and Tom In-Reply-To: <20040819190303.34429.qmail@web50902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040820015757.9293.qmail@web42104.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110689 Neisha Saxena wrote: >What is it with Harry and his "saving people thing"? This is just as extreme, IMHO, as LV's reaction to his very similar childhood. There is a super-hero/super-villan dichotomy between Harry and Voldemort that is extremely interesting. They are mirror images of each other. [snip-o-rama] 2) This is some sort of deep-seated psychological reaction to being an orphan and being raised by the Dursleys, although, not being a psychologist, I'm not sure how it would work. It does however, seem to mirror what many of you are suggesting is a deep-seated psychological reaction that LV had to his childhood. akh: The two reactions appear to be control reactions to me. Both LV and Harry remember being helpless and powerless as children. (While the rest of us may have actually been powerless, our parents allowed us to believe we had some control over our lives. In Dudley's case, he does have control early, only to lose it in GOF when he's forced on a diet. But I digress...) I feel Harry has several things in abundance that LV knows not, and one of them is empathy. Because of this, he finds satisfaction in "saving people," imagining their distress in a given situation and now having the power to control the outcome. By contrast, LV also comes into a situation where he now has a control and power he never realized at the orphanage, but without empathy, he has no interest in helping people. He goes to the other extreme, manipulating people regardless of their feelings. Harry's frustration in OOTP may be caused, in some part, by his powerlessness at 4 Privet Drive, although I also ascribe to the depression theory. He has been deprived of the control he has now come to know and expect, and he also feels his efforts have not been appreciated. Do-gooders rarely do kind acts in order to get appreciation, but they can grow resentful if they are never appreciated for their efforts. (This comes from a Development officer of many years. Trust me on this one...;-)) I make no claims to being an expert in psychology, but I was an Education major, so I took my fair share of Psych classes, back in the ancient days. akh, who is probably reiterating someone else's post, but there are just so many posts you can read in a day... --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Aug 20 02:24:15 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 02:24:15 -0000 Subject: a question... (Vampyres in HP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110690 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Megan" wrote: > Is it possible that someone could be Half-Wizard and Half-Vampyre? This would explain Snape quite well, I think. < This has been quite a controversial topic. The fantastic posts site seems to be down at the moment but here are the numbers of some pre-OOP messages on the subject : Yahoogroups Messages: 3,406, 3,428, 3,433, 3,448, 3,449, 3,456, 4,486, 9,373,20,245, 20,341, 22,555, 29,613, 35,299, 35,429, 35,639, 36,038, 36,117 >From the world book day chat : Megan: Is there a link between Snape and vampires? JKR: Erm... I don't think so. Whether that was a disdainful denial or a wheezing waffle depends on your point of view. JKR also remarked at the Edinburgh festival, in answer to the question of whether Snape is a pure blood wizard: ---- Snape's ancestry is hinted at. He was a Death Eater, so clearly he is no Muggle born, because Muggle borns are not allowed to be Death Eaters, except in rare circumstances. You have some information about his ancestry there. ---- You'll notice she didn't answer the question Pippin From navarro198 at hotmail.com Fri Aug 20 03:00:03 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 03:00:03 -0000 Subject: Why didn't the Longbottoms go into hiding? (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110691 Bookworm: > Both the Potters and Longbottoms went into hiding around the same > time. Voldemort found the Potters first because of Pettigrew. > After Voldemort disappeared the Longbottoms could come out of > hiding. mhbobbin: But this all raises another question about the Potters' hiding. Why weren't the Potters in hiding before the Fidelius Charm? The Potters were only under the Fidelius Charm for less than a week before Pettigrew betrayed them. Fudge (in his PoA exposition) explains that one of DD's spies had alerted DD (Snape Perhaps?) that LV was looking for the Potters. Fudge also explained that the Potters knew someone was keeping LV aware of their movements for some time prior to that. (Sirius had suspected Lupin.) As there was over a year between the Prophecy / Birth of HP and the Potters sealing their fate with Pettigrew, what protections were the Potters taking before this? This does possibly support the idea that the Potters were living at Hogwarts, possibly as teachers and that their movements out of Hogwarts were all that mattered. They also may have constantly been on the move or taking other precautions. Assuming DD told both the Longbottoms and the Potters of the Prophecy --and as they were all in the Order of the Phoenix I would expect that he did--what precautions were the Potters taking prior to the Fidelius Charm--as they knew that LV was aware of their movements? Or possibly the question is why weren't they taking precautions for an entire year prior to their deaths? Bookworm: According to canon (so far) the only people who knew about the prophecy were Dumbledore and whoever overheard it in the Hog's Head. (It isn't stated, but I would think Dumbledore told the Potters and the Longbottoms.) My theory is that the eavesdropper was Snape who used his partial knowledge of the prophecy as an `in' to meet with Dumbledore and arrange to "return to our side at great personal risk" (paraphrased from: GoF, The Pensieve). As Dumbledore told Harry, there were two families to whom the prophecy might apply ? the Potters and Longbottoms. Lily is supposed to be good at charms. We don't know what Alice Longbottom's specialty was, but she was talented enough to be an Auror. We also have been told that the charm that protected Harry was based on ancient magic, and that Voldemort tends to overlook ancient magic. I believe that Dumbledore worked with Lily and Alice to develop the protective charm that would protect both boys. Mostly likely the charm was complicated and took some time to fine-tune and put in place. When they were ready, Dumbledore sent Snape to tell Voldemort about the prophecy, then `learned' that Voldemort was looking for them and the two families went into deeper hiding. Something to keep in mind: the One was born to those who had thrice defied the Dark Lord. If you are the Supreme Overlord of the Universe ;-) and someone defies you three times, wouldn't you be keeping track of them? Here were two couples who had done just that. It would be surprising if he had just shrugged it off, even without the prophecy. As members of the Order, who had already defied Voldemort, the Potters and Longbottoms would have lived with the knowledge they would be attacked and would have taken security precautions. The major threat the prophecy added was their sons also became targets. Your idea that they were living at Hogwarts is intriguing, especially considering that Dumbledore was the only one Voldemort feared. Two questions come to mind: (1) If the Potters were staying at Hogwarts, why didn't Fudge mention that during the scene in the Three Broomsticks? and (2) What made Godric's Hollow a safer place for them to go? [Something to think about. I don't have an answer for this.] A few quotes from that scene, keeping in mind that most of what we know about the betrayal is from Fudge, with some comments by McGonagall: Fudge: "Not many people are aware that the Potters 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. He advised them to go into hiding." McGonagall: "Naturally, James Potter told Dumbledore that Black would die rather than tell where they were, that Black was planning to go into hiding himself...and yet, Dumbledore remained worried. I remember him offering to be the Potters' Secret-Keeper himself." McGonagall: "He 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." How did Fudge know what happened? This sounds more like him repeating gossip, pretending he was `in-the-know'. He is the one telling most of the story in the scene. To answer my own question, above, maybe Fudge didn't know the Potters were at Hogwarts (if they were), but he seems to know a lot of other details. OTOH, McGonagall is closer to Dumbledore, so her comments carry more weight. These comments sound like something Dumbledore might have discussed with her. Dumbledore, however, is a master as half-truths and prevarication. He might not lie, but he may not be telling the entire truth. He may have offered to be Secret-Keeper knowing that James would decline; that way he could truthfully say he offered. (He strikes me as very Machiavellian, so there are likely hidden depths to much of what he says and does ? but that's another discussion.) In the second quote, McGonagall refers to "their movements." This could mean either (1) their daily activities, or (2) when they relocated from one place to another trying to hide. She also tells us that Dumbledore had suspected a traitor for "some time". Definition (1) works even if Voldemort didn't know about the prophecy. As stated above, he would be watching them for an opportunity for revenge. Back to your question about the year-plus between the prophecy and the attack. I suspect that Voldemort didn't know about the prophecy until just before the attacks. If, as many people believe, Snape is a double agent for Dumbledore, he has had a lot of practice hiding things from Voldemort. Whether Snape dropped hints that he was investigating something or pretended that he just heard it ? well, either scenario could work. Whichever the case, I think Voldemort learned about the prophecy just before the attack. Ravenclaw Bookworm [With apologies for the long post. It started out as a short answer, but the thoughts wouldn't stop.] From caesian at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 03:29:44 2004 From: caesian at yahoo.com (caesian) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 20:29:44 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Depression ... in OotP In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2E47427A-F259-11D8-94B4-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110692 I, Caesian, have snipped most of psyche's excellent post below - leaving only a hint of the full and detailed analysis she created. I recommend reading her post first if you are at all interested in reading this one. psyche wrote: > ...I feel that depression is what Harry is suffering from for most of > OotP, ... I knew when I read PoA onwards that Jo must have had > depression at some point in her life, ... (I later found, in reading > interviews, that she had indeed suffered from both depression and from > artist's block, .... For example, she uses her experience in writing > about the Dementors - she has said so in [an] interview. But what I > really want to look at is Harry in OotP, as I don't think I've seen a > connection made elsewhere between his behaviour and depression.... > Harry ... is overwhelmed by feelings of injustice, and by rage... His > mood swings, triggered by the tiniest events, ... which contributes to > the problem that the sufferer's nearest and dearest are often baffled > by their behaviour: 'The warm glow that had flared inside him at the > sight of his two best friends was extinguished as something icy > flooded the pit of his stomach. All of a sudden - after yearning to > see them for a solid month - he felt he would rather Ron and Hermione > left him alone.''Harry felt a dull, sinking sensation in his stomach > and before he knew it the feeling of hopelessness which had plagued > him all summer rolled over him again.' now Caesian: At first, I was disappointed to realize that psyche intended to make the case that Harry is depressed in OotP, because I had already considered the issue and decided it was too clouded to judge for certain. That Harry may be feeling emotions that are not even his own - emotions that originate in Lord Voldemort - made this an impossible call from my initial readings. Enter psyche, who's detailed post made me realize that the extent and degree of the similarities between Harry's situation and clinical depression could not have been accidental. Our author is meticulous and almost fanatically opposed to the inclusion of irrelevant material. And, reading psyche's post, as well as those that followed, showed me meaning in the books that I had not fully considered. All of this brings me to another speculation, which I think is the next logical step if we do agree that Harry is, in fact, meant to be "depressed" by the author of this book. But first, I wanted to address some issues raised by Del and Kathy, who disagree that Harry is depressed and make compelling arguments of their own. I am not an expert on depression, far from it. But, my profession is Neuroscience and I have some knowledge of depression from a clinical perspective, as well as from a familial and personal history of this disorder. As an aside, I do want to include that in the same way other people disclose their own biases to explain their posts and opinions. However, I also want to include this disclaimer based on years of experience introducing what I do at parties, etc. Yes, not to put too fine a point on it, that does make me a brain-surgeon, technically (although not really, and that's not what I do most of the time!!!). But that doesn't really translate well to other skills, such as remembering where you parked your car, for example - everybody is given an equally robust set of talents, in my view, and if I'm good at Neuroscience that doesn't mean I'm good at comprehending Harry Potter, maybe even less so. Sorry, that's way off track probably, and maybe more for my benefit - which I try to avoid - but I am trying to communicate in a manner that is the opposite of pompous! so I hope you'll factor in my intent and lack of writing skills. To summarize Del's very good post, she noted that (1) Harry did not show all of the signs of clinical depression, (2) and even those signs he did exhibit were not consistently present. For example, we do not have reason to believe he has suffered loss of appetite severe enough to result in weight loss. (3) Both Katie and Del point to the fact that Harry should be expected to demonstrate signs of stress and grief because his situation demands it. (4) In addition, everyone seems to agree that perhaps Sirius is, in fact, clinically depressed in OotP. I want to address points 1-3 at the same time. First off, both Del and Kathy are correct that these symptoms, the symptoms of depression, are natural and expected when a person is suffering from grief or incredible stress. Those who endure traumatic life events (even good changes, such as a much-wanted promotion, or new baby can be 'traumatic' - change is stressful), or who suffer the loss of a loved one or are personally involved in the death of another human being - even a stranger - are expected to suffer from such symptoms. This is the normal and appropriate response to such events, and it is those persons who do not go through this grieving who are considered unusual and possibly deranged. When someone is grieving, and for good reason, are they "depressed"? Yes, they are, very much so. (I think.) The distinction I believe Del and Kathy are making is between depression that is triggered by a traumatic event - a natural and healthy response to loss - and depression that is pathological. In other words, certain individuals can suffer prolonged bouts of depression that do not seem to be triggered by external events. (Patients who are grieving and depressed are given palliative care - care to lessen the severity of their symptoms, such as mild sleep aids - while patients who are clinically depressed are given treatment to attempt to address the organic cause of their inappropriate depression. We do not always give such treatments to patients with a recognized traumatic event because a certain degree of grieving is considered healthy.) While Harry has every reason to grieve, and to show these symptoms, and while it may be unlikely that he is one of those who suffers from a predisposition to inappropriate clinical depression, he IS clearly depressed during OotP. He does not show all of the diagnostic symptoms of depression, nor does he seem depressed all of the time. He's still depressed - these are consistent with the clinical picture - and as psyche noted, each individual is unique. Sirius is also depressed during OotP, and although we see little of him (as is typical of someone dealing with depression in the way Sirius does), I believe his struggle with depression is an intentional counterpoint created by the author. Back to my original point - what does this all mean if Harry is literally connected to the mind of Lord Voldemort? It seems to me that the trials Harry endures and triumphs over through each book are a well worn and symbolic path to personal enlightenment. Each book presents a challenge that might be viewed as a metaphor for something the reader could encounter in the non-magical world. Harry, as our Hero Protagonist shows us the way to overcome the metaphoric challenge, as we struggle along side him at the moments of his greatest losses, even his death, and then triumph with him. In this case, the literal situation is that Lord Voldemort is invading Harry's world, unto his very mind, and Harry is beset by rage, frustration, grief, sadness and loss. We could interpret this literally, and probably with just cause. Harry's task is to triumph over his depression, to deal with his grief, to be sad and to rise again to fight the good fight. He is a role model for dealing with grief and loss while Sirius, his counterpoint, is less successful. While Harry displays coping skills that mitigate and address his grief, such as his leadership in the DA and his recognition of his friend's solidarity and love, Sirius - with his slightly Mundungus waft of drink, and his sad recalcitrant retreat into himself - is a model of what not to do in grief. (Poor Sirius. His life story was one of the most tragic in a Septology of loss and tragic life histories. Perhaps his death will be a better adventure.) But there may be another layer of metaphor on top of this literal situation. What metaphor is the author making through the mind-link with Lord Voldemort? I am not entirely certain, because I do not know whether we fully understand the link yet. Nor am I convinced that Harry has truly triumphed over his grief, if he ever can in such a constant onslaught. The coping skills he developed in OotP may serve him well as he struggles with the loss of Sirius, perhaps his greatest challenge thus far - but no amount of coping skill can mitigate that he will have much suffering ahead of him. Nor is it clear that he has repelled the mind-link with Voldemort. But, he has exorcized his demon at least once, and it was through the power of his love for Sirius that he was able to do so. In this sense, I feel the mind-link with Voldemort is (as is almost everything else in these complex books) much more than a mere plot device. It is one of the most pervasive metaphors that has yet been introduced to the series. Any thoughts on what this might mean? Is Voldemort hate? Is Harry able to invoke (sorry, to those fundamentalist who feel this word is loaded) the power of love? Do love and hate struggle for control within him (a.k.a. us), and gaining the power to choose which will triumph is the Hero's journey? I dunno. Cheers, Caesian - who is still really excited about the (I think) solution of the DADA jinx on another thread, especially in light of this comment by JKR: Royal Albert Hall Appearance June 26 2003 Q&A with Stephen Fry SF: ...We've still got time for more questions to come in from around the world if you want to email them in and Mr ? will bring them in. Now, we have another questions from another competition winner who's called Jackson Long, there in the audience too JKR: Hey Jackson SF: Hello Jackson, hurrah. And lets have a look and see what your question was shall we? JL: Prof Snape has always wanted to be the defence against the dark arts teacher. In book 5 he still doesn't get the job Why does Professor Dumbledore not allow him to be the defence against the dark arts teacher? SF: There JKR: That is an excellent question and the reason is that, I have to be careful what I say here, the reason is that to answer it fully would give and awful lot away about the remaining two books but when Professor Dumbledore took Professor Snape on to the staff and Professor Snape said I'd like to teach defence against the darks arts please and Professor Dumbledore FELT THAT THAT MIGHT BRING OUT THE WORST IN Professor Snape (Caesian's caps) Somewhat JKR: So he said I think we'll let you teach potions and see how you get along there SF: Hmm. Now Snape, we talked a little about him before. There's something about the letter S isn't there? JKR: Yes there is SF: Especially with an N in with it. You can't help saying it without snarling JKR: I could have very easily have called him Snicket but Snicket is a funier, kinder word SF: And sneeze and sneer and Snape and JKR: And snarl (also...) SF: Where as most of the character, like Snape for example, are very hard to love but there's a sort of ambiguity I think is probably the best word you can't quite decide, there's something rather sad about Snape as well, something very lonely and you kind of, although he turns out to of course have such a wicked past and it's fascinating to watch how he you know, in the first book we thought he was the evil one and a aprt form Voldemort the most evil and in the second we thought that and slowly we just get this idea that maybe he's not so bad after all JKR: Yeees. You shouldn't think he's too nice, let me just say that. SF: Right I shall bear that in mind. Worth watching Serverus Snape JKR: He's worth keeping and eye on, definitely and... The Connection 12 October 1999 J.K. Rowling Interview Transcript There?s an important kind of redemptive pattern to Snape He, um, there?s so much I wish I could say to you, and I can?t because it would ruin. I promise you, whoever asked that question, can I just say to you that I?m slightly stunned that you?ve said that and you?ll find out why I?m so stunned if you read Book 7. That?s all I?m going to say. From caesian at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 03:42:07 2004 From: caesian at yahoo.com (caesian) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 20:42:07 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why didn't the Longbottoms go into hiding? (long) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110693 > mhbobbin: > But this all raises another question about the Potters' hiding. Why > weren't the Potters in hiding before the Fidelius Charm? The Potters > were only under the Fidelius Charm for less than a week before > Pettigrew betrayed them. ... > As there was over a year between the Prophecy / Birth of HP and the > Potters sealing their fate with Pettigrew, what protections were the > Potters taking before this? Ceasian: Because Dumbledore also had a spy, and when his spy Severus Snape told him that Voldemort was about to take action against the Potters they immediately went into hiding. (I think?) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Fri Aug 20 05:03:40 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 05:03:40 -0000 Subject: Harry and Tom In-Reply-To: <20040819190303.34429.qmail@web50902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110694 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Neisha Saxena wrote: > Oh dear. You seem to have snipped out my real > question. So, I'll ask it again in hopes of a > response. My bad :-) > What is it with Harry and his "saving people thing"? > This is just as extreme, IMHO, as LV's reaction to his > very similar childhood. There is a > super-hero/super-villan dichotomy between Harry and > Voldemort that is extremely interesting. They are > mirror images of each other. I'll boil it down into 2 things: abandonment and dependability. 1) Abandonment As an orphan with his 'relatives' Harry suffered. He had know one to look out for him, and he knows it. Survivors often feel, at least for a while, that the dead abandoned them, and orphans feel this most acutely. Parents are _supposed_ to be there, after all. Now, if someone is in trouble, not helping them is abandoning them to their fate... or to someone else's rescue attempts. Even a delay is abandonment for that length of time. I would say that Harry cannot stomache abandoning those he cares for in this fashion. 2) Dependability Even after arriving at Hogwarts, Harry doesn't exactly learn to trust that others (adults, rather) will fill in for him when something needs doing. Hagrid doesn't believe that Snape (or any faculty member) is after the stone, Minerva doesn't believe that anyone is after the stone, Lockhart won't even attempt to help Ginny, the government shows its unfairness repeatedly, etc. If Harry doesn't do the rescuing, who else will? No one, at least not for sure. How's that? :) Josh From b_boymn at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 06:29:25 2004 From: b_boymn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 06:29:25 -0000 Subject: Paintings can talk, but not photos? They're Idiots. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110695 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steven Spencer" wrote: > > > Redlena wrote: > > There are various examples of people talking with the subjects > > of paintings... ... But there are no mentions, that I can recall, > > of anyone ever talking to the subject of a photograph. > > > > And I'm sure Harry would have talked to his parents' photos if he > > could. > > > Terpnurse: > ... there *is* one instance that I can recall off the top of my head > of a photograph making noice at least. ... Sirius threw an old photo > ... and the glass shattered, causing the photo's subject to make > high-pitched screams. ... It struck me as being 'off' to my concept > of paintings vs. photographs. B_Boymn: "...squealed shrilly..." is what those photos did. I have often wondered if the were actually squealling, or if the were simply going through the motions. In any event, here is a list I complied of links about the nature of portraits, most of which, I think, are my own posts on the matter. ..., if you are interested in a more indepth analysis of Photos vs Paintings in the WW, please see my published works. Thu Sep 11, 2003 6:14 pm Re: photo vs. painting in magical world ... http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80505 Sat Aug 2, 2003 12:20 pm Portraits http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/74923 Good thread, lots of discussion. See my post later in the thread Tue Aug 12, 2003 2:38 pm Paintings vs. Photos http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/76735 Long thread with many sub-threads. My posts are in a sub-thread. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/76837 In addition, we have new statements by JKR from Edinburgh in here latest book reading. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Q: All the paintings we have seen at Hogwarts are of dead people. They seem to be living through their portraits. How is this so? If there was a painting of Harry's parents, would he be able to obtain advice from them? A: That is a very good question. They are all of dead people; they are not as fully realised as ghosts, as you have probably noticed. The place where you see them really talk is in Dumbledore's office, primarily; the idea is that the previous headmasters and headmistresses leave behind a faint imprint of themselves. They leave their aura, almost, in the office and they can give some counsel to the present occupant, but it is not like being a ghost. They repeat catchphrases, almost. The portrait of Sirius' mother is not a very 3D personality; she is not very fully realised. She repeats catchphrases that she had when she was alive. If Harry had a portrait of his parents it would not help him a great deal. If he could meet them as ghosts, that would be a much more meaningful interaction, but as Nick explained at the end of Phoenix?I am straying into dangerous territory, but I think you probably know what he explained?there are some people who would not come back as ghosts because they are unafraid, or less afraid, of death. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Recently, were discussed whether Sirius would return to the story as a Portrait. Although not everyone agreed, most of us concluded that a portrait might be long on personality, but it would be very short on substance. JKR's recent comments seem to confirm that. This ties in very nicely with my posted theories that characters in photos and portraits are like actors in a play. Portraits are like the movie version of that persons life, they have a significant degree of personality, and some substance, but they are not the complete person. 'Actors' in a photograph have the equivalent character and substance as that of a person in 15 or 30 second TV commerial. You do get a sense of their personality, but there is virtually zero substance to them. So, basically, photos don't say much because they are idiots. Hope that helps. Steve/b_boymn From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Aug 20 06:44:26 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 06:44:26 -0000 Subject: Why didn't the Longbottoms go into hiding? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110696 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "baphythegoat" wrote: > It is also intersting to note that while Neville and Harry are in the > same year, that this does not necissarily mean that they were born > weeks apart... Could Neville be a bit younger?(even up to a year?) > After all, much has been made of his addled memory. Could it be > possible that the curse on the Longbottoms affected their child... > directly, becuase he was technically in utero? > > Hmmmm? > > I always had the notion that Neville was given by Dumbledore as an > example of another boy who could have been in Harry's shoes, not > necessarily that it would have to had been him OR Harry... > > Baphy the goat Geoff: You seem to have overlooked the very specific information given to Harry by Dumbledore: '"It means - me?" Dumbledore surveyed him for a moment through his glasses, "The odd thing, Harry," he said softly, "is that it may not have meant you at all. Sybill'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 "The Lost Prophecy" p.742 UK edition) I think that is sufficiently detailed to rule your suggestions out of consideration - both born at roughly the same time and only two names in the frame. From melissahyatt at umich.edu Fri Aug 20 00:44:34 2004 From: melissahyatt at umich.edu (LeahBrahms) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 00:44:34 -0000 Subject: Draco's nature (was Power vs Morality ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110697 Del wrote: > Draco is another interesting parallel to Tom. [snip] > Fourth, just like Tom, Draco is after *power*, and he fears those more > powerful than he. He doesn't care about right and wrong, only about > who is most powerful and how he himself can gain more power. There's been a lot of discussion about Voldemort's ability to love and/or form friendships, and comparisons with Draco and his questionable home environment. I've tried to find the post that pointed out that, while Draco has before him the example of the friendships between Harry, Ron, and Hermione, his friendships are apparently quite lacking in depth. The CoS polyjuice scene is perfect to demonstrate the superficial relationship between Draco and Crab and Goyle. The first time through GOF, when Rita quotes Draco as saying that Harry has made friends with werewolves and giants, that "he'd do anything for a bit of power", I assumed that this was Draco just finding the nastiest things he could think of to say about Harry. But notice that it's firmly based in fact. Pansy didn't seem particularly concerned with being factual when she described Hermione (okay, "really ugly" can be subjective, but it sounds like she's just being spiteful). Does anyone read this as Draco actually believing that Harry is making a power play by befriending Hagrid and Lupin? We've seen Draco suck up to Snape (telling him he should apply to be headmaster when Dumbledore is gone, etc.) and apparently got on Umbridge's good side pretty quickly. Is Draco capable of friendships that aren't merely self-serving? If he isn't, he *would* only see Harry's relationships with Lupin, Hagrid, and Dumbledore (he accuses Harry of being Dumbledore's pet; obviously he believes Harry to be sucking up to DD) as bids for power and self-advancement. To counter this idea, of course, we have ample evidence that Draco holds Hagrid in no esteem and thus would have a hard time believing that someone would be more powerful with Hagrid on their side (of course, the irony is that it's likely that Dumbledore will be shown to be). And with Draco's reaction to Lupin's being a werewolf - that he resigned lest the "mommies and daddies" complain that their children are at risk - it seems that Draco trivializes how dangerous Lupin might be (and therefore his importance as a Dark creature). But if Draco believes that all Harry's friendships are about seeking power, it sounds like Draco might be heading down the path of those who believe that "there is only power, and those too weak to seek it". LeahBrahms, longish-time lurker, first-time poster, hoping this angle hasn't been completely talked to death yet From aoibhneach1 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 01:15:16 2004 From: aoibhneach1 at yahoo.com (Cindy) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 01:15:16 -0000 Subject: Why now? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110698 sad1199 wrote: > the only ending I would like to see is Harry defeating Voldemort > and going on to live a happy ever after... My SHIP is R/Hr, I > would like to see Harry starting a more adult relationship in > book seven with maybe Luna or Ginny but my problem with the SHIPS > is that 99% of high school relationships that go to marriage don't > last in the real world, maybe in WW the odds are better, huh? Also, > I would like to see Snape either condemned or redeemed. I am pushing > for redemption but, unfortunately, do not expect that to happen. As > I posted earlier I just CANNOT believe that JKR would allow Harry > to die at the end. It just doesn't happen. If the public is reading > for enjoyment, how many people out there want to see the hero DIE at > the end of the story? I also believe that even if the books are > written for a general audience, children still read them and the > hero just DOES NOT die in children's minds. ***************************************************** I feel the same way. I can't believe that JKR would let Harry die at the end. It is possible that there is something about the veil - perhaps he goes to join Sirius and his parents - a sort of bittersweet ending. I don't know...I just think it would be hard for her to write Harry's ending, to part with the character, based on how difficult she said it was to write about Sirius's death. Also, regarding the high school relationships, I tend to agree, but James and Lily could not have been more than 20 when Harry was born, based on Lupin's age - around 35. It sounded like a pretty solid marriage but who really knows. And I think Snape is a real mystery. I haven't quite figured him out yet - I think it could go either way, and he might actually wind up dying as well. Cindy (formerly Misty_December) From sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 07:42:58 2004 From: sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com (sevenhundredandthirteen) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 07:42:58 -0000 Subject: Death (was Re: Why now? (other books / series)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110699 > > > sad1199: > > > As I posted earlier I just CANNOT believe that JKR would allow Harry > > > to die at the end. It just doesn't happen.[snip] > > > > > > Again, I posted earlier if Harry dies I may just burn all of my HP > > > books and start a long chain of furious, scathing letters to the > > > author. Chinaski wrote: More often the hero dies rather than attain > the "happily ever after". According to Joseph Campbell, the last part of > the hero's journey is Return, or Resurrection and it is through that return that the hero achieves freedom from the fear of death. I (Laurasia) reply: I agree. If Harry dies at the end of the series it will be because he *has* to die. JK wouldn't just accidentally kill him off. The death would have to be necessary for the well-being of the entire wizarding and muggle world. In other words, (if Harry dies, it will be because...) Harry *has* to die in order to attain the 'happily ever after.' If the only way Harry can stop Voldemort is to die, do you still want Harry to win? Do you still want good to triumph over evil? As shown through Sirius' abrupt and unexpected death, JKR wants her readers to be prepared for 'real world death.' Perhaps this indicates that she will take the theme further and *not* give Harry a happily ever after with a wife and a baby. Perhaps she wants to show us that there are more important things than your own personal contentment. Perhaps she wants to show us that Harry can do what the rest of us can't- save other's lives, at the expense of one's own. After all, heroes are heroes for a reason- they are extraordinary people. Joseph Campbell uses the Return as a way of demonstrating that the hero is not an ordniary person. There are very few heroes who acheive greatness and then go back to ordinary life. Most heroes accomplish a great deal and then take back privledged knowledge and experiences which mean that they can never return to the staus quo. That is why their 'tests' are so monumentous. If heroes faced ordinary struggles that could be easily forgotten then they would only be average. Many heroes (who don't die) come back from their journeys changed permanently by the situation- In "Lord of The Rings" Frodo is destroyed by The One Ring and can never return to the blissful ignorant life he once knew. In destroying Voldemort Harry could be affected deeply. He might have to surrender a part of his soul in order to destroy Voldemort. He might have to take on a piece of Voldemort in himself to commit the murder. If that happens, I would prefer to see Harry die, as opposed to live a half-life until the ends of his days. JKR is certainly setting us up so accept death- In PS we see Flamel willingly accept his fate as an adventure, and we understand that it's better to die than to drink Unicorn's blood. Voldemort's most defining characteristic is that he is afraid of death (but will kill many others): the whole series of books is dependant on the fact that Voldemort tried to stop the only person who could ever destroy him (according to the prophecy). In order for Harry to conquer Voldemort, it follows logically that he must also conquer death. We also know that Harry wanted to die for a brief period of time at the end of OotP. He wanted death as absolution and relief. Harry is also transfixed by the Veil, but he is completely distraught when Sirius dies, has nightmares for months after seeing Cedric murdered, and when being attacked by Dementors in OotP thinks of never again seeing his friends. This suggests Harry has no fear of dying himself, only fear of losing others. (An exact opposite to Voldemort). It will be far, far, far worse for Harry to live through the entire series and see all his friends die. JKR has told us that there are many more deaths to come. Harry's already lost both his parents, his godfather and a schoolmate he respected. I'd hate to think of him growing old with another dozen or so friends and mentors added to that list. Unless someone else kills Voldemort for him, I think that Harry will be too affected to ever live a tradtionally happy life. Especially if he doesn't die, but close friends do. If Harry lives, I will be saddened more that is he dies. In dying he will return to his parents, the thing he has longed for most of all his entire life. In living he will be isolated and become a hermit (like the heroes of great Westerns, who return to the wild to be alone once the journey is over). The end of OotP where Harry sits alone by the lake suggests that he may well follow down this path. Harry doesn't share the details of his fate with Ron and Hermione, he has taken the burden on alone, which to me suggests he might carry it alone until the end of time. I don't know whether Harry will live or die, but I know I want the 'happier ending.' I don't want Harry to be alone for the rest of his life. I think JKR could write it that way, and I would definitely accept it as a resolved ending, but it will also be a very sad ending. I think that there is very little hope for Harry to get a 'happily ever after.' And I don't think that if he lives it automatically ensures that he will. After all, 'there are things worse than death.' ~<(Laurasia)>~ From aoibhneach1 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 02:24:20 2004 From: aoibhneach1 at yahoo.com (Cindy) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 02:24:20 -0000 Subject: The Clue Behind the Door (Aberforth?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110700 > minervakab says: I believe it is a description of the Half Blood > Prince who is DD's brother who is also the proprietor of the Hog's > Head Inn where DD hears the original prophesy and who has been hired > as the next DADA teacher. > > We are all dying to know who the HBP is so I think JKR gave us a > description of him. The glasses, the hair, and the eyebrows remind > me of DD. The fact the JKR would not tell anything about the > propietor in her interview at the recent book signing add weight to > the speculation about DD's brother owning the Hog's Head. As for > the DADA part, I have no good reason for it. I just think it would > be cool. ********************************************************* I don't think it is DD's brother, because that would make DD a half- blood prince, too, and there has been nothing to suggest that DD is a half-blood. I think it is probably the DADA teacher, myself. Cindy (aka Misty) From marmys at bellsouth.net Thu Aug 19 23:48:36 2004 From: marmys at bellsouth.net (Marleen) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 19:48:36 -0400 Subject: The DADA Jinx / Snape's secret? References: Message-ID: <001101c48647$0b898b60$0100a8c0@marmyscomputer> No: HPFGUIDX 110701 > > finwitch wrote: > > > > 2) It is possible that the DADA post IS sort of jinxed. Anyone who > > has taught DADA has had his darkest secret revealed; incompetent/evil > > ones get themselves hurt. Dumbledore would NOT want Snape's Dark Mark > > leak into the public... > Valy: > Also, remember's JKR's words: "Dumbledore thinks it would bring the > worst in Snape." Maybe his dark mark? Or maybe something else? Marmy replies: Someone mentioned maybe James Potter was the DADA teacher. That could make sense. Lupin always told Harry how proud his dad would have been of his(Harry's) Dark Arts ability, etc. Snape came to teach when Harry was 1 yr old, he probably wanted James' position, now that he had died and LV was supposedly gone. I always wondered what James did for a living. Maybe the part of bringing the worst out in Snape was taking the class of "someone he disliked" (that being James). Interesting theory...... From phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk Fri Aug 20 07:49:37 2004 From: phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk (Kate Harding) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 07:49:37 -0000 Subject: Depression ... in OotP In-Reply-To: <2E47427A-F259-11D8-94B4-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110702 Thank you Caesian! You defended my theory better that I could. Depression is not just a weird, chemical thing that happens to some people and not others. It doesn't always happen at random. For most people it happens as a direct result of life events. It is far more common than people think. I'm told that 1 in 3 people will experience it. But a lot of people don't realise that's what they're experiencing. They think they're just having a rough patch - and in a sense they are, because this is a spectrum, not on-off. You either have chicken pox or you don't - depression's not like that. 'Normal' people have it too! And very commonly. There *are* some people who struggle with it all their lives, seemingly without reason, and perhaps this is the kind of depression that many people think of when they hear the word. This is not the kind I was thinking of with Harry. Depression also happens to people for short periods of time, people who may recover in a few weeks or months and show no sign of it ever again. It is a natural state, with good adaptive reasons (which I will go into if people like but seems out of place here) (the real problems come when you get stuck in that state, when it doesn't pass). As others have pointed out, it is natural to be depressed after a bereavement. That doesn't mean that it's not depression. And a natural depression like that can be exacerbated by other factors, such as time to brood. If a person with that kind of temporary depression shuts themself away and doesn't talk about it (which is largely what depressed people want to do!), it will probably get worse because they have nothing to stop them brooding. If they are able to occupy themselves and talk about how they feel, they will probably recover faster. I'd like to reemphasise that all depressions are different. Some depressions are chemical, neurological, and permanent. Some are temporary and a reaction to events. Some are mild, some severe. The fact that Harry is not miserable all the time does not mean he's not suffering from depression. In my case I had short periods where I was able to be fairly cheerful, mostly when my friends were around being entertaining, and periods when I felt fairly normal, mostly when I was able to be busy and distracted, when I had something to do. Harry's mood seems to work the same way. As my doctor says, when you're depressed you have good days and bad days, and you know you're recovering when the the good days start to outnumber the bad ones. The extent of Harry's depression (in my view) changes a lot over the course of the book, and this is natural too. To use my own experience as an example again, my depression went in waves. As I recovered I began to have weeks of feeling bloody awful most of the time followed by weeks of gradully improving until I felt almost normal most of the time. Each peak was followed by a trough. Del: Well sure his sleep is disturbed, but not by depression psyche: I don't understand what you mean by this. His sleep was disturbed by feelings of guilt, regret and anxiety. Which are all part and parcel of depression. My sleep was disturbed, too, but not because I was lying there thinking, 'oh, I'm so depressed'. It was mostly that my heart was racing for no decent reason, that I was anxious that I wouldn't be able to sleep. But these were the result of the depression - in my case it had raised my adrenaline levels. Del, your experience of depression seems to have been very much more severe than mine, and prolongued. Mine was a 'moderate' case. Your criteria for depression seem to be correspondingly more demanding. Mel: I believe it's possible he's suffering from "reactive depression" which is very common in teenagers. JK has said that "Harry has to constantly fight depression" in Time Magazine. Certainly it's not "clinical depression" or "bi-polar disorder" which would be far more noticeable and show constant symptoms. Not all depression does (post partum, seasonal effective disorder, etc.). Plus I believe it's almost normal for teenagers to suffer mild depression. psyche: Very well put. I certainly agree that Harry does not have bi-polar disorder or similar. However, I do think he's showing signs of more than mild depression. Not severe, I believe, but more than mild. And I agree with Caesian, that his learning to cope with the things life has thrown at him will be an important part of his journey. Personally, I learnt an *emormous* amount from my depression, and have a much stronger coping mechanism as a result. psyche (with apologies for so much personal comparison) From marmys at bellsouth.net Thu Aug 19 23:52:56 2004 From: marmys at bellsouth.net (Marleen) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 19:52:56 -0400 Subject: Why now? (other books / series) References: Message-ID: <001d01c48647$a6538d30$0100a8c0@marmyscomputer> No: HPFGUIDX 110703 Becky: > The end of the Lord of the Rings Trilogy ends in death-- only Sam, > Pippin, and Merry seem to avoid it. The grey havens, as nice as > they seem-- well, I don't know. Maybe some people don't see it as > death. There's very little doubt in my mind-- just because it seems > like another adventure doesn't mean it's not death-- to the well > organized mind, death is but the next adventure. Sadly, because of > comments like that strewn throughout the book, I think JK could pull > off Harry dying, so long as it's his choice/sacrifice and he knows > exactly why he's doing it. (And we do, too). Marmy replies: It's almost like the Star Trek Movie where Spock sacrifices himself so everyone else will live, (not for the good of the one, but the good of the many) but then he is reborn later.....hmm, interesting. From phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk Fri Aug 20 07:52:33 2004 From: phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk (Kate Harding) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 07:52:33 -0000 Subject: Ginny - Guinevere? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110704 On a much lighter note than my recent posts, I realised when I was waking up this morning that Ginny has the same name as Guinevere. Her full name is Ginevra: Ginevra, Genevieve and Jennifer are all (according to my name etymology book) localised versions of Guinevere. Probably completely irrelevant, since we have no way of knowing whether that was Jo's intention. psyche From humantupperware1 at yahoo.com.au Fri Aug 20 07:45:33 2004 From: humantupperware1 at yahoo.com.au (humantupperware1) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 07:45:33 -0000 Subject: Why now? In-Reply-To: <20040819210122.94109.qmail@web52002.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110705 > Luckdragon surmises: > > It doesn't bode well for those of us who hope for a happy ending. When > the author "guides" our questioning me thinks guilt is in the air. JKR > felt bad at killing off Sirius (she had to do it) and fans really reacted > to this. Whenever before has an author had to deal with this kind of fan > reaction while in the midst of writing her novels? She knows we will not > be happy and she is trying to prepare our minds for what is coming. She > has already joked about having to go into hiding when she has revealed > things the fan base was dreading. I still cannot believe she will kill > off Harry (I won't til the last word of the 7th book); but there will be > deaths and many of us will be furious. HumanTupperware: I agree with your point here.....It must be the most extraordinary amount of pressure to write such a well loved book, and we all know there are more deaths coming......I can't remember the specific interview, but JK specifically says that Sirius' death is "the beginning of the deaths" or some such thing........and though I would like to believe that Harry will not die, I think there is a large chance that he will. Think about JK's veiled comments to this one.."he will survive TO book seven" (my caps) and she has asked a few interviewers why they assume he will be alive after the 7th book, when they ask he if she will write more books on what Harry does after Hogwarts. She has also said that she has had the books planned for so long, she can't change the ending now even if she wanted to, and that she never really intended the books for children. Personally I think that if I was writing such a massive thing for so many years, the only way to end that particular chapter(unintentional pun) in my life would be to kill him. If Harry doesn't die, we will be pestering her for the rest of her life to write more Harry books. Oh dear. Now I've dug myself into a hole by convincing myself that she IS going to kill him, so she can get on with the rest of her life....aaaarrrrggghhhh!!! Sorry! HumanTupperware From sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 08:37:37 2004 From: sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com (sevenhundredandthirteen) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 08:37:37 -0000 Subject: Good Writing (was Why now?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110706 Kneasy wrote: > Remember - these books were not conceived with a fan-base in the > hundreds of millions in mind and it's totally impossible for all of us > to get the ending we want. Me - I'm already getting prepared. I can > think of three endings that would satisfy me - and all of them have low > probabilities of coming to pass. So it's likely that I'll re-read > volumes 1-6 fairly frequently and pass the final one on to a Charity > shop. I expect to read it just once. > Unless she surprises me, of course. > But I'm not very optimistic about that. I (Laurasia) reply: We all seem to have so little faith in JKR. No matter what the ending is, if JKR is a good writer she will make us believe that it was the best way for the books to end. If JKR is a good writer, the ending should feel inevitable and the only possible way in which the events preceeding it could ever be resolved. If JKR is a bad writer, then there will be so many loose ends that we could conseiveable see dozens of other more sastifying ways for the book to end. I think JKR is a good writer. No matter what the ending is, I have faith that when it comes I will have been positioned to believe that it is the only solution that the characters can take. I think deciding what endings would sastisfy is foolish at this point in the series. We don't even know if the prophecy is true. Hopefully JKR really is a good writer and when the last chapters of Book 7 unfold the story will reach a high-point which only has one possible way out. That way, when the story follows that path we will *all* realise that it was necessary and the only sastisfying end. This, I think, is why Sirius's death was deemed 'sloppy writing' by some fans. Because, as yet, we can see dozens of possible ways out of Sirius's death, and, as yet, not many ways it could possibly actually benefit the story. There will hopefully be a point of no return in which, if anyone turns back, Voldemort will rule over the world forever. Not many fans want that. And I think he will be overcome. Surely that one simple fact is what the books are leading us up to. If JKR is a good writer every step along the way was leading us up to Voldemort's downfall. And that means whatever consequences occur after he is destroyed are only the necessary outcomes of acheiving the one most important goal. No matter which SHIPs sink and which one sail I believe that by the end I will believe that they are 'meant to be.' No matter who lives or who dies, I hope that any death was necessary to the story. ~<(Laurasia)>~ From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Fri Aug 20 08:54:47 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 08:54:47 -0000 Subject: Depression and Harry in OotP -- Information In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110707 >>> Psyche wrote: > I knew when I read PoA onwards that Jo must have had depression at > some point in her life, because her descriptions of certain feelings are so clear, so accurate, that I immediately recognised them from my own experience. <<< Brenda: Thank you Psyche, for your wonderful post! I remember reading that exact statement here before, though can't remember who. > Please excuse any generalisations I make. Although I recognise my > own experiences in Harry's, other depression sufferers will feel > completely different. Depression is a complicated beastie, and no > two sufferers will have the same experience. > For example, although one of the common conceptions of depression is a lack of feeling, some depressions are associated with a lot of anxiety, and some with a lot of anger. <<< Bren: Alright, all the psychology posts lately have invoked the neuroscience in me. I just wrote the huge neuro exam this morning, with the topic of depression and schizophrenia fresh in mind. Allow me to elaborate with scientific information. First of all, to present you with a generalized spectrum of mental health: Anxiety/depression -- Bipolar/mania/depression -- Schizophrenia --Continuum of depression: blues to severe psychotic depression (lose contact with reality)-- It is generally understood that while anxiety is more environmental, other mental disorders are more hereditary. With bipolar disease and schizophrenia, it is estimated to be of 70% genetic contribution, which is quite significant. Identical twins are found to have about four times higher concordance rates for mood disorders than fraternal twins. > one possible trigger which is recognised is a prolonged period of > perceived failure, uselessness, helplessness, being defeated or > trapped - which is why it's so common among the unemployed. The following is an excerpt from "Psychology" (Henry Gleitman, 5E, 781~782): --------------------------------------------------------------------- -------- About 20% of depressions have psychotic features: that is, they are accompanied by delusions or hallucinations. Some of these are variations on the theme of worthlessness Others concern guilt about some unspeakable, unpardonable sin, and patients report hearing the devil tell them that they will surely burn in hell for eternity The extreme of depression is a depressive stupor in which the person may become entirely unresponsive, rock back and forth, urinate or defecate on herself, and mutter incoherently. Specific cognitive defects often accompany severe depression, including disrupted attention and short-term memory. Moreover, depressed patients often exhibit various physical manifestations that are called vegetative signs It is as if both bodily and psychic batteries have run down completely. Vegetative symptoms seem to predominate in the depressions that occur in non-Western cultures, while mood symptoms like feelings of worthlessness and sinfulness are largely confined to Western depressions. The reasons for this difference are unknown, but several hypotheses have been proposed. These include the implicit blame that individualist Western cultures affix on people who are not faring well and the various ways that the cultures understand and cope with death and mourning. --------------------------------------------------------------------- -------- >>> By the cognitive model [snip] the theory is that > when you think about negative things, it makes you feel bad, > and when you feel bad, you are more prone to thinking about > negative things and remembering negative feelings > - the negatives seem closer and the positives farther away ? > and so if you dwell on these thoughts and feelings > you will quickly spiral down and down. <<< This cognitive view described above was originally proposed by psychiatrist Aaron Beck. "For Beck, the depression stems from a triad of intensely negative and irrational beliefs that the person holds about herself, her future, and the world around her. The individual believes that she is worthless, that her future is bleak, and that whatever happens around her is sure to turn out for the worst. These beliefs, then, form the core of a NEGATIVE COGNITIVE SCHEMA in terms of which the patients interprets whatever happens to her." (Gleitman, 786 from "Psychology") Developed from Beck's hypothesis, there have been other cognitive accounts for depression, for instance the Learned Helplessness Theory by Martin Seligman and Depressive Explanatory Style. Of course, these are merely psychogenic factors for mental disorders. There are numerous on-going researches on trying to extract the precise neurosynaptic mechanisms for the organic factors. For instance, the dopamine hypothesis, dopamine-serotonin interaction hypothesis, or glutamate hypothesis is widely believed to explain schizophrenia (bottom line, overactive dopamine neurons). With depression, many investigators believe it to be the neurotransmitter serotonin, while others insist on the importance of norepinephrine. Different hypotheses naturally influence different methods of treatment. Conventional antidepressants include selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) which increase the diffusion of serotonin, for synaptic transmission. SSRIs can also act as alternative to anxiolytics in treating anxiety. >>> I think we can make that leap and theorise that she intended to be writing about depression when she wrote OotP Harry. <<< Bren: Well I'll wait till we scan Harry's brain and see if there is any significant tissue loss in his fronto-limbic cortex (around anterior cingulated and orbito-frontal cortex)! :D What I have realized, after composing this long and `encyclopedic' post, is that Harry is more likely exhibiting very early stages of depression. I have never experienced depression, which would explain why I had failed to pick up these signs in PoA and OoP. If a reader with similar experience felt that way, then I am certainly not going to argue whether his/her intuition is right or wrong. Although I must ask you, Psyche, where did you find evidences of depression in PoA? Or you just meant the chills when the Dementors drew near? This is my take on the issue, and it is extension of what Psyche has declared earlier on: "Depression is a complicated beastie, and no two sufferers will have the same experience." I agree with Del that Harry does not exhibit all of the classic signs of depression -- he is only fifteen! What a LIFE to battle with fully-developed depression AND the undesired legacy to save the world! It is very much possible that Harry is in fact starting to suffer from what Muggles call `clinical depression'; however if he is it is still very primitive and he will fight it without realizing. His much- returned selfless and sacrificial love from friends and others will help him through it. >>> Katie wrote: > However, I stand by my previous supposition (if anybody remembers it) > that Sirius does seem to be clinically depressed in OOTP. I also > think it partially explains some of his reckless behavior. <<< Bren: Katie, you are back!!!! ;) Of course I remember your supposition that Sirius appears to be clinically depressed. If I were to choose a depressed character from Potterverse it will definitely be Sirius, not Harry. But now that Sirius has moved onto `the next great adventure', hopefully he has tasted some real joy in (after)life! Brenda, who just realized that an 'almost' brain-surgeon Caesian has posted a MUCH better and thorough explanation. If I didn't have to go through my textbooks and lecture notes I wouldn't even be posting this! *ashamed* From drednort at alphalink.com.au Fri Aug 20 09:07:05 2004 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 19:07:05 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Depression and Harry in OotP In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41264BD9.5395.55DADA5@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 110708 On 19 Aug 2004 at 22:06, delwynmarch wrote: > Del replies : > Well then I don't think Harry was depressed in OoP. Well, I'd just like to weigh in with an opinion on this conversation. Let me explain where I am coming from. From the age of 12 onwards, I suffered from significant clinical depression. This is not a matter of any real dispute - I spent ten years suffering from it and I remember the experience particularly vividly. I had to endure it, because there were reasons why medication wasn't a good idea, and counselling alone wasn't enough to alleviate it. I self medicated with tubes of Nestle condensed milk, but that was about the only semi-effective treatment (-8 There were reasons - triggers - for my depression, but in my case, it was also chemical in nature, so even when the triggers were absent, it didn't go away. It was fairly severe - I did have significant thoughts of suicide at times, but perhaps the best indication of what it was like is when my father died, a man I greatly loved, shortly before my sixteenth birthday - well, I actually became slightly less depressed as a result of that experience. When I talk about being depressed, I'm not talking about a particularly mild form. And my view, based on my experiences, is that Harry in Order of the Phoenix definitely shows very real signs of depression. > "Low mood or marked loss of pleasure" > No. Harry had low times, granted, but he's not feeling low most of the > time. He's feeling angry and frustrated, but not low. And he most > definitely doesn't have a constant loss of pleasure, he still enjoys > what he's always liked : the company of his friends (except when they > start bickering or when they annoy him), Quidditch, Sirius's letters, > or just being at Hogwarts. In fact, he himself makes the remark that > Umbridge seems to be trying to take away everything that gives him > pleasure, which implies that he still does get pleasure from those > things. But then he gets his revenge by taking pleasure in teaching > the DA anyway. You have to bear in mind that depression does not necessairly mean feeling low, all or even most of the time. It can mean that, but it doesn't have to. As I've said, I suffered from severe depression as a teen, but that doesn't mean I was *always* feeling low. I had significant periods when I was actually quite happy. In my case, the signs of my depressive illness wasn't that I had a low mood all the time - it was the fact that I had a low mood as a 'default' mood. It's normal to be depressed if bad things are happening to you. Depressive illness (not the best term, perhaps, but I don't want to get into semantics) is when you are depressed even when nothing bad is happening to you. At least that is one form of depression - the form I had. If good things were happening to me, I was as happy as most people would be. But... well, basically I didn't have a neutral position. I was either happy when I had a reason to be - or deeply, deeply unhappy, if I didn't have a reason to be happy. I was unhappy whether bad things were happening - or whether my life was entirely satisfactory, just not good. I was perfectly capable of pleasure. I sought it out. And I found it. But *unless* I was actively enjoying myself, I rapidly slid into depression. And that's what I see in Harry. His 'default setting' seems depressed to me. > "Significant change in appetite and marked weight loss" > > We haven't seen that. Except when he does have a depressive episode > and starves himself for a day or two, but otherwise he's got as > healthy an appetite as ever. This is one thing where in a minority of cases, the symptom of depression can actually be the reverse of the norm. While many depressives give up on food to an extent, for others it becomes a comfort. The food that is described as available at Hogwarts, is, IMHO, excellent comfort food! When I was depressed I didn't stop eating. In fact, eating became one of the easiest places for me to find the moments of pleasure that temporarily alleviated my depression. And the food I had to eat wasn't Hogwarts quality. > "Sleep disturbance" > > Well sure his sleep is disturbed, but not by depression. "A little from column a and a little from column b'. Perhaps we can't really make a good assessment on this, because of the other things. > "Feelings of worthlessness, low self-esteen, tendency to feel guilty" > > Harry does have times when he feels guilty. But they are quite rare > and they never last. As for feeling worthless or having a low > self-esteem, I don't see that at all. Even in the middle of his > hellish summer, he's still aware of everything he's accomplished. Yes, but... well, again, so was I - not that my accomplishments were anywhere near like Harry's, of course. But I would argue (because this is what happened to me), that being aware of your accomplishments may very easily be a defence mechanism to the feelings of guilt, or worthlessness, or low self-esteem that are common (though not universal) in depression. The mind tries to fight depression in many cases, consciously and unconsciously. If you're feeling low, you do often bring memories of past achievements to the fore. And they can help. > "Inability to concentrate" > > No, I don't think so. I suppose Binns' classes don't count (-8 But again, not universal. I often became hyperfocused when I was most depressed, rather than losing the ability to concentrate. > "Thoughts of death and suicide." > > I can't remember. Maybe it happened a few times, but it's nowhere as > bad as it should get to be a symptom of depression. I can't remember either - but seriously, *any* though of suicide in a teen is a potential symptom of depression to be taken very seriously if there are any other clear symptoms. By itself, the occasional thought probably isn't a big deal - but if there's anything else going on, it very well may be. > So no I don't think Harry is depressed. He has low mood episodes, when > things go particularly wrong, but that's normal. He's full of anger > and especially of frustration, but that's absolutely normal under the > circumstances. Yes, it is. But so would depression be. And anger and frustration are common symptoms of depression - *especially* in teenage boys who have very few other socially acceptable ways of expressing depressed feelings. Honestly... considering what Harry saw at the end of Goblet of Fire, and the lack of opportunity he's had to process it (except for that one brief period with Molly Weasley at the end of Goblet of Fire - one of my favourite scenes in all the novels, because I know what experiences like that can do to you if you don't have that chance to let it out), I'd be quite surprised if he doesn't have a measure of depression - considering he does have frustration and anger, anyway. Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html (ISTJ) | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 "You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia From romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 08:37:59 2004 From: romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com (romuluslupin1) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 08:37:59 -0000 Subject: Both Snape & Fudge are DEs: 3rd 'Missing' DE In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040817084435.01cd2528@pop3.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110709 > Brenda: > >> It is a general knowledge amongst the Death Eaters that Karkaroff > was their traitor. So everyone blames Karkaroff as the cowardly > traitor. << > > > psyche/Kate: > They blame him as *a* cowardly traitor. That doesn't mean they don't feel > the same way about Snape. Romulus Lupin: The DE in Azkaban do not blame Snape, or Sirius would have know he was one of them. My books are on loan, so I can't check page numbers, but in GOF (I think) he tells the trio that while Snape was part of a gang of Slytherins who all turned DE he was never accused of being one. If Snape is the traitor, he's a secret one. Romulus Lupin, who can't believe he's defending Snape (well, speaking up for him at least) when he is his least favorite character in teh whole Potterverse From romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 08:58:03 2004 From: romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com (romuluslupin1) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 08:58:03 -0000 Subject: James' Invisibility Cloak (was Alastor, and James' money, and godmother/marriage In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110710 Rebecca huntergreen wrote << James had to get all that money from somewhere. I wonder if he had > inheritence too? >> Catlady answered: > The Goat Pad is still useful, even tho' it hasn't been updated for a > year: http://www.angelfire.com/magic/aberforthsgoat/index.html > > It found: > http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2000/1000-livechat- aol.html > : > > JKR: "But James inherited plenty of money, so he didn't need a > well-paid profession." > > Q: "Where did James get his Invisibility Cloak?" > JKR: "That was inherited from his own father -- a family heirloom!" Romulus Lupin: Ok, things might be different in the Potterverse, but I thought you could only inherit from someone who was dead, right? But we know Mr Potter was alive while James was at school, since Sirius was always welcome at Mr. and Mrs. Potter's after he got his own place at 17. So while Mr Potter could have died shortly after James' 7th year and left him the money, how come he had the IC to begin with when he was still at school. DD tells Harry (don't remember where) that his father used the IC to nick food from the kitchen and Lupin in POA tells Harry WPP used it to reach the Whomping Willow undetected (paraphrased) so he did have it at school. I don't get it... Romulus Lupin, more confused than ever From romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 08:30:02 2004 From: romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com (romuluslupin1) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 08:30:02 -0000 Subject: Lily's Protection (Re: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110711 "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote in 110306: > My theory is I think Lily was able, with her magic, to put an > image of herself in her baby's mind, that would be like an 'imaginary > mum' (by analogy with 'imaginary friend') who would cuddle Harry and > tell him that he's a good kid who doesn't deserve Dursley abuse and > tell him about how decent people behave, thus being that one caring > adult said to be necessary to even a 'resilient' child's survival of > serious abuse... Romulus Lupin: I've read this theory before, but I always had this little problem with it. Why would Lily put an anti-Dursley spell on Harry? He was supposed to go live with his godfather and Guardian, Sirius Black, who, while probably an immature father would certainly have been a doting one (he is a doting godfather, inasmuch as his situation and the world he lives in consent him to be). Are you suggesting Lily knew Sirius would end up in Azkaban and Harry would have to live with the Dursleys? If so, how did she come by that knowledge? Romulus Lupin, who just can't refrain from posting these days From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 09:42:54 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:42:54 -0000 Subject: Why didn't the Longbottoms go into hiding? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110712 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "baphythegoat" wrote: > It is also intersting to note that while Neville and Harry are in the > same year, that this does not necissarily mean that they were born > weeks apart... Could Neville be a bit younger?(even up to a year?) > After all, much has been made of his addled memory. Could it be > possible that the curse on the Longbottoms affected their child... > directly, becuase he was technically in utero? > > mhbobbin: Neville is born the day before Harry, so is one day older. In OotP,Chapter 37, page 842-Scholastic-- when DD explains the Prophecy, he explains to Harry there were two boys "born at the end of July that year". And recently JKR revealed on her website that Nevilles birthday is on July 30. I've been trying to figure out how long after the Potters were killed the Longbottoms were attacked. It doesn't seem to be specified anywhere, except it is implied that it is days, weeks, or months later, not within the mysterious 24 hours following. The two relevant chapters in GoF are "The Penseive" and "Padfoot Returns". Sirius talks about Barty Crouch Junior being brought into Azkaban-- Sirius is already in prison but how long?. Harry sees the three trials in DD's Penseive as Death Eaters are rounded up. Barty Junior has been caught with three DEs (The Lestranges) who had already avoided Azkaban (not definitive in timing). Some time would have had to pass for the DEs to realize LV was truly gone before the Longbottoms would have been tortured to find out what had happened to him. But I can't find anything more specific about the timing-- anyone remember anything else? mhbobbin From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 09:48:23 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:48:23 -0000 Subject: Why didn't the Longbottoms go into hiding? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110713 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "carodave92" wrote: > > > > Maybe the Longbottoms didn't go into hiding because, as Aurors, they > were actively hunting for LV (prior to the night in Godric's Hollow) > and then DEs (following that night). Neville could have been in > hiding with his Gran or someone else. However, just as a policeman > wouldn't hide from a felon who threatened his life, the Longbottoms > probably couldn't fade from the scene because of a threat. > > carodave mhbobbin writes: that makes sense that they had a job to do. Except that at the time LV goes after the Potters he seems to have been **winning** the war so it also wouldn't be surprising to learn that ones who feared they specifically might be targeted might not stick around to find out. LV was picking off OotP members one by one. And Sirius Black declined to be the Potters' secret keeper because he himself was planning to go into hiding. mhbobbin From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Aug 20 10:54:57 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 10:54:57 -0000 Subject: Death (was Re: Why now? (other books / series)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110714 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sevenhundredandthirteen" wrote: Laurasia: > Many heroes (who don't die) come back from their journeys > changed permanently by the situation- > In "Lord of The Rings" Frodo is destroyed by The One Ring > and can never return to the blissful ignorant life he once knew. In > destroying Voldemort Harry could be affected deeply. He might have > to surrender a part of his soul in order to destroy Voldemort. He > might have to take on a piece of Voldemort in himself to commit the > murder. If that happens, I would prefer to see Harry die, as opposed > to live a half-life until the ends of his days. Geoff: I have always said I want to see Harry survive. However, if you look at Frodo's case in the Lord of the Rings, he came back to Middle- Earth after the fall of Sauron and in fact remained at Bag End for just under two years. So he was able to spend time with his friends and see the way things were developing before he made the decision that he would be better off in mind and body by taking up Arwen's gift and sailing West to Valinor. I think I could live fairly happily with a scenario like that. I know that in many books and especially in modern real life, deaths happen abruptly but I would like to see a post-Voldemort Harry at least living for a time without that damned prophecy hanging over him and, if possible, for a bit longer than that.... From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Aug 20 11:04:22 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 11:04:22 -0000 Subject: Why now? (other books / series) In-Reply-To: <001d01c48647$a6538d30$0100a8c0@marmyscomputer> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110715 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Marleen" wrote: Becky: > > The end of the Lord of the Rings Trilogy ends in death-- only Sam, > > Pippin, and Merry seem to avoid it. Geoff: You presumably mean death in battle or something... Aragorn and Arwen continue in Gondor for 120 years after the defeat of Mordor, Eomer lived nearly 65 years more, Eowyn merried Faramir and they lived on in Ithilien... Becky: > >The grey havens, as nice as > > they seem-- well, I don't know. Geoff: They are the place from which the ships sail over the sea to Elvenhome where the Elves live a lissful existence. Frodo goes there (as I mentioned in message 110714) and Sam, Legolas and Gimli also went there after many years. Hardly ending in death as I think you meant it. The options are still open for Harry - well, not strictly true, but for those who speculate they are; the dealer of the answer is playing her cards close to her chest(!) From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 11:12:47 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 11:12:47 -0000 Subject: Depression ... in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110716 Psyche wrote : " it is natural to be depressed after a bereavement. That doesn't mean that it's not depression. And a natural depression like that can be exacerbated by other factors, such as time to brood. If a person with that kind of temporary depression shuts themself away and doesn't talk about it (which is largely what depressed people want to do!), it will probably get worse because they have nothing to stop them brooding. If they are able to occupy themselves and talk about how they feel, they will probably recover faster." Del replies : If this reminds me of anyone in OoP, it's Cho, not Harry. She's the one who's always brooding, who doesn't seem to be able to get out of her grief, who doesn't seem to find a way out of her sadness, who keeps falling into pieces all over the place, and who seems to feel better only when she's kept occupied. Harry isn't like that at all. Psyche wrote : "His sleep was disturbed by feelings of guilt, regret and anxiety. Which are all part and parcel of depression." Del replies : I disagree. Harry's sleep is rarely disturbed by anything, and when it is it's not by depression. During the summer he's got nightmares where he relives the graveyard scene, which I believe is a perfectly normal reaction to a traumatic event. And the rest of the year, the only thing that seems to disturb his sleep is those obsessive dreams about the Door at the end of the Corridor. In fact, I think it's remarkable how little guilt, anxiety and regret seem to bother him, especially at night. And I suppose what you suffered from was anxiety attacks, right ? My husband has those, it's not nice. Psyche wrote : " Del, your experience of depression seems to have been very much more severe than mine, and prolongued. Mine was a 'moderate' case. Your criteria for depression seem to be correspondingly more demanding. " Del replies : You gave us a list of criteria, and I just showed that IMO Harry doesn't fit most of them. In particular, he doesn't fit the one that you said he has to fit : he has *not* lost his ability to find pleasure. If Umbridge had not taken everything he likes away, he would still find as much pleasure in them as he used to. And even so, he still manages to find something else that gives him pleasure, such as going out with his girl (even if it always turns bad) and the DA. He has not lost his ability to find and feel pleasure, hence he's not depressed, according to the criteria you gave us. Psyche wrote : "However, I do think he's showing signs of more than mild depression. Not severe, I believe, but more than mild. " Del replies : As far as depression is concerned, I worried more during OoP about Sirius, Cho and Neville (well, I've worried about Neville right from the first book, that kid is holding too many things back for his own good). I was wondering at the end of GoF if Harry would manage, but when I read the beginning of OoP, I knew he wasn't on the way to depression, not in the near future anyway. He's remarkably *empty* of guilt and regret for one thing. Not that he should have any, since nothing that happened was his fault. But if he was indeed depressed, then he *would* be blaming himself for Cedric's death, which he doesn't. I can perfectly be wrong, of course. I'm just expressing my feelings, as we all do, right ? Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 12:19:05 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 12:19:05 -0000 Subject: Depression and Harry in OotP In-Reply-To: <41264BD9.5395.55DADA5@localhost> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110717 Shaun wrote : "I was perfectly capable of pleasure. I sought it out. And I found it. But *unless* I was actively enjoying myself, I rapidly slid into depression. And that's what I see in Harry. His 'default setting' seems depressed to me." Del replies : I guess we just don't see Harry the same way, because I don't see that his defaut setting has changed from the previous books. In my eyes, he has only added an alternative setting : anger. But when he's neither angry nor happy nor anything special, I just don't see that he's depressed. At least, no more than he was before OoP. Now if someone wants to make a case that Harry's been suffering from a sort of mild depression right from PS/SS, that's another thing entirely and I might agree. Shaun wrote : " in a minority of cases, the symptom of depression can actually be the reverse of the norm. While many depressives give up on food to an extent, for others it becomes a comfort." Del replies : I happen to know that very well from personal experience. It's even a warning sign between my husband and me : when I start eating too much junk food, that's a sure sign that depression is coming back. Quite often my husband will notice it before me ! But Harry doesn't seem to have any food-related problem of any kind. He doesn't starve himself, but he doesn't stuff himself either. He enjoys eating, but he always did and that's healthy. He has no problem skipping meals if he needs time to study, he doesn't look for opportunities to nick food from the kitchens, or whatever. If anyone has a food problem in the Trio, it's Ron : he's got an unhealthy love for sweets, and he never skips (and even actively looks for) opportunities to stuff himself. Shaun wrote : " being aware of your accomplishments may very easily be a defence mechanism to the feelings of guilt, or worthlessness, or low self-esteem that are common (though not universal) in depression. The mind tries to fight depression in many cases, consciously and unconsciously. If you're feeling low, you do often bring memories of past achievements to the fore. And they can help." Del replies : I understand that. But the thing is, Harry seems to have a healthy understanding of his accomplishments : he knows he's done great things (and gets upset when people seem to overlook that), but he's also aware that he's no superhero, and he gets upset when Ron and Hermione seem to see more in what he did than he himself does. Harry is pretty good as identifying what is his doing or not, in good things as in bad things : he knows he's beaten LV at the graveyard, but he also knows that he couldn't have done it without the help he received, and he also knows he could not have saved Cedric no matter what. He's not feeling either overly proud nor overly guilty. Doesn't sound like depression to me. Shaun wrote, about the inability to concentrate : "I suppose Binns' classes don't count (-8 But again, not universal. I often became hyperfocused when I was most depressed, rather than losing the ability to concentrate." Del replies : Well, if Binns's classes count, I guess pretty much every student in Harry's class is depressed, except for Hermione :-) As for hyperfocus, we don't see much of that either, except in the situations that require it. I, Del, wrote : " "Thoughts of death and suicide." I can't remember. Maybe it happened a few times, but it's nowhere as bad as it should get to be a symptom of depression. " Shaun answered : "I can't remember either - but seriously, *any* though of suicide in a teen is a potential symptom of depression to be taken very seriously if there are any other clear symptoms. By itself, the occasional thought probably isn't a big deal - but if there's anything else going on, it very well may be." Del replies : I agree that even an occasional thought of suicide is dangerous in a teenager. But neither of us seems to remember even a single time when it happened. The *only* time I can remember is when LV is possessing Harry in the MoM, and I wouldn't take it as a sign of depression. Shaun wrote : " And anger and frustration are common symptoms of depression - *especially* in teenage boys who have very few other socially acceptable ways of expressing depressed feelings." Del replies : You've got a point there. But still I'm not sure this anger can be taken as a sure sign of depression. I would take this anger for just what it is : anger and frustration at being called a liar and not being able to defend himself. Anyone would be angry in his situation, without any need to call in depression. Shaun wrote : "Honestly... considering what Harry saw at the end of Goblet of Fire, and the lack of opportunity he's had to process it (except for that one brief period with Molly Weasley at the end of Goblet of Fire - one of my favourite scenes in all the novels, because I know what experiences like that can do to you if you don't have that chance to let it out), I'd be quite surprised if he doesn't have a measure of depression - considering he does have frustration and anger, anyway." Del replies : As I said in another post, I was *expecting* Harry to experience some kind of depression at the end of GoF. But when I started OoP, I saw that JKR didn't seem to be taking him in that direction. I was actually quite surprised at how *little* he seemed to be feeling bad when awake. He's angry and frustrated, sure, and he even goes into an alternating pattern of overdrive and stupor after the Dementor attack, but he never seems to dwell on Cedric's death or on anything else. He's looking *forward*, he's in a *positive* mood concerning the war, he has a healthy dose of self-esteem, he's sure of his capacities, and so on. That was confusing to me at first, especially considering that we are told that he's got nightmares about the graveyard almost every night. And then I understood that the answer might be precisely that : his brain is processing the events at night, so Harry doesn't have to process them during the day. After all, we're talking about a boy who showed almost no sign of dysfunction after being abused for 10 years ! It's not such a strech to assume that he must have a very effective built-in coping mechanism. Del From miamibarb at BellSouth.net Fri Aug 20 12:21:33 2004 From: miamibarb at BellSouth.net (Barb Roberts) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 08:21:33 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why now? In-Reply-To: <20040819210122.94109.qmail@web52002.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040819210122.94109.qmail@web52002.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <7912341F-F2A3-11D8-AF82-000A95DC8A32@bellsouth.net> No: HPFGUIDX 110718 Bee Chase wrote: > ...Whenever before has an author had to deal with this kind of fan > reaction while in the midst of writing her novels? She knows we will > not be happy and she is trying to prepare our minds for what is > coming. She has already joked about having to go into hiding when she > has revealed things the fan base was dreading... > Hmm...actually, the fan reaction is quite reminiscent of the public reaction that Dickens received during his lifetime. Dickens published novels chapter by chapter in magazines. The public went nuts *really nuts* waiting for the appearance of some of his installments too. Of course Dickens didn't have to deal with the Internet, and JKR does. Now I am curious to whether JRK will be using the results from her polls to make minor modifications in her next two books? Or is she is just keeping us occupied while she finishes her next book and at the same time put an end to our false speculations? If the former, was the win of the Evans question, in reality, a messed up a fact-seeking poll? This may explain her "take my family in hiding" joke. Her response to the win leads me to think that she may have been more interested to see our reaction to the other two questions. After all she does have the twins doing "market studies" in OotP, so I wouldn't be surprised if she is doing the same. We will see. Barbara Roberts (Ivogun) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 12:31:57 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 12:31:57 -0000 Subject: Good Writing (was Why now?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110719 Laurasia wrote : "If JKR is a good writer, the ending should feel inevitable and the only possible way in which the events preceeding it could ever be resolved. (snip) This, I think, is why Sirius's death was deemed 'sloppy writing' by some fans. Because, as yet, we can see dozens of possible ways out of Sirius's death, and, as yet, not many ways it could possibly actually benefit the story." Del replies : Yep, Sirius's death was exactly my objection to your former paragraph : the events that led to it were *not* shown to be inevitable. There were *so many* ways in which Harry could have done things differently ! My personal pet peeve being that if Harry could get his head at GP, and if he didn't intend to take his friends with him to the MoM, and if he was in such a hurry to get to London, then why on Earth didn't he take *all of himself* to GP, and checked on his own whether Sirius was there or not ??? And that's only *one* example of the kind of things that seemed *logical* to do and yet Harry didn't do them, and we are *not* given a good reason of why he didn't think of them. So if Book 7 turns out the same way, then I can understand that some people would be frustrated. But personally, I just have to look at PoA and GoF, at how tightly the plot was written, how logically the events were following each other, and I regain my faith in JKR. I for now choose to decide that PoA and GoF were the norm, and that OoP is the exception, and that HBP and Book 7 will follow the norm :-) Del From romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 09:51:49 2004 From: romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com (romuluslupin1) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:51:49 -0000 Subject: An out-there Snape theory? In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.2.20040816190935.0173c9d0@mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110720 Lissa: >(Just for the record, Sirius and Remus are the only male/male couple >I ship, although I'll entertain the amusing notion that Snape is in >love with Remus as opposed to Lily. I don't think either's really >true, but I can really make the pieces fit for that one. I mention >it because my junior high kids accused me of thinking everyone's >gay. ::Sigh:: ) Must be a catching disease. My niece says the same thing about me ;-) I was thinking, we all know Regulus Black was a Slyth, right? And so was Snape (probably). Their ages can't be all that much far apart for Regulus (who was younger than Sirius) to have been a DE and killed by LV. Even if we go with the highest possible age for Sirius (taking JKR comment that Snape, and therefore Sirius, was 35ish in PS instead of GOF) and the lowest possible age for Regulus (let's say he became a DE and was killed within a year from leaving Hogwarts) they can't be more than 7 years apart, probably much less. Which means Snape met Regulus when they where both at school. I think Snap's the one who enlisted Reggie as a DE. I think he befriended Regulus thinking he could get back at Sirius somehow, at least at first, and then he fell in love with him. After all good looks seem to run in the Black family, if Snape is gay Regulus is a more likely candidate as a love interest than Sirius (or James or Lupin). Anyway, a few weeks ago I was helping my niece study for her history exam. I tested her on the subject of WWII and how I Hitler was paying families to have lots of nice Arian children to populate Germany (or was that Mussolini and Italy?). Well, anyway, Hitler was taking the "go forth and multiply" command very seriously (although twisted to suit his agenda. He even sent gays to Auschwitz and other similar places to be exterminated together with other "lesser races" (his idea, not mine). And I was struck with a (probably farfetched) idea: what if LV did the same? We know there is *one* DE LV (had) killed because he refused to follow orders. What if he ordered Reggie to marry a nice, pureblood, female DE (or DE relative) and he was zapped. *This* is why Severus turned traitor on his former master, that's the story he told DD. He loved Regulus, the only one who loved him back, and he died because of that love. Regulus became a DE to make Snape happy and this caused his death. No wonder Severus wants revenge against LV and his henchmen. All in my opinion, of course. Remulus Lupin, who's not sure if he made a lick of sense and ask forgiveness for his ramblings. My only excuse is that I'm not an English speaker and expressing "philosophical" concepts in another language isn't always easy From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Aug 20 12:32:47 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 12:32:47 -0000 Subject: James' Invisibility Cloak (was Alastor, and James' money, and godmother/marriage In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110721 Catlady wrote: > > > > Q: "Where did James get his Invisibility Cloak?" > > JKR: "That was inherited from his own father -- a family heirloom!" > > Romulus Lupin: > > Ok, things might be different in the Potterverse, but I thought you > could only inherit from someone who was dead, right? snip> DD tells Harry (don't remember where) that his > father used the IC to nick food from the kitchen and Lupin in POA > tells Harry WPP used it to reach the Whomping Willow undetected > (paraphrased) so he did have it at school. I don't get it... > > Potioncat: I think JKR used the word inherit as in "passed down." Sometimes parents pass down family heirlooms to their children while the children can use them, or after the parent doesn't really have a need for the heirloom. Perhaps the Potters are a long line of rule breakers and it is family tradition to give the son the IC while at school. From phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk Fri Aug 20 11:17:24 2004 From: phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk (Kate Harding) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 11:17:24 -0000 Subject: Depression and Harry in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110722 My word, this thread is getting scholarly! Maybe we should all think about collaborating on a paper for Accio 2005. Brenda: > This cognitive view described above was originally proposed by > psychiatrist Aaron Beck. psyche: Yes indeed, god bless him. I would have been in a right muddle without cognitive techniques. Thanks for the details and references - my psychology degree is 10 year further away than yours, and I can't put my finger on relevant studies etc. Brenda: > Of course, these are merely psychogenic factors for mental > disorders. > Well I'll wait till we scan Harry's brain and see if there is any > significant tissue loss in his fronto-limbic cortex (around > anterior cingulated and orbito-frontal cortex)! :D psyche: Interestingly, you and I seem to come at this from different angles, presumably because you're coming at it from the neuroscience side, while I'm coming at it more from the psychotherapeutic side. You seem to see the cognitive processes as a kind of shadow play projected over the 'real' neurological processes. I see the neurological processes being merely the chemical results of the cognitive and emotional problems. The distinction doesn't really matter, of course, because the two processes run in parallel, so the direction of causation is irrelevant (oh dear, the philosopher coming out in me). I'm only really commenting because I wouldn't want people to get the impression that the mentally ill are somehow medically or genetically a different or inferior kind of person - anyone can suffer depression, two famous examples being Churchill and Lincoln. (I know you weren't implying that, but I really want to be clear, because there's so much stigma attached to these illnesses). Brenda: > What I have realized, after composing this long and `encyclopedic' > post, is that Harry is more likely exhibiting very early stages of > depression. psyche: I think the idea of 'early stages' is a bit of a red herring, because it's defined by what happens next. He may recover, or he may get worse, depending on his choices and the reactions of those around him. But if he recovers, that doesn't mean he didn't have depression. Simply that it didn't progress to be a *severe* case. For example, the fact that I was lucky enough to realise I had a problem and get help before I reached the suicidal stage, doesn't mean that I didn't have depression. Perhaps the mild/moderate/severe distinction is a better way of looking at it. People can go from mild to severe, or severe to mild and then all the way out. Most people who go through a patch of depression as a result of life events recover as those events are lifted. I think Harry's gone a little past this point - I think his depression has begun to feed on itself. But I don't think he's gone any further than I did, which means he can still recover fast with the right help. The problem is that he doesn't know he needs help, because he doesn't know he's depressed, and he's not talking to anyone about it. I may be wrong, though - perhaps he'll come out of it as he finds ways to *do* something about his situation and about LV. Brenda: > Although I > must ask you, Psyche, where did you find evidences of depression in > PoA? Or you just meant the chills when the Dementors drew near? psyche: Sorry if I gave the wrong impression - I didn't mean to imply that Harry was depressed in PoA. I don't think I remember him showing any signs of depression before OotP. I was just talking about the dementors. For example, that feeling they produce, that you 'will never be happy again', is very characteristic of depression. Jo has said that the dementors were 'about depression' rather than just fear. That's all I was talking about - that her writing of their effects was informed by her experience of depression. Brenda: > It is very > much possible that Harry is in fact starting to suffer from what > Muggles call `clinical depression'; however if he is it is still > very primitive and he will fight it without realizing. His much- > returned selfless and sacrificial love from friends and others will > help him through it. psyche: This seems like a fair analysis. Although I would be worried about his tendency to blame himself and his unwillingness to talk about his feelings - both could keep him down there longer than he needs to be. Dreadnought: > It's normal to be depressed if bad things are happening to you. > Depressive illness (not the best term, perhaps, but I don't want to > get into semantics) is when you are depressed even when nothing bad > is happening to you. psyche: Firstly, thanks, Dreadnought for your really well-argued post! It's reassuring to know that others have had the same intuition about this as I have. I think your distinction is a helpful way of looking at it (with the proviso that we're looking at a continuum). The question then is, to paraphrase Brenda, whether Harry's natural depression following the death of Cedric etc and his long dark night (summer) of the soul at the Dursleys will alleviate naturally or go on to develop into a more prolonged problem. It didn't just go away after being rescued from the Dursleys - he continued to have depressive feelings, and continues to have bouts of it throughout the book. Probably too early to tell whether he is recovering or not. psyche From phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk Fri Aug 20 11:36:07 2004 From: phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk (Kate Harding) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 11:36:07 -0000 Subject: Depression ... in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110723 Del: > If this reminds me of anyone in OoP, it's Cho, not Harry. She's the > one who's always brooding, who doesn't seem to be able to get out of > her grief, who doesn't seem to find a way out of her sadness, who > keeps falling into pieces all over the place, and who seems to feel > better only when she's kept occupied. Harry isn't like that at all. psyche: I think the difference between them boils down to this: Cho is more obviously upset, so *seems* to have taken it worse, because she is more comfortable expressing her emotions. Harry seems extremely uncomfortable showing emotion. For example (sorry I don't have time to locate the quotes) the times when Molly or others hug him and he feels a welling up of something that he can't identify and isn't prepared to give into. He doesn't understand his emotions and can't express them. For this reason, while Cho *looks* like a worse case, I think she's healing just fine - crying is a coping mechanism after all. But Harry is supressing, not dealing. He expects emotion to be logical (which is why he can't understand Cho's behaviour) and this shows how little he understands his own emotion - anyone in tune with their emotion knows it's not logical. Del: > And the rest of the year, the only > thing that seems to disturb his sleep is those obsessive dreams > about the Door at the end of the Corridor. psyche: Yes. At this point I think he's going through an active patch, where he has plenty to distract him, and so his depression is going through a hiatus. I'm especially talking about the early parts of the book, and a few relapses later. As others (apologies, no time to check who) have said, these feelings come and go in many cases. I won't respond to your other points, because I think others have already done so better than I could! Del: > And I suppose what you suffered from was anxiety attacks, right ? My > husband has those, it's not nice. psyche: Yes, anxiety problems were part of my depression, though thankfully I never had a full blown panic attack. Closest I came was one time when I got the feeling of the walls closing in, at which point I realised I was about to have a panic attack and got myself a paper bag to breathe into! My anxiety mostly took the form of horrible nameless dread. I feel for your husband - what I went through was bad enough, and as I say, I was only a moderate case. Del: > I can perfectly be wrong, of course. I'm just expressing my feelings, > as we all do, right ? psyche: Absolutely! And ditto. psyche From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 20 13:00:14 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:00:14 -0400 Subject: Death Message-ID: <001701c486b5$a2dd2120$7ac2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 110724 Laurasia "The end of OotP where Harry sits alone by the lake suggests that he may well follow down this path. Harry doesn't share the details of his fate with Ron and Hermione, he has taken the burden on alone, which to me suggests he might carry it alone until the end of time." DuffyPoo: Harry hasn't told Ron and Hermione yet. In a World Bookday Chat from March 2004, the question was asked: "Will Harry tell Neville about the Prophesy? to which JKR replied, "Harry will tell his nearest and dearest about the prophecy when he's ready. He needs time to digest the news himself first." Laurasia "I don't want Harry to be alone for the rest of his life." DuffyPoo: Which is why my vote is for someone else, other than HP, to be 'the one' in the prophecy. Harry has put up with so much fame, notoriety, etc. already, I can just imagine what he would become if he then turned out to be the one who has to do the vanquishing of the Supreme Evil Power of the Universe, as well. He would have to go into hiding, with ten Fidelius Charms in place. But if someone like Neville, or Wormtail, or Derek were the one who had to finish off LV, HP would still be the hero of all he has so far accomplished, but 'the one' would be the hero of the vanquisment only, which would be quite enough, IMO. They wouldn't have all the build up to deal with as well as the hero worship for the task. Both HP and 'whoever' could go on living quite normal lives. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 13:06:09 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 13:06:09 -0000 Subject: Depression and Harry in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110725 Psyche wrote : "Most people who go through a patch of depression as a result of life events recover as those events are lifted. I think Harry's gone a little past this point - I think his depression has begun to feed on itself." Del replies : What exactly makes you feel that ? I personally get the feeling that if he wasn't permanently called a liar, and if he could fight LV, then Harry's condition would improve dramatically. The way I see it, Harry keeps feeling bad because the events that make him feel bad are *never* lifted. LV is still out there, the WW keeps refusing to believe Harry, Umbridge keeps doing her best to make his life miserable. Harry is attacked from everywhere (including his own classmate in his own dormitory !), so of course he's not being overly happy. Psyche wrote : " Although I would be worried about his tendency to blame himself and his unwillingness to talk about his feelings " Del replies : I don't see that Harry tends to blame himself particularly. He gets paranoid upon hearing that he's possessed by LV, but then who wouldn't ? As for being unwilling to talk about his feelings, I'd say he's just like everyone else on that one : none of the kids seems to be willing to talk. Except maybe Cho. Neville in particular has always kept everything to himself, and nobody ever seemed to find that strange. Psyche wrote : " It didn't just go away after being rescued from the Dursleys - he continued to have depressive feelings, and continues to have bouts of it throughout the book." Del replies : After being rescued, he went to live in a Dark house, where he spent his days fighting Dark Magic. LV was out there, but those who were fighting him refused to include Harry in the fight. He was threatened with expulsion from Hogwarts. And so on. No wonder he was still feeling low ! And his circumstances became barely better when he went to Hogwarts and they steadily got worse as time went by. After a while, many people at school joined in the unhappiness, both among the kids and the teachers. Umbridge made life miserable for a lot of people, and she put a special emphasis on ruining Harry's life. I'm not surprised at all that he would feel bad about it. But I argue that it was only those nasty circumstances that made him feel bad, not mild depression feeding on itself. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 13:18:31 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 13:18:31 -0000 Subject: Depression ... in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110726 Psyche wrote : "I think the difference between them boils down to this: Cho is more obviously upset, so *seems* to have taken it worse, because she is more comfortable expressing her emotions. Harry seems extremely uncomfortable showing emotion. (snip) For this reason, while Cho *looks* like a worse case, I think she's healing just fine - crying is a coping mechanism after all. But Harry is supressing, not dealing." Del replies : We could get into a girl/boy discussion over this, with the stereotype of girls coping better by talking and being over-emotional and boys coping better by acting and keeping silent. But what I really want to object to is when you say that Cho is healing just fine. I'm not so sure. Almost everything she does throughout the year shows that she's completely off-balance. When Hermione says that she keeps falling apart all over the place, it seems obvious to me that she's reached a point where her depression is preventing her from functioning properly. It's even interfering with her usually pleasurable activities, such as Quidditch : she's always been a rather good player, but Hermione says that lately she's been playing so badly that she's afraid of being thrown out of the team. And Hermione says that around Christmas, 6 months after Cedric's death. A depression that lasts that long in a teenager is dangerous. And we see no sign that Cho gets better later. So really I would say that Cho is coping much worse than Harry. Del From ms_melanie1999 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 14:05:08 2004 From: ms_melanie1999 at yahoo.com (Miss Melanie) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 07:05:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Depression and Harry in OotP -- Information In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040820140508.70346.qmail@web53406.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110727 Brenda wrote: Of course I remember your supposition that Sirius appears to be clinically depressed. If I were to choose a depressed character from Potterverse it will definitely be Sirius, not Harry. But now that Sirius has moved onto `the next great adventure', hopefully he has tasted some real joy in (after)life! My (Melanie) reply: I agree that Sirius had spouts of depression but I have always thought that Sirius seemed to be ADD. He seemed completely impulsive and prone to fits of rage and tantrums. Also there is the fact that he hated being locked up in house, had a major inferiority complex. While those traits are not always found in people with ADHD they certainly are quite common. ~Melanie --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Aug 20 14:09:36 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 14:09:36 -0000 Subject: Good Writing (was Why now?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110728 > Kneasy wrote: > > Remember - these books were not conceived with a fan-base in the hundreds of millions in mind and it's totally impossible for all of us to get the ending we want. < It's also impossible for all of us to get the level of detail we want, which is why I think JKR is communicating more publicly with the fans. I think she's facing the end of the series and realizing that there are a whole lot of things her fans would be delighted to know, but just can't be crammed into the books without boring the average reader to tears, I mean, who, outside the fandom, gives a hoot about Ron's middle name? I do agree that she's also managing our expectations, but is she managing them so that we'll see what's coming, or so that we won't? On the evidence of Phoenix, I'd say the latter. For all the weighing and bagging of evidence that went on here at HPFGU, for all that we were told OOP would be a dark book and that someone close to Harry would die, it was still a shock. And that was very much the effect that JKR intended. She *still*does not want first time readers of OOP to know that Sirius is doomed, although, if you reread the books from PoA on knowing that, there's so much foreshadowing that he might as well have a neon sign that says "goner" over his head. But she was very careful to make sure it could all be interpreted as misdirection--we were so glad those death omens weren't for Harry that it never occurred to most of us that they could be for ::sob:: Sirius himself. So when she says "keep your eye on Petunia" or "keep your eye on Snape" that is like the wave of the magician's wand. Very likely we will learn something interesting about those characters, but it won't be what we think it is. Laurasia: > > This, I think, is why Sirius's death was deemed 'sloppy writing' by some fans. Because, as yet, we can see dozens of possible ways out of Sirius's death, and, as yet, not many ways it could possibly actually benefit the story.< Herself has said that we will understand why Sirius had to die, and I believe her. For now it is a mystery on several levels, especially if you accept the premise that we don't really know who killed him. But, IMO, Harry's decision to go to the DoM was only peripheral--we are going to understand in the end, I believe, that the central and critical cause of Sirius's death was his refusal to free Kreacher. That is what makes it tragedy and not melodrama. But in a series about choices, it is utterly necessary that we be convinced that heroes, even *the* hero, can make bad ones--otherwise there is no jeopardy. Pippin From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 14:23:39 2004 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 14:23:39 -0000 Subject: Ginny - Guinevere? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110729 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kate Harding" wrote: > On a much lighter note than my recent posts, I realised when I was > waking up this morning that Ginny has the same name as Guinevere. Her > full name is Ginevra: Ginevra, Genevieve and Jennifer are all > (according to my name etymology book) localised versions of Guinevere. > > Probably completely irrelevant, since we have no way of knowing > whether that was Jo's intention. > > psyche And of course, there's Arthur Weasley, as well as Percy, who may or may not be named Percival. There's been some discussion of this topic, but no firm conclusions, I think. There are all sorts of possible resonances for the Arthurian connection--the major one being simply to reinforce the Weasley's Englishness, and the fact that these are the good guys... There's also the fact that her name means "white and smooth" in Welsh. Which could have all sorts of meanings... From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Aug 20 14:27:41 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 14:27:41 -0000 Subject: Could Sirius have been bipolar? Re: Depression and Harry in OotP -- Information In-Reply-To: <20040820140508.70346.qmail@web53406.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110730 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Miss Melanie wrote: > Brenda wrote: > Of course I remember your supposition that Sirius appears to be clinically depressed. If I were to choose a depressed character from Potterverse it will definitely be Sirius, not Harry. < Sirius's mood changed so completely between GoF and the beginning of OOP that some people thought he was completely out of character. But what if he were bipolar? Any comments from our mental health experts on that possibility? Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Aug 20 14:35:33 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 14:35:33 -0000 Subject: Depression ... in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110731 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: . A depression that lasts that long in a teenager is dangerous. > And we see no sign that Cho gets better later. So really I would say that Cho is coping much worse than Harry. > She seems to be doing okay by the end. When she passes Harry in the train corridor, she blushes instead of bursting into tears. She's started a new relationship with Michael Corner, and she's stuck by Marietta, which I have to admire, even though I don't admire Marietta herself very much. Pipin From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Aug 20 14:37:11 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 14:37:11 -0000 Subject: Why now? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110732 Kneasy wrote: snip > The fans seem to be developing definite expectations - about this > character or that; about the solution to this puzzle or that; for this resolution or that. So much so that some are getting pretty involved or even dogmatic about it. Some no longer say "I think this might happen.." they say "This will not happen" or "I experienced this, I know about this, so I'm an expert." snip > > Remember - these books were not conceived with a fan-base in the > hundreds of millions in mind and it's totally impossible for all of us to get the ending we want. Me - I'm already getting prepared. I can think of three endings that would satisfy me - and all of them have low probabilities of coming to pass. So it's likely that I'll re-read volumes 1-6 fairly frequently and pass the final one on to a Charity shop. I expect to read it just once. > Unless she surprises me, of course. > But I'm not very optimistic about that. > Potioncat: Oh, Kneasy, you are an optimist. You do know what an optimist is? When the situation is at its darkest and someone says, "It can't get any worse." The optimist comes back with, "Oh, yes it can!" In the beginning this was all new and fun. It was "Oh, look at this pun!" and "Gee, this was foreshadowed in book 1" and "Where have I heard the name Black before?" And the with the long wait for the next book fans became restless. They began to find one another and bounce theories off each other. (sometimes painfully) Will the next book confirm or destroy our theories? What new things will happen? If this... then that...? Suddenly fans are reading up on mythology, researching word roots, and reading Jane Austen. At some point, as you said, it went from "I wonder if..." to "It just has to be..." Then (for me) along came Mark Evans and ruined it all. How could something so obivious be so wrong? (Choose what is right over what is easy?) So I'm stepping back (yes I am, see, one centimeter back) and trying to enjoy the puzzle without ruining it. Trying more to find what is there rather than looking for what will be. Will I be disapointed? I don't know. It will be either be "Wow, I didn't expect that!" or "What? I didn't expect that." or "Hey, I was right all along!" Now we have JKR joining in. I'm not sure yet if that is good or bad. I'd rather she stay at work on the book! If anything her clues leave me more confused. (As if that's possible!) What I do believe is that in a few years, after book 7 has come and survived the hype. After the movies are "old" someone will pick up book 1 and enjoy it. Go to book 2, start to see the puns, the clues and rush to get book 3. Those readers will have the fun of guessing and getting it right (or wrong), but will work their way through pretty quickly. The rest of us will remember how awful it was to wait between books and how much fun it was to struggle with the clues and argue with the other fans. And I'll bet most of us will still be re-reading all 7 books. Just not as often. Potioncat (who remembers waiting for each next book in the Merlin series by Mary Stewart, but didn't have anyone to discuss it with) From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 14:53:11 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 14:53:11 -0000 Subject: Depression ... in OotP - Cho In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110733 Pippin wrote : " Cho seems to be doing okay by the end. When she passes Harry in the train corridor, she blushes instead of bursting into tears. She's started a new relationship with Michael Corner, and she's stuck by Marietta, which I have to admire, even though I don't admire Marietta herself very much." Del replies : I understand why Marrietta did what she did, and I can't really blame her : the girl was stuck between two diametrically opposed loyalties. I think JKR had fun with us once again on that one : she kept us focused on Zacharias Smith as the potential traitor, when Marrietta was just as likely, if not even more. After all, she did *not* want to come and to enter the DA, that was very obvious right from the beginning. If we'd known her mom was working for the Ministry, we would probably have realised she was the one set up to betray. As for Cho, I guess you're right and she's finally getting better by the end of the year. I wonder how much Marrietta's betrayal counted in that recovery ? After all, Cho was forced to reconsider many of her own choices, and to decide where she was going. The fact that she both stuck by Marrietta and kept going to the DA seems to indicate that she'd managed to reach some new balance in her life, unlike when she forced her best friend to follow the boy she fancied (and with whom she should never have gone out with under the circumstances she was in, but that's another story). Del From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 16:10:23 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 16:10:23 -0000 Subject: Good Writing (was Why now?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110734 [snip snip snip] Pippin wrote: > Herself has said that we will understand why Sirius had to die, > and I believe her. For now it is a mystery on several levels, > especially if you accept the premise that we don't really know > who killed him. But, IMO, Harry's decision to go to the DoM was > only peripheral--we are going to understand in the end, I believe, > that the central and critical cause of Sirius's death was his > refusal to free Kreacher. That is what makes it tragedy and not > melodrama. > dcgmck: Ah, but has Sirius indeed died in the sense that one normally understands death, in a terminal, end-of-communications way? Is further reference to that bit of mirror another red herring? What is with that Veil? (I do agree that we don't really know what killed Sirius.) What I don't agree with is that his refusal to free Kreacher made his death inevitable. In fact, didn't Sirius want to send Kreacher forever from GP, along with all the other memorabilia of his ancestors? It was, in fact, Dumbledore who said that Kreacher could not be released because he knew too much. From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 16:19:48 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 16:19:48 -0000 Subject: Good Writing (was Why now?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110735 [snip snip] Laurasia wrote: > There will hopefully be a point of no return in which, if anyone > turns back, Voldemort will rule over the world forever. Not many > fans want that. And I think he will be overcome. Surely that one > simple fact is what the books are leading us up to. If JKR is a good > writer every step along the way was leading us up to Voldemort's > downfall. And that means whatever consequences occur after he is > destroyed are only the necessary outcomes of acheiving the one most > important goal. dcgmck: Ah, now you're selecting an ending: that Voldemort (or any human) must die. JKR has said that there will be another death, and that it will be very sad. That doesn't preclude the possibility that neither Harry nor LV/TR will actually die. A third alternative to the dilemma presented Harry and, by extension, the readers is an eternal struggle in which the representatives of good and evil neither die nor are able to live any kind of "normal" existence. Instead, they take their conflict to another plane/dimension. Veil, anyone? From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 20 16:21:57 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 16:21:57 -0000 Subject: Could Sirius have been bipolar? Re: Depression and Harry in OotP -- Information In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110736 Brenda wrote: > > Of course I remember your supposition that Sirius appears to > be clinically depressed. If I were to choose a depressed > character from Potterverse it will definitely be Sirius, not Harry. < Pippin: > Sirius's mood changed so completely between GoF and the > beginning of OOP that some people thought he was completely > out of character. But what if he were bipolar? Any comments > from our mental health experts on that possibility? SSSusan: Not a mental health expert, but way back about 20 years ago I did get my BS in psych and 15 years ago my MS in counseling. My understanding of bipolar disorder--and the BIGGEST mistake I think lay people tend to make--is that the mood swings associated with it are *not* short-term, like from Monday to Tuesday. The swings are deep and can last days, weeks or months. [PLEASE correct me, *real* psychologists, if I've got that wrong!] The manic phases are typically marked by an "I can do ANYTHING!" feeling and rash or impulsive behavior [such as monstrous shopping sprees]. The depressive phases, which again, are not hour by hour or day by day, but lengthy phases, we're more familiar with--typically true clinical depression, I believe. I definitely can see why people have seen Sirius as having acted clinically depressed in OoP. "Rash" and "impulsive" are words we've heard a lot about Sirius, too, but have these been actual phases with him, or is it more just his overall personality? Experts want to chime in? From barbara_mbowen at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 16:33:16 2004 From: barbara_mbowen at yahoo.com (barbara_mbowen) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 16:33:16 -0000 Subject: Depression in OOP Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110737 This is an excellent thread. I have to say, I pretty much agree with psyche that Harry shows signs of depression in OOP, although I do agree also with Del that he's been showing slight signs of it all along. What is he most afraid of? It should be Voldemort, but instead, it's the Dementors. What do the dementors represent? Lupin thinks it's fear, but JKR has said they represent depression. They suck the happiness out of people, make them obsess over their worst memories, and then drive them mad. I think Harry is at great risk for depression through out the books, and part of what so appeals to readers about him is how well he manages to fend it off. But in OOP, he did seem to stumble. I don't just mean his rages. But when he had to summon his patronus to fight off those dementors, it took him three tries: "Another wisp of of silver smoke, feebler than the last, drifted from the wand-- he couldn't do it anymore, he couldn't work the spell-- .........Think...something happy... But there was no happiness in him....The dementor's icy fingers were closing on his throat..." (OOp, American edition, p.18, ) Where is the kid who could fend off 100 dementors at the end of Prisoner of Azkaban? He can barely manage to fend off two, and one of them even has its hands around his throat when he does. Harry is having a hard, bad time. And then there's that time in GoF where he goes and hangs out with the owls, to get away from it all (p.539-540). To me, this reeked of sadness and weariness. Of course Harry has every right to be sad, weary, angry and very much *depressed*. It is very much situational depression, he would be crazy *not* to feel this way. So it seems to me that Harry has always been at high risk for depression (abused child, orphan, social outcast until he reaches Hogwarts, and even at Hogwarts singled out for abuse by people like Malfoy and Snape). Harry has us all rooting so very hard for him because he is fighting all this. He is like a Dickensian orphan against the cold, cruel world, only the wizarding world is even colder and crueler than 19th century London, where there were at least no Voldemorts. Harry's pillars are Ron and Hermione, Dumbledore and Sirius. They keep him sane and as happy as he can be under the circumstances. Losing one of those pillars was an excruciating blow. We can only hope he doesn't lose any of the other three. Barbara (Marmelade's Mom) who has been situationally depressed and been married to a chemically (clinically) depressed man From drliss at comcast.net Fri Aug 20 16:23:08 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (drliss at comcast.net) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 16:23:08 +0000 Subject: Another Snape Theory Message-ID: <082020041623.8206.4126256C0004F9070000200E22007354469C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 110738 Romulus: We know there is *one* DE LV (had) killed because he refused to follow orders. What if he ordered Reggie to marry a nice, pureblood, female DE (or DE relative) and he was zapped. *This* is why Severus turned traitor on his former master, that's the story he told DD. He loved Regulus, the only one who loved him back, and he died because of that love. Regulus became a DE to make Snape happy and this caused his death. No wonder Severus wants revenge against LV and his henchmen. All in my opinion, of course. Lissa: Funny. I was actually coming up with a Snape/Regulus theory as well, although it was much darker and less romantic. What if Snape was the one who killed Regulus? Sirius claims to hate his family, and probably does for the most part, but he's still very bitter, and very hurt by the entire lack-of-family type thing he's got going. It's one thing to not agree with your family, or to fight with them- it's another thing to cut them out of your life all together and never speak to them again. (Are you listening, Percy Weasley?) And as Kreacher keeps saying that Sirius broke his mother's heart, I suspect it wasn't as easy as Sirius would like us to believe. (Or would like himself to believe.) He knows, at least, that Voldemort himself didn't kill Regulus. Maybe he's heard enough to know that Snape was the one that carried out the orders? I agree when people say the hatred seems very personal on both sides, and this certainly happened well after they despised each other, but I can see where that would only add fuel to the fire. Of course, like so many of my speculations, there's no real evidence for it. ::sigh:: (Although it gets fun when you toss the Snape-is-an-illegitimate-Black theory into it, doesn't it?) (Incidentally, off-topic for this thread but not for the list, I don't think Sirius's death was a result of sloppy writing at all. It's frustrating because it COULD have been prevented, and yet, I think that was exactly JKR's point. Everything's obvious in hindsight, and we can't predict the outcome of our decisions. It was sad it happened, but sadly, it was realistic. Well, as realistic as being shot in the chest with a spell and falling through a portal to another realm are going to be, anyway!) Lissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cruthw at earthlink.net Fri Aug 20 17:22:45 2004 From: cruthw at earthlink.net (caspenzoe) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 17:22:45 -0000 Subject: Hagrid's potential off-spring (was re: Hagrid's parents) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110739 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Josh Warren" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "garybec" > wrote: > > Lycaea wrote: the one thing we want to know is: how the hell did they > > have sex? > > Becki's thoughts on the subject; what the heck did he > > see in her? Josh > I'll admit to having considered _both_ topics way too often, but I'm > surprised the womenfolk didn't consider the implications of Hagrid's > querying Madame Maxime about _which_ of her parents was the giant! > This evidently worse both ways people! Forget the pencils... > > I guess in Grawp's case, we can only hope he had one ugly father. We > do have a rather singular example of the giants in canon, so it might > not be fair to make too many assumptions. However, I do seem to > recall Grawp being the runt of the litter. *gulp* Add _that_ to your > musings! > > Josh Let's take it a step further: What do the laws of genetics say about the potential products of a Hagrid/Mme Maxime pairing? Assuming that both Hagred and Maxime are 1/2 giant, couldn't this produce some purely genetically giant off- spring, as well as some purely genetically human off-spring, and/or any combination in between? If this theory is correct, isn't the Hagrid/Maxime pairing a really bad idea? From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Aug 20 17:23:33 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 17:23:33 -0000 Subject: Good Writing (was Why now?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110740 > dcgmck: > Ah, but has Sirius indeed died in the sense that one normally understands death, in a terminal, end-of-communications way? Is further reference to that bit of mirror another red herring? What is with that Veil? (I do agree that we don't really know what killed Sirius.)< Pippin: Well, he seems to have missed out on the foul, rotting corpse part, but yeah, I think he is conventionally dead, or as dead as anyone gets in the Potterverse, where the dead whom we love never truly leave us. dcmck: > What I don't agree with is that his refusal to free Kreacher made his death inevitable. In fact, didn't Sirius want to send Kreacher forever from GP, along with all the other memorabilia of his ancestors? It was, in fact, Dumbledore who said that Kreacher could not be released because he knew too much.< Pippin: Did Dumbledore say that? I only remember Sirius saying it: "If you could just set him free," said Hermione hopefully, "maybe--" "We can't set him free, he knows too much about the Order," said Sirius curtly. "And anyway, the shock would kill him. You suggest to him that he leave this house, see how he takes it." -- OOP ch6 How Kreacher was supposed to betray anybody if he was dead of shock, Sirius didn't explain. You can see he didn't really put much thought into it...typical Sirius, I must say. and later.. "[Hermione] was quite right, Harry," said Dumbledore. "I warned Sirius when we adopted twelve Grimmauld Place as our headquarters that Kreacher must be treated with kindness and respect. I also told him that Kreacher could be dangerous to us. I do not think that Sirius took me very seriously, or that he ever saw Kreacher as a being with feelings as acute as a human's--" [...] "Sirius did not hate Kreacher," said Dumbledore. "He regarded him as a servant unworthy of much interest or notice. Indifference and neglect often do more damage than outright dislike." --OOP ch 37 Maybe no amount of kindness and respect would have made any difference to Kreacher, but we don't know, because Sirius never gave him the choice. It's horribly ironic that Sirius, who of all people ought to feel some empathy with a captive, wasn't able to do so. Pippin From tigerfan41 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 17:28:27 2004 From: tigerfan41 at yahoo.com (Darrell Harris) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 10:28:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Digest Number 5122 In-Reply-To: <1093012656.19714.62448.m19@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20040820172827.87123.qmail@web52510.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110741 Maybe I'm just addled but I don't remember anywhere in the books that says Lilly did anything more overt than give her life in defence of Harry. Could someone point me to the location that states she performed a specific spell, charm or other act to provide a specific old magic protection to Harry prior to the attack. I know there are hints ( She had a wand good for charms etc.) but I can't find anywhere that makes me think she prepared in advance to die to give Harry a special shield. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From lszydlowski at hotmail.com Fri Aug 20 17:32:12 2004 From: lszydlowski at hotmail.com (mizstorge) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 17:32:12 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Sirius/Remus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110742 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Dicentra spectabilis" wrote: Remus as human is not more wolf-like than he would have > been sans the bite. Is there any canon evidence to show that he's > wolf-like as a human? Miz Storge' replies: Just read a two-part article in recent issues of 'Alaska' magazine (called "The Glacier Wolf"???) which described a black wolf that wandered into civilized parts. The author was very concerned the animal would end up getting itself killed because of its' activities. The Glacier Wolf was very secretive about it's sleeping places and discreet in comings and goings. However, it became very playful when dogs were about and liked to romp with dogs out for walks and even those tied up in their yards - even sharing food. Eventually, the wolf wandered unmolested back to the wilderness. Remus has some of the characteristics of this particular 'lone wolf'. We know he's secretive and reserved, we presume he romps with Padfoot and Prongs, we know he's loyal to his pack (the Marauders, the Trio and the Order - if you discount the ESE! theories). Mooney just might not be an Alpha, and his pack is being hunted to extinction. A lonely, romantic figure living on the edge - not unlike the Glacier Wolf. Maybe he has a fercious streak we've yet to see. From lszydlowski at hotmail.com Fri Aug 20 17:55:21 2004 From: lszydlowski at hotmail.com (mizstorge) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 17:55:21 -0000 Subject: Why now? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110743 As Galadriel Waters recently pointed out, HP fandom is in a unique position right now: we can interact with the author during the writing process, try to figure out the clues and, as this thread originally pointed out, be "guided" by the author in our conclusions. No-one who starts to read the series after Book 7 comes out will have had these opportunities. Now, while we're coongratulating ourselvess, I want to that propose this process probably works both ways. JKR also has had the opportunity to read our comments and hypotheses, our fiction and our debates. I wonder in what ways this has affected her writing? Oh, not The Big Picture, but the details - the hand-squeeze (for the HG/RW crowd) in the POA movie, the 40-line stare in OoTP (for HMS Wolfstar), the denial that LV is related to HP after that Star Wars page with HP characters penciled-in briefly appeared (and was taken off the net by legal injunction), and such-like. These also gently guiding our thoughts. To a certain extent, I think WE are influencing - subtly - the story in a synthesis with JKR. HP may be more unique than we realize - if the author is generously allowing the readers to help tell the story. From candlekicks at yahoo.ca Fri Aug 20 15:33:04 2004 From: candlekicks at yahoo.ca (candlekicks) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 15:33:04 -0000 Subject: depression in OoP Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110744 I started a new post because I couldn't decide which one to attach this to! Going back to Sirius... wasn't there a reference to a potion that makes people feel anxious and agitated and reckless. Harry is hearing about it during an exam or something and getting drowsy, he's having difficulty focussing... I have to look it up... Okay... took a while but I found it. :) It's in the chapter called Dumbledore's Army. Canadian Version, Hardcover, Page 340. "Midnight cam and went while Harry was reading and rereading a passage about the uses of scurvy-grass, lovage and sneezewort and not taking in a word of it. 'These plantes are moste efficacious in the inflaming of the braine, and are therefore much used in Confusing and Befuddlement Draughts whrer the wizared is desirous of producing hot-headedness and recklessness..... ... Hermione said Sirius was becoming reckless cooped up in Grimmauld Place... ...moste efficacious in the inflaming of the braine, andr are therefore much used... ... the Daily Prophet would think his brain was inflamed if they found out that he knew what Voldemort was feeling... ...therefore much used in Confusing and Befuddlement Draughts..." I always got from this that Sirius was also under the influence of a potion. Given by??? Mundungus??? Kreacher??? It just seemed too much of a coincidence to me. Sirius' depression seems to have been aided. Linda From claphamsubwarden at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 16:09:37 2004 From: claphamsubwarden at yahoo.com (Chris) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 16:09:37 -0000 Subject: Ginny - Guinevere? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110745 Kate Harding wrote: On a much lighter note than my recent posts, I realised when I was waking up this morning that Ginny has the same name as Guinevere. Her full name is Ginevra: Ginevra, Genevieve and Jennifer are all (according to my name etymology book) localised versions of Guinevere. Chris: According to legend Guinevere was either a warrior woman or a regal queen, depending on who is analysing the data. JKR's names also generally have significance to the character (Ie Lupin = Werewolf, Black = dark history) so it does make you wonder. Either Ginny will be an important and vital part of the final battle or Harry's love interest! (I am a big Harry/Ginny shipper) Antoshachekhonte wrote: And of course, there's Arthur Weasley, as well as Percy, who may or may not be named Percival. There's been some discussion of this topic, but no firm conclusions, I think. There are all sorts of possible resonances for the Arthurian connection--the major one being simply to reinforce the Weasley's Englishness, and the fact that these are the good guys... There's also the fact that her name means "white and smooth" in Welsh. Which could have all sorts of meanings... Chris: Harry was born in Godric's Hollow, now aside the reference to the Hogwarts' founder, which is in Wales, and also in Wales is the ancient site of Caerlon which is a possible location for Camelot. I am not sure JKR will go this way but I am exploring it in my own fan fiction if you are into fanfic. ChrisT http://www.schnoogle.com/authorLink/c_j_tebb http://groups.yahoo.com/group/merlin_legacy From p_implies_q at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 16:40:25 2004 From: p_implies_q at yahoo.com (p_implies_q) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 16:40:25 -0000 Subject: Good Writing (was Why now?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110746 delwynmarch wrote: > Del replies : > Yep, Sirius's death was exactly my objection to your former paragraph > : the events that led to it were *not* shown to be inevitable. Alice responds: I agree that it did not seem inevitable, but must disagree that this makes it bad writing. (Something else may, I suppose, though.) In fact, that it was so possible that he should have lived -- easily, even -- seemed meaningful. Harry's had one lesson in the vulnerability of life in Cedric Diggory, but that was simpler: Wormtail murdered him, and that's all there is to it. Moments after the event, Harry tries to force this simplicity on to Sirius's death ('SHE KILLED SIRIUS -- I'LL KILL HER!'). The attempt doesn't work, and so he keeps trying to make it simple, to pin it down, in other ways: it's Snape's fault, it's Kreacher's fault, it's Harry's own fault (this last, I suspect, will hold him up the longest). But the reality that he's going to *have* to confront if he's ever going to be able to deal with this and move on is that it was a confluence of several persons' wills, good and evil alike, bad timing, stupidity -- which, regardless of how inexplicable, just IS - - and little, meaningless things, like how close Sirius * happened* to be standing to the Veil when he took a Stunner. And things in life happen that way -- without that strong sense of inevitability, of motion forward in a plan -- in the short term at least. Inevitability? 'That's chess!' Shtuff happens? That's life. I don't believe for a moment that this quality of Sirius's death is an accident in the book that, of the whole series thus far, is most concerned with fate and prophesy. Delwynmarch: There > were *so many* ways in which Harry could have done things differently > ! My personal pet peeve being that if Harry could get his head at GP, > and if he didn't intend to take his friends with him to the MoM, and > if he was in such a hurry to get to London, then why on Earth didn't > he take *all of himself* to GP, and checked on his own whether Sirius > was there or not ??? Alice: If I believed that Harry could have done this, then I'd actually have to say that this is a gaping, yawning plot hole. I don't think that the fact that he could put his head through *does* mean that he could put the rest of himself through, though. The primary reason is simply that if he could, it seems like Hogwarts would have serious security issues: Slytherins of ill repute could be slinking off to do evil sorts of things, and Seamus Finnegan would be a regular at the Leaky Cauldron. Moreover, Sirius was able to put his head in Gryffindor common room's fireplace, but if he were able to put the rest of himself through on account of that, he would never have cut up the Fat Lady in PoA. For that matter, why would anyone have bothered putting up anti-Apparation wards? It seems clear that there is a 'communication only' mode to Floo, and that the wards around Hogwarts are set up to allow this mode only. One could argue that the unclear presentation constitutes bad writing, but I expect that it's actually good writing: the books are given from Harry's point of view; since this is the sort of thing that Harry would probably just pick up by immersion, it's better if we do, too. Delwynmarch: And that's only *one* example of the kind of > things that seemed *logical* to do and yet Harry didn't do them, and > we are *not* given a good reason of why he didn't think of them. Alice: The only thing that leaps out at me as a really dazzling feat of stupidity -- illogic, to be consistent with your terms -- is not even thinking of Snape. And that, too, seems realistic: we are often blinded by our pride/prejudice/human stupidity in general, and we often wind up regretting what we do bitterly because of it. But I do have to admit -- *Harry* never thinking of Snape seems realistic to me; Harry and Ron both overlooking it, even -- but Harry, Ron, and *Hermione* all three . . . well, that makes me wonder whether Hermione really didn't think of him. But no need to break out the conspiracy theories here. ;) I definitely do agree, though, Delwynmarch, that since this is a story, and moreover a story built around a prophesy, many more events like Sirius's death would make the series lose coherence and conviction. And that, now we've had our explosion of chaos, things are going to have to start converging. . . . I hope so, anyway. Well, that's enough hot air from me, I think. Cheers, Alice From ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com Fri Aug 20 17:37:27 2004 From: ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com (ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 13:37:27 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Could Sirius have been bipolar? Message-ID: <195.2d8b4d57.2e5790d7@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110747 In a message dated 8/20/2004 12:24:56 PM Eastern Daylight Time, susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net writes: > The > depressive phases, which again, are not hour by hour or day by day, > but lengthy phases, we're more familiar with--typically true > clinical depression, I believe. > This depends completely on the person and sometimes on their age. Fetching abnormal psychology textbook... yay, I still have it! It says there are two major types: Bipolar I, in which the person has at least I full manic episode. They may not have depression, but they might. And there's Bipolar II where there's at least one episode of major depression followed by at least one hypomanic episode (mild mania) There's also rapid cycling, in which the person experiences at least 2 full cycles of mania and depression w/in a year. It can be a lot more than that. A lot of the time in kids (who usually get diagnosed as learning disable, adhd, or having oppositional defiant disorder) it cycles several times a day or week. The reason I'm bringing all of this up is that people associate bipolar with a dramatic mood change over a long period of time. It's not always like that. The more you cycle the worse it is because there's an in between time where you're manic as hell and you want to do something and make a difference, but you're also depressed. Some types of antidepressants increase this, and you're much more likely to commit suicide during these periods. Or behave recklessly in a self destructive way. This stupid text book is out of date, because there's also something called early onset bipolar, which starts in early childhood. There are book on it. There are support groups for the parents who feel like they're trapped in hell. I get the feeling that this might have been what Sirius had also. He almost killed Severus, undoubtedly got punished for it, but it doesn't seem to have affected his behavior toward Severus at all. Punishment doesn't usually affect these kids. You can take away privileges, yell at them, or try rewarding them for behaving, and it doesn't change anything. You can beat them and they'll still throw tantrums. Rereading this, I see another way that that fits in with Sirius. He left his parents and went to live with James. All we know is that he left because they were mudblood haters. They might have hated him just as much, because he was a little tyrant who tried to force his tolerant views on them. James's parents wouldn't have seen this in him because a) they wouldn't set him off by ranting out mudbloods, and b) bipolar people are utter angels around non-family members. They're usually charismatic, and I might be biased here, but they seem pretty bright to me. Often they're creative or talented and other people love them. They're not the kids throwing tantrums in the grocery store. They wait until they get home. Harry was locked in the cupboard and whatnot, with the intention of breaking his spirit. I get the feeling that if the wizard world had never been shown to him, it would have worked. With a bipolar person, all that would have done was make them more spirited. Harry behaved, and pretended to be broken by what they did to him; a bipolar person wouldn't have. If you're not bipolar and you don't know somebody who is, you might think it's crazy that they'd continue to misbehave despite a sure consequence, but they do. Punishment isn't a deterrent. (Not sure how much this fits into adult onset though, but if he is bipolar, I wouldn't be surprised if Sirius had it as a kid.) I really don't think he's bipolar though. And diagnosing fictional characters with mental disease is one of my hobbies (I think Brian Kinny from QAF is bipolar, but that's another subject). If he's depressed at the time, he would have stayed put. People who are going through the depressive stage have a very 'screw it' attitude, that can block out everything else, even a godson's needs. If he was manic he wouldn't have seemed so depressed. Plus, he had reason to be depressed. He was locked up in that stupid house with that stupid elf and that stupid picture. That can do it for somebody who's emotionally sensitive (and yes, he *is*. He *needs* attention. He *needs* validation from others). Bipolar people don't need a reason to be depressed. They just get depressed. Prior to that, he did seem manic, but that could just be the way he's set. I'm BP and I seem hypomanic when I'm normal, and when I'm depressed I seem just like everybody else. Mary, who is amused that her spell check tries to change Kinny to kinky. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From claphamsubwarden at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 17:51:04 2004 From: claphamsubwarden at yahoo.com (Chris) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 17:51:04 -0000 Subject: Good Writing (was Why now?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110748 Just a couple of points about the hints/speculation and expectation. People have speculated on what if scenarios, most notably why did Harry not floo to Grimmauld Place? My answer to this is that he is an emotional, misguided teenager. Notice how many times people, especially Dumbledore, keep telling Harry how he keeps getting himself into situations that he need not. Like Tom Riddle implied, it is easy to manipulate people that wear their hearts on their sleeves. Speculation is healthy for the books in my opinion. The books are such works of art that even though the story was conceived and planned out 10 years ago, they are successful for a reason and that is because JKR is a good storyteller. Now these stories take time to craft and mould to perfection, the speculation keeps the magic alive. (I apologise for the pun but it is how to describe the saga.) Also other people have said that part of the problem is the amount of communications around now that people can pool ideas and discuss points endlessly like we all do on here. However it also provides the solution. If you do not like the ending, when it is released, you have a range of options which you can follow. You can do nothing, brood, and burn the book. Or you can use that wonderful creation of the internet and do any, some or one of the following: 1. Register your disapproval on a website, such as this. 2. Discuss why it ended that way and why it is wrong. 3. Start a we hate the ending campaign and try to get the book re- written. 4. Write a fanfic and use the "real" ending. You know the one, the one you came up with. Fanfic is a wonderful release of the intense and endless speculation. I love reading and writing fanfiction and also engaging in the discussions on this website. However I know that no matter what happens at the end of "Harry Potter and the....." I will accept that it is JKR's book, JKR's world and gospel, irrelevant of whether I like it or not. End Rant, hehe. Oh and option three was a JOKE, unless Professor Bicycle does turn up in the next two books. ChrisT http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Merlin_legacy http://www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/c_j_tebb From beelissa at nycap.rr.com Fri Aug 20 18:38:51 2004 From: beelissa at nycap.rr.com (Melissa Worcester) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 14:38:51 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Gringotts: Sirius' Vault & Harry's Inheritance References: Message-ID: <003401c486e4$f070db50$b724c845@CPQ21816182602> No: HPFGUIDX 110749 >"I used your name but told them to take the gold from Gringotts >vault number seven hundred and eleven - my own." (PoA, 315. UK) In my US edition, the vault *number* is not mentioned, just that it's Sirius' vault. I wonder if this is significant? Melissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dk59us at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 18:52:26 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 18:52:26 -0000 Subject: Why didn't the Longbottoms go into hiding? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110750 mhbobbin wrote: > I've been trying to figure out how long after the Potters were > killed the Longbottoms were attacked. It doesn't seem to be > specified anywhere, except it is implied that it is days, weeks, or > months later, not within the mysterious 24 hours following. The two > relevant chapters in GoF are "The Penseive" and "Padfoot Returns". > Sirius talks about Barty Crouch Junior being brought into Azkaban-- > Sirius is already in prison but how long?. Harry sees the three > trials in DD's Penseive as Death Eaters are rounded up. Barty Junior > has been caught with three DEs (The Lestranges) who had already > avoided Azkaban (not definitive in timing). Some time would have had > to pass for the DEs to realize LV was truly gone before the > Longbottoms would have been tortured to find out what had happened > to him. But I can't find anything more specific about the timing-- > anyone remember anything else? > > mhbobbin Eustace_Scrubb: I've also wondered about that. For the most part, I'll refer to my previous post, Message 109870, which theorizes that the Longbottom attack took place not long after Godric's Hollow (days not weeks or months). But I'll also followup on a comment earlier in this thread: Ravenclaw Bookworm wrote: > Something to keep in mind: the One was born to those who had thrice > defied the Dark Lord. If you are the Supreme Overlord of the > Universe ;-) and someone defies you three times, wouldn't you be > keeping track of them? Eustace_Scrubb again: Absolutely. And so it would come as no surprise to the DEs for Voldemort to tell them he was going to go take care of the Potters and the Longbottoms _without_ telling them about the Prophecy. The DEs wouldn't find it surprising for Voldemort to make an example of these two couples. And I would think that Voldemort would have his reasons for keeping the Prophecy to himself, as there's no point in revealing your potential weaknesses to your erstwhile supporters anymore than to your enemies. Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb "'Not useless,' said the Owl. 'EUSTACE!'" From ladypensieve at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 19:30:54 2004 From: ladypensieve at yahoo.com (Lady Pensieve) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 19:30:54 -0000 Subject: Could Sirius have been bipolar? Re: Depression and Harry in OotP -- Information In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110751 > Pippin: > > Sirius's mood changed so completely between GoF and the > > beginning of OOP that some people thought he was completely > > out of character. But what if he were bipolar? Any comments > > from our mental health experts on that possibility? > > SSSusan:> Experts want to chime in? I'm no mental health expert, but there could be other reasons for this abrupt change in behavior. Someone on another site had come up with a theory about using the 7 'challenges' in PS/SS or the 7 books. This means that book 6 will be the room with the potions. If OOP is a foreshadowing of HBP, then Sirius could have been 'poisoned with a potion'that changed his personality. Remember in OOP that Harry was studying about plants...CH 18 Dumbledore's Army: "These plants are moste efficacious in the inflaming of the braine, and are therefore much used in Confusing and Befuddlement Draughts, where the wizard is desirous of producing hot-headedness and recklessness " If the other person's theory is correct, and you take this paragraph a step further, and Kreacher could have been putting a little something into Sirius' drink/food. This also means that we'll probably find out about it in HBP...and that this will happen again - but,who will be the next one to get it? Sorry for putting a bit of a kabash on the 'mental' thing, but sticking to canon, there's usually a plot afoot, rather than normal life happenings. Kathy From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 20 19:31:15 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 19:31:15 -0000 Subject: Could Sirius have been bipolar? In-Reply-To: <195.2d8b4d57.2e5790d7@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110752 Mary: > A lot of the time in kids (who usually get diagnosed as learning > disable, adhd, or having oppositional defiant disorder) it cycles > several times a day or week. The reason I'm bringing all of this > up is that people associate bipolar with a dramatic mood change > over a long period of time. It's not always like that. SSSusan: Now, this "several times a day" notion definitely goes against what I was taught. Has the discipline changed that much in 20 years?? Is there a practicing psychologist out there who can straighten this out? Siriusly Snapey Susan From b_boymn at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 19:47:12 2004 From: b_boymn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 19:47:12 -0000 Subject: Good Writing & Death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110753 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "p_implies_q" wrote: > > Delwynmarch: > > And that's only *one* example of the kind of things that seemed > > *logical* to do and yet Harry didn't do them, and we are *not* > > given a good reason of why he didn't think of them. > Alice: > The only thing that leaps out at me as a really dazzling feat of > stupidity -- illogic, to be consistent with your terms -- is not > even thinking of Snape. ...*Harry* never thinking of Snape seems > realistic to me; Harry and Ron both overlooking it, even -- but > Harry, Ron, and *Hermione* all three . . . well, that makes me > wonder whether Hermione really didn't think of him. But no need > to break out the conspiracy theories here. ;) > > ... since this is a story, and moreover a story built around a > prophesy, many more events like Sirius's death would make the series > lose coherence and conviction. And that, now we've had our > explosion of chaos, things are going to have to start converging. > . . . I hope so, > anyway. > > Cheers, > Alice B_Boymn: Just three quick (Ha!) points. 1.) The significant thing about Umbridge's fireplace is that it is NOT being monitored by the Floo Network. That allows Umbridge to have private conversations without fear of being overheard. However, I think her fireplace is constrained by the same restictions as all fireplaces at Hogwarts. Certainly, if the fireplaces were completely open to travel, students would be traveling from House to House making mischief, as well as students sneaking out of the castle all the time. 2.) All three of Harry, Ron, and Hermione forgetting about that Snape was a member of the Order. I don't have a problem with this, Snape is not someone that any of them would consider a friend, ally, or someone to turn to in time of trouble. In fact, in nearly any circumstance, I could see Snape as being the LAST person they would think of. 'Help' and 'Snape' are two words, that in their minds, just never go together. And I say that with full knowledge that Snape 'helped' fight Harry's broom jinx in PS/SS. If nothing else, their perspectives are too colored by the Student/Teacher, Adult/child, Us/Them, enemy+advesary relationship they have with Snape. Restated, their intellectual minds may know that Snape is an Ally, but to their student/child minds, Snape is the enemy. 3.) Sirius's death. Death is rarely satisfying; it rarely comes with resolution. You're driving down the road one day, satisfied and content with the world, when some idiot eating a sandwich while yakking on the cell phone crosses the centerline and snuffs your life out. No tearful goodbyes, no chance to resolve old issues, no chance to say 'I love you' or 'I'm sorry'; just gone. In addition, I think JKR meant Sirius's death to be a hollow, pointless, and unsatisfying death. Hargrid tries to make it 'satisfying' by saying that Sirius died in battle, and that how he would have liked to go, but, of course, Harry points out that Sirius wouldn't have like to go to his death by any means. I remember before the book came out, we were all speculating about who would die. In one thread, I pointed out that it would absolutely be the background character who was moved to the foreground and presented in an endearing and/or sympathetic way (I was voting for the Creevy brothers). But I ignored my own advice, and in another thread said, that of all the people it could be, the one person it could NOT be was Sirius. Sirius was just too important to Harry, Harry needed him too much for Sirius to leave the story. If I had had my head screwed on straight, I would have realized that this sense of 'need him too much' was the guaranteed death blow to Sirius. I also think that JKR thought we would understand the Veiled Archway more. "Beyond the veil" is a common euphemism for death. I search the net for [ "Beyond the veil" ] (including the quote marks) and found over 40,000 matches. I changed it to [ "Beyond the veil" Death ] and got nearly 19,000 matches. Then when she added the reference after the battle in the Atrium to the room with the veiled archway being called the Chamber of Death, I think she rightfully assumed we would get it. But even after combining a common euphemism with the 'Chamber of Death' we still, as readers, wanted satisfaction, meaning, justification, explanation, hope, and our beloved Sirius back, so we did what we do, and that is, come up with alternate explanation and conspiracy theories to supposed the idea that he was not really dead, or that he would return by some magical means. Harry does the same thing; he hope Sirius will come back through the mirror, or at least, he will be able to communicate. When that fails, he looks for Nick in the hope that Sirius will come back as a ghost. He, like us, is searching for an 'out', an alternate possibility. But in the end, he, like us, will have to come to grips with the fact that someone near and dear to us (whether you loved him, or loved to hate him) is gone. As a side note, just to keep the theorists fueled, many of the searched 'Beyond the Veil' links are about /near/ death experiences. 'Beyond the Veil' still does mean or imply into the land of the dead, but most people who go 'beyond the veil' and return, are people who don't make it all the way. They enter the 'tunnel of light' and are met there by a friend, beloved relative, or an angel who tells them it is not their time and that they must return. Theoretically, if you make it beyond the 'tunnel of light', there is no turning back. This is typically true in near death experience, but not always so in Mythological advantures. There are some theories in which Harry, for whatever reason, goes beyond the veil into the tunnel where he meets various people and does various things, then he is told he must return. This could be either an independant adventure or in the final battle with Big-V. Just a few thoughts. Steve/B_Boymn From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 19:48:28 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 19:48:28 -0000 Subject: Good Writing (was Why now?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110754 Alice wrote : " I don't think that the fact that he could put his head through *does* mean that he could put the rest of himself through, though. The primary reason is simply that if he could, it seems like Hogwarts would have serious security issues: Slytherins of ill repute could be slinking off to do evil sorts of things, and Seamus Finnegan would be a regular at the Leaky Cauldron." Del replies : Well no, because all the fires the students can have access to would obviously be monitored. DD would immediately be informed of any student travelling by Floo powder and of their destination. Moreover, we've never even heard of any student using the fireplaces to just communicate with someone else (apart from Harry), even though they can do it. It seems that if there's any unspoken agreement, it's that students don't use Floo powder at Hogwarts. And finally, we haven't heard of any kind of restriction on Floo communication and travel in general. We saw that Amos Diggory chose to only pop his head into the Weasleys' fireplace, even though this fire was used previously to Floo travel. It could be that the Weasleys have put some kind of protection on their fireplace, I grant you that, but from what we know Harry has never been told about those subtleties. Alice wrote : "Sirius was able to put his head in Gryffindor common room's fireplace, but if he were able to put the rest of himself through on account of that, he would never have cut up the Fat Lady in PoA." Del replies : He Floo-phoned in GoF, but cut up the Fat Lady in PoA. His mental state had greatly improved in between those two events, he was *much* more rational in GoF than in PoA. Alice wrote : " For that matter, why would anyone have bothered putting up anti-Apparation wards? It seems clear that there is a 'communication only' mode to Floo, and that the wards around Hogwarts are set up to allow this mode only." Del replies : The Floo network is monitored : DD would probably be informed immediately if anyone entered or left Hogwarts through a fireplace. Apparition, on the other hand, is not monitored at all. Alice wrote : "One could argue that the unclear presentation constitutes bad writing, but I expect that it's actually good writing: the book are given from Harry's point of view; since this is the sort of thing that Harry would probably just pick up by immersion, it's better if we do, too." Del replies : It might be good writing but it would be inconsistent with JKR's usual style. Usually, she tells us what Harry knows that makes him take such or such decision. If Harry knew that he could only communicate through the fireplace but not travel, and if that is the reason he didn't try, then I'm surprised that we're not told that. Alice wrote : " *Harry* never thinking of Snape seems realistic to me; Harry and Ron both overlooking it, even -- but Harry, Ron, and *Hermione* all three . . . well, that makes me wonder whether Hermione really didn't think of him. But no need to break out the conspiracy theories here. ;)" Del replies : I agree, that's another convenient inconsistency. The only solution I can see is that Harry shouting at her so violently upsetted Hermione so much that either she lost her wits and truly didn't think of Snape, or she did think of him but was too scared of Harry's reaction to mention it (she probably hoped that Harry would discover that Sirius was safely at GP, and even if he wasn't, she hadn't planned on Harry getting caught before they could make up new plans and she could tell him about Snape). Del From meyerjc16 at uww.edu Fri Aug 20 13:42:11 2004 From: meyerjc16 at uww.edu (ge25y) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 13:42:11 -0000 Subject: depression?? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110755 First I would like to say that everyone has had really interesting things to say about this but I think there are two things that are missing. 1. While we can debate forever about Harry's guilt after Ced's death in GOF what about any guilt he might feel about Sirius's death in OotP? If there is going to be something that is going to make Harry depressed I would say it will be this event, not Cedric. And if he was depressed before that it would not help anything at all. 2. However, I think that were forgetting that depression is actually a normal and healthy emotion. Now, like anything else if it is uncontrolable that there's a problem but I don't think that Harry's sadness can be looked at like that. I mean think about the events in his life... he actually handles it all incredible well. Is Harry sad, yes.. is he angry, oh sure... but doesn't he have reason to be? I think that he's emotional outbursts are really very healthy and important to have if he's going to keep control of things. Even DD says at the end of OotP that the fact that Harry can feel this way is he's biggest strength. Just hope that nobody feels that Harry is being unhealthy... Jennie who doesn't usually post but loves reading them and hopes no one gets angry. :) From candlekicks at yahoo.ca Fri Aug 20 19:12:27 2004 From: candlekicks at yahoo.ca (candlekicks) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 19:12:27 -0000 Subject: Good writing... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110756 I decided not to snip and just start over... I just wanted to ask a question of everyone.... How many of you thought of the mirror to communicate with Sirius as you read the passage? Harry was frantic, he was running around and yelling at everyone... it was shocking that Sirius was in trouble. Everything that we had read before-hand showed Harry seeing things as they were happening, not lies. The mirrors were given and never opened or spoken of again. I think that this is great writing on JKR's part. We are sucked into Harry's panic and are just as frantic. Hermione settles him down enough to get him to check at all, and that took some doing. Harry would never think to go to Snape for help, he tries not to think of Snape at all for anything. His only thoughts are to go and help the closest thing to a father that he can remember. I am interested to see what use the mirror is going to be in the future. JKR has said that they will play a role in the latter books. Harry has smashed his in his frustration... and we don't know where Sirius has left his... Linda, one who panicked with Harry and forgot the mirrors until too late! Silly me! From kinsfire at earthlink.net Fri Aug 20 19:13:47 2004 From: kinsfire at earthlink.net (Kinsfire) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 15:13:47 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ginny - Guinevere? References: Message-ID: <000a01c486e9$d256eab0$5b11fb0a@7z6mn11> No: HPFGUIDX 110757 Kate Harding wrote: On a much lighter note than my recent posts, I realised when I was waking up this morning that Ginny has the same name as Guinevere. Her full name is Ginevra: Ginevra, Genevieve and Jennifer are all (according to my name etymology book) localised versions of Guinevere. Chris: According to legend Guinevere was either a warrior woman or a regal queen, depending on who is analysing the data. JKR's names also generally have significance to the character (Ie Lupin = Werewolf, Black = dark history) so it does make you wonder. Either Ginny will be an important and vital part of the final battle or Harry's love interest! (I am a big Harry/Ginny shipper) Antoshachekhonte wrote: And of course, there's Arthur Weasley, as well as Percy, who may or may not be named Percival. ------------------ Now for Kinsfire's quick comments: Pray, if that's what JKR is thinking, that she doesn't follow what most think of as the full legend. If Harry is Arthur, and Ginny is Guinevere, then who's Lancelot? Who's Modred? Is Neville Lancelot, and then she'll betray Harry with Neville? That's the problem with reading too much into a name... Kinsfire [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dfrankiswork at netscape.net Fri Aug 20 20:08:51 2004 From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 20:08:51 -0000 Subject: Canon is not decideable Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110758 I was re-reading the transcript from the Edinburgh chat and noticed this: "Q: Apart from Harry, Snape is my favourite character because he is so complex and I just love him. Can he see the Thestrals, and if so, why? Also, is he a pure blood wizard? JKR: Snape's ancestry is hinted at. He was a Death Eater, so clearly he is no Muggle born, because Muggle borns are not allowed to be Death Eaters, except in rare circumstances. You have some information about his ancestry there. He can see Thestrals, but in my imagination most of the older people at Hogwarts would be able to see them because, obviously, as you go through life you do lose people and understand what death is." It's the last sentence that caught my eye: "in my imagination most of the older people at Hogwarts..." In effect she isn't saying that she knows exactly which individuals can see Thestrals, but rather that if she makes the effort she imagines something that she considers plausible. In other words, she answered that question (apart from the bit relating specifically to Snape) like a nescient reader, not an omniscient author. Which means that we know there are some canon questions which quite simply do not have a clear answer; for example, "Can Madam Pince see Thestrals?" may be one. It may be that if we asked JKR that particular question she *could* give a definite answer, but I think it virtually certain that a roll-call of all the adults ('older people') at Hogwarts would turn up *someone* about whom JKR could only say that she thinks it probable. On top of that, she relativises by saying "in *my* imagination" as if to imply that somebody else's imagination might come to a different conclusion that is just as valid. A bit like a HPFGU member posting "IMO". I feel fanfic writers should be able to take something from that. David, feeling like Kurt G?del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 20:09:59 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 20:09:59 -0000 Subject: Could Sirius have been bipolar? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110759 SSSusan wrote : " My understanding of bipolar disorder--and the BIGGEST mistake I think lay people tend to make--is that the mood swings associated with it are *not* short-term, like from Monday to Tuesday. The swings are deep and can last days, weeks or months." Del replies : Well, as with depression, there are apparently milder forms of bipolar disorder. My husband is bipolar but with very fast and irregular cycles. By fast I mean that his manic phases usually only last a few hours, at most 2 or 3 days. They are not as strong as they can get in more severe forms of bipolar disorder, but he does get this feeling that he can do anything and that his mind is sprinting 10 times faster than normal. It doesn't overwhelm him, but his behaviour does visibly change, when you know him well enough. Those manic phases are also much rarer than his depressive episodes (which are also usually a bit longer). In short, he's depressed with manic episodes once in a while. I'm not sure that would fit Sirius, though I must admit that Sirius's behaviour does remind me a bit of my husband's behaviour when he's under more stress than he is comfortable with. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 20:30:46 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 20:30:46 -0000 Subject: Good writing... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110760 Linda asked : "I just wanted to ask a question of everyone.... How many of you thought of the mirror to communicate with Sirius as you read the passage?" Del replies : Unless my mind is completely confused, we couldn't have thought of the mirrors as we didn't even know about them yet. Harry never opened the package Sirius gave him until after Sirius was dead. Now of course, we could have remembered that Sirius had given Harry *something* to communicate with him. I must admit I didn't. Linda wrote : "Everything that we had read before-hand showed Harry seeing things as they were happening, not lies." Del replies : Actually no, quite the opposite in fact. We know that in *2* instances only, Harry saw something that was truly happening (the murder of Frank Bryce, and the attempted murder on Arthur Weasley). But all the rest of the time, every single time Harry was seeing that stupid door at the end of the corridor, we knew it was *not* a real event, unless we assumed that LV was indeed going to the DoM every night and managed to go a little further every night. Alice wrote : " I think that this is great writing on JKR's part. We are sucked into Harry's panic and are just as frantic." Del replies : It didn't work for me AT ALL. The moment I realised that Harry believed his dream was real, I was jerked *out* of the story, because it was such nonsense for me. And I got steadily more annoyed and irritated as people tried to put some sense in Harry's head and he refused to see what was so obvious to me. But I admit I never thought of the present Sirius had given Harry precisely in case he needed to talk. For that matter I didn't think of Snape either :-) Del From dk59us at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 20:34:12 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 20:34:12 -0000 Subject: Why now? (other books / series) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110761 Becky wrote: > > >The grey havens, as nice as > > > they seem-- well, I don't know. > Geoff noted: > They are the place from which the ships sail over the sea to > Elvenhome where the Elves live a blissful existence. Frodo goes there > (as I mentioned in message 110714) and Sam, Legolas and Gimli also > went there after many years. > > Hardly ending in death as I think you meant it. The options are > still open for Harry - well, not strictly true, but for those who > speculate they are; the dealer of the answer is playing her cards > close to her chest(!) Eustace_Scrubb: I could be wrong (often am), but I believe that the general thought is that mortals who are allowed to go to the Undying Lands can be freed from many of the mental and physical hurts they sustained in Middle-earth, but they do not lose their mortality. Is there any similar place or state in the Wizarding World? Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb "'Not useless,' said the Owl. 'EUSTACE!'" From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Fri Aug 20 20:47:14 2004 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 20:47:14 -0000 Subject: Savior complex? (was "Harry and Tom") In-Reply-To: <20040819190303.34429.qmail@web50902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110762 --- Neisha Saxena wrote: > > What is it with Harry and his "saving people thing"? > This is just as extreme, IMHO, as LV's reaction to his > very similar childhood. There is a > super-hero/super-villan dichotomy between Harry and > Voldemort that is extremely interesting. They are > mirror images of each other. > > I have two theories as to why Harry is so hell-bent on > saving people (or "heroics" as Lucius Malfoy put it): > > > > 2) ... some sort of deep-seated psychological > reaction to being an orphan and being raised by the > Dursleys.... Do you really think it is all that odd for a person to go out of his way to help others? You refer to the scene on the Hogwarts Express in SS where Harry buys all the sweets as an example. That scene has always struck me as a perfect natural reaction by a kind, empathetic kid who knows what it's like to be made to do without while others lap up the good life, and who has never had any money to treat others. Sure he's still learning the bounds of propriety, but sharing the candy is just a genuine, honest reaching out for friendship. More generally, most of the adventures in the books begin when Harry is put in a situation in which he feels that if he does not stick his neck out to help someone (or solve a problem), no one will: * Draco and Neville's Remembrall * Hermione and the troll * Getting Norbert to Charlie and his friends * Going after the stone * The polyjuice impersonations in CS * Following the spiders into the forest * Going to Lockhart about the Chamber, and then entering it ...all the way down to... * Setting out to rescue Sirius in the Department of Mysteries Of course we, as readers, can see ways out of the situations that Harry cannot see -- that makes for good drama -- but from Harry's position, as a pre-teen/young teen who is constantly being thrust into unfamiliar situations with little in the way of a support network, it legitimately looks as though everything is left up to him. I don't think it's a sign of some deep-seated psychological problem that Harry wants to help Neville or Hermione or Hagrid or Ginny or Gabrielle or Cedric or Arthur or Sirius. Rather, it's a sign of a young man who knows right from wrong, and is willing to stand up for what is right. --Matt From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Fri Aug 20 20:53:42 2004 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 20:53:42 -0000 Subject: James' Invisibility Cloak (was Alastor, and James' money, and godmother/marr In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110763 Catlady: > > > > > > Q: "Where did James get his Invisibility Cloak?" > > > JKR: "That was inherited from his own father -- > > > a family heirloom!" Romulus Lupin: > > > > Ok, things might be different in the Potterverse, > > but I thought you could only inherit from someone > > who was dead, right? > > [But James had the cloak while he was at school, > > at which time James's father was still alive.] Potioncat: > > I think JKR used the word inherit as in "passed down." > Sometimes parents pass down family heirlooms to their > children while the children can use them, or after > the parent doesn't really have a need for the heirloom. > > Perhaps the Potters are a long line of rule breakers > and it is family tradition to give the son the IC > while at school. Or perhaps, as with the snitch in the Pensieve scene, James nicked the invisibility cloak to use while at school. He could always have legitimately inherited it later on. -- Matt From melissahyatt at umich.edu Fri Aug 20 20:56:59 2004 From: melissahyatt at umich.edu (LeahBrahms) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 20:56:59 -0000 Subject: Hagrid's potential off-spring (was re: Hagrid's parents) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110764 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "caspenzoe" wrote: > Let's take it a step further: > > What do the laws of genetics say about the potential products of a > Hagrid/Mme Maxime pairing? Assuming that both Hagred and Maxime are > 1/2 giant, couldn't this produce some purely genetically giant off- > spring, as well as some purely genetically human off-spring, and/or > any combination in between? If this theory is correct, isn't the > Hagrid/Maxime pairing a really bad idea? Then again, we can understand just why Hagrid was so excited to meet another half-giant (and female to boot!). Poor guy. I would think that any prospective full-giant offspring would be a great opportunity to see just how valid wizards' prejudice against the giants is. We've heard as common wisdom that giants "just like killing". Hermione sees this as just more prejudice, and even Dumbledore seems to believe that the giants are fundamentally bad or he wouldn't have wanted to approach them for the good side. How have Hagrid and Maxime's personalities been affected by being half-giant? Hagrid has the desperate desire to prove that these so- called "dangerous" creatures are actually entirely lovable, an understandable reaction to his mother's abandonment of him as a child. Maxime in GoF hadn't come to terms with her giant parentage (although by the summer of OoP she's fine). Clearly, while their size has been influenced by their giant parents, their psychological makeup seems entirely human. These two seem quite fit to be parents, to human children or half- giants. Would they be able to keep giant children in line? Hagrid's dad did fine by him, but then Hagrid wasn't a full-blooded giant with a thirst for blood. But if these giant children were raised by loving, half-wizard parents, maybe they wouldn't have the same prejudice against wizards as the rest of their kind. Dumbledore as matchmaker, anyone? LeahBrahms From eloiseherisson at aol.com Fri Aug 20 21:33:12 2004 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloise_herisson) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 21:33:12 -0000 Subject: Hagrid's potential off-spring (was re: Hagrid's parents) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110765 caspenzoe: > > > > Let's take it a step further: > > > > What do the laws of genetics say about the potential products of a > > Hagrid/Mme Maxime pairing? Assuming that both Hagred and Maxime are > > 1/2 giant, couldn't this produce some purely genetically giant off- > > spring, as well as some purely genetically human off-spring, and/or > > any combination in between? If this theory is correct, isn't the > > Hagrid/Maxime pairing a really bad idea? LeahBrahms: > > Then again, we can understand just why Hagrid was so excited to meet > another half-giant (and female to boot!). Poor guy. > > I would think that any prospective full-giant offspring would be a > great opportunity to see just how valid wizards' prejudice against > the giants is. Yes....but think about the physical implications. Mme Maxime is not a full sized giantess. Giving birth to a full sized giant baby would be risky to say the least. I guess that at least she lives in the WW, where it may be possible both to accomodate and ease the passage of such an infant by the use of well placed engorgement charms or the like, but to be honest, I'd rather not think about it too closely. ~Eloise From music4masses at earthlink.net Fri Aug 20 21:37:21 2004 From: music4masses at earthlink.net (Erin Hamilton) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 17:37:21 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Digest Number 5124 Message-ID: <4610162.1093037841836.JavaMail.root@bigbird.psp.pas.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 110766 "SSSusan: Not a mental health expert, but way back about 20 years ago I did get my BS in psych and 15 years ago my MS in counseling. My understanding of bipolar disorder--and the BIGGEST mistake I think lay people tend to make--is that the mood swings associated with it are *not* short-term, like from Monday to Tuesday. The swings are deep and can last days, weeks or months. [PLEASE correct me, *real* psychologists, if I've got that wrong!] The manic phases are typically marked by an "I can do ANYTHING!" feeling and rash or impulsive behavior [such as monstrous shopping sprees]. The depressive phases, which again, are not hour by hour or day by day, but lengthy phases, we're more familiar with--typically true clinical depression, I believe. I definitely can see why people have seen Sirius as having acted clinically depressed in OoP. "Rash" and "impulsive" are words we've heard a lot about Sirius, too, but have these been actual phases with him, or is it more just his overall personality? Experts want to chime in?" Erin H: Hi. I used to contribute here regularly, but can no longer keep up. I'm not a psychiatrist, but I am Bipolar. My moods are highly reactive, but I generally cycle every two weeks or so. Having said that, I'm careful diagnosing fictional characters when their condition hasn't been clarified in the narrative. Bipolar is a serious mental illness. Sirius may've been asymptomatic when he pulled the infamous "prank" on Snape. He would have no regard for the consequences, but not intentionally. His prison term, obviously a traumatic experience, would have exacerbated a condition like BP. Consistant with mania or hypomania, many of Sirius's decisions are rash, but, more importantly, they are often accompanied by a distorted sense that he will not get caught or that nothing can happen to him. It seemed fine to him at the time to just pop in at Harry's fireplace or join the Order members rescuing Harry without regard to consequences, or when he told Harry he wasn't like his father after all. Mean, yes, but not intentionally so. This sort of emotional upswing and accompanying grandiosity may have helped Sirius risk his prison escape, but it also may have ultimately cost him his life. Having something to occupy you is critical. I have a very busy job, and I need that stimulation. I get bored and ruminate very easily. Bipolar or clinically Depressed, Sirius cooped up with no means of contributing to the cause was an emotional catastrophe waiting to happen. That may be why Lupin, his friend, stayed with him. But Lupin was often gone. Someone (DD?) should have done something more. When Sirus perked up at X-Mas in OOtP, his mood may've responded to the positive stimulus. I'm reactive like that. I think he had too much time to ruminate. That will get you. Still, it is hard to say. But you can, from my perspective, argue that he may've been at least Bipolar Type II. BPII is less extreme than BP I, but the suicide rate is higher. I can empathize with Sirius, which is why I can't condemn him because of his behavior. Emotional Hell cannot be described or understood easily, especially if you haven't been there. Just a thought or two, Erin H. __ "To summarize: it is a well-know fact that those people who must WANT to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it. To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job. To summarize the summary of the summary: people are a problem." Douglas Adams, Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy From marmys at bellsouth.net Fri Aug 20 21:09:43 2004 From: marmys at bellsouth.net (Marleen) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 17:09:43 -0400 Subject: depression?? References: Message-ID: <003001c486fa$038dd7f0$0100a8c0@marmyscomputer> No: HPFGUIDX 110767 Jennie wrote: 2. However, I think that we're forgetting that depression is actually a normal and healthy emotion. Now, like anything else if it is uncontrolable that there's a problem but I don't think that Harry's sadness can be looked at like that. I mean, think about the events in his life... he actually handles it all incredibly well. Is Harry sad, yes.. is he angry, oh sure... but doesn't he have reason to be? I think that his emotional outbursts are really very healthy and important to have if he's going to keep control of things. Even DD says at the end of OotP that the fact that Harry can feel this way is he's biggest strength. Just hope that nobody feels that Harry is being unhealthy... Marmy replies: I so totally agree! I think Harry is holding up really well under the circumstances. Also, don't forget, during all this, he only has his peers (who are just growing emotionally themselves) to help him through it. And they aren't the ones experiencing the actually pain..they are only feeling what Harry tells them. We don't realize how much our parents help us through difficult times when we are teenagers, but we always know they are there. Harry doesn't have that, and even DD is avoiding him and Hagrid isn't there. All the male adults that he needs. I think Harry is really holding it together! I don't feel he's being unhealthy at all. I think JKR is just trying to show us how BAD life is for Harry and prepare us for the emotional explosion yet to come! From slgazit at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 20 22:06:33 2004 From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 22:06:33 -0000 Subject: Hagrid's potential off-spring (was re: Hagrid's parents) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110768 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "caspenzoe" wrote: > Let's take it a step further: > > What do the laws of genetics say about the potential products of a > Hagrid/Mme Maxime pairing? Assuming that both Hagred and Maxime are > 1/2 giant, couldn't this produce some purely genetically giant off- > spring, as well as some purely genetically human off-spring, and/or > any combination in between? The answer may be "None". the product of a horse and donkey's mating is a mule. While perfectly capable animal otherwise, it is generally sterile. As for the logistics of giant/human mating... Well, without getting too graphic here, who says that the giants' sexual organs and offsprings must be proportionally gigantic? For all we know they could be human sized in these departments... :-) Salit From danielmorgan191 at hotmail.com Fri Aug 20 22:22:48 2004 From: danielmorgan191 at hotmail.com (danielmorgan322) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 22:22:48 -0000 Subject: Hide the animals! was Re: The Clue Behind the Door In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110769 tina: > > My first thoughts exactly but there is a problem. Spectacles. They > weren't invented until 1275 or thereabouts. It can't be GG as he > was at the Founding. Now it could be another glimpse of him. Who > knows where JKR will take us! > A quick answer to my own post, could GG have lived long enough to > get spectacles? We all know DD is 150 ish + ... I'm going on the > presumption that the school was founded around 1000AD. Anyone thought about Nicolas Flamel? That was the first name that came to my mind. I can't back it up with cannon, its just a hunch. Anyone? Morgan From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Fri Aug 20 22:50:02 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 22:50:02 -0000 Subject: Harry's Depression in OoP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110770 >>> Psyche/Kate Harding wrote: > My word, this thread is getting scholarly! Maybe we should all think about collaborating on a paper for Accio 2005. <<< Brenda: Apologies for being too scholarly and on constant lecture-mode. Most of posters here are SUCH good debaters that the only way to make some intellectual contribution is to shower everyone with scientific facts. Sort of defence mechanism, if you will. *shrugs* And how did you know I've started writing a paper for Accio 2005 ;P?! This thread is very informative and provides a whole new way of character analysis, I think we should collaborate on a paper! > Brenda earlier: > > Of course, these are merely psychogenic factors for mental > > disorders. > > Well I'll wait till we scan Harry's brain and see if there is any significant tissue loss in his fronto-limbic cortex (around > > anterior cingulated and orbito-frontal cortex)! :D > > psyche: > You seem to see the cognitive processes as a kind of shadow play projected over the 'real' neurological processes. > I see the neurological processes being merely the chemical results of the cognitive and emotional problems. > The distinction doesn't really matter, of course, because the two > processes run in parallel, so the direction of causation is > irrelevant [snip] I wouldn't want people to get the > impression that the mentally ill are somehow medically or genetically a different or inferior kind of person - anyone can suffer depression <<< Brenda: I wholeheartedly agree with you, there is much stigma attached to these illnesses. And no, I actually don't view mental disorders as the byproducts of neurophysiological defects, rather the reverse seems true (your take). I have always been a happy little kid -- everyone used to comment on how I'm always smiling and laughing. But what I have learned over last few years is how EASY it is to feel depressed and helpless, especially over things that were too demanding for your own ability or out of control. I suppose it comes down to how fast one recognizes this as more profound problemis and struggles to move on. And I gently ask you not to pin me down with "it ain't so, you wouldn't know how it felt!" because I'm simply wondering why some manages to get out and others fall deeper and deeper. Prolonged self-indulgement of "I can't do anything, I'm hopeless" will most definitely slow down the activities of neurotransmitters and neurophysiological processes as whole. As for the significant tissue loss in fronto-limbic cortex -- this is observed in more severely-depressed patients, of course. Also not necessarily all of them, else general treatments will be much more effective to most patients. Human brain is *extremely* plastic, and no two brains are the same! I can imagine that while Harry's brain structure will look very normal under MRI scan, his activities (e.g. glucose, oxygen, blood, etc) might start to show some deviations from norm. But fMRI is expensive and has long line-up, so no. >>> psyche: > I think the idea of 'early stages' is a bit of a red herring, because it's defined by what happens next. > He may recover, or he may get worse, depending on his choices and the reactions of those around him. > But if he recovers, that doesn't mean he didn't have depression. > Simply that it didn't progress to be a *severe* case. Brenda: Oops. Pardon me for not being clear. Yes, I meant Harry is suffering from early stages of depression from the POV of physicians, per se. I certainly had no intention of implying that his depression will progress, good heaven's, I couldn't do that to our hero! (though not my favorite character, this new analysis has made me feel more sympathetic towards Harry ;P) JKR said that Harry will fell better and learn to control his anger in next books, right? Right? >>> Psyche: Most people who go through a patch of depression as a result of life events recover as those events are lifted. > I think Harry's gone a little past this point - > I think his depression has begun to feed on itself. <<< Brenda: As many posters have pointed out, Harry's symptoms of depression in OoP can be easily accounted by the amounting stress from circumstances. Though that IS how depression starts, really. It will be awhile before Harry realizes this as more serious issue than mere teenage angst. These doesn't seem to be Mind Healers in Wizarding World either, which worries me. But then simple Cheering Charm or antidepressant potions might help ;) >>> Del wrote: Harry keeps feeling bad because > the events that make him feel bad are *never* lifted. > Harry is attacked from everywhere (including his own classmate in his own dormitory !), so of course he's not being overly happy. Brenda: But that's how depression starts?! >>> Psyche wrote : > " Although I would be worried about his tendency to blame himself and his unwillingness to talk about his feelings " >>> Del replied : > I don't see that Harry tends to blame himself particularly. He gets > paranoid upon hearing that he's possessed by LV, but then who wouldn't ? > As for being unwilling to talk about his feelings, I'd say he's just like everyone else on that one : none of the kids seems to be willing to talk. Except maybe Cho. Neville in particular has always kept everything to himself, and nobody ever seemed to find that strange. <<< Brenda: I always viewed Harry's tendency to blame everything on himself as typical teenage hero's problem. He believes he had chances to fix it but he didn't or couldn't. Very desperately trying not to go into Occlumency and Sirius' death here, but except for those occasions Harry feels helpless and blames himself because he is the hero, Marked One to conquer Voldemort. He knows he has powers to stop more tragedies from happening. Cho is another can of worms. So is Neville. [Oy oy, Annoyed Grunt] Brenda, preparing herself for another Professor-mode for Sirius' Bipolar theory. From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com Fri Aug 20 22:54:51 2004 From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 22:54:51 -0000 Subject: Hide the animals! was Re: The Clue Behind the Door In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110771 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "danielmorgan322" wrote: > Anyone thought about Nicolas Flamel? That was the first name that > came to my mind. I can't back it up with cannon, its just a hunch. > Anyone? > > Morgan It's most likely a new character, after all JKR has introduced a new character in every book so far. I'm guessing it's the new DADA teacher. McMax From EyeMelodius at hotmail.com Fri Aug 20 23:01:34 2004 From: EyeMelodius at hotmail.com (annunathradien) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 23:01:34 -0000 Subject: Going back to DD knowing all (and the prophecy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110772 Josh Warren wrote: > Does anyone else find that to be a VERY interesting conversation in > retrospect? Despite DD knowing a great many things, he certainly has the age and experience, I don't think he knows *everything*. I do think this is possibly the impression we're supposed to get in OOTP. Not even DD - him or his knowledge - was infallible in that book. I tend to go back to Firenze's role in OOTP and potentially the HP series overall. He not only criticizes human intelligence and/or perceptions ("fettered" and "blinkered" I believe he called it), but the character in particular seems to impart that nothing ("even centaur's knowledge") is foolproof. Even centaurs have "read the signs wrongly". Which, of course, brings me back to the Prophecy. I often wonder, as I'm sure we all do, if DD's interpretation of it is the end all be all. Like many, I question whether the Prophecy is even referring to Harry... but it might not even be referring to Neville either. Then again, I'm paranoid and I tend to question everything in HP, especially the big stuff a la Trelawney's prophecies (and canon interpretations thereof). ~annunathradien From santana0000 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 22:11:53 2004 From: santana0000 at yahoo.com (santana1800) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 22:11:53 -0000 Subject: The Prophecy and the Conclusion Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110773 I am of the belief that Harry has to die in the conclusion. In the prophecy it states that LV would mark Harry as his equal. Throughout the series, there are several references to how much alike the two are as well. I don't believe that Harry is as powerful as LV is now, but by the final showdown, Harry's powers will have grown. Harry can already shake off the Imperius curse, which most wizards twice his age cannot. LV and Harry share similar powers, similar strengths, and very similar wands (or weapons). It was already shown that the wands have a way of canceling eachothers spells out since they share the same core. And so, if Harry truly has been marked as LVs equal, I don't see any other outcome except for both Harry and LV to die. It would be similar to how Sir Arthur Conan Doyle killed off his hero, Sherlock Holmes. Holmes and his nemesis Dr. Moriarty were of equal mind and strength, so in the end, they both had to die. (Of course Doyle later brought Holmes back, but that's beside the point.) I also expect that LV is mortal now and can die since he used Harry's blood to restore his body. So, I don't think that either will succeed over the other, but instead end up killing eachother in the final showdown. Just my opinion; any thoughts? Santana From susanadacunha at gmx.net Fri Aug 20 22:24:06 2004 From: susanadacunha at gmx.net (Susana da Cunha) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 23:24:06 +0100 Subject: Depression and Harry in OotP References: <1092577408.10935.21773.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <003b01c48705$a211d380$562f0dd4@taxi> No: HPFGUIDX 110774 Del wrote: >As I said in another post, I was *expecting* Harry to experience some kind of depression at the end of GoF. But when I started OoP, I saw that JKR didn't seem to be taking him in that direction. I was actually quite surprised at how *little* he seemed to be feeling bad when awake. He's angry and frustrated, sure, and he even goes into an alternating pattern of overdrive and stupor after the Dementor attack, but he never seems to dwell on Cedric's death or on anything else. He's looking *forward*, he's in a *positive* mood concerning the war, he has a healthy dose of self-esteem, he's sure of his capacities, and so on. That was confusing to me at first, especially considering that we are told that he's got nightmares about the graveyard almost every night. And then I understood that the answer might be precisely that : is brain is processing the events at night, so Harry doesn't have to process them during the day. After all, we're talking about a boy who showed almost no sign of dysfunction after being abused for 10 years ! It's not such a strech to assume that he must have a very effective built-in coping mechanism. I read most of the posts under this subject and I was surprised of how many people fail to see that. Harry is a tough boy that had a tough childhood and is having a very tough adolescence. I had a tough adolescence myself (though not a tough childhood) and I think that helped me a lot, later in life, when i did suffer from depression. But most importantly, it helps me understand Harry's anger and frustration =extremely= well. (I knew there was a gratification coming to every thing I went through! ;-) ) So I will try to explain: First of all, you must imagine you're fifteen. It doesn't work at the age of 30 (at that age you 'just' get depressed!). At fifteen you want to have a large group of friends who are all very cool and think you're cool; you want to date; you want to do things you weren't allowed when you wore a child; you want to build something you really believe in (so you join clubs/organizations); you think you know the whole picture; and (most importantly) you want people to take you seriously! At all of this, the lack of only the latest will get you angry and frustrated. But, oooohhh, the way it gets you! At OotP, Harry is not 'just' being ostracized by society, he is being ignored/treated like a child by adult figures he regards (DD, Mrs Weasley). And I tell you, from the personal experience of having both those things happening to me while growing up, the first just gets you angry (though very angry) and the latest gets you... crying, screaming (to any one, at the slightest provocation), wanting to hit someone (mostly the adult figures who ignored you), wanting to run away... It also amplifies the other things you want/need as a teenager: You start thinking that you really, really are the ONLY person in world that has the whole picture (the others can't even see that you're a very mature person and that you can handle yourself)! So you think it's ok to break some rules because the people imposing them don't know better (in Umbridge's case this was true, of course, but I was thinking about disregarding occlumency practice or listening behind doors to things that the less people know the better). You also get passionate about your interests - in Harry's case Dumbledore's Army. And as for dating... well, that is personal and can't be extrapolated. In my case, I didn't want to love anyone but I saw dating as part of having many friends and being cool so I dated many boys who didn't mean a great deal to me (and many others who did). In Harry's case, I believe he liked Cho but needed his love to be unpolluted by the other terrible things in his life. And speaking of terrible things, my argument is that Harry's conduct in OotP is perfectly normal for a strong-willed fifteen-year-old boy who is being treated like a child (Don't get out of the house; You're too young to be in the Order; Don't go anywhere without a guard; Don't be an attention-seeking brat; etc.) But over that, Harry has a psycho trying to kill him (Don't worry. The adults are taking care of it. You don't need to know what he's up to. Might trouble your little mind.); he witnessed a murder (Don't be an attention-seeking brat.); and he knows a very dangerous person is on the loose gathering strength (You must tell no lies.) while no one seems to care (Don't be an attention-seeking brat.). I think he took it rather well. Susana From susanadacunha at gmx.net Fri Aug 20 22:26:09 2004 From: susanadacunha at gmx.net (Susana da Cunha) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 23:26:09 +0100 Subject: An out-there Snape theory? References: <1092577408.10935.21773.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <003c01c48705$a400f950$562f0dd4@taxi> No: HPFGUIDX 110775 Remulus Lupin wrote: >We know there is *one* DE LV (had) killed because he refused to >follow orders. What if he ordered Reggie to marry a nice, pureblood, >female DE (or DE relative) and he was zapped. *This* is why Severus >turned traitor on his former master, that's the story he told DD. He >loved Regulus, the only one who loved him back, and he died because >of that love. Regulus became a DE to make Snape happy and this caused >his death. No wonder Severus wants revenge against LV and his >henchmen. All in my opinion, of course. Actually, I always thought the story Snape told DD involved the death of someone he loved by the hands of the DE's. But I picture his wife: one of the old Slytherin gang who joined the DE along with the others but without real conviction and then tried to back out and was killed. The only canon to support this is the fact that Snape always wears black. I think your theory is out-there only because if Regulus and Snape's stories are one and the same then might seem like an isolated case within the DE's. And I'm sure there were several cases like of the kind. I rather believe Regulus' story is a clue to Snape's story. Snape's story and the stories of those eventually close to him will probably be one of the most interesting and significant issues in the Potterverse - I'm a believer in the "George" and "GEORGE'S SISTER DIANA" theories (that can be found in Fantastic Posts and Where to find them, under Hypothetic Alley). Susana From melaniertay at yahoo.com Fri Aug 20 23:56:51 2004 From: melaniertay at yahoo.com (Mel) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 23:56:51 -0000 Subject: Good writing... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110776 Linda wrote : "Everything that we had read before-hand showed Harry seeing things as they were happening, not lies." Del replies : Actually no, quite the opposite in fact. We know that in *2* instances only, Harry saw something that was truly happening (the murder of Frank Bryce, and the attempted murder on Arthur Weasley). But all the rest of the time, every single time Harry was seeing that stupid door at the end of the corridor, we knew it was *not* a real event, unless we assumed that LV was indeed going to the DoM every night and managed to go a little further every night. Mel: I agree with Linda on this, becasue I believe the corridor dreams were different from Harry's actual "visions". In the corridor he is not seeing through Voldemort's eyes as he does when he's having a vision. Nor was he made ill from the MOM dreams. I think he mentions that he may bore to death. Del says : > It didn't work for me AT ALL. The moment I realised that Harry > believed his dream was real, I was jerked *out* of the story, because > it was such nonsense for me. And I got steadily more annoyed and > irritated as people tried to put some sense in Harry's head and he > refused to see what was so obvious to me. Mel: I can't really know the answer to this for myself. I figured the vision was fake, but I'm not sure if it was because the book was almost over and we knew someone had to die. This could have meant Sirius because he was captured, but that did not seem likely, as it would have Harry finding his dead body at the Ministry. No big battle scene or climax to end the book. I really wish I hadn't known about the death prior to reading. Mel From nanomaus at gmx.de Fri Aug 20 22:52:08 2004 From: nanomaus at gmx.de (diane lord) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 00:52:08 +0200 Subject: Why now?| LV never loved anyone References: <1092958411.14663.13436.m23@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <00d201c48708$52f4f590$0201a8c0@cheesy> No: HPFGUIDX 110777 Hi there, I am new to the list, and hope this post is okay and applies to the rules as far as I understood them. Re: Why now? sad1199 here: As I posted earlier I just CANNOT believe that JKR would allow Harry to die at the end. It just doesn't happen. If the public is reading for enjoyment, how many people out there want to see the hero DIE at the end of the story? I also believe that even if the books are written for a general audience, children still read them and the hero just DOES NOT die in children's minds. nano says: My favourite childrens books were the Narnian tales from C. S. Lewis, and the heroes ended up dying there too. I have two theories on how the series will end: 1. The power behind the door might be (as already said many a times on the list) sacrificial love - one thing LV knows nothing about. In order to activate it HP would have to sacrifice himself. This would also fit in with the prophecy, LV dying by the hand of HP. This would not however have to be sad, as he would at long last be able to see his parents (I beleive in life after death in the WW). JKR said in Edinburgh that HP would survive UP to the seventh book, she refused to comment on wether or not he survived after book 7 to reach adulthood. I also believe that HP & LV may be linked as such that their fates will be the same - this would mean HP would have to die in order to destroy the Dark Lord - this could be the reason DD did not try to kill LV in OoTP. It could also be the key as to why LV did not die - HP survived, and because of this LV did also (kind of - he didn't cease to exist anyway). I think this was part of what happened when LV first tried to kill HP - HP received some of LV's talents and gifts - and LV also received some of HP's, including the protection, that HP had received from his mother. This protection was what kept LV from blowing up and linked the two for life. 2. Another favourite theory of mine (allthough very far fetched), is that the one thing LV knows absolutely nothing about is how to forgive others. I know this may sound soppy, but what if Harry gets the chance to kill LV and doesn't - for the simple fact that he [HP] is not evil. What if he instead CHOOSES to forgive LV, if he feels sorry for him, because he sees, that TR's fate was so close to his own, and realizes what he himself could have became, if he had not had such guidance along the way? And going even further - HP forgiving & not killing LV would mean LV is in a life debt situation to HP. Wouldn't this be even worse than dying for LV??? I mean after being the WW worst Villain and killing and using everyone and thing in his path having to accept the fact that he owes his life to a mere 'boy'. Would this be enough to make him so mad at himself, that he would seize to exist (been reading to many fairy tales I know)? **************************************************************************** RE: LV never loved anyone Tyler's Lion in 110671: If they were available, he didn't take advantage of these opportunities because HE NEVER LOVED ANYONE. He didn't have those attachments, if they were available. He didn't learn love from his peers b/c we know HE NEVER LOVED ANYONE. He didn't learn it in primary school, either. I condemn the orphanage b/c it had him as an infant, and infants can't do anything. They are completely dependent on others. I don't think you can hold a baby responsible for forming a relationship. Babies WANT to love people, and it's not hard to get them to love you. nano says: I think, that in an Orphanage the adults are bound to have kept some of the children waiting - this might make some of the children unhappy or even angry. Now just think - in Muggle cases the children would cry and scream - but what if the child can perform magic? What if the adults and other children start to notice, that the child is some kind of weirdo ??? The child would certainly be an outsider - and the more detached the child becomes the more anger heaps up, the worse the pressure gets, the crueler the pranks on others get. This is a downward spiral, which could well lead to TR not having been loved by anyone, and because of this not being able to give love. The older the child gets the more it learns to use its talents to scare others into doing what the child wants - no wonder TR/LV turned into a power driven, power hungry monster. Being raised in a muggle orphanage there was hardly anyone there to stop him, was there? So TR's lesson learnt in the orphanage can't have been a good one. And by the time he came to Hogwarts it was to late to show him, as he had already learnt what he could achieve by surpressing others and using them for his cause. Just a few thoughts I had to get out of my system... Greetings from Germany nano From slgazit at sbcglobal.net Sat Aug 21 00:10:15 2004 From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 00:10:15 -0000 Subject: The Prophecy and the Conclusion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110778 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "santana1800" wrote: > I am of the belief that Harry has to die in the conclusion. In the > prophecy it states that LV would mark Harry as his equal. And right after the above it states that "but he will have power the Dark Lord knows not". And Harry being "marked equal" does not necessarily imply that he "is equal". A long time ago JKR said that the last word in the entire series is "scar" (sorry, don't have the link handy, quoting from memory). I think she later said that may have changed, but I can't think of a logical concluding sentence that will end with the word "scar" after Harry is already dead (and presumably mourned/burried - can't imagine her killing him and leaving us in the dark about the outcome). So while I think his death is a strong probable conclusion, it is by no means certain. > I also expect that LV is mortal now and can die since he > used Harry's blood to restore his body. I think that if "killed" now, the same magic used to retain his spirit in bodyless form will still work, and he would come back to power again. He has to be destroyed in a different way, and I suspect that DD knew that and therefore did not even try. Harry shares mind, blood and wand core with LV and I suspect the mental merge between them will become even stronger and start going the other way as Harry matures and becomes stronger - perhaps LV will start experiencing Harry's emotions too even without possessing him. This is why only Harry can do it - LV must be destroyed in some spiritual fashion rather than physical death. Salit (who is certain of one outcome at least - LV will be destroyed at the end...) From xtremesk8ergurl2 at aol.com Fri Aug 20 23:57:19 2004 From: xtremesk8ergurl2 at aol.com (xtremesk8ergurl2 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 19:57:19 EDT Subject: Could Sirius have been bipolar Message-ID: <1d7.2921c144.2e57e9df@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110779 Mary: > A lot of the time in kids (who usually get diagnosed as learning > disabled, adhd, or having oppositional defiant disorder) it cycles > several times a day or week. The reason I'm bringing all of this > up is that people associate bipolar with a dramatic mood change > over a long period of time. It's not always like that. SSSusan: > Now, this "several times a day" notion definitely goes against what > I was taught. Has the discipline changed that much in 20 years?? > Is there a practicing psychologist out there who can straighten this > out? I'm an undergraduate psych/theatre arts major and I was taught the same thing as Mary, but I'm not a psychologist. -xtremesk8ergurl2 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From drednort at alphalink.com.au Sat Aug 21 00:12:22 2004 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:12:22 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Depression and Harry in OotP In-Reply-To: References: <41264BD9.5395.55DADA5@localhost> Message-ID: <41272006.19351.89A9AA1@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 110780 On 20 Aug 2004 at 12:19, delwynmarch wrote: > Shaun wrote : > "I was perfectly capable of pleasure. I sought it out. And I found > it. But *unless* I was actively enjoying myself, I rapidly slid into > depression. And that's what I see in Harry. His 'default setting' > seems depressed to me." > > Del replies : > I guess we just don't see Harry the same way, because I don't see that > his defaut setting has changed from the previous books. In my eyes, he > has only added an alternative setting : anger. But when he's neither > angry nor happy nor anything special, I just don't see that he's > depressed. At least, no more than he was before OoP. Now if someone > wants to make a case that Harry's been suffering from a sort of mild > depression right from PS/SS, that's another thing entirely and I might > agree. Well, in fact, that is pretty much what I'd argue - I think Harry has probably been in a mild depressive state the whole time we've been reading about him, probably due to his upbringing in a fairly loveless environment. What's changed in Order of the Phoenix, in my view, is twofold. Firstly, any depression has become more focused by the events that occurred at the end of Goblet of Fire. GoF is *different* from the previous novels. Bad things happen to Harry during the course of Philosopher's Stone and Chamber of Secrets, but they are more or less resoved by the end of the year. Harry doesn't have to spend his entire summer holidays brooding over what happened to him the previous year, because it is over. The Philosopher's Stone is safe. Tom Riddle is contained, the Chamber is safe. The same is more or less true at the end of Prisoner of Azkaban - where *most* issues have been resolved at the end of the book - although Harry does have one carry over issue in that for a brief period he thought he was going to be free of the Dursley's, only to have that hope dashed. But most of the issues have gone away for the summer - they ended before he left Hogwarts for the year. Goblet of Fire is *very* different. The events of the end of Goblet of Fire don't go away. Harry had to confront evil, and real devastation in a way he hadn't ever had to, except as a baby. Harry has to deal with Cedric being killed next to him, and the knowledge that this is the start of something else. He has much more to deal with and brood over than he ever has before. And he has nobody to turn to for help to deal with these things. Harry is having to deal with things that are *far* worse than he has before. That changes the way he sees the world. I think he has probably been prone to depression since at least the age of 11 - he's just been resilient enough to, for the most part, keep it at bay. But resilience has limits. In Harry's case, though, he does have one big advantage in dealing with a depression. One way people, especially teens, deal with depressive episodes is to turn them into anger. It gives them an outlet for their depression. In the absence of a decent target for their anger, many direct it at their families and friends (and Harry does this to an extent). But Harry has the huge advantage that he actually does have a real, legitimate, target for his anger. He has every reason and every right to be angry at Lord Voldemort. He has a legitimate focus - and I think that legitimate focus, to an extent at least, probably attenuates other expressions of depression. The second issue that's different in Order of the Phoenix is... now, how do I put this? Okay - I mentioned in my earlier post that I was deeply depressed for most of my adolescence. That depression was initially triggered by a hideously bad school environment. And by the same token, the primary reason I survived my adolescent depression was because I wound up in an absolutely wonderful school environment. One of the reasons the Harry Potter books appealed to me when I first read them was because Harry's reaction to Hogwarts as a place of wonder, so mirrored my own to the school I attended when I was 13 in many ways. The time I started at that school was the time of my deepest, darkest, depression, and if I hadn't gone to that school, I think there's a very high probability I wouldn't have survived the following year. I was that depressed. The only reason I didn't kill myself was because I was promised this new school would be far far better - and it lived up to that (despite the presence of Snape-like teachers!). I mention all that, because I think something similar applies to Harry, though to what degree it's true is hard to say precisely. I think Harry, very much, loves Hogwarts. It is his sanctuary. It's the place where he has his heart and his soul. It's the place he loves to be. It's the place where his depression is alleviated (assuming, of course, it exists). Harry has seemed less depressed in the first four books *because* of the existence of Hogwarts. His sanctuary. His place of happiness. Now consider Order of the Phoenix. I don't think anyone would argue that Harry spends his time at the Dursley's constantly wanting to return to Hogwarts. Well, one of Harry's first experiences in Order of the Phoenix is having to live under the threat that that will not happen. He's been told he is expelled. Imagine that... imagine being told that the place you've been happy at for the last four years is somewhere you may not be allowed to return to. If there's a trace of depression in your psyche, that's going to bring it a bit further forward in some fashion or another. When Harry is cleared - his happiness is obvious and incredible. But when he gets to Hogwarts, it's no longer the sanctuary it was. Umbridge's presence sees to that. The stories about him in the Daily Prophet sees to that. He hasn't been made a Prefect. He winds up being banned from Quidditch. He is constantly punished for lying, when he is telling the truth... His sanctuary is flawed. His place of safety has changed immeasurably. Again, if Harry has been suffering from a mild depression all his adolescence, or if he's just been prone to it, it would be abnormal under the circumstances for it not to become more pronounced given what he is having to deal with now. Hogwarts in Order of the Phoenix, is a very different place for Harry (not just Harry - for all the students). > Shaun wrote : > " in a minority of cases, the symptom of depression can actually be > the reverse of the norm. While many depressives give up on food to an > extent, for others it becomes a comfort." > > Del replies : > I happen to know that very well from personal experience. It's even a > warning sign between my husband and me : when I start eating too much > junk food, that's a sure sign that depression is coming back. Quite > often my husband will notice it before me ! Yes, but that's only one way it expresses itself (and it does that for me as well). Del: > But Harry doesn't seem to have any food-related problem of any kind. > He doesn't starve himself, but he doesn't stuff himself either. He > enjoys eating, but he always did and that's healthy. He has no problem > skipping meals if he needs time to study, he doesn't look for > opportunities to nick food from the kitchens, or whatever. If anyone > has a food problem in the Trio, it's Ron : he's got an unhealthy love > for sweets, and he never skips (and even actively looks for) > opportunities to stuff himself. The point is, I'm not saying that Harry has an eating problem - because I don't think he does. My point was that the idea that depression leads to a change in appetite, and weight loss, is hardly universal. For many depressives, the exact opposite can happen - and for a significant number, there may be no real change at all. In the Hogwarts environment, where the food seems so good, I would assume that a healthy teenaged boy is already eating at least as much of it as is good for him - and given the number of stairs those kids have to climb everyday, they can probably eat a fair bit. When people overeat for pleasure (as depressives quite often do), it's generally because it's overeating that is giving them pleasure. If the food itself is wonderful (pleasure giving) to start with, there's less incentive for that to happen. I'm not saying Harry has an eating problem... I'm trying to figure out how to say what my point is. Serious generalisation follows: Depressives are only likely to undereat if eating is a chore. The reason depressives tend to undereat in many cases, is because they have lost interest in food, just as they've lost interest in other areas of their lives. If eating is not a chore - for example, if the food is unusually good, that is much less likely to happen. Junk food does complicate matters slightly - but while the Hogwarts diet doesn't seem incredibly healthy by muggle standards, it doesn't seem to me to include a lot of junk food. Susanna/pigwidgeon37's essay at the Lexicon outlines the type of food they eat (http://www.hp-lexicon.org/essays/essay-food.html): "Roast beef, roast chicken, fried sausages, stew, casserole, tripe (which McGonagall ironically offers Trelawney in PA), pork chops, shepherd?s pie, steak, Cornish pasties, lamb chops, sausages, bacon and steak, steak and kidney pudding, steak and kidney pie, black pudding, sandwiches (chicken and ham, for Harry and Ron in CS); bread, marshmallows and crumpets (Harry and Ron roast them over the Common room fire during the Christmas holidays in PS/SS), baked pumpkin (at Halloween), roast potatoes, jacket potatoes, boiled potatoes, mashed potatoes, chips, Yorkshire Pudding, peas, sprouts, carrots, gravy, ketchup, custard tart, Mint Humbugs, ice cream, apple pies, treacle tart, Spotted Dick, chocolate ?clairs, chocolate gateau, jam doughnuts, Trifle, strawberries, jelly, and rice pudding." While most moder nutritionists would probably roll their eyes at an entire diet like that, most of it really doesn't fall into the category of junk food. The kids do eat 'junk food' - sweets, most notably - as nearly all kids do when they have the chance, and some probably overindulge on occasions (as many kids do when they have the chance). But overall, I actually suspect their intake of sweets, etc, is actually fairly low. There's no sign of a tuck shop at Hogwarts - in term time, they can certainly get sweets when they can go into Hogsmeade, but opportunities to do that are fairly limited (at least, official opportunities are - I've always found the fact that there is a secret tunnel between Britain's only Wizarding School, and one of the best Wizarding sweetshops in the country, very amusing. I have a mental image of generations of Hogwarts students digging a few feet a year, knowing that one day, ONE DAY, in the distant future, they will achieve the ultimate objective!) My view of teenage children with the type of access to sweets that Hogwarts students have, is that, the vast majority would probably absolutely binge on sweets after a Hogsmeade weekend (poor Madam Pomfrey!), but very few sweets would last until Tuesday - meaning that most of the time, they are not eating many at all. Hogwarts actually has a fairly healthy and nutritious diet - *provided* the children are getting adequate exercise. And as someone who used to have to climb three levels of stairs a day, everyday, while he was at school, on multiple occasions, I find it *very* easy to believe that in a seven floor castle, with even towers, and one hundred and forty two staircases, that the kids are getting all the aerobic workout they need! > Shaun wrote : > " being aware of your accomplishments may very easily be a defence > mechanism to the feelings of guilt, or worthlessness, or low > self-esteem that are common (though not universal) in depression. The > mind tries to fight depression in many cases, consciously and > unconsciously. If you're feeling low, you do often bring memories of > past achievements to the fore. And they can help." > > Del replies : > I understand that. But the thing is, Harry seems to have a healthy > understanding of his accomplishments : he knows he's done great things > (and gets upset when people seem to overlook that), but he's also > aware that he's no superhero, and he gets upset when Ron and Hermione > seem to see more in what he did than he himself does. Harry is pretty > good as identifying what is his doing or not, in good things as in bad > things : he knows he's beaten LV at the graveyard, but he also knows > that he couldn't have done it without the help he received, and he > also knows he could not have saved Cedric no matter what. He's not > feeling either overly proud nor overly guilty. Doesn't sound like > depression to me. Well, then, you have a very different view of depression than the type I experienced. That's the thing that has to be borne in mind - there's no single experience of depression. Just a lot of generalities. Quite frankly, what I see in Harry is rather similar in this respect to what I went through. I knew I had achieved pretty nice things... not in the same league as Harry, of course, but, as one example, when I was 12, I became the youngest (by over two years) student in my state to ever reach the all-Secondary Schools public speaking finals, competing againt kids who were up to 17, along with a host of other significant academic awards. I had *real* achievements to look at, and I was proud of them. But I was also aware of my own limitations. I didn't exagerate my 'good achievements', nor did I - except for brief periods when I was in the absolute deepest throes of depression, undervalue them. I didn't feel overly proud. Or overly guilty. I felt a bit of both, depending on what I was thinking about. And I most assuredly was depressed. People have to be very careful in generalising about depression. I see Harry as depressed, partly because what I see is in many ways, very similar to what I experienced - but there are also some rather significant differences. > Shaun wrote, about the inability to concentrate : > "I suppose Binns' classes don't count (-8 > > But again, not universal. I often became hyperfocused when I was most > depressed, rather than losing the ability to concentrate." > > Del replies : > Well, if Binns's classes count, I guess pretty much every student in > Harry's class is depressed, except for Hermione :-) > > As for hyperfocus, we don't see much of that either, except in the > situations that require it. Ah, but I'm not saying, hyperfocus is common. I've seen it - but it actually seems fairly uncommon to me. My point in mentioning it, is because it illustrates that this is not a black and white issue - like most of the diagnostic characteristics of depression. Even if most people have a particular symptom, there may be a minority who are quite the opposite - and even more who fall in between the two outliers. > Shaun wrote : > " And anger and frustration are common symptoms of depression - > *especially* in teenage boys who have very few other socially > acceptable ways of expressing depressed feelings." > > Del replies : > You've got a point there. But still I'm not sure this anger can be > taken as a sure sign of depression. I would take this anger for just > what it is : anger and frustration at being called a liar and not > being able to defend himself. Anyone would be angry in his situation, > without any need to call in depression. Yes, and no, in my view. Harry certainly has a reason to be angry when he's called a liar, and not able to defend himself. But a lot of his anger *doesn't* have any nice, clear, single cause like that. There's some cases where he has clear reasons. But there's plenty where I don't think he does. People need to bear in mind that a person who is suffering from depression that doesn't have a reason, can also, at the same time, be depressed for a reason. A person who has a depressive illness, and who is suddenly falsely accused and punished, for example, may now have a legitimate reason to be depressed. But that doesn't mean that the depressive illness has suddenly vanished or become irrelevant. Harry does have some legitimate reasons for being depressed. But I think there's a lot more going on than just normal reactions. > Shaun wrote : > "Honestly... considering what Harry saw at the end of Goblet of Fire, > and the lack of opportunity he's had to process it (except for that > one brief period with Molly Weasley at the end of Goblet of Fire - one > of my favourite scenes in all the novels, because I know what > experiences like that can do to you if you don't have that chance to > let it out), I'd be quite surprised if he doesn't have a measure of > depression - considering he does have frustration and anger, anyway." > > Del replies : > As I said in another post, I was *expecting* Harry to experience some > kind of depression at the end of GoF. But when I started OoP, I saw > that JKR didn't seem to be taking him in that direction. I was > actually quite surprised at how *little* he seemed to be feeling bad > when awake. He's angry and frustrated, sure, and he even goes into an > alternating pattern of overdrive and stupor after the Dementor attack, > but he never seems to dwell on Cedric's death or on anything else. > He's looking *forward*, he's in a *positive* mood concerning the war, > he has a healthy dose of self-esteem, he's sure of his capacities, and > so on. That was confusing to me at first, especially considering that > we are told that he's got nightmares about the graveyard almost every > night. And then I understood that the answer might be precisely that : > his brain is processing the events at night, so Harry doesn't have to > process them during the day. After all, we're talking about a boy who > showed almost no sign of dysfunction after being abused for 10 years ! > It's not such a strech to assume that he must have a very effective > built-in coping mechanism. No, it isn't. But frankly, if Harry didn't have a very effective coping mechanism, I'd expect to see him in St Mungo's by now. Harry seems to me to have an unusual level of resilience for a child his age, right from the start of Philosopher's Stone. As he gets older, I think his resilience does increase - but so do the pressures that are constantly building on him. Now, using myself as an example again, I was probably the opposite in this regard. I lacked resilience, I was less resilient than the normal child when I was 11 or 12. That's one major reason why I collapsed into extremely awful and obvious depression at that age. But as I got older, my resilience did increase (both 'naturally' and with help - help that Harry isn't getting). The fact that Harry hasn't collapsed into a gibbering heap means he probably is unusually strong, and has probably found unusually strong defence mechanisms to deal with what assaults him. That's great - and to his credit. But here's the thing... Resilience doesn't always *stop* people from becoming depressed, when they have good reason to be. It *can* do that, for some people. But it doesn't always. What it can mean is merely that you are able to cope with your depression - and that's what I see in Harry. If Harry *wasn't* depressed, I would, actually expect him *to* dwell on Cedric's death. You see that as a sign that Harry is not depressed. I think it's very likely to be the exact opposite. A 'healthy' reaction to what Harry saw happen to Cedric would involve thinking about it quite a bit. The fact that Harry doesn't do so, is because his mind is *defending* against what he saw. It's not absorbing it. It's not processing it in a healthy way. It's simply shielding itself. Now, Harry, isn't in total denial by any means, but I would say his unconscious refusal to think about this - and I do think that is what is going on. It's not a sign of psychological health if your mind won't let you think about genuinely bad experiences or shields you from them. I went through something, somewhat similar I think. At the end of my fourth form year at school, my father died very suddenly. The thing is... you have to understand that the way school worked where I am back then, your last two years of secondary school - Year 11 and 12, Form V and VI, almost completely determined your educational future. They really did determine where you could go to university, and what course you could do. My father died just before this two year period started for me. I couldn't afford the luxury of time to grieve. So I locked my feelings down as much as I could, and refused to think about what had happened to me and what I'd lost. Because I could not afford to do that. I decided - and I think I was right to decide that - that the best way I could honour my father was to do well in my education, especially seeing that the main thing that killed him was stress, and the main cause of his stress was me and my education. I had to lock my feelings down. I didn't do it perfectly. I didn't completely fail to process it. But to a huge extent, I simply locked away the feelings. I didn't dwell on them. I did look forward, all the time, to the future. My self esteem was probably the best it had been since I was 8 years old, my mood was upbeat and positive. I was more confident of what I could achieve than I ever was before. Pretty much matches the way you describe Harry in Order of the Phoenix. But was I still deeply depressed? Of course, I was. Had my depressive illness gone away? No, it hadn't. Was I behaving in a psychologically healthy fashion... actually I'm not sure. I think given the reality I was facing, my attitude was reasonably healthy. And that may be true for Harry as well. But even if Harry is dealing with depression the best way he can, given the situation he's found he's found himself in - that wouldn't mean the depression isn't there. What I see in Harry - and this is just my perception, based on my experiences, and a little bit of knowledge of depression from outseide my experiences - is a remarkable boy whose resilience is preventing him from being crushed in a situation where he would have every reason to crumple. The fact he doesn't, may say a great deal about his character, and his strength, and his power, and his self esteem, and his self image, and his self confidence. But it doesn't really necessarily say anything at all to say that he's not dealing with depression. You expected to see Harry depressed in Order of the Phoenix, but because Harry's depression didn't match what your schema tells you depression is, you don't see him as depressed. Whereas, in my case, it matches my schema of depression extremely well. I *know* I was depressed. I can't *know* that for Harry, of course. But I can say, that what I see and read in him is very, very familiar. 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 dolis5657 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 00:23:51 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 00:23:51 -0000 Subject: Good Writing (was Why now?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110781 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: [snip] > dcmck: > > What I don't agree with is that his refusal to free Kreacher > made his death inevitable. In fact, didn't Sirius want to send > Kreacher forever from GP, along with all the other memorabilia > of his ancestors? It was, in fact, Dumbledore who said that > Kreacher could not be released because he knew too much.< > > Pippin: > Did Dumbledore say that? I only remember Sirius saying it: > > "If you could just set him free," said Hermione hopefully, > "maybe--" > > "We can't set him free, he knows too much about the Order," > said Sirius curtly. "And anyway, the shock would kill him. You > suggest to him that he leave this house, see how he takes it." -- > OOP ch6 > > How Kreacher was supposed to betray anybody if he was dead > of shock, Sirius didn't explain. You can see he didn't really put > much thought into it...typical Sirius, I must say. > > and later.. > "[Hermione] was quite right, Harry," said Dumbledore. "I warned > Sirius when we adopted twelve Grimmauld Place as our > headquarters that Kreacher must be treated with kindness and > respect. I also told him that Kreacher could be dangerous to us. > I do not think that Sirius took me very seriously, or that he ever > saw Kreacher as a being with feelings as acute as a human's--" > [...] > "Sirius did not hate Kreacher," said Dumbledore. "He regarded > him as a servant unworthy of much interest or notice. > Indifference and neglect often do more damage than outright > dislike." > > --OOP ch 37 > > Maybe no amount of kindness and respect would have made > any difference to Kreacher, but we don't know, because Sirius > never gave him the choice. It's horribly ironic that Sirius, who of > all people ought to feel some empathy with a captive, wasn't able > to do so. > > Pippin Ouch! Touche... OK... so Dumbledore never actually said that Kreacher couldn't be set free or dismissed, but it still seems that that would have been a difficult thing to accomplish, unless Sirius had had the forethought to do so prior to opening the house to the Order. Even then, would Kreacher actually have left once he was free to do so? Freedom, after all, means that one also has the choice to stay... I do like the observation that Sirius' inability to empathize with Kreacher as a captive is ironic. On the other hand, Kreacher doesn't seem to have felt particularly trapped, just intruded upon... Still, it is Harry who has the empathetic breakthrough in recognizing the similarity between his situation and Sirius' in being housebound and excluded. It's kinda cool that JKR is able to reflect both awareness and obtuseness through use of the same characters, almost in the same breath. I guess that goes back to our subject line of "good writing". :-) From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 00:30:13 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 00:30:13 -0000 Subject: Why now? (other books / series) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110782 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Eustace_Scrubb" wrote: > Becky wrote: > > > >The grey havens, as nice as > > > > they seem-- well, I don't know. > > > > Geoff noted: > > They are the place from which the ships sail over the sea to > > Elvenhome where the Elves live a blissful existence. Frodo goes > there (as I mentioned in message 110714) and Sam, Legolas and Gimli also went there after many years. > > > > Hardly ending in death as I think you meant it. The options are > > still open for Harry - well, not strictly true, but for those who > > speculate they are; the dealer of the answer is playing her cards > > close to her chest(!) > > Eustace_Scrubb: > > I could be wrong (often am), but I believe that the general thought is > that mortals who are allowed to go to the Undying Lands can be freed > from many of the mental and physical hurts they sustained in > Middle-earth, but they do not lose their mortality. Is there any > similar place or state in the Wizarding World? > dcgmck: Dumbledore tells Harry in PS/SS that death is but the next great adventure. Nearly Headless Nick tells Harry in OotP that he was afraid of the next plane of existence. Harry, Luna, Neville, and Ginny hear voices across the threshold beyond the Veil. There is only conjecture because no one has returned from either Elvenhome or from beyond the Veil to say, at least as far as we have thus far been informed... From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 00:32:37 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 00:32:37 -0000 Subject: Harry's Depression in OoP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110783 Brenda wrote : "Apologies for being too scholarly and on constant lecture-mode. Most of posters here are SUCH good debaters that the only way to make some intellectual contribution is to shower everyone with scientific facts. Sort of defence mechanism, if you will. *shrugs* " Del replies : I have no problems with people giving expert information on difficult or complicated subjects. In fact, I appreciate that, as it prevents the discussion from deviating too far from reality. Brenda wrote : "I'm simply wondering why some manages to get out and others fall deeper and deeper. Prolonged self-indulgement of "I can't do anything, I'm hopeless" will most definitely slow down the activities of neurotransmitters and neurophysiological processes as whole." Del replies : Well, yes, of course. But if you don't think you can do it, if you know you're going to fail, why would you try anyway ? If you asked a normal person to jump up 2 meters high, just like that, they wouldn't do it, right ? They'd look at you like you're crazy and they would dismiss your request because they would just know they can't do it. That's the way it feels when you're depressed : people telling you to do this or that simply don't make sense to you because you *know* you can *not* do those things. As for why some manage to get out early while others sink deeper, it's a complicated issue. Recognising what's going on is important, and unfortunately the depressed person is quite often the last to see wha'ts going on. Even friends and family can be blind. It took me several years after I realised I was depressed to figure out that my mom's annoying behaviour was simply due to her being depressed too. On the other hand, it took me 5 minutes to figure out that my husband's best friend's ex-girlfriend was psychotic, when neither guy had been able to figure things out for months. Then there's having a strong support network, finding the right people to guide you, and so on. I, Del, wrote: "Harry keeps feeling bad because the events that make him feel bad are *never* lifted. Harry is attacked from everywhere (including his own classmate in his own dormitory !), so of course he's not being overly happy." Brenda answered : " But that's how depression starts?!" Del replies : Sure ! What I meant is that I get the impression that Harry is only still in the stage where only really depressing events make him feel bad. He hasn't reached the stage where he overreacts to small events, and he's nowhere near the stage where he starts feeling depressed for no reason at all. If we compare his low mood to physical pain for example, I think he only suffers agony when something hits him badly for example. He hasn't reached the stage where a simple scratch will make him suffer very strongly, and he's nowhere near the stage where his body will start hurting badly for no reason at all. Yes he's in pain and that is to be expected, but his pain seems to me to still be strictly related to the blows he's receiving, and I don't get the impression that he's suffering from unexplicable and unprovoked pangs of pain. I'm not sure this helped, but I tried :-) Brenda wrote : "I always viewed Harry's tendency to blame everything on himself as typical teenage hero's problem. He believes he had chances to fix it but he didn't or couldn't. Very desperately trying not to go into Occlumency and Sirius' death here, but except for those occasions Harry feels helpless and blames himself because he is the hero, Marked One to conquer Voldemort. He knows he has powers to stop more tragedies from happening." Del replies : I'm really confused by this. First because I don't see that Harry blames everything on himself, not at all ! If he should have blamed himself for anything, it would have been for Cedric's death, and yet he didn't. Can you point me to times where he blamed himself wrongly ? As for blaming himself because he is the Hero, the Marked One, I don't understand how he could, since he only discovered about the Prophecy at the end of OoP. So what do you mean exactly ? Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 01:10:47 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 01:10:47 -0000 Subject: The Dream (was Good writing...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110784 Mel wrote : " I believe the corridor dreams were different from Harry's actual "visions". In the corridor he is not seeing through Voldemort's eyes as he does when he's having a vision. Nor was he made ill from the MOM dreams. I think he mentions that he may bore to death." Del replies : It's not that simple. Frank Bryce vision : Harry does *not* see that one through LV's eyes. Arthur Weasley vision : Harry sees that one through the eyes of the snake that LV is possessing. There's another one I can remember, the one where a DE (Rookwood ?) is revealing something to LV. Harry sees that one through LV's eyes but he doesn't realise that right away. First he notices his own hands and voice, and then he sees himself in a mirror. Had he not seen and heard those things, it's not clear whether Harry would have realised that he was LV. Let's get to the Corridor dreams now. What makes you think he's not seeing them through LV's eyes ? We're never told whether Harry sees any part of his body, nor if he sees himself in a mirror, and he never talks. In fact, considering that those dreams are actually a translation of LV's obsession with getting to the Prophecy, it would make perfect sense that Harry would see those fantasies through the eyes of the one who wants to live them. Up until he realises that he can contaminate Harry's mind, LV believes that those fantasies are strictly private, so why would he dream of anyone but himself going down that corridor ? And finally the vision about Sirius. Harry sees that one through LV's eyes. He sees his hand and hears his voice, so there's no doubt. But that's *precisely* one of the things that scream "fake vision" to me. The beginning of the vision is *exactly* the same as all the previous dreams he's had about the DoM. The content is exactly the same, the intent is exactly the same : get to a specific spot. Why ? Harry doesn't know at first. And then finally he gets where he's been wanting to go for *a whole year*. And what does he find ? Sirius. A bloodied Sirius who's obviously been tortured for quite some time already. But Harry doesn't notice anyone else around. No DE grovelling to their master "He's here Master, we got him and brought him to you as you ordered, but he won't do it, he won't take the Prophecy." Nope, nobody, as though Sirius had been torturing himself. And then there's the dialogue between the two : LV tells Sirius to "take it for me...". Take what ? Obviously, Sirius knows what LV is talking about, it sounds like they are simply continuing a conversation they'd been having, but how could that be if LV just arrived there ?? And those are just the *major* problems I have with this vision, there are also some minor ones. But really my main problem is : how could a dream Harry's been having for almost a year relate an event that's taking place now ?? This is the very same dream he's been having for months, only taken to its conclusion for the first time. It simply doesn't make sense to me. Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 01:42:33 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 01:42:33 -0000 Subject: Savior complex? (was "Harry and Tom") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110785 "Matt" wrote: snip. I don't > think it's a sign of some deep-seated psychological problem that Harry > wants to help Neville or Hermione or Hagrid or Ginny or Gabrielle or > Cedric or Arthur or Sirius. Rather, it's a sign of a young man who > knows right from wrong, and is willing to stand up for what is right. > Alla: I don't think that is a problem either. I mean I am sure it has some kind of psychological explanation. Every pattern of our behaviour can be analysed with very interesting results, but whatever are roots of Harry's "saving people thing", I admire characters and real people with such trait. From melaniertay at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 01:52:22 2004 From: melaniertay at yahoo.com (Mel) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 01:52:22 -0000 Subject: The Dream (was Good writing...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110786 > Del replies : > It's not that simple. > > Frank Bryce vision : Harry does *not* see that one through LV's eyes. Mel: I agree with this. As I'm not sure that this vision was actually "confirmed" to Harry as being exactly true either, but I could be wrong. This entire scene was somewhat strange for the books as a whole (I think anyway). > Arthur Weasley vision : Harry sees that one through the eyes of the > snake that LV is possessing. > There's another one I can remember, the one where a DE (Rookwood ?) is > revealing something to LV. Harry sees that one through LV's eyes but > he doesn't realise that right away. Mel: He doesn't realize it right away in the Sirius vision either. He thinks he's himself until someone speaks through his mouth. He had never been made aware that it was anyone other than him until the last one. He had every reason to believe that Voldemort would eventually go there having concluded that was where the weapon was kept (and Voldemort eventually did show up there). Also, in all three cases he sweats a lot and/or feels ill, but not so with just the regular hallway dreams. Plus, Harry knows the difference between the dreams and visions. He didn't go running to DD or worry about what Voldemort was up to after having a corridor dream. Granted he couldn't tell the difference between the false vision and the real ones, but to his knowledge he had not had a false one prior to the Sirius one. Why would he automatically think it was? Mel From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 01:56:07 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 01:56:07 -0000 Subject: Harry's Depression in OoP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110787 > > Del replies : snip. > I'm really confused by this. First because I don't see that Harry > blames everything on himself, not at all ! If he should have blamed > himself for anything, it would have been for Cedric's death, and yet > he didn't. Can you point me to times where he blamed himself wrongly ? > > Alla: Del, could you please clarify , what do you mean by saying that Harry should have blamed himself for Cedric's death and did not? He surely did blame himself: ""It wasn't your fault, Harry," Mrs.Weasley wispered. "I told him to take cup with me," said Harry" - GoF, paperback, p.714 So, he definitely blames himself. Are you saying that it was his fault? From macfotuk at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 01:56:24 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 01:56:24 -0000 Subject: Peerage and Rank in WW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110788 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cindy" wrote: > I don't think it is DD's brother, because that would make DD a half- > blood prince, too, and there has been nothing to suggest that DD is a > half-blood. There has been nothing to suggest much at all about DD and his background. How old is he etc? I almost believe the Dumbeldore=Ron theory because although I thought at first it was a preposterous idea JKR has had others (polyjuiced Crouch Jr = Moody, timeturner to save Sirius, RiddleMort, QuirrelMort and, dare I say it, HarryMort). But on the theme of royalty and rank - we know little so far about princes, kings or queens in the WW. Sir Nick was clearly a peer, but a muggleworld peer? (he's a wizard or else couldn't be ghost if I've read it right). If a WW peer, then that suggests WW royalty. We have rank clearly already - Malfoys (blacks) old, pureblood and rich/respectable, Weasleys lowly and poor salt-of-the-earths. In general the WW seems strange compared with the muggleworld. Is Fudge the top wizard in the UK? Or is there a 'king of the WW'? President? Who elected Fudge and how and when (most is known on the latter). Why isn't the best/strongest/most powerful (at magic) wizard the top wizard? DD surely qualifies but perhaps he's too humble and self- effacing to seek power. If LV puts himself outside the system then do we have a goodie vs baddie 2-party system? Or is it 3-party - LV etc = baddies, OotP/DD - goodies and the rest (MoM and the average WW inhabitant = liberals/apathetics/wets/NIMBYs/anything for a quiet life/other). Has anyone read anything I missed that enlightens, or otherwise have a view on this? Obviously JKR can't put everything in and this might be why an eighth* backstory/encyclopedia book is proposed (not sure JKR approves!) * Arguably she already wrote two books not considered, but nonetheless containign info, i.e Quidditch through the ages and fantastic beasts and where to find them (or whatever the titles were). From patientx3 at aol.com Sat Aug 21 02:31:57 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 02:31:57 -0000 Subject: Depression ... in OotP - Cho/Marietta In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110789 Pippin wrote : >>Cho seems to be doing okay by the end. When she passes Harry in the train corridor, she blushes instead of bursting into tears. She's started a new relationship with Michael Corner, and she's stuck by Marietta, which I have to admire, even though I don't admire Marietta herself very much.<< Del replied: >>I understand why Marrietta did what she did, and I can't really blame her : the girl was stuck between two diametrically opposed loyalties.<< HunterGreen: I don't really blame her either. I blame Cho more for bringing her to the meeting when she clearly didn't want to. Yes, Marietta could have refused to go, but who knows what Cho said to her to convince her to come in the first place. And then after she had signed it really didn't matter if she was going to meetings or not, on paper she was a member of the group (and I'm sure Cho kept pushing her to come along). As the reader, we're stuck seeing everything from Harry's perspective, which of course makes what Marietta did look horrible and unforgivable. But from her point of view, its rather understandable. Her role models (her parents, the government) were telling her that Voldemort was not back, and that Harry was unstable. On top of that, she was being told that if she was found out to be a part of that group she would be expelled. Perhaps Harry, Ron, Hermione and the others were committed enough to learning DADA to take that risk, but she has far less motivation. Look how long it takes her before she actually says anything, I'll bet she was obsessing about it from the first meeting on. It might have even come up over Christmas when she was at home with her family. She was faced with being expelled and therefore ruining her future, and betraying her friends. From her point-of-view what she was doing was the "right thing", since the students were breaking school rules. I don't think she did it maliciously at all. Of course that doesn't mean that what she did wasn't wrong, and I do think she deserved to have 'sneak' written across her face. However, Cho deserves as much of the blame as she does. Cho should have known better than to bring Marietta to any of the meetings. Del: >>As for Cho, I guess you're right and she's finally getting better by the end of the year.<< HunterGreen: I wonder how she was when she wasn't around Harry? We only see a small window of her behavior, it could be that she was able to control herself when she was not around a reminder of what happened to Cedric. I don't know if she was necessarily clinically depressed any more than Harry. From macfotuk at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 03:01:01 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 03:01:01 -0000 Subject: Death (was Re: Why now? (other books / series)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110790 > I (Laurasia) reply: > > I agree. If Harry dies at the end of the series it will be because > he *has* to die. JK wouldn't just accidentally kill him off. The > death would have to be necessary for the well-being of the entire > wizarding and muggle world. > > In other words, (if Harry dies, it will be because...) Harry *has* > to die in order to attain the 'happily ever after.' > > If the only way Harry can stop Voldemort is to die, do you still > want Harry to win? Do you still want good to triumph over evil? > > As shown through Sirius' abrupt and unexpected death, JKR wants her > readers to be prepared for 'real world death.' Perhaps this > indicates that she will take the theme further (MacFoTUK interposes here that she already has - MANY times - see below) and *not* give Harry > a happily ever after with a wife and a baby. Perhaps she wants to > show us that there are more important things than your own personal > contentment. (but I agree with most of what Laurasia wrote in the rest of that post - 110699) MacFoTUK now writes: I've for a long time unwillingly thought that Harry might (have to) die at the end. It's a neat way for JKR to make certain the series has 7 books and only 7 books as she says was always planned. I hate the idea for two reasons - 1. my own fear of death (not alone in this I suspect!) - so how can a hero die? and 2. These are 'kid's books' - so how can the hero die? Excuse me though one minute - just 'cos I and many others hate the idea of our own mortality and, therefore, that of a hero/character we have been identifying with all along doesn't mean shit doesn't happen (excuse my French if you are offended by this usage) and JKR has always shown she is a mature writer of very great ability who doesn't (isn't prepared to and doesn't believe one should) let kids off lightly. Death is a reality - it is one of the most basic themes of humanity - something each and every one of us shares in our future as a certainty and yet one which completely puzzles us and often frightens the bejasus out of us (or into us). In writing a series of books that have death so centrally as a theme JKR is writing a great piece of literature even if many other aspects of HP and the WW are much less likely to survive the test of time - especially its contemporary setting and escapist/mystical theme of magic. The series opens with death: Harry's parents - what could be sadder? What could more rapidly cause us to identify with Harry and feel sorry for him and empathetic? Even in book one death remains a theme throughout - ghosts, the philosopher's stone (eternal life), Voldemort's indiscriminate (as well as targeted) murders of innocents and/or 'the good' as a reign of terror, the unicorn's death (again death, well murder, of innocence/great good/beauty, Voldemorts thirst for life AT ANY PRICE and, though we don't see it, Quirrel's death. JKR is not afraid to face kids with death even though some adults feel they should be protected because, IMO, she may hold with the view that kids respond best to the truth and to being spoken to as grown-ups rather than well meaning babying - I know what I liked best as a kid in tv programmes and books was the no holds barred approach (even if I'm a fantasy fan) rather than the everything in the garden is rosy (Enid Blyton) approach that placates the very young. Lemony Snicket's success (A series of misfortunate events series) stems from this same view though in fact I personally find his (?) writing extremely childish and Victorian melodramatic in many other ways. Harry faces death in all the novels so far, with many many obvious examples such as the death of Percy which she was slated by some for at the time as being 'too much' for children. I don't have time or energy to do the complete list (not least cos it's so long!) but other examples include LV 'immortalising' himself as Tom Riddle, the Dementors' ultimate weapon being to convey an undead (soulless) fate in victims of their kiss, Voldemort having done some dirty deal to stay alive and his followers being called death eaters (they too want to cheat death it seems and this is likely to be what LV has promised them as the reward for their loyalty). The worst curse there is and the only one to which there is no counter curse, although the end scenes of OotP show that it can be dodged and deflected, is avada kedavra - the killing curse. JKR has repeatedly emphasized that to cheat death is to cheat oneself and Nearly Headless Nick's speech to Harry at the end of OotP seems to affirm this. In her recent Edinburgh interview she says we (her overly analytical fans) should ask ourself why LV didn't die the night he tried to kill Harry and got hit with his own curse and why Dumbledore didn't kill him in OotP (assuming DD can, which I think he can't, or won't). I believe this implies that to kill Voldemort will be to also sacrifice Harry and, therefore that Harry may have to sacrifice himself to rid the world of LV - DD maybe won't kill LV now because he won't kill Harry - Harry must be free to choose to do this for himself. Death may also be seen as the only means of redeeming LV, as well as saving the world from him. The veil could have tremendous (but still unrevealed) significance and in an earlier post (see 109302 and 109395) I already outlined a view I have that Harry may have contributed to Sirius' death (if that is what he is - dead - Lupin's statement that Sirius is d-, could mean disappeared or something else, though most others have told Harry that Sirius IS dead/lost forever). The DeathEaters also freaked to see Harry on the dais in the death arch/veil room and Lupin stopped him jumping onto it. I'm wondering if Lily didn't have a job looking into death, something the MoM clearly does do, and maybe the knowledge she had from her studies allowed her to come up with the defences she used to protect Harry. It is interesting to think that had she known that her actions might intertwine Harry and LV's fates so much she might have chosen his death rather than what, if he dies at the end, might be viewed as a rather miserably fated, if noble and necessary, life (namely to exist solely as a frequently sad, unloved and misunderstood hero destined chiefly to be the only weapon the WW has to get rid of nasty old LV). Perhaps DD's letter to the Dursleys (read Petunia) also stated that she HAD to protect him because he was all the world (WW or muggle) had as defence against LV. This is the simplest explanation I have for why she would take him despite it being so much against her will, at least from what we've been led to believe so far. If Harry IS the only weapon, as we have been led to believe the prophecy suggests, either DD can't kill LV on his own, or for him (DD) to do so would have unacceptable consequences. Lastly. I have to say that my first reading of OotP was definitely coloured by the pre-hype from JKR that someone significant would die. She set up many instances where, variously, one thought Ron, Mr Weasley Sr, Hagrid and only at the end Sirius would be 'the' one to die. Reading this way spoiled for me, to an extent, what I knew even then was a book as well written as any of the others. Although Sirius' death was shocking it would have been even more so to me without the hype. I suppose this illustrates what JKR said in her Edinburgh interview, i.e. that we should be careful what we ask her to reveal, because 'knowing' ahead of time might spoil the reading. I know that after the first read I was left feeling that despite its being a very enjoyable read, OotP was the least of the 5 books since its main plot despite the gorgeously vile Umbridge was to kill Sirius. I always found the prophecy (enigmatic though it remains) a bit of a let down to hang the whole book on, but yes in hindsight I recognise that a lot was revealed or introduced in book 5, including new characters and unfinished new or ongoing threads like the lasting effects (if any) of the brain on Ron, the development of Neville and his importance (plus the breaking of what may have been an inhibitory wand), decline or outing of Fudge, the Percy mystery, Occlumency and legilimency, Snape's memories, introduction of thestrals (more death imagery), Luna (ditto), Tonks, metamophomagi, Grawp and so on. From macfotuk at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 03:10:26 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 03:10:26 -0000 Subject: Death (was Re: Why now? (other books / series)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110791 Spot the Freudian error: (correction to my last post) > examples such as the death of Percy which she was slated by some for > at the time as being 'too much' for children. I *meant* Cedric of course (though like his mum I do worry about Percy) - and is it coincidence that one of DD's names is Percival on a DD=Ron mutating to DD=Percy theme? Percy threw spanners in HP's works several times earlier in the books and maybe this was pompousness but maybe more to it than that. Still curious about why he's turned (if he has etc). From HxM_fan at hotmail.com Sat Aug 21 00:17:54 2004 From: HxM_fan at hotmail.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Val=E9rie_Brabon?=) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 02:17:54 +0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: An out-there Snape theory? References: <1092577408.10935.21773.m12@yahoogroups.com> <003c01c48705$a400f950$562f0dd4@taxi> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110792 Susana said: Actually, I always thought the story Snape told DD involved the death of someone he loved by the hands of the DE's. But I picture his wife: one of the old Slytherin gang who joined the DE along with the others but without real conviction and then tried to back out and was killed. The only canon to support this is the fact that Snape always wears black. --------------- Valy says: I remember have read a theory like this in a site, and this is very possible. It was about Snape meeting a muggle, and they fallen in love and married in secret. And one day, his wife got killed by Voldemort or the DE. And she was pregnent. (We know Voldy and the DE are against muggle-born and muggle relationships stuff.) I also remember had read a bit of OotP at library (I havent got it yet...... *cries*) where he was at St-Mungos, in a bed, with a very mournful expression on his face. I think something happened to him, and made him leave the DE. Maybe a wife who died? What do you think about this? Valy. PS: once again, sorry about my terrible english. Some belgian chick here... ^^; ========================== "Under your clothes, I'm sure you're nude!" http://www.livejournal.com/users/valy http://www.fanfiction.net/~valy http://www.fanfiction.net/~youpla http://valy.deviantart.com From sage2245 at msn.com Sat Aug 21 00:26:44 2004 From: sage2245 at msn.com (gir978) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 00:26:44 -0000 Subject: Graveyard (WAS re: No Women DEs at Graveyard? ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110793 Tina wrote: > One slightly related question regarding this chapter in GoF, > where are all the women? Are there any women DE's besides > Bellatrix? What about Narcissa? She was (implied) to be > having fun torturing muggles at the QWC but she wasn't in the > circle. I think we are unnecessarily limiting ourselves in regards to the graveyard scene. Just because Voldemort names *some* of the DEs, that doesn't mean there are not others present. Harry even thinks to himself (p.660, ch.34 GOF) "...All he had learned there was the Disarming Spell, expelliarmus...and what use would it be to deprive Voldemort of his wand, even if he could, when he was surrounded by Death Eaters, outnumbered by at least thirty to one?" I think JKR left plenty of room for other DEs to be present and we just don't know about it yet. -Gir From marmys at bellsouth.net Sat Aug 21 00:28:47 2004 From: marmys at bellsouth.net (Marleen) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 20:28:47 -0400 Subject: "Indifference and neglect" (was Re: Good Writing (was Why now?)) References: Message-ID: <000c01c48715$d31358e0$0100a8c0@marmyscomputer> No: HPFGUIDX 110794 > Pippin: > [...] > "Sirius did not hate Kreacher," said Dumbledore. "He regarded > him as a servant unworthy of much interest or notice. > Indifference and neglect often do more damage than outright > dislike." > > --OOP ch 37 Marmy replies: When DD says, "Indifference and neglect often do more damage than outright dislike," could he be possibly referring to LV per chance? From aoibhneach1 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 02:27:19 2004 From: aoibhneach1 at yahoo.com (Cindy) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 02:27:19 -0000 Subject: Peerage and Rank in WW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110795 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, macfotuk at y... wrote: > But on the theme of royalty and rank - we know little so far about > princes, kings or queens in the WW. Sir Nick was clearly a peer, but > a muggleworld peer? (he's a wizard or else couldn't be ghost if I've > read it right). If a WW peer, then that suggests WW royalty. We have > rank clearly already - Malfoys (blacks) old, pureblood and > rich/respectable, Weasleys lowly and poor salt-of-the-earths. ************************************************************ Cindy (aka Misty): This also begs the question: in what context is the word "prince" being used? It has been used at least once (I think twice, actually) in the phrase "pampered little prince". Could the half-blood prince not be royalty but a spoiled brat? ************************************************************ > Why isn't the best/strongest/most powerful (at magic) wizard the top > wizard? ************************************************************ Cindy: For the same reason that the most intelligent person isn't the President of the United States? Maybe ability doesn't have much to do with who is the top in politics, just like in the muggle world. Just a guess. ************************************************************ From drednort at alphalink.com.au Sat Aug 21 03:44:58 2004 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 13:44:58 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Peerage and Rank in WW In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <412751DA.23635.41BBCC@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 110796 On 21 Aug 2004 at 1:56, macfotuk at yahoo.com wrote: > But on the theme of royalty and rank - we know little so far about > princes, kings or queens in the WW. Sir Nick was clearly a peer, but > a muggleworld peer? (he's a wizard or else couldn't be ghost if I've > read it right). Just one observation - Sir Nick is *not* clearly a peer. A knighthood (indicated by the title 'Sir') is not a peerage. His rank suggests that there is some sort of organised system of honours, etc, at work, and that may include peerages - but a knight is not a peer (a peer may be a knight). 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 Sat Aug 21 06:29:34 2004 From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 06:29:34 -0000 Subject: Gilderoy lockhart - JKR's ex??? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110797 After reading JKR latest interview (http://www.mugglenet.com/mediasp/2004/august/jkrinterview.shtml) I think there is a strong possibility that the character was based on none other than her ex-husband. We don't know much of him other than she has been with him only a short time and left him behind to the uncertain life of a poor single mom before or shortly after the birth of her daughter. If I remember correctly he at one time tried to falsely claim to have helped/contributed to her early work on the Potter series. JKR's description of the model for Lockhart suggests that the person hurt her deeply and that she was seriously involved with him for two years (although that phrase is slightly ambiguous and could refer to Lockhart rather than the model)... The quote (from mugglenet): JKR: "The only character who is deliberately based on a real person is Gilderoy Lockhart. [Laughter]. Maybe he is not the one that you would think of, but I have to say that the living model was worse. [Laughter]. He was a shocker! The lies that he told about adventures that he'd had, things he'd done and impressive acts that he had committed He was a shocking man. I can say this quite freely because he will never in a million years dream that he is Gilderoy Lockhart. I am always frightened that he is going to turn up one day. He is just one of those people from your past whom you feel you have never quite shaken off. I will look up one day at a signing and he will say, "Hello, Jo". [Laughter]. Other people have contributed the odd characteristic, such as a nose, to a character, but the only character who I sat down and thought that I would base on someone is Gilderoy Lockhart. It made up for having to endure him for two solid years." Salit From slgazit at sbcglobal.net Sat Aug 21 06:56:20 2004 From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 06:56:20 -0000 Subject: Why Harry will still study Potions in book 6... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110798 >From JKR's latest interview (posted in http://www.mugglenet.com/mediasp/2004/august/jkrinterview.shtml): Question: How do you make up the weird names for the potions? JKR: "Sometimes invention gives out. I was writing the latest chapter of Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince and I needed to come up with another name for another potion. I sat for ten minutes at the keyboard then I just typed "X". I thought, "I'll go back and fill that in later."" Okay, not quite a proof, but the phrase "another name for another potion" suggests that several are described in the HBP book. The likeliest explanation to that is that Harry manages to continue studying potions. Salit From b_boymn at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 07:56:20 2004 From: b_boymn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 07:56:20 -0000 Subject: Peerage and Rank in WW In-Reply-To: <412751DA.23635.41BBCC@localhost> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110799 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Shaun Hately" wrote: > On 21 Aug 2004 at 1:56, macfotuk at y... wrote: > > > But on the theme of royalty and rank - we know little so far about > > princes, kings or queens in the WW. Sir Nick was clearly a peer, > > but a muggleworld peer? (he's a wizard or else couldn't be ghost > > if I've read it right). > Shaun: > > Just one observation - Sir Nick is *not* clearly a peer. A > knighthood (indicated by the title 'Sir') is not a peerage. > > His rank suggests that there is some sort of organised system of > honours, etc, at work, and that may include peerages - but a knight > is not a peer (a peer may be a knight). > > > Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought > Shaun Hately b_boymn: Just a couple of minor comments. The separation of the wizard and muggle world has not always existed, especially with regard to royalty. Prior to the massive and oppressive influence of the Christian church, wizards were the common advisers to Kings, and by extension, would logically be the associates of the Aristocracy. Witness Merlin as the advisor to King Arthur. It's clear that prior to church influence, and even after the introduction of the church, stronger wizards would be powerful, influential, and wealthy citizens of the realm. Only during dark periods of paranoid superstition, general hard times, and oppressive church influence would wizards need to go underground. During this early and middle period in history (ficitonal history, of course), the gap between the lives of wizards and non-wizards would not have been that great; both lived in similar houses, both wore similar clothes, both ate similar food. However, in modern times with the advent of the industrial revolution and the invention of modern technology, the gap in the lifestyle of wizard and muggles would have greatly widened. Remember these events all occurred after the wizard world permanently became a secret society. Wizards only have limted use of automobiles, wizards don't use anything that runs on electricity, wizards don't use technologically modern entertainment media (no TV, computer games or movies), etc.... They still dress, build and equip their houses, and construct their general lifestyle in a fashion that varies from 50 to 250 years out of date relative to muggles. My main point is that anytime prior to the industrial and technilogical revolution wizards would have been able to come and go unnoticed in the muggle world. Today that is still very much possible, but takes a substantial and greater effort on the part of wizards. Therefore, there is nothing in my mind that makes it inconsistent for Nick to have been knighted in 1425 by the royalty of Britian, and killed by beheading 67 years later. In fact, I would go so far as to say that if the Prime Minister knows about the wizard world, there is a very high likelihood that the Royal Family knows about them too. (Gear up the FanFic engines, Harry and Ron meet Harry and Will, or more interestingly (for some), Hermione and Ginny meet Harry and Will. They are, afteral, close to the same age.) Although, I will also concede that there could be assorted elite Orders/Brotherhoods/etc... in the wizard world that bestow honors of knighthood or perhaps merely title on certain members. As far as the half blood Prince, it's nearly impossible to say if this is a metaphorical title or a literal title. I was trying to come up with a way to make Victor Krum related to the royal family of Bulgaria, but couldn't think of any way that his return could move the story forward. Although, if it does happen, remember, you heard it here first. Just a few thoughts. Steve/b_boymn From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 21 08:50:28 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 04:50:28 -0400 Subject: Good writing... Message-ID: <000e01c4875b$e9229d30$7cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 110800 Linda asked : "I just wanted to ask a question of everyone.... How many of you thought of the mirror to communicate with Sirius as you read the passage?" Del replies : Unless my mind is completely confused, we couldn't have thought of the mirrors as we didn't even know about them yet. Harry never opened the package Sirius gave him until after Sirius was dead. Now of course, we could have remembered that Sirius had given Harry *something* to communicate with him. I must admit I didn't. DuffyPoo: "A way of letting me know if Snape's giving you a hard time....I want you to use it if you need me, all right." [Sirius] "It would not be he, Harry, who lured Sirius from his place of safety, no matter how foully Snape treated him in their forthcoming Occulmency classes." From this it is easy to see that Harry believed it only had one purpose, something in regard to how he was being treated by Snape. Harry had determined not to use it and we, as readers, were meant to forget about it, just as Harry had forgotten. Interesting, though, that it *was* Harry who lured Siris from his place of safety after all. Linda wrote : "Everything that we had read before-hand showed Harry seeing things as they were happening, not lies." Del replies : "Actually no, quite the opposite in fact. We know that in *2* instances only, Harry saw something that was truly happening (the murder of Frank Bryce, and the attempted murder on Arthur Weasley)" DuffyPoo: I can think of one more: the conversation with Rookwood just prior to Avery being tortured. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 05:51:52 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 05:51:52 -0000 Subject: Harry's Depression in OoP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110801 Depression in HP in OoP I have been reading most of the post about the possibility of Harry having depression in OoP. I have not seen any post about what I am about to say. I did not read them all so if someone has already said this forgive me. I was very amazed when I read OoP as to the way that JKR shows Harry as suffering from PTSD, or Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. It is as if JKR had talked to a mental health professional for information.. because she did such a perfect job of it. He clearly shows the signs.. I don't have a DSM here.. but he shows survival guilt, wants to avoid talking about it (with Cho Chang), hyper viligent, flashbacks (in the form of nightmare), and so on. JKR shows Harry experiencing exactly like I would expect given what he has been through. I would be shocked if she hadn't shown these signs, since any normal person, teen or otherwise, would have this reaction. Instead of asking anyone for help, Harry does what many people do, he tries to cope with it on his own. So what I am saying is that he is not suffering from Major Depression, he has PTSD. (Acute Stress Disorder only last for about 2 weeks. Since it is more that 2 weeks I would say that he has PTSD.) Tonks_op From aoibhneach1 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 07:32:26 2004 From: aoibhneach1 at yahoo.com (Cindy) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 07:32:26 -0000 Subject: Gilderoy lockhart - JKR's ex??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110802 Salit wrote: > After reading JKR latest interview > (http://www.mugglenet.com/mediasp/2004/august/jkrinterview.shtml) I > think there is a strong possibility that the character was based on > none other than her ex-husband. JKR's description of the model > for Lockhart suggests that the person hurt her deeply and that she > was seriously involved with him for two years ... *************************************************** The same thought occurred to me after reading what JKR said. The fact that she mentioned having to "endure him for two solid years" made me very suspicious that it *was* her ex that she was talking about. Interesting. Cindy From stonehaven at hotkey.net.au Sat Aug 21 08:30:10 2004 From: stonehaven at hotkey.net.au (katefrost777) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 08:30:10 -0000 Subject: The Runespoor Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110803 JKR has given us much more information about the Runespoor (three headed snake, popular pet of Dark Wizards) in Fantastic Beasts than almost any other entry. Why? Could it's existence be the crux of the whole series of seven books? Consider the three-headed Runespoor: Planner head, Dreamer head and Critic head (the only head with venomous fangs). Fantastic Beasts tells us that the Runespoor "rarely reaches a great age, as the heads tend to attack each other". Now consider the rebounded curse: Baby Harry is left with a scar after the attack, even though the avarda kedavra curse *leaves no trace*. Why is this? Could it be because LV's rebounded curse split LV in two, with one half of him going off as an evil vapour barely alive and the other half smashing into baby Harry's head, thus leaving a scar, and residing within Harry as a benign memory/presence/essence/soul? Wouldn't that result in three "heads" "combining" from that one incident, i.e. 1.Harry, 2.LV/benign soul and 3.LV/evil vapour? (Planner, dreamer, critic) And they are indeed very much connected, as we see with HP's scar hurting when LV is near/angry/happy. And could this be the reason that LV was able to survive, as JKR said recently at Edinburgh "we should be asking why (LV) survived". Was one of his protection mechanisms an ability to defeat an avarda kedavra curse by splitting and seeking out host bodies to create a Runespoor effect? Sounds weird, but I have read hairier theories (which I love reading!) Then finally consider the prophecy: "..either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives..." At a stretch, might I suggest that JKR has cleverly tricked us into assuming the "singular" meaning of the words "either" and "neither"? Could they not be interpreted in the "plural" thus: "...either (Harry or LV/benignsoul) must die at the hand of the other (LV/evilvapour) for neither (Harry nor LV/benignsoul) can live while the other (LV/evil vapour) survives..." This would also mean an unfortunate final ending of death for all three "heads" as well. Poor Harry. Maybe this was the reason DD did not kill LV in the MOM at the end of OotP, because maybe he knows that to kill LV would be to kill "all" of him, including the part in Harry's head, with the effect of killing Harry as well? I have searched the archives as a new member and found absolutely nothing on the subject of the Runespoor. It would be a surprise if it has been included for no reason whatsoever. But, of course, many things have been shown to have been included for no reason in the past. Cheers everybody, katefrost777 From vmonte at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 10:56:42 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:56:42 -0000 Subject: Gilderoy lockhart - JKR's ex??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110804 Salit wrote: After reading JKR latest interview (http://www.mugglenet.com/mediasp/2004/august/jkrinterview.shtml) I think there is a strong possibility that the character was based on none other than her ex-husband. JKR's description of the model for Lockhart suggests that the person hurt her deeply and that she was seriously involved with him for two years ... Cindy responded: The same thought occurred to me after reading what JKR said. The fact that she mentioned having to "endure him for two solid years" made me very suspicious that it *was* her ex that she was talking about. Interesting. vmonte: Yes, you both are probably right. After all, Carly Simon wrote the song "You're so Vain" after ex-boyfriend Warren Beatty. vivian From squeakinby at tds.net Sat Aug 21 11:02:11 2004 From: squeakinby at tds.net (squeakinby) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 07:02:11 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Gilderoy lockhart - JKR's ex??? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41272BB3.9080207@tds.net> No: HPFGUIDX 110806 vmonte wrote: >Yes, you both are probably right. After all, Carly Simon wrote the >song "You're so Vain" after ex-boyfriend Warren Beatty. > > It was Warren Beatty????!!!! Hmmm Somehow that's less satisfying than I thought it would be But to bring this back to Potter. I guess it's decided Lockhart isn't Philip Pullman then. Jem From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sat Aug 21 12:02:43 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 12:02:43 -0000 Subject: Why now? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110807 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > Oh, Kneasy, you are an optimist. You do know what an optimist is? > When the situation is at its darkest and someone says, "It can't get > any worse." The optimist comes back with, "Oh, yes it can!" > Kneasy: Worse? Who said anything about it getting worse? Mind you, it could - especially if those fluffy SHIPpers have their way. Can't think of *anything* worse than the series degenerating into romantic slush. Apart from that the word 'worse' doesn't apply, but the word 'different' does. I like these books a lot and the sword of Damocles so far as I'm concerned is labelled 'cliche'. That would be a real downer. I've expressed my thoughts before (see 101614 - Which way?) on this theme. I'm hoping that JKR can come up with a resolution sufficiently challenging to lift this series into a class apart. There are others with similar hopes out there (or so the contents of my mail box says) and that's not really surprising. Posters often give clues to their backgrounds, personalities and tastes in their messages and the crowd on this site are as diverse as any you'll find on the web. Not the sort to congregate around run-of-the-mill fantasy (though I was a little disappointed at some of the opinions expressed on the OT Board recently re favourite books. Pretty trite, some of them. I expected a more challenging selection from the membership.) Potioncat: > And the with the long wait for the next book fans became restless. > They began to find one another and bounce theories off each other. > (sometimes painfully) Will the next book confirm or destroy our > theories? What new things will happen? If this... then that...? > Suddenly fans are reading up on mythology, researching word roots, > and reading Jane Austen. > > At some point, as you said, it went from "I wonder if..." to "It > just has to be..." Then (for me) along came Mark Evans and ruined > it all. How could something so obivious be so wrong? (Choose what > is right over what is easy?) Kneasy: Sending readers out to read other books is a signal success for JKR; long may this continue to happen (though there are those of us who see half quotes in the books and wonder if the other half is going to turn up - DD's "..truth is precious.." spoken on more than one occasion could just be a partial quote from Churchill that might yet be completed "In wartime... truth is so precious that she should always be accompanied by a bodyguard of lies." It would match my view of DD too - sneaky. Never trust the obvious. A lesson we should all have learned reading these books. Never did like the Mark Evans theories, much, much, too obvious. It would hhave been really depressing if those had come about - for one thing it would have meant that the author had lied to us. That would have been unforgivable. Although I recognise that my preferred resolutions are unlikely, they are still possible. I keep my fingers crossed and, as I said in the 'Which way?' post I'll hope like hell that she has a better imagination than we have. Kneasy From claphamsubwarden at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 11:38:41 2004 From: claphamsubwarden at yahoo.com (Chris) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 11:38:41 -0000 Subject: The End... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110808 We are continually speculating on the end and about whether Harry will die in the Seventh Book. JKR's answer that he will survive up to the seventh book, really should not come as a surprise. What other answer can she give? If HP dies in the sixth book what is the point of the seventh, and do we really want to know if he dies or not and ruin the ending? How many people flicked to the end of OoTP to see who died in that tome. I refused to and went through the book going, it cannot be Arthur, it cannot be Hagrid, it cannot be McGonagall, it cannot be Hermione etc, so why would we want her to answer that question? As to my opinion on the ending Harry Potter is a tragic hero, no parents, no friends(pre-Hogwarts), constantly misunderstood, revered and hated for something his mother did. To me the only ending will be a tragic one. With either Harry, Ron or Hermione or any combination dying. ChrisT From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 12:54:21 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 12:54:21 -0000 Subject: The Dream In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110809 Mel wrote : "Granted he couldn't tell the difference between the false vision and the real ones, but to his knowledge he had not had a false one prior to the Sirius one. Why would he automatically think it was?" Del replies : Maybe not automatically, but Hermione *did* point out to him that maybe his dream was just that, a dream. She apparently never believed that it was a true vision. Del From marmys at bellsouth.net Sat Aug 21 12:25:52 2004 From: marmys at bellsouth.net (Marleen) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 08:25:52 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The End... References: Message-ID: <007f01c48779$ff976140$0100a8c0@marmyscomputer> No: HPFGUIDX 110810 ChrisT writes: We are continually speculating on the end and about whether Harry will die in the Seventh Book. JKR's answer that he will survive up to the seventh book, really should not come as a surprise. What other answer can she give? If HP dies in the sixth book what is the point of the seventh, and do we really want to know if he dies or not and ruin the ending? How many people flicked to the end of OoTP to see who died in that tome. I refused to and went through the book going, it cannot be Arthur, it cannot be Hagrid, it cannot be McGonagall, it cannot be Hermione etc, so why would we want her to answer that question? As to my opinion on the ending Harry Potter is a tragic hero, no parents, no friends(pre-Hogwarts), constantly misunderstood, revered and hated for something his mother did. To me the only ending will be a tragic one. With either Harry, Ron or Hermione or any combination dying. Marmy replies: I agree completely with you Chris. I didn't skip to the end either. We have already seen "heros" die in this series. (i.e. Harry's mother sacrificing herself so LV might be killed). We don't know what frame of mind JKR was in when she wrote the plot to Harry. She has said that she is sticking to her original story. So the reality of Harry dying in the end,could be a pausible one depending on JKR's mood at the time! From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 13:04:37 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 06:04:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Good Writing (was Why now?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040821130437.72309.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110811 --- delwynmarch wrote: > There were *so many* ways in which Harry could have done things > differently ! My personal pet peeve being that if Harry could get > his head at GP, and if he didn't intend to take his friends with > him to the MoM, and if he was in such a hurry to get to London, > then why on Earth didn't he take *all of himself* to GP, and > checked on his own whether Sirius > was there or not ??? And that's only *one* example of the kind of > things that seemed *logical* to do and yet Harry didn't do them, > and we are *not* given a good reason of why he didn't think of > them. YES! THANK YOU! I thought I was the only one who went nuts at this point in OOTP. After all the "I've got to get to London! angst and he's finally got his head in the fireplace and he KNOWS how to floo by now - and he just uses it like a telephone???? Even if he did believe Kreachur that Sirius had gone out, he'd still have been closer to the MoM if he'd flooed to GP. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 13:07:26 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 13:07:26 -0000 Subject: Harry's Depression in OoP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110812 Alla wrote : "Del, could you please clarify , what do you mean by saying that Harry should have blamed himself for Cedric's death and did not?" Del replies : I lost you somewhere, uh :-) ? Sorry. What I meant is that if he was indeed depressed, and if one of his symptoms was *undue* guilt, then I would expect one of his major areas of guilt to be over Cedric's death. I am certainly *not* saying that he should be feeling guilty about that, it was *not at all* his fault ! Alla wrote : " He surely did blame himself: ""It wasn't your fault, Harry," Mrs.Weasley wispered. "I told him to take cup with me," said Harry" - GoF, paperback, p.714" Del replies : Yes he blames himself, but only in the immediate aftermath of the events. I don't remember him blaming himself for Cedric's death weeks or months after it happened. Harry blames himself right after it happened, but IMO that's not at all a sign of depression, that's not at all excessive guilt. It's just the normal kind of guilt that many innocent people feel when something bad happens and they wonder if they could have prevented it. If everything goes right, they sooner or later come to realise that what happened was not at all their fault and that they needn't dwell on what they could have done differently. Even though we are not expressly told that Harry came to that conclusion, it seems to me that he did. Del From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 13:15:30 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 06:15:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Could Sirius have been bipolar? Re: Depression and Harry in OotP -- Information In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040821131530.51292.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110813 --- pippin_999 wrote: > Sirius's mood changed so completely between GoF and the > beginning of OOP that some people thought he was completely > out of character. But what if he were bipolar? Any comments > from our mental health experts on that possibility? > > Pippin I don't think so. Sirius was a live-on-the-edge kind of guy; had he been a muggle he'd have been a NASCAR driver or something equally stressful and dangerous. He needed the thrill of taking risks and conquering danger to burn off that restless energy. The risks he ran in GOF took care of that for him so that when he met with Harry his biggest issue was eating people food rather than rats. In OOTP he was tied down and restrained and all that restless energy had nowhere to go and so it had an adverse effect on his personality. He was in a major pout all through the first half of the book; after that he became even more reckless to the point where keeping up a good facade in front of Harry fell to the wayside. Magda _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 13:28:56 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 13:28:56 -0000 Subject: Depression ... in OotP - Cho/Marietta In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110814 HunterGreen wrote : "Of course that doesn't mean that what Marrietta did wasn't wrong, and I do think she deserved to have 'sneak' written across her face." Del replies : Wrong according to what rule ? Not according to the law for sure, quite the contrary. She was obeying the law, she was following school rules, she was protecting her future and her family, what's wrong with that ? And we don't know if she ever believed that LV was back. I also have a problem with the way the enlistment was conducted : people showed up to an *information* meeting about learning extra-curricular skills, and they ended up having to enroll in a resistance group and signing a contract. And when the DA became illegal, we aren't told that people were offered a choice to leave the group. All of that was quite wrong too. I mean, honestly, if our kid belonged to a group who turned outlaw and started learning to fight the official, elected government, because their apparently delusional leader is having paranoid ideas, would we really think that they are doing a bad thing by turning the group in ?? *We* know better, but we have no reason to believe Marrietta did. HunterGreen wrote : "I wonder how Cho was when she wasn't around Harry? We only see a small window of her behavior, it could be that she was able to control herself when she was not around a reminder of what happened to Cedric. I don't know if she was necessarily clinically depressed any more than Harry." Del replies : I'm basing my supposition that Cho was depressed not only on how she behaves around Harry but also on what Hermione tells us about her after the Kiss. She says that Cho is crying all the time all over the place, and that her Quidditch playing has become so bad that she's afraid she'll be kicked out of the team. To me, those are 2 clues that something was severely wrong with her. Harry, on the other hand, never became dysfunctional like that. Del From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 13:29:31 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 06:29:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Another Snape Theory In-Reply-To: <082020041623.8206.4126256C0004F9070000200E22007354469C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: <20040821132931.7536.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110815 --- drliss at comcast.net wrote: > [Sirus]knows, at least, that Voldemort himself didn't kill Regulus. > Maybe he's heard enough to know that Snape was the one that carried > out the orders? I agree when people say the hatred seems very > personal on both sides, and this certainly happened well after they > despised each other, but I can see where that would only add fuel > to the fire. > > Lissa Sirius only found out that Snape had been a DE at the end of GoF when Snape showed Fudge (and everyone else in the room) the Dark Mark on his arm. Earlier in GoF he told the Trio that he'd never heard about Snape being a DE although he hung around with a lot of other Slytherins who became DE's. Magda _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 14:02:14 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 07:02:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Savior complex? (was "Harry and Tom") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040821140214.26166.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110816 --- Matt wrote: > Of course we, as readers, can see ways out of the situations that > Harry cannot see -- that makes for good drama -- but from Harry's > position, as a pre-teen/young teen who is constantly being thrust > into unfamiliar situations with little in the way of a support > network, it > legitimately looks as though everything is left up to him. I don't > think it's a sign of some deep-seated psychological problem that > Harry wants to help Neville or Hermione or Hagrid or Ginny or > Gabrielle or > Cedric or Arthur or Sirius. Rather, it's a sign of a young man who > knows right from wrong, and is willing to stand up for what is > right. > > --Matt And that's true - up to the end of OOTP. But it's clear that charging into situations without a backup plan or at least without considering the situation from all angles will only take you so far and in fact can lead to your death eventually. And a dead hero is no good to anyone, least of all himself. Hermione threw up reasonable objections to Harry's vision of Sirius in danger and Harry's response was to simply get more and more angry rather than confront them. He also didn't hesitate to use emotional blackmail on Ron when it looked like Ron might side with Hermione ("You didn't ojbect when I saved your sister!" "I didn't say I had any objections!" (not an exact quote)). When I was reading OOTP I thought it was the usual climatic rescue scene being set up but Harry's comment to Ron was what made me realize that something was somehow badly wrong and that Harry was going to make some kind of mistake or fall into a trap. I think that was JKR's intention in OOTP, to make us (and Harry) realize that good intentions and noble purpose will only take you so far and that you've got to use your reason too. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From dontask2much at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 14:12:57 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (rebecca) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:12:57 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Runespoor References: Message-ID: <005a01c48788$f5e6c460$6501a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 110817 From: "katefrost777" > Consider the three-headed Runespoor: Planner head, Dreamer head and > Critic head (the only head with venomous fangs). Fantastic Beasts > tells us that the Runespoor "rarely reaches a great age, as the heads > tend to attack each other". > I have searched the archives as a new member and found absolutely > nothing on the subject of the Runespoor. It would be a surprise if it > has been included for no reason whatsoever. But, of course, many > things have been shown to have been included for no reason in the > past. > charme: Welcome! :) Actually, there's more to your theory than you think, IMO. In OoP where Harry dreams about the attack on Mr Weasley, did you take note of the number of bites Harry says he experienced making? There are 3, and I find that uncannily provoking... charme From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Aug 21 14:31:11 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 14:31:11 -0000 Subject: Why now? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110818 Kneasy wrote: > Although I recognise that my preferred resolutions are unlikely, they are > still possible. I keep my fingers crossed and, as I said in the 'Which way?' > post I'll hope like hell that she has a better imagination than we have. > Potioncat: You also said in this post you expect to be disappointed with book 7, unless I misunderstood you. I also hope she has a better imagination than we do...in fact I'm sure she does. (I went back and read the post you suggested, but I couldn't paste any of it here.) Your original post on this thread asked, why is she interacting now? I really wish she wasn't. Although, like most fans, I check her site for information regularly. But for me OoP was almost ruined by the forewarning that someone would die. In the first place I rushed through it so that no one would spoil it for me. In the second place, once it was over, I felt exploited. Someone will die: is it the Weasley kids? Arthur? Hagrid? McGonagal... oh, just Sirius... (sorry, but that was my reaction.) So I felt jerked around. Was this afterall, just like those disaster movies a few years ago? Here are the characters, who will die? I realised that if I started the book without knowing that a death was an important part of it, I wouldn't have felt that way. Although I have my favorite characters, I don't have a preferred ending. I already know, whatever comes, I won't learn as much as I want to about my favorite characters. I'm a little puzzled by the posts who feel a certain ending is predetermined by literary tradition or some other set of rules. So, while I won't be upset if Snape wasn't married to Florence, I'm interested in what did cause his turn from LV. And if one of the ships is correct, that's fine too, but I'll be as happy if it's never mentioned. I'm going to stop trying to predict any of this. But maybe, just maybe, I should find a book of Churchill speeches. Potioncat From squeakinby at tds.net Sat Aug 21 14:42:56 2004 From: squeakinby at tds.net (squeakinby) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:42:56 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why now? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41275F70.9050000@tds.net> No: HPFGUIDX 110819 potioncat wrote: >But for me OoP was almost ruined by the forewarning that someone >would die. In the first place I rushed through it so that no one >would spoil it for me. In the second place, once it was over, I >felt exploited. Someone will die: is it the Weasley kids? Arthur? >Hagrid? McGonagal... oh, just Sirius... (sorry, but that was my >reaction.) > > I'm not sure I felt exploited but my reaction was just the same. Oh Sirius dies? Oh well. >I realised that if I started the book without knowing that a death >was an important part of it, I wouldn't have felt that way. > > I agree. Once a secret is learned it's not a big deal. Equate it with people who seek the mystery of life, some magic element. For Christians, having Jesus die and come back should be magic aplenty! But since it's so obvious, it becomes a commonplace thing. The magic's gone. >But maybe, just maybe, I should find a book of Churchill speeches. >Potioncat > > > And oddly enough, I spent most of this morning trying to find a speech of Churchill's in which he railed against the evils of Nazism long before the rest of the world understood the threat. Jem From dontask2much at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 14:44:31 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (rebecca) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:44:31 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Depression and Harry in OotP References: <41264BD9.5395.55DADA5@localhost> <41272006.19351.89A9AA1@localhost> Message-ID: <00cb01c4878d$5ea47070$6501a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 110820 From: "Shaun Hately" > Shaun wrote : > "I was perfectly capable of pleasure. I sought it out. And I found > it. But *unless* I was actively enjoying myself, I rapidly slid into > depression. And that's what I see in Harry. His 'default setting' > seems depressed to me." > > Del replies : > I guess we just don't see Harry the same way, because I don't see that > his defaut setting has changed from the previous books. In my eyes, he > has only added an alternative setting : anger. But when he's neither > angry nor happy nor anything special, I just don't see that he's > depressed. At least, no more than he was before OoP. Now if someone > wants to make a case that Harry's been suffering from a sort of mild > depression right from PS/SS, that's another thing entirely and I might > agree. charme: I'm with Del: I don't agree that Harry is "depressed" although I understand what you both are trying to say. Harry is a teenager. Teens get angry, get happy, and have massive mood swings either way. In other words, it's all about opposites and "twos" in these books a lot of times, isn't it? I also am reminded of the the constant phrase you hear from teenagers, and you hear from nearly all of them: "That's not fair!" It happens when they start to realize the difference between normality and exception in a social sense. I think that's where Harry's anger stems from - in the beginning of OoP, Harry thinks it is unfair that DD tells everybody but him what's going on, and when he arrives at GP, he pretty much flips out on Ron and Hermoine, doesn't he? He's got an ego about it, too: who saved the SS? who killed the basilisk? who fought off the dementors? It's all about "me" in his sense, wouldn't you say? Typically normal teen behavior. Teen anger about the perception of unfairness, lack of respect, the "me" factor is nothing new, and IMO, completely in stride with JKR's depiction of Harry as an exception who is coming (then does at the end of OoP) to accept he IS different and his fame and destiny are not in the general normality for anyone else he knows. charme From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Aug 21 15:02:49 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 15:02:49 -0000 Subject: Savior complex? (was "Harry and Tom") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110821 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Matt" wrote: > Do you really think it is all that odd for a person to go out of his > way to help others? > More generally, most of the adventures in the books begin when Harry is put in a situation in which he feels that if he does not stick his neck out to help someone (or solve a problem), no one will: >Rather, it's a sign of a young man who knows right from wrong, and is willing to stand up for what is right. < Yes, but he keeps trying to do it in such ridiculously extravagant ways. He's like Don Quixote. Although, unlike the man of La Mancha, Harry really does have fabulous powers, he keeps galloping off to tilt with the windmills, imagining threats where none exist , while meantime the real ogres, who mostly look just like you and me, go about their business snickering in their sleeves at him. Take the situation in PS/SS and transpose it to the real world--suppose there's a plot to steal the secret formula for Coca-Cola, which is, I am not making this up, guarded in a vault in Atlanta, Ga. You discover that a friend of yours has inadvertently told a member of the gang how to get into the building. You try to alert the president of the company, but he's out of town. You find yourself talking to a VP, who doesn't take you seriously, mostly because you haven't told her about your friend. For most of us, this would resolve into a dilemma about whether to give your friend away or not (and Rowling/Dumbledore recognizes this by rewarding Neville.) You wouldn't in a million years decide that the only way to save the formula would be to break into the vault and steal it yourself--but that's what Harry does. It's excusable, because in PS/SS Harry's an eleven year old kid who thinks he's fallen into a fairy tale, and that the world really is an arena for him to demonstrate his heroism, but at almost sixteen, he really needs to stop thinking like that. Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Aug 21 15:31:15 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 15:31:15 -0000 Subject: Could Sirius have been bipolar? Re: Depression and Harry in OotP -- Information In-Reply-To: <20040821131530.51292.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110822 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > In OOTP he was tied down and restrained and all that restless energy had nowhere to go and so it had an adverse effect on his personality. He was in a major pout all through the first half of the book; after that he became even more reckless to the point where keeping up a good facade in front of Harry fell to the wayside.< But Sirius doesn't seem either stir-crazy or depressed in his floo conversation with Harry about James. Harry doesn't notice anything off about his godfather's appearance, and while Sirius wants to rush off to the school and have a word with Snape, he's dissuaded from doing so easily enough. Sirius may not fit the clinical description of bipolar disorder, (and after all, Jo isn't a psychologist either). But I just wonder if we (and Harry) are off the track in trying to find external reasons for Sirius's mood swings. Pippin From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 21 15:55:22 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 11:55:22 -0400 Subject: Why Harry will still study Potions in book 6... Message-ID: <001a01c48797$44b6f930$82fae2d1@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 110823 Salit "JKR: "Sometimes invention gives out. I was writing the latest chapter of Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince and I needed to come up with another name for another potion. I sat for ten minutes at the keyboard then I just typed "X". I thought, "I'll go back and fill that in later."" Okay, not quite a proof, but the phrase "another name for another potion" suggests that several are described in the HBP book. The likeliest explanation to that is that Harry manages to continue studying potions." DuffyPoo: Not necessarily, although I am quite certain HP will continue with potions. The Trio made Polyjuice Potion outside of class, although Hermione, at least, had heard about it in class. This could be as simple as that. Hermione continues to take the classes, even though HP and RW do not, and she tells them about a potion that can do something or other to further their cause. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jlv230 at yahoo.co.uk Sat Aug 21 13:45:51 2004 From: jlv230 at yahoo.co.uk (jlv230) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 13:45:51 -0000 Subject: Hide the animals! was Re: The Clue Behind the Door In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110824 My first thought was of the constellation Leo, which made me think of the Black family, although I'm sure plenty of other wizards have astrological names. Incidentally, Regulus is the brightest star and the Heart of the Lion in Leo and Regulus is associated with royalty. Food for thought indeed! I'm not sure if the lion-like description has anything to do with these things but I would not be surprised if this is a new character with a name like Leo/Leonard/Leopold. If I let my inagination run riot I think of a long lost relation of Sirius who comes into Harry's life because he has some claim on the Black estate in book 6. Any thoughts? JLV From psychmonky at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 15:12:00 2004 From: psychmonky at yahoo.com (Scott Campbell) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 08:12:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Savior complex? (was "Harry and Tom") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040821151200.60003.qmail@web51505.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110825 You're forgetting that this is the person that harry cares about the most in the world and the only parent he has ever known. In my opinion he has a moral obligation to go and save him if he has the info and the ability and can not alert anyone else. Of course he should have swallowed his pride and went to Dumbledore... From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com Sat Aug 21 17:14:49 2004 From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 17:14:49 -0000 Subject: FILK: George Weasley Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110826 George Weasley To the tune of Tom Lehrer's George Murphy http://members.aol.com/quentncree/lehrer/gmurphy.htm THE SCENE: Diagon, Number 93. FRED WEASLEY, in his first solo, responds to his critics FRED: Retail trade of magic tricks May induce some hysterics >From Missus Dolores To Ilias Yocaris Because George Weasley is the guy Who's done as well as I. Oh gee, it's great, At last we've got an entrepreneur who is Just as smart as me! We will protect the Wizard World Through our artillery Developed here at this address Diagon, Ninety-Three The essays that you've read On the NYT's Op-Eds Say that capitalist methods are corrupt. Should the Weasleys run joke shops? They say that It's innately exploitative to sell Headless Hats Though now we all hasten to reject their folly With the support Of Mother Molly Marketing to Muggles we will next pursue We'll lobby `gainst the Secrets Laws of 1692 Yes, now that we are corporate, we gonna go quite far We'll be as wealthy As JKR! - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm The views of Ilias Yocaris ("French literary theorist") may be read on July 18 2004 New York Times' Op-Ed Page (the URL is too long to insert here, but you can look it up on TLC or Google). BTW, Tom Lehrer fans: Every song from his 1965 album "That Was The Year That Was" has now been HP-filked, except for Werner Von Braun. Anyone want to take a crack at it? From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Sat Aug 21 17:29:01 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 17:29:01 -0000 Subject: Savior complex? (was "Harry and Tom") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110827 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Matt" > wrote: > > Do you really think it is all that odd for a person to go out of > > his way to help others? > It's excusable, because in PS/SS Harry's an eleven year old kid > who thinks he's fallen into a fairy tale, and that the world really > is an arena for him to demonstrate his heroism, but at almost > sixteen, he really needs to stop thinking like that. I will argue that PS/SS is not the savior complex, but self- preservation. Harry is determined to stop Voldemort from getting the stne and coming back to kill him. Josh From susanadacunha at gmx.net Sat Aug 21 16:41:12 2004 From: susanadacunha at gmx.net (Susana da Cunha) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 17:41:12 +0100 Subject: An out-there Snape theory? References: <1092577408.10935.21773.m12@yahoogroups.com> <003c01c48705$a400f950$562f0dd4@taxi> Message-ID: <00be01c487a5$629349f0$562f0dd4@taxi> No: HPFGUIDX 110828 Susana said: Actually, I always thought the story Snape told DD involved the death of someone he loved by the hands of the DE's. But I picture his wife: one of the old Slytherin gang who joined the DE along with the others but without real conviction and then tried to back out and was killed. The only canon to support this is the fact that Snape always wears black. --------------- Valy said: I remember have read a theory like this in a site, and this is very possible. It was about Snape meeting a muggle, and they fallen in love and married in secret. And one day, his wife got killed by Voldemort or the DE. And she was pregnent. (We know Voldy and the DE are against muggle-born and muggle relationships stuff.) I also remember had read a bit of OotP at library (I havent got it yet...... *cries*) where he was at St-Mungos, in a bed, with a very mournful expression on his face. I think something happened to him, and made him leave the DE. Maybe a wife who died? What do you think about this? --------- I have trouble believing Snape would fall in love with a muggle or even a muggle-born. The scene in the pensive (if you haven't read it yet, this is... * SPOILER * As I was saying, in Snape's worst memory we see him call Lily a mud blood, which is an indication that he did believe the mud blood/pure blood prejudice. I also believe that "someone he loved" might not be a wife at all. It could just be his friends (other DE's). Or maybe he was disappointed in "someone he loved" (Lucius?). I don't think it would take something as big as a wife's death to stray him from the DE's. If you imagine yourself among the DE's, you can imagine seeing lots of 'little' things that pile up to 'this is wrong!' - "George" and "GEORGE'S SISTER DIANA" theories (that can be found in Fantastic Posts and were to find them, under Hypothetic Alley). As for the wife matter, JKR said in an interview (can't remember which): "Who would want Snape in love with him?" (not an exact quote) I thought "only another DE" but come to think of it... IMO, Snape is absolutely capable of loving someone, but it would take a very 'special' woman to love him back! Susana From cantor at vgernet.net Sat Aug 21 17:47:33 2004 From: cantor at vgernet.net (cantoramy) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 17:47:33 -0000 Subject: Potions and Book 7 (was Why Harry will still study Potions in book 6...) In-Reply-To: <001a01c48797$44b6f930$82fae2d1@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110829 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > Salit > "JKR: "Sometimes invention gives out. I was writing the latest chapter > of Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince and I needed to come up with > another name for another potion. I sat for ten minutes at the keyboard > then I just typed "X". I thought, "I'll go back and fill that in later."" > > Okay, not quite a proof, but the phrase "another name for another > potion" suggests that several are described in the HBP book. The > likeliest explanation to that is that Harry manages to continue > studying potions." > > > DuffyPoo: > Not necessarily, although I am quite certain HP will continue with potions. The Trio made Polyjuice Potion outside of class, although Hermione, at least, had heard about it in class. This could be as simple as that. Hermione continues to take the classes, even though HP and RW do not, and she tells them about a potion that can do something or other to further their cause. About Potions: Harry, et al, will most certainly attend Potions class, or else how will he be able to have contact with and aggrevation from Snape?! He told McGonagall in OoP that he wants to be an Auror and she replied that he would need to take Potions for the next two years, and that she would help him "if it's the last thing I do!" (OoP, "Career Advice"). However, he will need an "Outstanding" on his Potions O.W.L., and I wonder how that will happen? About Book 7: To have Voldemort and Harry both die in a fight to the death--"Frankenstein," anyone? Been there, done that. JKR is much to clever and original to use that for an ending. However, I shall reiterate: Warner Brothers' will not allow its most profitable licensed character, Harry Potter, to be killed off. He's worth too much, as are Hermione and Ron. If they are willing to let him die, there will have to be a stupendous substitute for "happily ever after." Otherwise, the public relations department at WB will be working overtime for years. JKR owns the text between the book covers, but Warner Brothers owns all the characters and inanimate objects unique to the books (e.g., the Snitch) and the licensing rights. Scholastic and Bloomsbury own publishing rights and exclusivity in their respective countries (USA and Great Britain), in order to prevent competition. This is the eternal creative conundrum--how far is an artist of any kind willing prostitute himself or herself before it's all about the money and no longer about the art? JKR in now wealthy enough that it's no longer about the money, so we fans have nothing to fear! I have been called mercenary and cynical whenever I have expressed this opinion, but WB is in business for one reason--to make money. They would never do anything to purposely cause themselves a loss-- unless it was for tax purposes, just like all American corporations! cantoramy From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Aug 21 17:49:10 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 17:49:10 -0000 Subject: Savior complex? (was "Harry and Tom") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110830 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Josh Warren" wrote: > I will argue that PS/SS is not the savior complex, but self- preservation. Harry is determined to stop Voldemort from getting the stne and coming back to kill him.<\ Pippin: But, why, *why*, should Harry think that the Stone would be safer in his hands than it would be guarded by all the protections Dumbledore has placed around it? And in fact, it's doubtful that Quirrell could have extracted the Stone from the mirror before Dumbledore arrived, if Harry hadn't done it for him. I think that in Harry's young mind, his right to be regarded as a bona fide hero and his escape from Dursleydom are bound together -- he *is* playing the hero to some extent, though not consciously. As the Sorting Hat told him, he has a nice thirst to prove himself. I think he made the unconscious assumption that if he didn't prove himself to be the hero everyone thought he was, he was going to be sent back. And to hark back to the original topic, Tom might have some of the same issues. Tom might have emerged from his sorting thinking that his right to be at Hogwarts instead of the orphanage depended on his proving himself to be a true Slytherin. And what better way to do that than to step into the role of Dark Wizard and Slytherin's Heir? Maybe the ordinary person wouldn't have the ability to choose not to love, as the ordinary person probably couldn't choose to be as brave as Harry. But these are not quite ordinary people...they have choices we don't. Pippin From Kadoo96801 at aol.com Sat Aug 21 17:51:29 2004 From: Kadoo96801 at aol.com (Kadoo96801 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 13:51:29 EDT Subject: Dumbledore and The End Message-ID: <7d.5658f4bf.2e58e5a1@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110831 In JKR's lastest interview at the Edinburgh Book Festival She was asked >What form does Dumbledore?s Patronus take? > >Good question. Can anyone guess? You have had a clue. There was a little whisper there. >It is a phoenix, which is very representative of Dumbledore for reasons that I am sure you >can guess. Now, there is some theories in fandom floating around that have to do with Harry and Voldemort's immortality, or more prevalently, their mortality...but has anyone thought about Dumbledore? I mean, Dumbledore is presented as Very Old, he also worked with NIcolas Flamel on the stone, and he is the only wizard Voldemort fears (and now, JKR compares him to a Phoeniz). from what we know about the phoenix, they die and are then reborn, making them immortal. I think it is very likely that Dumbledore is the only truly immortal character. In my personal opinion, I beleive that DD has to sacrifice himself for Harry at the end of the series, as in, Harry and Dumbledore both cannot coexist because they are so similar to each other and it could never be two powerful good wizards (HP and DD) versus one (Voldemort). I also support the idea that neither Harry nor Voldemort can live in order to bring the end to dark wizardry. Therefore, two out of these three main charcters (HP, VM, DD) need to die. How about Voldemort and Harry both dieing at the hands of DD, then DD passing his immortality and sacrificing his own life for Harry, who will be "reborn" like the Phoenix as the boy who lived again, filling the void in the WW left by the death of Dumbledore. This series will not end without major implications from Dumbledore--he is like the patriarch of the wizarding world Just a very noncohesive Thought...anyone agree? -Popo [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Sat Aug 21 18:55:59 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 18:55:59 -0000 Subject: Savior complex? (was "Harry and Tom") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110832 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Josh Warren" > wrote: > > > I will argue that PS/SS is not the savior complex, but self- > preservation. Harry is determined to stop Voldemort from getting > the stne and coming back to kill him.<\ > > Pippin: > But, why, *why*, should Harry think that the Stone would be safer > in his hands than it would be guarded by all the protections > Dumbledore has placed around it? And in fact, it's doubtful that > Quirrell could have extracted the Stone from the mirror before > Dumbledore arrived, if Harry hadn't done it for him. All Harry knew at the time was that no one would believe him about Snape, that Voldemort was involved, that how to pass the first obsticle was known, and that a restored Voldemort would quite likely lead to his own death. He first sought out Dumbledore, and found him gone, and he was again not believed by the faculty. Harry had no idea that the mirror would prove such a good defense, and I agree with you there... in the end, Harry actually put the stone at more risk, as far as we can assume. Also, didn't Harry think Dumbledore was gone until the next day? So, Harry acted in his own defense after it being seemingly abandoned to him. His only other option was to go to sleep and pray that he wouldn't wake up to Voldemort's wand against his forehead. Josh From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 19:00:59 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 12:00:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Could Sirius have been bipolar? Re: Depression and Harry in OotP -- Information In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040821190059.22154.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110833 --- pippin_999 wrote: > But Sirius doesn't seem either stir-crazy or depressed in his floo > conversation with Harry about James. Harry doesn't notice > anything off about his godfather's appearance, and while Sirius > wants to rush off to the school and have a word with Snape, he's > dissuaded from doing so easily enough. Yes, but... 1. Harry's questions about James, Sirius, Snape and the Pensieve memory are so unexpected that Sirius (and Remus) have all they can do trying to gauge Harry's emotions, trying to remember the incident, trying to explain and put in perspective past history. Sirius doesn't have time or opportunity to dwell on his own feelings. 2. Also Remus was there in the house. It always helped Sirius when someone else was around, someone he could interact with. It was when he was alone with Kreacher that things got really bad and he had nothing to do but dwell on how much he wanted to go out and what a little tick Kreacher was. Magda _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 20:40:02 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 20:40:02 -0000 Subject: Depression ... in OotP - Cho/Marietta In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110834 > Del replies : > Wrong according to what rule ? Not according to the law for sure, > quite the contrary. She was obeying the law, she was following school > rules, she was protecting her future and her family, what's wrong with > that ? And we don't know if she ever believed that LV was back. > Alla: According to the moral rules? Like it is wrong to betray your friends? Your answer will probably be about relativity of morals, but I strongly disagree with that, as you probably know by now. :o) I would agree that Cho should not have forced her to come, if she did not want to stay, but when she made such choice, she should have followed through. As all other members of the DA did. Was there anything "illegal" with what she did? Of course not. It was her right to betray her friends, but then she absolutely deserved what she got at the end, IMO. I had a tiniest twinge of sympathy for her, when Kingsley so shamelesly modified her memory, but such sympathy dissappeared fast. She was obeying the law? Well, any law put into place by professor Umbridge deserved to be sabotaged, IMO. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 20:51:39 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 20:51:39 -0000 Subject: Harry's Depression in OoP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110835 > > Del replies : > I am certainly *not* saying that he should be feeling guilty > about that, it was *not at all* his fault ! Alla: Thanks for clarification. :) > Del replies : > Yes he blames himself, but only in the immediate aftermath of the > events. I don't remember him blaming himself for Cedric's death weeks > or months after it happened. Harry blames himself right after it > happened, but IMO that's not at all a sign of depression, that's not > at all excessive guilt. It's just the normal kind of guilt that many > innocent people feel when something bad happens and they wonder if > they could have prevented it. Alla: Oh, I see. Well, I think that he continues to blame himself through out the summer non-stop. "Dudley gave a harsh bark of laughter then adopted a high-pitched, whimpering voice. "Don't kill Cedric! Don't kill Cedric! "Who is Cedric - your boyfriend?" - OoP, p.15, paperback. Harry is still having nightmares about graveyard. If that is not the sign of guilt, I don't know what is. I think that Harry is depressed, but JKR did not go into enough detail to describe the condition, she only painted it on the surface. I remember talking with the poster (Was it Evita?) She posted very interesting essay about non-existance of psychiatric and psychological help in the WW and I tend to agree. Many people through the books seem to need it, but after seeing the death of the classmate Harry is a very good candidate for that. From patientx3 at aol.com Sat Aug 21 21:33:34 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 21:33:34 -0000 Subject: Depression ... in OotP - Cho/Marietta In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110836 HunterGreen previously: "Of course that doesn't mean that what Marrietta did wasn't wrong, and I do think she deserved to have 'sneak' written across her face." Del replies : >>Wrong according to what rule ? Not according to the law for sure, quite the contrary. She was obeying the law, she was following school rules, she was protecting her future and her family, what's wrong with that ? And we don't know if she ever believed that LV was back.<< HunterGreen: Well, wrong because she could have just stopped going to the meetings. No one was *forcing* her. She could have told Cho after the meetings became illegal (since the first one was not breaking any rules) that she wasn't comfortable being involved in them. As much as I understand her actions, and believe that *she* didn't think she was doing anything horrifically wrong, she was getting a number of children expelled, at least one of them being a good friend of hers. She wasn't just telling Umbridge that the meetings existed, she was telling them *where* they were and *when* to catch them. Del: >>I also have a problem with the way the enlistment was conducted : people showed up to an *information* meeting about learning extra-curricular skills, and they ended up having to enroll in a resistance group and signing a contract. And when the DA became illegal, we aren't told that people were offered a choice to leave the group. All of that was quite wrong too.<< HunterGreen: I agree with you there, and that was Hermione's fault. She decieved Harry with it too, because he really didn't want to teach anyone but her and Ron. If her intention was to set up the group at the end of that first meeting she should have been more careful about who she invited and more specific about what the meaning entailed. Its unfair that they didn't get a chance to remove their name after the meetings became illegal. Enrolling in a 'grey-area' DADA study group is much different than enrolling in one *specifically* against the rules. Del: >>I mean, honestly, if our kid belonged to a group who turned outlaw and started learning to fight the official, elected government, because their apparently delusional leader is having paranoid ideas, would we really think that they are doing a bad thing by turning the group in ?? *We* know better, but we have no reason to believe Marrietta did.<< HunterGreen: I'm sure her parents would have been very pleased with her, and like I said in my last post, its saying something how long it took for her to finally crack and say something. I think she was thinking about telling something since around the first or second meeting. That's why I put more of the blame on Cho than on Marietta. Cho really should know better than to bring the daughter of a loyal-to-Fudge MoM official to a resisting-the-MoM group. I don't think that Marietta thought that what she was doing was *morally wrong* (since according to the way things looked for her, it was the right thing to do), but what she did had the repurcussions of expelling a large chunk of students, including a few that were her friends, that's why I thought she deserved to have 'sneak' on her face. HunterGreen previously: >>I wonder how Cho was when she wasn't around Harry? We only see a small window of her behavior, it could be that she was able to control herself when she was not around a reminder of what happened to Cedric. I don't know if she was necessarily clinically depressed any more than Harry.<< Del replied: >>I'm basing my supposition that Cho was depressed not only on how she behaves around Harry but also on what Hermione tells us about her after the Kiss. She says that Cho is crying all the time all over the place, and that her Quidditch playing has become so bad that she's afraid she'll be kicked out of the team. To me, those are 2 clues that something was severely wrong with her. Harry, on the other hand, never became dysfunctional like that.<< HunterGreen: I had forgotten about that. If she was having trouble with Quidditch and crying *all-the-time* she was definitely worse off than Harry. She seemed happy enough during the time they were *walking* to Hogsmeade and during the DA meetings though, so I can't see her being *clinically* depressed (since I believe that entails *never* having a break from depression). I know they're essentially the same thing, but I prefer to think of her condition as grief as opposed to depression. Maybe by the end of the year enough time had passed that Cedric's death didn't bother her as much anymore. And by then the cause of his death was no longer being denied, which might have helped too. From marmys at bellsouth.net Sat Aug 21 18:31:03 2004 From: marmys at bellsouth.net (Marleen) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 14:31:03 -0400 Subject: Why now? / The death in OoP References: Message-ID: <001401c487ad$03ff9530$0100a8c0@marmyscomputer> No: HPFGUIDX 110837 potioncat wrote: > But for me OoP was almost ruined by the forewarning that someone > would die. In the first place I rushed through it so that no > one would spoil it for me. In the second place, once it was over, > I felt exploited. Jem replied: > I'm not sure I felt exploited but my reaction was just the same. > Oh Sirius dies? Oh well. > I agree. Once a secret is learned it's not a big deal. Marmy replies: I so agree!!! I rushed through the book to find out who died before it leaked out on the internet. Then I reread the book and savored every word. (I've actually read it quite a few times) I think as the discussions become more heated about the end of the series, we see that Sirius dying did have a great impact on the scheme of things. From carodave92 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 19:56:56 2004 From: carodave92 at yahoo.com (carodave92) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 19:56:56 -0000 Subject: Why Harry will still study Potions in book 6... In-Reply-To: <001a01c48797$44b6f930$82fae2d1@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110838 > Salit: > Okay, not quite a proof, but the phrase "another name for another > potion" suggests that several are described in the HBP book. The > likeliest explanation to that is that Harry manages to continue > studying potions. > > DuffyPoo: > Not necessarily, although I am quite certain HP will continue with > potions. The Trio made Polyjuice Potion outside of class, although > Hermione, at least, had heard about it in class. This could be as > simple as that. Hermione continues to take the classes, even though > HP and RW do not, and she tells them about a potion that can do > something or other to further their cause. Harry has to continue with potions through his NEWTS in order to become an Auror, which he was set to do when he had his career counseling session with McGonagall. carodave From suedepatch at hotmail.com Sat Aug 21 19:57:42 2004 From: suedepatch at hotmail.com (danni_yetman) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 19:57:42 -0000 Subject: Will Harry continue to study Divination in book six? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110839 Hi everyone! My name is Danni Yetman, I'm 18, from Newfoundland, Canada, and I am a PotterHead as well...who needs dope when you have Harry?! I seriously do need a 12 step program...but not yet! I'm studying in England right now, and I am pleased to say I did visit the Platform 9 3/4 wall at Kings Cross St. Pancras. I also took a picture of the bridge (or a bridge that looks like that bridge) Harry and Hagrid walked across in the PS film! But enough about me...what I want to know is what else Harry is going to take during his sixth and seventh years. Unfortunately I do not have a copy of the books with me (I cannot wait to get home and have another re-read of all of them!), but I believe that McGonagall says that Harry needs to get x number of NEWTs to go to Auror school or whatever, and after she tells him his required courses, he still needs at least one more....I'm thinking it will be Divination, because she wouldn't throw Firenze in there and make it clear at the end that both he and Trelawney will be teaching and not have Harry continue in my opinion...will he also continue with Care of Magical Creatures? I mean, who says he can't take extra NEWTs too right? Although it might be too much work...maybe it's not important....what's your opinion?! From lisdeleo at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 20:17:19 2004 From: lisdeleo at yahoo.com (lisdeleo) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 20:17:19 -0000 Subject: Harry's Depression in OoP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110840 > Alla wrote : > He surely did blame himself: > "It wasn't your fault, Harry," Mrs.Weasley wispered. > "I told him to take cup with me," said Harry. - GoF, paperback, p.714 > Del replies : > Yes he blames himself, but only in the immediate aftermath of the > events. I don't remember him blaming himself for Cedric's death weeks > or months after it happened. Harry blames himself right after it > happened, but IMO that's not at all a sign of depression, that's not > at all excessive guilt. It's just the normal kind of guilt that many > innocent people feel when something bad happens and they wonder if > they could have prevented it. If everything goes right, they sooner or > later come to realise that what happened was not at all their fault > and that they needn't dwell on what they could have done differently. > Even though we are not expressly told that Harry came to that > conclusion, it seems to me that he did. Now Lisl: IMO, Harry *would have* continued feeling guilty about Cedric if he hadn't been so distracted by everyone not believing him about Cedric's death in the first place. Look - before he returns to Hogwarts in OotP, Cedric's death is haunting his dreams, and he has to refuse to allow himself to think about it ("Don't think about that, Harry told himself sternly for the hundredth time that summer." first american edition, p.8) However, once he arrives at Hogwarts and is faced with the disbelief of half the student body, his guilt is simply overpowered by his anger and frustration. I predict that in HBP, now that the WW knows Harry was telling the truth, Harry may have to deal with the guilt over Cedric's death arising again, as he doesn't have anger to distract him....and guilt over Sirius' death won't help either. I'd be surprised if we don't see some major guilt - the worst pitfall of his "saving people thing" is that when he doesn't, he takes it *hard*. From patientx3 at aol.com Sat Aug 21 22:39:54 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 22:39:54 -0000 Subject: Harry's Depression in OoP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110841 Del wrote: >> I don't remember him blaming himself for Cedric's death weeks or months after it happened. Harry blames himself right after it happened, but IMO that's not at all a sign of depression, that's not at all excessive guilt. It's just the normal kind of guilt that many innocent people feel when something bad happens and they wonder if they could have prevented it.<< Alla replied: >>Harry is still having nightmares about graveyard. If that is not the sign of guilt, I don't know what is.<< And so did Lisl: >>IMO, Harry *would have* continued feeling guilty about Cedric if he hadn't been so distracted by everyone not believing him about Cedric's death in the first place. Look - before he returns to Hogwarts in OotP, Cedric's death is haunting his dreams, and he has to refuse to allow himself to think about it<< HunterGreen: I don't know if having nightmares about Cedric constitutes *guilt*. Its more a reaction to a traumatic incident, a basic sign of post- traumatic stress. He witness Cedric dying, whether or not he thinks its his fault, its going to bother him. Its certainly bothering Cho and there's no way she could think its her fault. In the case of Sirius, I think the revelation about the prophecy is distracting him from his guilt (which he does have a reason to feel, unlike in the case of Cedric). IMO He could go either way in the next book, those feelings may or may not continue (they could be replaced with basic grief or depression). From suedepatch at hotmail.com Sat Aug 21 20:18:52 2004 From: suedepatch at hotmail.com (danni_yetman) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 20:18:52 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore and The End In-Reply-To: <7d.5658f4bf.2e58e5a1@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110842 I've been thinking a lot about this myself, Harry, Dumbledore, and Voldemort. Should Harry have to kill Voldemort, then I think the only way he could resolve himself to do it is if Voldemort had killed someone Harry deeply cared about (ie, Dumbledore, Ron, Hermione). I don't think this will cause the curse to bounce off again, because Voldemort isn't going to let that get him twice (or will he?). There has also been a lot of speculation going around about if Dumbledore is evil...I'm sure you've all heard it. Now, I myself believe he is on the good side, but I want to entertain all theories. Voldemort's followers always refer to him as the Dark Lord...but are the definitely refering to him? Is Voldemort the Dark Lord, is there a Darker Lord than him, and maybe this is Dumbledore? Now I don't think this is the case...but it could be a case...it would be an interesting twist in terms of language and would teach us a lesson about making assumptions wouldn't it? I don't know...you can never tell with JKR! Well, my point is that I see your point...and raise you another! Danni From uath50 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 20:47:52 2004 From: uath50 at yahoo.com (uath50) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 20:47:52 -0000 Subject: The Clue (was Re: Hide the animals! was Re: The Clue Behind the Door) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110843 McMax : > It's most likely a new character, after all JKR has introduced a > new character in every book so far. I'm guessing it's the new DADA > teacher. I think that the person that is described, is Luna Lovegood. Who says that the clue isn't a woman or a girl. "uath50" From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 22:54:01 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 22:54:01 -0000 Subject: Marrietta's betrayal (was Depression ... in OotP - Cho/Marietta) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110844 Alla wrote : "According to the moral rules? Like it is wrong to betray your friends? Your answer will probably be about relativity of morals, but I strongly disagree with that, as you probably know by now. :o)" Del replies : :-) But no, I don't even need to get there. I just have to point out that "it is wrong to betray your friends" is a flawed rule. When your friends do dangerous and illegal things, then it is actually *right* to betray them, since they have betrayed you and your morality and the law in the first place. If my kid, as a teenager, ever has friends experimenting with firearms for example, then I *will* expect him to betray them, for everybody's sake. Now of course you're going to tell me that the *circumstances* were special, that the DA were not kids playing with fire but courageous kids putting up a resistance cell, or something like that, right ? Then I'll answer that *we* know that, but that we have no proof that Marrietta believed that. It took *Seamus*, who was *living* with Harry, most of the year to shift his loyalty from his mother to his classmate, so why should Marrietta know any better ? Alla wrote : "I would agree that Cho should not have forced her to come, if she did not want to stay, but when she made such choice, she should have followed through. As all other members of the DA did. " Del replies : But the very circumstances in which the kids got to sign the parchment are very sneaky. Here's what Hermione said : "I - I think everybody should write their name down, just so we know who was here. But I also think, " she took a deep breath, "that 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're up to." I find this very manipulative and dishonest ! On one side, she's saying that the list is only to know who was there. But on the other side, she's saying that whoever signs agrees not to tell. She actually *tricked* all of them ! She left them NO CHOICE. I mean, imagine that you're invited by a friend to go to a political meeting. That friend belongs to a rather extremist party, but he tells you that meeting is only about giving out information about his party. And then you go there, and you hear things that you don't like, including hard criticism of the government and paranoid delusions. But then at the end of the meeting, you're told that you have to sign a register and that by signing that register you're agreeing not to tell anyone about what you've heard. In effect, they are making you an accomplice of their misdeeds and propaganda. How would you take that ? Moreover, one very important thing happened after Marrietta signed : the DA became illegal. That changes everything. Alla wrote : " Was there anything "illegal" with what she did? Of course not. It was her right to betray her friends, but then she absolutely deserved what she got at the end, IMO." Del replies : It was her friends who were doing illegal stuff. She did *not* deserve to be punished for setting her own situation straight. *Especially* since she had not been told that there was a punishment attached to her telling. Cho is right : it *was* a horrible trick on Hermione's part to jinx the list and not tell anyone. Practical, but horrible. Moreover there's one issue that's never considered : in what circumstances did Marrietta betray the DA ? Did she betray them of her own accord, or did Umbridge exercise any kind of pressure on her ? Umbridge apparently didn't use Veritaserum on her, but I wouldn't be surprised if Umbridge had been blackmailing her. The fact that Marrietta didn't straight out give all the details about the DA, but only told Umbridge when and where she could find them seems to indicate IMO that Marrietta was very reluctant in her betrayal. I wouldn't be the least surprised if she had been pushed into a corner so to speak. Alla wrote : "She was obeying the law? Well, any law put into place by professor Umbridge deserved to be sabotaged, IMO." Del replies : I understand the feeling, but I have to disagree with the statement. Anarchy lurks around the corner when we start choosing which laws we're going to obey. Moreover, putting any morality over the law is terribly dangerous. After all, isn't it exactly what LV and the DEs are doing ? Their morality isn't ours, but if we claim the right to put our morality over the law, then we automatically grant them the same right. Dangerous, very dangerous. Del From navarro198 at hotmail.com Sat Aug 21 22:54:06 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 22:54:06 -0000 Subject: Potions and Book 7 (was Why Harry will still study Potions in book 6...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110845 cantoramy: However, I shall reiterate: Warner Brothers' will not allow its most profitable licensed character, Harry Potter, to be killed off. He's worth too much, as are Hermione and Ron. If they are willing to let him die, there will have to be a stupendous substitute for "happily ever after." Otherwise, the public relations department at WB will be working overtime for years. I have been called mercenary and cynical whenever I have expressed this opinion, but WB is in business for one reason--to make money. Bookworm: If Warner Brothers changed the ending from what JKR wrote they would end up losing money. First, there would be the wailing and gnashing of teeth from the fans. Then all JKR would have to do is express disappointment in the film. Attendance would drop magically. I do agree with you that Harry will be in Potions for the next two years. What would the books be without Harry dealing with Snape and Malfoy in class? I'm also reasonably sure there are hints and clues hidden in the Potions lessons that we haven't figured out yet. Ravenclaw Bookworm From shalimar07 at aol.com Sat Aug 21 16:06:13 2004 From: shalimar07 at aol.com (mumweasley7) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 16:06:13 -0000 Subject: Why Harry will still study Potions in book 6... In-Reply-To: <001a01c48797$44b6f930$82fae2d1@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110846 > Salit: > Okay, not quite a proof, but the phrase "another name for another > potion" suggests that several are described in the HBP book. The > likeliest explanation to that is that Harry manages to continue > studying potions." I agree he needs to study potions more. JKR said we should concentrate on what lengths LV went to to assure he would not die. Remember in SS Snape said he could teach them to stopper death. "mumweasley7" From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 22:57:45 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 22:57:45 -0000 Subject: Harry's Depression in OoP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110847 > HunterGreen: > I don't know if having nightmares about Cedric constitutes *guilt*. > Its more a reaction to a traumatic incident, a basic sign of post- > traumatic stress. He witness Cedric dying, whether or not he thinks > its his fault, its going to bother him. Its certainly bothering Cho > and there's no way she could think its her fault. Alla: Well, it could be as you say post traumatic stress, or it it could be guilt. i think it is hard to separate them, anyway. As I said, I don't think that JKR deals with psychological reactions to trauma well. I think her message that Harry is supposed to just overcome all of it, being the hero he is. (it actually applies to many characters in "potterverse", not just to Harry, IMO) But how realistic is it? Yes, yes, I know this is not the "realistic" genre, BUT after OoP, where she spent so much time describing Harry's emotions, i expect a little bit more realism from her. BUT, I am very sceptical after she said that in the next book Harry will have to overcome (or master his emotions) in order to be useful (I am paraphrasing and I think she said it in the March , 2004 chat) Just how fast will she make Harry to master his emotions? Will she make him contemplate and decide "OK, now all my grief, pain, guilt, whatever, should be magically done and get over with. Now I have to go to war and kill Voldemort."? What exactly is going to happen? Another chat with Dumbledore and everything is fine? Sorry, it does not work this way. As I said, I understand limitations of the genre and I don't expect psychological treatise, but a little more reality? From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 23:01:40 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 23:01:40 -0000 Subject: Harry's Depression in OoP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110848 Alla wrote : "Harry is still having nightmares about graveyard. If that is not the sign of guilt, I don't know what is." Del replies : I'm not a psychological expert, but I most definitely wouldn't interpret nightmares as exclusively a sign of guilt ! Alla wrote : "She posted very interesting essay about non-existance of psychiatric and psychological help in the WW and I tend to agree. Many people through the books seem to need it, but after seeing the death of the classmate Harry is a very good candidate for that." Del replies : *sigh* I agree, I agree completely !! Harry, Cho, Neville, Sirius, are just a few examples of some people who are in dire need of counseling. But as that poster said, and as I said myself in earlier posts, the WW doesn't seem to be aware of psychological problems, nor does it seem to do anything to help people with mental problems. Which is a pity really, considering that they seem to have potions that make our best medicine look like candies. Del From navarro198 at hotmail.com Sat Aug 21 23:16:48 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 23:16:48 -0000 Subject: Marrietta's betrayal (was Depression ... in OotP - Cho/Marietta) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110849 Del: Moreover, one very important thing happened after Marrietta signed: the DA became illegal. That changes everything. Alla wrote: "Was there anything "illegal" with what she did? Of course not. It was her right to betray her friends, but then she absolutely deserved what she got at the end, IMO." Del replies: It was her friends who were doing illegal stuff. She did *not* deserve to be punished for setting her own situation straight. *Especially* since she had not been told that there was a punishment attached to her telling. Cho is right: it *was* a horrible trick on Hermione's part to jinx the list and not tell anyone. Practical, but horrible. Bookworm: As Del pointed out, after Marietta signed the DA became illegal. However, she continued to attend the meetings. She could have chosen to stop going. I do agree that is was very sneaky of Hermione to attach a punishment without saying anything. Much more devious than I would have expected her to be. Del: Moreover there's one issue that's never considered: in what circumstances did Marrietta betray the DA? Bookworm: If we can take Umbridge's word for it, Marietta approached her. "'Well, Minister, Miss Edgecombe here came to my office shortly after dinner this evening and told me she had something she wanted to tell me. She said that if I proceeded to a secret room on the seventh floor, sometimes known as the Room of Requirement, I would find out something to my advantage. I questioned her a little further and she admitted that there was to be some kind of meeting there. Unfortunately at this point this hex,' she waved impatiently at Marietta's concealed face, `came into operation and upon catching sight of her face in my mirror the girl became too distressed to tell me any more.'" (OoP, Ch27) What prompted her to tell all we don't know, but unless Umbridge is lying, Marietta came to her. I almost wrote that it was possible that she did lie, but one of the things that makes her truly horrible is that she doesn't lie. She just twists the truth (e.g. telling Harry he was to "write lines" for his detention). Ravenclaw Bookworm From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 23:18:26 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 23:18:26 -0000 Subject: Marrietta's betrayal (was Depression ... in OotP - Cho/Marietta) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110850 > Del replies : > :-) > But no, I don't even need to get there. I just have to point out that > "it is wrong to betray your friends" is a flawed rule. When your > friends do dangerous and illegal things, then it is actually *right* > to betray them, since they have betrayed you and your morality and the > law in the first place. Alla: Del, this is the cultural difference on which we are never going to agree to. I grew up in the communist regime. I was taught quite early that opposition to such regime was very noble and decent thing. Now, we are not talking about murderers or thiefs, but when my friends were accused of committing so called "political crimes", I consider them to be heroes and would never think of betraying them. I think that analogy with "political crimes" works quite well for OOP, therefore it is incredibnly hard for me if not IMPOSSIBLE to sympathise with Marietta. > Del replies : snip. >> I find this very manipulative and dishonest ! On one side, she's > saying that the list is only to know who was there. But on the other > side, she's saying that whoever signs agrees not to tell. She actually > *tricked* all of them ! She left them NO CHOICE. Alla: Yes, Hermione left them no choice as to keeping silent about the meetings that is true. BUT, Hermione did not take away from her her right to leave. Hermione did force the secrecy on other DA members. I shudder to think what would happen to other kids, if she would not. >> Del replies : snip. > > Moreover there's one issue that's never considered : in what > circumstances did Marrietta betray the DA ? Did she betray them of her > own accord, or did Umbridge exercise any kind of pressure on her ? > Umbridge apparently didn't use Veritaserum on her, but I wouldn't be > surprised if Umbridge had been blackmailing her. Alla: Blackmailed her with what? Yes, if we learn that umbridge tortured her, that would be a different story. But we know nothing to that effect so far, if I am correct. > > Alla wrote earlier: > "She was obeying the law? Well, any law put into place by professor > Umbridge deserved to be sabotaged, IMO." > > Del replies : > I understand the feeling, but I have to disagree with the statement. > Anarchy lurks around the corner when we start choosing which laws > we're going to obey. > Alla: Or the situation in the society. will start changing for the better. > From susanadacunha at gmx.net Sat Aug 21 20:38:01 2004 From: susanadacunha at gmx.net (Susana da Cunha) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 21:38:01 +0100 Subject: Savior complex? (was "Harry and Tom") References: Message-ID: <010c01c487c1$d6652fd0$562f0dd4@taxi> No: HPFGUIDX 110851 Matt wrote: > Do you really think it is all that odd for a person to go out of his > way to help others? > More generally, most of the adventures in the books begin when Harry > is put in a situation in which he feels that if he does not stick his > neck out to help someone (or solve a problem), no one will: > Rather, it's a sign of a young man who knows right from wrong, and is > willing to stand up for what is right. < Pippin wrote: > Yes, but he keeps trying to do it in such ridiculously extravagant ways. > Take the situation in PS/SS and transpose it to the real world--suppose > there's a plot to steal the secret formula for Coca-Cola, which is, I > am not making this up, guarded in a vault in Atlanta, Ga. You discover > that a friend of yours has inadvertently told a member of the gang how > to get into the building. You try to alert the president of the company, > but he's out of town. You find yourself talking to a VP, who doesn't > take you seriously, mostly because you haven't told her about your > friend. > > For most of us, this would resolve into a dilemma about whether to give > your friend away or not (and Rowling/Dumbledore recognizes this by > rewarding Neville.) You wouldn't in a million years decide that the > only way to save the formula would be to break into the vault and steal > it yourself--but that's what Harry does. > It's excusable, because in PS/SS Harry's an eleven year old kid who > thinks he's fallen into a fairy tale, and that the world really is an > arena for him to demonstrate his heroism, but at almost sixteen, he > really needs to stop thinking like that. --------------- I agree, but I don't think it's a savior complex. Harry is an 'action' person. If he sees something that has to be done, his first instinct is to do it (maybe that's why he's a good seeker). I was actually surprised he waited so long before setting of to the ministry. In PS/SS I thought it was unrealistic that those particular eleven-year-olds would think the stone would be safer in their hands. But they were eleven (oh, what an adventure!). At fifteen and with their life experience (they haven't been sitting around watching telly)... it's simply dumb! Did Harry think he could fight V & DE all by him self? (He had Luna, Ginny and Neville - such a reassurance.) Wouldn't you think by that time he should have remembered to have a plan? (Or wouldn't Hermione remember to ask if he had one?) Well at lest Harry cleared something up for us: 'Hermione, it doesn't matter if he's done it to get me there or not - they've taken McGonagall to St Mungo's, there isn't anyone from the Order left at Hogwarts who we can tell, and if we don't go, Sirius is dead!' - OotP He was obviously willing to give himself in exchange of Sirius' life. But being Sirius such an important person for him, I wouldn't call it a "saving-people thing". Anyway, whenever he had the urge to put himself in danger to save someone he remember to alert someone in a better position to help. But unfortunately he was unable to: * Hermione and the troll - he never planned a rescue; he was going to tell her to get back to the house dormitories. * Going after the stone - McGonagall wouldn't listen (and he was eleven). * The polyjuice impersonations in CS - he wasn't trying to save anyone; he was playing Dick Tracy. * Following the spiders into the forest - he was playing Dick Tracy again, following Hagrid's clue (he learned a lesson, I think). * Going to Lockhart about the Chamber, - very reasonable of him - and then entering it - the chamber was there (only he could have opened it) and it was too much to resist (I would have sent Ron or Lockhart for the other teachers, though). * Fleur's sister in the lake - after almost being killed by a dragon, is it that farfetched to assume they were in danger? If you thought she was in danger, wouldn't you have done the same? I don't think he has a saving-people thing because he doesn't set out to save people (except for Sirius, but he went to McGonagall first). I think he's an action person that just can't stay put when there's action to be taken. Susana From uath50 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 21:07:22 2004 From: uath50 at yahoo.com (uath50) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 21:07:22 -0000 Subject: Savior complex? / The Stone (was "Harry and Tom") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110852 > Josh wrote: > > I will argue that PS/SS is not the savior complex, but self- > > preservation. Harry is determined to stop Voldemort from getting > > the stone and coming back to kill him.<\ > Pippin: > But, why, *why*, should Harry think that the Stone would be safer > in his hands than it would be guarded by all the protections > Dumbledore has placed around it? And in fact, it's doubtful that > Quirrell could have extracted the Stone from the mirror before > Dumbledore arrived, if Harry hadn't done it for him. I think you might have a point, but consider this: Harry thought that he was helping by trying to save the stone. I don't think that he was trying to make a better name for himself, I think he thought he was helping Dumbledore. "uath50" From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 23:25:48 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 23:25:48 -0000 Subject: Depression ... in OotP - Cho/Marietta In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110853 HunterGreen wrote : "No one was *forcing* her." and " what she did had the repurcussions of expelling a large chunk of students, including a few that were her friends, that's why I thought she deserved to have 'sneak' on her face." Del replies : In another post, I expressed my doubts about that. As you said, Marrietta held her tongue for months, so why should she crack suddenly for no reason ? IMO she had a reason to crack and a good one at that. My best guess is that Umbridge discovered about the existence of the group and that Marrietta was a part of it, and she pressured her into giving her more details. For example, Marrietta could have talked to her parents about it, and her mom could have mentioned at the MoM that Harry Potter was forcing her daughter into doing bad things. That kind of thing happens all the time in RL after all. But because Marrietta didn't necessarily give all the details to her mom, Umbridge would not know enough to make her move, so she pressured Marrietta. Knowing Umbridge, she could have threatened the girl with anything from expulsion to her mom losing her job. So yes Marrietta knew that talking meant incriminating and expelling her friends, but it was either her or them, and after all they were doing something illegal, and she had never really wanted to be a part of it. So... It might sound far-fetched, but if you look at it with an impartial eye, you'll see that it is very possible : a kid gets in with the wrong crowd, talks about it to her parents, who go and complain to the haedmaster. HunterGreen wrote : "If she was having trouble with Quidditch and crying *all-the-time* she was definitely worse off than Harry. She seemed happy enough during the time they were *walking* to Hogsmeade and during the DA meetings though, so I can't see her being *clinically* depressed (since I believe that entails *never* having a break from depression)." Del replies : Not necessarily. Most depressed people do manage to find temporary relief in intense activity and entertainment with friends. So the fact that Cho seemed happy enough while chatting with Harry or training hard during the DA meeting is not at all a contra-indication of depression. On the other hand, the fact that she reverses to her crying state so *quickly* after she finishes her activities could indeed be a sign of depression. Take the Christmas kiss for example : they had all been training for an hour, then they all happily Merry Christmassed each other, and she sent Marrietta away so she could talk to Harry. And then almost right away she thinks of Cedric and bam ! I mean, she should have been in a happy and romantic mood, completely focussed on the kiss she intended to give to Harry, and Cedric should have been quite far away from her mind, but no, here she goes thinking about him again. I do take that as an unhealthy and overly long dwelling on sad thoughts, which is one sign of possible depression. Del From uath50 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 21:22:47 2004 From: uath50 at yahoo.com (uath50) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 21:22:47 -0000 Subject: Betrayal? Cho/Marietta (was Re: Depression ... in OotP - Cho/Marietta) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110854 Alla: > I would agree that Cho should not have forced her to come, if she > did not want to stay, but when she made such choice, she should > have followed through. As all other members of the DA did. > > Was there anything "illegal" with what she did? Of course not. It > was her right to betray her friends, but then she absolutely > deserved what she got at the end, IMO. I agree, she deserved what she got. You don't sign an agreement and then go running to Umbridge and tell. What was she thinking? And as for Cho, that girl may have been her friend, but her loyalty should have been with Harry. "uath50" From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 23:31:49 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 23:31:49 -0000 Subject: Marrietta's betrayal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110855 Ravenclaw Bookworm wrote : " If we can take Umbridge's word for it, Marietta approached her. What prompted her to tell all we don't know, but unless Umbridge is lying, Marietta came to her. I almost wrote that it was possible that she did lie, but one of the things that makes her truly horrible is that she doesn't lie. She just twists the truth (e.g. telling Harry he was to "write lines" for his detention)." Del replies : I agree. I'm pretty sure that Marrietta did approach Umbridge *that evening*. But I wouldn't be surprised if Umbridge had talked with Marrietta on previous occasions, and had made it clear that Marrietta had better talk. As you said, Umbridge is very good at twisting the truth, so of course she wouldn't mention that she had been blackmailing the girl, for example. Del From uath50 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 21:53:59 2004 From: uath50 at yahoo.com (uath50) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 21:53:59 -0000 Subject: Harry getting to GP by floo / thestrals (was Re: Good Writing) In-Reply-To: <20040821130437.72309.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110856 Magda: > After all the "I've got to get to London!" angst and he's finally > got his head in the fireplace and he KNOWS how to floo by now - > and he just uses it like a telephone? Harry couldn't send his head because the network was being watched. How was Harry suppose to get to GP? He couldn't use the thestral to get there, he would have been spotted. "uath50" From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 23:34:15 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 23:34:15 -0000 Subject: Betrayal? Cho/Marietta (was Re: Depression ... in OotP - Cho/Marietta) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110857 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "uath50" wrote: >> I agree, she deserved what she got. You don't sign an agreement > and then go running to Umbridge and tell. What was she thinking? > And as for Cho, that girl may have been her friend, but her loyalty > should have been with Harry. > Alla: Well, I can forgive Cho, since I understand that after Cedric's death she is in pain, confused, etc. I don't mind her standing up for her friend and I don't mind her not showing much loyalty to Harry because even as non-shipper I think that Cho and Harry are very mismatched as pairing. :o) I would even prefer Harry with a new character than with her. (Please JKR, whoever, Ginny, Hermione, nobody, just not Cho :o)) From susanadacunha at gmx.net Sat Aug 21 21:15:29 2004 From: susanadacunha at gmx.net (Susana da Cunha) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 22:15:29 +0100 Subject: Warner Bros. and Harry's survival (was Re: Potions and Book 7) References: Message-ID: <012701c487ce$8bccbd00$562f0dd4@taxi> No: HPFGUIDX 110858 cantoramy wrote: "However, I shall reiterate: Warner Brothers' will not allow its most profitable licensed character, Harry Potter, to be killed off. He's worth too much, as are Hermione and Ron. If they are willing to let him die, there will have to be a stupendous substitute for "happily ever after." Otherwise, the public relations department at WB will be working overtime for years. ... WB is in business for one reason--to make money. They would never do anything to purposely cause themselves a loss-- unless it was for tax purposes, just like all American corporations!" Well, that is all very true. But if JKR refuses to make a happy ending what are they to do? Refuse to publish book seven? Susana From susanadacunha at gmx.net Sat Aug 21 22:34:02 2004 From: susanadacunha at gmx.net (Susana da Cunha) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 23:34:02 +0100 Subject: Savior complex? / The Stone (was "Harry and Tom") References: Message-ID: <013a01c487ce$fbdffdf0$562f0dd4@taxi> No: HPFGUIDX 110859 > Pippin wrote: > But, why, *why*, should Harry think that the Stone would be safer > in his hands than it would be guarded by all the protections > Dumbledore has placed around it? And in fact, it's doubtful that > Quirrell could have extracted the Stone from the mirror before > Dumbledore arrived, if Harry hadn't done it for him. > Josh wrote: > All Harry knew at the time was that no one would believe him about > Snape, that Voldemort was involved, that how to pass the first > obstacle was known, and that a restored Voldemort would quite likely > lead to his own death. He first sought out Dumbledore, and found him > gone, and he was again not believed by the faculty. Harry had no idea > that the mirror would prove such a good defense, and I agree with you > there... in the end, Harry actually put the stone at more risk, as > far as we can assume. Also, didn't Harry think Dumbledore was gone > until the next day? > So, Harry acted in his own defense after it being seemingly abandoned > to him. His only other option was to go to sleep and pray that he > wouldn't wake up to Voldemort's wand against his forehead. ---------- I think Josh and I are on the same brain wavelength on this subject, with a slight difference. I don't think Harry thought of all of that (not consciously at least). Action people act on instinct: they don't stop to think *why* they have to do things; they just know they *have* to. Now, instinct is usually underestimated. People who act on instinct (raised hand here) do it because their instinct doesn't let them down. What Harry doesn't seem to realize yet is that you can only trust instinct if you have all the facts (or at least most of them). For example: you know your godfather is being tortured to death (happens all the time, right?) and you can't reach anyone that might resolve the situation in time. Your brain processes the information and says: "go yourself!" If you know that is likely a trap your brain might say: "go to Grimmauld Place and get information/help." Did I make sense? This subject along with "Depressive Harry" has made me think not many people understand Harry. I hope I'm wrong. Susana From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com Sat Aug 21 23:41:23 2004 From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 23:41:23 -0000 Subject: Will Harry continue to study Divination in book six? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110860 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "danni_yetman" wrote:...what I want to know is what else Harry is going to take during his sixth and seventh years...I believe that McGonagall says that Harry needs to get x number of NEWTs to go to Auror school or whatever, and after she tells him his required courses, he still needs at least one more....I'm thinking it will be Divination, because she wouldn't throw Firenze in there and make it clear at the end that both he and Trelawney will be teaching and not have Harry continue in my opinion...will he also continue with Care of Magical Creatures? I mean, who says he can't take extra NEWTs too right? Although it might be too much work...maybe it's not important....what's your opinion?! In OotP Prof.McGonagall tells Harry that to be an Auror he will need five N.E.W.T.s. She names four of them, Charms, Defense Against the Dark Arts, Potions, Transfiguration. McGonagall never says what the fifth one is and if it is an elective that Harry will take Care of Magical Creatures to stay close to Hagrid. Harry knows that Trelawney is a fraud and that Divination is something that you are born with, you can't learn it. And Hagrid in more important to Harry that either Firenze or Trelawney. McMax. From syroun at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 22:53:24 2004 From: syroun at yahoo.com (syroun) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 22:53:24 -0000 Subject: Quick to define Harry as "clinically depressed"? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110861 I find it odd that so many of you are quick to label Harry as depressed in GoF/Phoenix. As the facts stand, his life is quite complicated for a teenager, let alone an adult. He has no parental resourses, in whom he can confide and turn to for advise. He comes to find out that his father is less than "noble" in his routine behavior and even further, seems to derive great pleasure in torturing classmates, such as Snape, in much the same way Harry was constantly derided and mishandled by DD/Dursley family. And then, as the book ends, he is finally confronted with his most unfortunate fate - kill or be killed. His reaction to this can only be one of deep melancholy, as true depression is defined not by the preponderance of unfortunate or even dire circumstances, but rather, a lack of those circumstances. Those who become clinically depressed do so, in a cyclical fashion regardless of their environment, and have difficulty finding their way out. The rest of us, when confronted with awful circumstances, simply continue to trudge on with life, and despite the negative. In doing so, we find that eventually, we achieve one type of success or another and that gives us hope that others are to come. Harry will be no different. Past that diatribe, does anyone else think that TMR is the half- blood prince? Syroun From b_boymn at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 23:46:52 2004 From: b_boymn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 23:46:52 -0000 Subject: Marrietta's betrayal -Higher Moral Authority In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110862 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Alla wrote : > "She was obeying the law? Well, any law put into place by professor > Umbridge deserved to be sabotaged, IMO." > Del replies : > I understand the feeling, but I have to disagree with the statement. > Anarchy lurks around the corner when we start choosing which laws > we're going to obey. > > Moreover, putting any morality over the law is terribly dangerous. > After all, isn't it exactly what LV and the DEs are doing ? Their > morality isn't ours, but if we claim the right to put our morality > over the law, then we automatically grant them the same right. > Dangerous, very dangerous. > > Del B_Boymn: Equally, there is a problem with blindly following the law. The law is a matter of opinion and is changing all the time. In addition, Government, politicians, and therefore law can become corrupt as would likely be the case if Voldemort wins and takes over. We have discussed subject along this line before, and in that past discussion I have used the example of a soldier during wartime. A soldier is required by law to follow orders. His failure to do so can be very harshly punished even to the extent of the death penalty. However, international law has established the each soldier must answer to a higher more universal moral authority. If a soldier is ordered by his superior to commit what he believes to be a war crime or crimes against humanity, then he has both a moral and legal obligation to refuse. If he does not refuse, he can later be prosecuted for those war crimes or crimes against humanity. Of course, Catch-22, if he does refuse, he can also be prosecuted for disobeying orders and other assorted crimes. So, a common and reasonable morality does take precedence over common law. Obeying the law is the 'easy' choice, just keep your head down, hope for the best, and do what you are told; the choice of non-thinkers and non-doers. Those who think and do, make their choice based on a deeper and more universal sense of right and wrong. Harry is making his choices, or at least the really important ones, based on this same 'higher authority'. Independant of what the rules and the law says, Harry chooses to do what he knows to be right. The 'easy' way is to shrug his shoulders and say it's not his problem, let the grownups worry about the Stone. That way, regardless of whether it goes right or wrong, at least they can't blame it on him. The hard way, the hard moral choice, is to say, I don't care what happens to me, preventing Voldemort/Snape from getting the Stone is more important than petty rules and a little trouble. In Marietta's case, I do have some sympathy for her, she was faced with a difficult, if not impossible, moral dilemma. She was very much like the soldier during wartime, torn between internal and external forces. However, her betrayal came AFTER the Quibbler interview with Harry came out. Prior to that, she had strong reason to doubt Harry, and was in a position that was consistent with most of the students. Tempering that, she also had direct contact with Harry in the DA Club lessons which should of given her a strong sense of Harry as a person. She should have been able to see that he wasn't some lying, bragging, show-off. Once the Quibbler article came out, most of the students changed their mind about Harry, and at least considered the possibility that he might be right. However, it is at this time of general enlightenment, that Marietta choose to betray Harry. I have to wonder why, other than it was necessary for the story, at that time, did she decided to go to Umbridge? I have a suspicion, as suggested by others, that outside forces were putting a great deal of pressure on her, pressure to which she eventually caved. In closing, in our previous discusssion, we examined the various stages of moral enlightenment, and blindly following or ridgidly adhering to the rules is one of the lowest stages. In otherwords, to paraphrase Dumbledore, at some point in our life, we must choose between that which is right, and that which is easy. Just passing it along. Steve/b_boymn From shalimar07 at aol.com Sat Aug 21 23:02:55 2004 From: shalimar07 at aol.com (shalimar07 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 19:02:55 EDT Subject: New B-day on JKR's site (Re: The Clue) Message-ID: <24.5e67f3f6.2e592e9f@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110863 Just thought I'd let everyone know that the birthday has changed to 22/08/04 for Percy Weasley. "shalimar07" From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 23:47:15 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 23:47:15 -0000 Subject: Marrietta's betrayal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110864 Alla wrote : " Del, this is the cultural difference on which we are never going to agree to. I grew up in the communist regime. I was taught quite early that opposition to such regime was very noble and decent thing. Now, we are not talking about murderers or thiefs, but when my friends were accused of committing so called "political crimes", I consider them to be heroes and would never think of betraying them. I think that analogy with "political crimes" works quite well for OOP, therefore it is incredibnly hard for me if not IMPOSSIBLE to sympathise with Marietta." Del replies : Alla, I perfectly understand where you come from. But you must also try to understand where *Marrietta* comes from. The country in which you grew up was under a totalitarian regime. The country in which Marrietta grew up was a democracy (more or less, but at least people believed it was). That democracy was replaced by a totalitarian regime at the end of GoF, but that fact was not recognised for a whole year. So when you, Alla, correctly recognise that the DA are in fact doing a noble work for opposing a totalitarian regime, Marrietta on the other hand probably sees them as something close to junior terrorists. So OBVIOUSLY the two of you are going to react in completely opposite ways. Alla wrote : "Yes, Hermione left them no choice as to keeping silent about the meetings that is true. BUT, Hermione did not take away from her her right to leave." Del replies : We don't know that actually. We don't know if Hermione would have taken Marrietta's name off the list if Marrietta had expressed the desire to leave, thus keeping Marrietta as much in danger of expulsion as the others. Alla wrote : " Blackmailed her with what? Yes, if we learn that umbridge tortured her, that would be a different story. But we know nothing to that effect so far, if I am correct." Del replies : Blackmailed her with expulsion or with firing her mom ? And Umbridge has ways to torture people that don't necessarily leave traces, doesn't she ? Agreed, we don't know if Umbridge pressured Marrietta. But what we do know is that *something* must have happened for Marrietta to betray her best friend after keeping silent for several months. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 23:54:40 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 23:54:40 -0000 Subject: Betrayal? Cho/Marietta In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110865 uath50 wrote: " You don't sign an agreement and then go running to Umbridge and tell. What was she thinking?" Del replies : That's *exactly* the right question to ask. And as long as we don't know that, I find it quite arbitrary to condemn her like that. uath50 wrote : "And as for Cho, that girl may have been her friend, but her loyalty should have been with Harry." Del replies : That's interesting. Could you elaborate on that ? Don't you think that Cho was being loyal to both Harry and Marrietta ? What do you think Cho should have done ? Leave Marrietta altogether ? Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Aug 21 23:57:54 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 23:57:54 -0000 Subject: Harry getting to GP by floo / thestrals In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110866 Magda wrote : "After all the "I've got to get to London!" angst and he's finally got his head in the fireplace and he KNOWS how to floo by now - and he just uses it like a telephone? " uath50 answered : "Harry couldn't send his head because the network was being watched." Del replies : ??? 1. Harry *did* send his head, that's how he could talk to Kreacher. 2. Umbridge's fire was *not* monitored, that's why they went to all the trouble to use that one. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 00:08:24 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 00:08:24 -0000 Subject: Harry's Depression in OoP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110867 Alla wrote : "Just how fast will she make Harry to master his emotions? Will she make him contemplate and decide "OK, now all my grief, pain, guilt, whatever, should be magically done and get over with. Now I have to go to war and kill Voldemort."?" Del replies : That wouldn't be mastering his emotions, strictly speaking, only ignoring them. It can work, as Shaun could testify. Or else he could master them by first acknowledging them and by accepting/requesting support from his friends. Some kind of counseling would be nice too : maybe regular talks with DD or Lupin could help. Del From b_boymn at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 00:10:41 2004 From: b_boymn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 00:10:41 -0000 Subject: Will Harry continue to study Divination in book six? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110868 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "danni_yetman" wrote: >... McGonagall says that Harry needs to get x number of NEWTs to go > to Auror school or whatever, and after she tells him his required > courses, he still needs at least one more.... > > I'm thinking it will be Divination, because she wouldn't throw > Firenze in there ... and not have Harry continue in my opinion... > will he also continue with Care of Magical Creatures? I mean, who > says he can't take extra NEWTs too right? > > Although it might be too much work...maybe it's not important. > ...what's your opinion?! B_Boymn: McGonagall says he needs a /minimum/ of five NEWTs. The suggested ones are- - Tranfigurations - Charms - Defense Against the Dark Arts - Potions the remaining classes available to Harry are- - Divination - Herboloby - Care of Magical Creatures - History of Magic I think Harry and Ron are desperate to get out of Divination, even with Firenze, they don't put much faith in it. However, you are right, I alwasy knew that Firenze would come back into the story, and now he has, but the question is why is he back and what purpose will he serve? Actually, I don't have a clue. I think Harry will only continue with Divination if other classes he needs are unavailable. Although, I'm also quite sure that Harry didn't get a OWL in Divination, so I think that eliminates that class. I think he will take Care of Magical Creatures simply because Hagrid is his friend, and while he does enjoy the classes, he would also want to show support for Hagrid. I also don't think Harry go an OWL in Magical History, so that class is probably out. So that leaves Herbology as an extra class. It's possible that if Harry doesn't get into Potions, he will substitute Herbology which has some application in and connection to Potions. As far as Potion, Harry certainly got an OWL in Potions, but I just don't see any way he could have gotten an Outstanding OWL. That implies that while Snape is the teacher, Harry can't get into the class. Consequently, I am a supporter of the theory that Snape will be the DADA teacher and there will be a new Potions teacher. Final class list- - Tranfigurations - Charms - Defense Against the Dark Arts - Potions (maybe) - Care of Magical Creatures - Herbology (maybe) Sorry, no Divination. Just one man's opinion. Steve/b_boymn From drednort at alphalink.com.au Sun Aug 22 00:12:54 2004 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 10:12:54 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Quick to define Harry as "clinically depressed"? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <412871A6.22930.7E23AA@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 110869 On 21 Aug 2004 at 22:53, syroun wrote: > His reaction to this can only be one of deep melancholy, as true > depression is defined not by the preponderance of unfortunate or > even dire circumstances, but rather, a lack of those circumstances. > Those who become clinically depressed do so, in a cyclical fashion > regardless of their environment, and have difficulty finding their > way out. The rest of us, when confronted with awful circumstances, > simply continue to trudge on with life, and despite the negative. In > doing so, we find that eventually, we achieve one type of success or > another and that gives us hope that others are to come. > Harry will be no different. While you may be correct, I find it just slightly disturbing to see some of the attitudes towards clinical depression that are being expressed on this list. Above is one example: "Those who become clinically depressed do so, in a cyclical fashion regardless of their environment, and have difficulty finding their way out." Too many people here, seem to me to have a very narrow view of what clinical depression is, of what depression is. And unless Harry fits their own narrow definition, it's obvious to them he's not depressed. I suffered severe clinical depression for about a decade. That is a simple medical fact. Environment was a factor, as was my brain chemistry. I know this, not just because doctors told me this, but because I experienced it all in vivid detail. I know environment was a factor - a trigger, in my opinion - because I first developed it in a hellish environment. I know brain chemistry was a factor because when I finally started on medication to correct the chemical problems, I was fortunate enough that it brought my depression under control in a matter of weeks, after ten years of suffering it. The fact I had clinical depression is a medical fact. Now, the thing is, my clinical depression was not 'regardless of my environment'. My environment triggered it (it may have come anyway, of course, I have no way of knowing) and as my environment changed it got better or worse depending on the environment I was in. It certainly was not regardless of my environment. It was, in no way, cyclical. They looked for cycles. There were none that they could find. Difficulty finding a way out - OK, that one matches me (-8 My point is that there's no such thing as a single definition, or a single expression of clinical depression. There are common characteristics that a lot of clinically depressed people have - but in virtually any case, there will always be exceptions. I actually find it slightly weird to see some people here claim Harry can't be depressed because his symptoms don't match the very small set that they are using. I'm not saying the lists of symptoms are a bad idea, and I certainly think its totally valid for someone to use such a list to try and decide whether or not Harry is depressed - but by the same token, I think people really need to constantly bear in mind that these lists of symptoms are *very* generalised. I certainly can't say Harry is depressed with anything like 100% certainty. What I can say is what I see in him matches many of the symptoms of the depression I suffered, rather closely. There's a large distinction between those two ideas. 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 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 00:20:31 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 00:20:31 -0000 Subject: TMR HBP ? (was Quick to define Harry as "clinically depressed"?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110870 Syroun wrote : "Past that diatribe, does anyone else think that TMR is the half-blood prince?" Del replies : JKR answered that question on her website : "Is Tom Riddle the Half-Blood Prince ? Well, as Tom Riddle is the same person as Voldemort, and Voldemort is NOT the Half-Blood Prince... do I really need to answer this ? " (emphasis hers) Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 00:44:39 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 00:44:39 -0000 Subject: Marrietta's betrayal -Higher Moral Authority In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110871 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: >> B_Boymn: > > Equally, there is a problem with blindly following the law. The law is > a matter of opinion and is changing all the time. In addition, > Government, politicians, and therefore law can become corrupt as would > likely be the case if Voldemort wins and takes over. Alla: Exactly, thank you very much, Steve. Besides the fact that Ministry is already corrupt, if not for Harry and other children, Fudge will still be saying that Voldemort is not back, let's ignore everything. Who knows, maybe Umbridge will still be staying in school, if not for opposition students showed her. > Steve: > So, a common and reasonable morality does take precedence over common > law. Obeying the law is the 'easy' choice, just keep your head down, > hope for the best, and do what you are told; the choice of > non-thinkers and non-doers. Those who think and do, make their choice > based on a deeper and more universal sense of right and wrong. > > Harry is making his choices, or at least the really important ones, > based on this same 'higher authority'. Independant of what the rules > and the law says, Harry chooses to do what he knows to be right. Alla: Amen to that too. It is drifting OT, I am afraid, but where will we be now, if some people in the USA did not chose to disobey segregation laws , for example? I can only wonder where Harry got a sense of what is right and wrong. (Not from Dursleys, that for sure. I love Rita Winston's theory about "imaginary mom" Lily left in Harry's heart, but I guess other reasons also possible)./ Sure, Harry screws up his fair share, but when it is very important, I think his inside barometer works really well most of the time. From b_boymn at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 00:47:17 2004 From: b_boymn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 00:47:17 -0000 Subject: Quick to define Harry as "clinically depressed"? In-Reply-To: <412871A6.22930.7E23AA@localhost> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110872 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Shaun Hately" wrote: > Shaun > > ...edited... > > I certainly can't say Harry is depressed with anything like 100% > certainty. What I can say is what I see in him matches many of the > symptoms of the depression I suffered, rather closely. There's a > large distinction between those two ideas. > > > Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought > Shaun Hately B_Boymn: Thanks Shaun, we can always count on you to lend a fair and reasonable perspective to things. There are many types of depression. In some cases, it's like Diabetes, it's just a random error in the internal structure of your body dynamics. Something you live with and manage. For many people prone to depression, as you suggested, there is a 'trigger' that sets it off and from there, it cascades out of control. The trigger event comes and goes, but it has setup a lasting imbalance. Now, and more importantly, there are situations in real life were depression isn't a 'mistake', it's the natural and normal response to events. You failed a big test, you lost the big game, or even more tragic someone close to you died. Those, and many more, are appropriate situations in which depression is that natural and normal response. For most people, just like a shift in blood sugar, the body, mind, and spirit in time correct the situation and life goes on. In Harry's case, using the beginning of OotP as an example, people are stunned that Harry is so angry and depressed, but given his life, everything that has happened to him, depression and anger seem perfectly normal responses to me. You may all ask, how can Harry be so depressed and angry, and I must ask with equal or more fervor, how can he NOT? I have to believe that even the ever-mellow Luna Lovegood would be angry, frustrated, and depressed in Harry's situation. Taking it one step farther, I'm inclined to ask, how can Harry be so cheerful and calm under the circumstances. Just a thought. Steve/b_boymn From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 00:48:15 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 00:48:15 -0000 Subject: Marrietta's betrayal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110873 > Del replies : >> The country in which you grew up was under a totalitarian regime. The > country in which Marrietta grew up was a democracy (more or less, but > at least people believed it was). Alla: Del, I understand perfectly where Marietta comes from. I just refuse to sympathise with said course of action. I also would like to disagree with the contention that WW is a democracy or had ever been a democracy. I would like to refer you to Nora Renka's excellent essay "Why Voldemort was a fascist?", if of course you hadn't had a chance to read it yet. Post number is 108672 (it is among the recommended posts too) I wonder whether WW has ever been a democracy. Uath50 wrote previously: > " You don't sign an agreement and then go running to Umbridge and > tell. What was she thinking?" > > Del replies : > That's *exactly* the right question to ask. And as long as we don't > know that, I find it quite arbitrary to condemn her like that. Alla: Well, there are could be mitigating circumstances, but I don't think it is arbitrary to condemn her based on what she DID without knowing what happened in her head. From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Aug 22 00:51:29 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 00:51:29 -0000 Subject: Savior complex? / The Stone (was "Harry and Tom") In-Reply-To: <013a01c487ce$fbdffdf0$562f0dd4@taxi> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110874 : > > Pippin wrote: > > But, why, *why*, should Harry think that the Stone would be safer in his hands than it would be guarded by all the protections Dumbledore has placed around it? And in fact, it's doubtful that Quirrell could have extracted the Stone from the mirror before Dumbledore arrived, if Harry hadn't done it for him. > > > Josh wrote: > > All Harry knew at the time was that no one would believe him about Snape, that Voldemort was involved, that how to pass the firstobstacle was known, and that a restored Voldemort would quite likely lead to his own death. He first sought out Dumbledore, and found him gone, and he was again not believed by the faculty. Harry had no idea that the mirror would prove such a good defense, and I agree with you there... in the end, Harry actually put the stone at more risk, as far as we can assume. Also, didn't Harry think Dumbledore was gone until the next day?<< So, Harry acted in his own defense after it being seemingly abandoned to him. His only other option was to go to sleep and pray that he wouldn't wake up to Voldemort's wand against his forehead.<< Susana: > I don't think Harry thought of all of that (not consciously at least). > > Action people act on instinct: they don't stop to think *why* they have to do things; they just know they *have* to. > That's just it. Harry's instincts tell him he has to charge into battle, when other people's instincts would probably tell them to run for it, or run for help. And just as other people might have to learn to hold back on their instincts and think whether they should fight rather than run, Harry is going to have to learn to hold back on his instincts and think whether charging in is the best solution. Now, I want to make clear that I am not faulting almost-twelve Harry, but the overlooked options that were driving Del to accuse JKR of sloppy writing when Harry rushed to save Sirius in OOP are the same kind of options Harry overlooked in PS/SS. Harry could have asked Hagrid to tell Dumbledore or McGonagall about the stranger in the Hogs Head. Harry could have sent an owl to Dumbledore immediately, instead of only thinking of it after he found out there was only enough potion for one person to get past the flames. Harry could have raised the alarm and been believed as soon as he found the harp in the trap door room. BTW, I really don't think Harry could have flooed to Grimmauld Place. IIRC, we never see anyone use the GP fireplace for transport, only communication. Surely we'd have seen people flooing to and from the ministry and St. Mungo's if it were possible. Granted, JKR could have had somebody explain that, but too much explanation of that sort would sound like a poorly written Star Trek episode, where everybody is constantly explaining, for the benefit of the audience, things they should already know. Pippin From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 01:04:51 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 01:04:51 -0000 Subject: Marrietta's betrayal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110875 Alla wrote : "Well, there are could be mitigating circumstances, but I don't think it is arbitrary to condemn her based on what she DID without knowing what happened in her head." Del replies : Except of course that you're not condemning her for what she did, but for why you think she did it :-) What she did is simply to obey the law, there's nothing wrong with that in theory. All those arguments in favour of obeying a higher moral authority (to which I adhere, even if I don't write in to say so) clearly show that what is condemned in Marrietta is not her *action* in itself but the *reason* and the reasoning behind her action. And I *do* think that it is arbitrary to *assume* that we know why people do what they do and to condemn them based on that assumption, when they haven't had a single chance to explain themselves. Two examples : 1. We can just condemn anyone who's killed someone for murder and not care that they did it in self-defense, or inversely assume that nobody would ever kill except in self-defence and so absolve every murderer. 2. If what happened in his head and heart doesn't matter, then Harry is just plain stupid for rushing like that to the MoM, end of the discussion :-) Knowing what went on in a person's head *is* critical when judging them. Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 01:14:10 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 01:14:10 -0000 Subject: Marrietta's betrayal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110876 > Del replies : snip. > Knowing what went on in a person's head *is* critical when judging them. > Alla: Eh, yes it is critical, but it is POSSIBLE to render a judgment without knowing it. It could be an incorrect one, but, why not? What Marietta did (her action) could be called "obeying a law". Sure, why not? But I can also call her ACTION " betrayal of her friends" That in itself is enough for me to strongly dislike what she did without knowing what she thought at the moment. If I ever learn that Umbridge blackmailed her or torutred her in any way, physical or emotional, I will acquit her. :o) For now, in my mind, she is guilty. ;) By the way, Harry was definitely stupid for forgetting that Snape is a Member of the Order, but why is he stupid for rushing to save his godfather? He rushed to save his loved one. That was an attempt of noble action. How is it stupid? From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 01:18:08 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 01:18:08 -0000 Subject: Floo and GP (was Savior complex? / The Stone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110877 Pippin wrote : "BTW, I really don't think Harry could have flooed to Grimmauld Place. IIRC, we never see anyone use the GP fireplace for transport, only communication. Surely we'd have seen people flooing to and from the ministry and St. Mungo's if it were possible." Del replies : IIRC we don't see *anyone else* but Harry using the fireplace in GP for *anything*, so we can't really conclude whether this fireplace is a communication-only fireplace or not. That reminds me of another thing that puzzled me : if Harry can use the fireplace in GP, that means that fireplace is still connected to the Floo Network, right ? How does that tie in with the high level of security the Order has put on and around GP ? In particular, I'm wondering what the people monitoring the Floo network see at the place where GP should be, if they see anything at all ? Can you make a place Floo-unplottable ? And also : if Umbridge had managed to get a grip on Sirius's head, could she have gone back to GP with him, considering that she's not in the Secret ? Just wondering about the technicalities of the thing. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 01:31:00 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 01:31:00 -0000 Subject: Marrietta's betrayal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110878 Alla wrote : "What Marietta did (her action) could be called "obeying a law". Sure, why not? But I can also call her ACTION " betrayal of her friends" That in itself is enough for me to strongly dislike what she did without knowing what she thought at the moment." Del replies : All right. Let's try another one then :-) When Hermione told McGonagall about the Firebolt in PoA, was that right or wrong ? Alla wrote : "By the way, Harry was definitely stupid for forgetting that Snape is a Member of the Order, but why is he stupid for rushing to save his godfather? He rushed to save his loved one. That was an attempt of noble action. How is it stupid?" Del replies : For many reasons : - as you mentioned, he forgot about Snape, - he should have realised that his dream had more chances to be fake than not, - he should have learned Occlumency and not have the dream in the first place, - he should have realised that LV simply couldn't stroll in the corridors of the MoM in broad daylight, - even if LV was indeed there, he should have known he couldn't win over him anyway, and so on. In short, he should have realised that going to the MoM was a very stupid and most probably useless thing to do. That's the conclusion he would most probably have reached if he had been a *robot*, not a human teenager. If we discount what's going on in people's mind, then that's exactly how we see people : as robots who should obey our rules. But they are not. Harry is not a robot, and what was going on in his heart and mind explains why he did something so incredibly stupid. Del From desastreuse at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 01:32:49 2004 From: desastreuse at yahoo.com (desastreuse) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 01:32:49 -0000 Subject: Will Harry continue to study Divination in book six? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110879 Steve writes: > As far as Potion, Harry certainly got an OWL in Potions, but I just > don't see any way he could have gotten an Outstanding OWL. That > implies that while Snape is the teacher, Harry can't get into the > class. Consequently, I am a supporter of the theory that Snape will > be the DADA teacher and there will be a new Potions teacher. > > I think Harry will end up having Snape as an instructor again, too. My pet theory is that Dumbledore, because he constantly professes his trust in Snape, requires just one little thing from Snape in order to shunt him over to the DADA position he so dearly wants. And what is that one little thing Snape needs to do? It's simple: stop applying for the position. The year Snape stops applying for the position when it's open may actually be the year Dumbledore will give it to him because it sends the right subtle message to DD. Perhaps this is the year? From steve at hp-lexicon.org Sun Aug 22 05:24:30 2004 From: steve at hp-lexicon.org (hp_lexicon) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 05:24:30 -0000 Subject: Curse Scars In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110880 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Darby" wrote: > > I checked the Quotes at HP Lexicon and came up with nothing as to > the error being corrected by JKR. (Not surprising, I seldom find what I'm looking for there.) In Quick Quotes or in the Lexicon? They're two different sites. > said "never". I > don't know why they didn't correct it. I have been trying to find out the answer to this one. I've been asking the translators that I know if they have had any information given to then -- they get lists of these kinds of changes to incorporate into their work. So far no answer from them. Maybe a letter to Bloomsbury or Christopher Little would do the trick. It's very strange, though, isn't it? Steve the Lexicon From msturbo209 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 00:31:04 2004 From: msturbo209 at yahoo.com (stellablue571) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 00:31:04 -0000 Subject: Savior complex? / The Stone (was "Harry and Tom") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110881 > Josh: > All Harry knew at the time was that no one would believe him about > Snape, that Voldemort was involved, that how to pass the first > obsticle was known, and that a restored Voldemort would quite > likely lead to his own death. He first sought out Dumbledore, and > found him gone, and he was again not believed by the faculty. Harry > had no idea that the mirror would prove such a good defense, and I > agree with you there... in the end, Harry actually put the stone at > more risk, as far as we can assume. Also, didn't Harry think Dumbledore > was gone until the next day? > > So, Harry acted in his own defense after it being seemingly abandoned > to him. His only other option was to go to sleep and pray that he > wouldn't wake up to Voldemort's wand against his forehead. Stella: "So all I've got to wait for now is Snape to steal the Stone," Harry went on feverishly, "then Voldemort will be able to come finish me off...well I suppose Bane'll be happy." SS/ch.15 The Forbidden Forest Then in ch. 16... Maybe it was because they hadn't seen what Harry had seen in the forest, or because they didn't have scars burning on their foreheads, but Ron and Hermione didn't seem as worried about the Stone as Harry. The idea of Voldemort scared them, but he didn't keep visiting them in dreams, and they were so busy with their studying that they didn't have much time to fret about what Snape or anyone else might be up to. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "It's tonight," said Harry once he was sure professor McGonagall was out of earshot. "Snape's going throught the trapdoor tonight. He found out everything he needs, and now he's got Dumbledore out of the way. He sent that note, I bet the Ministry of Magic will get a real shock when Dumbledore turns up." ---------------------------------------------------------------------- It would seem to me that Harry felt that he was once again on his own, and it was indeed up to him to do something...Harry has always had to rely on his own self preservation instincts which are very strong. Perhaps Lily's sacrifice has something to do with this. Whatever the reason, Harry's got it in spades or he wouldn't have survived the Dursleys with an ounce of self intact. Since we know that Harry has never had anyone else to rely on, it makes perfect sense for him to be this way. In fact, many of the situations where Harry "plays the Hero", can be attributed to his self reliance, usually coupled with a need to act immediately lest some dire consequence result. In some cases, like the Remembrall, I think he just knows right from wrong. He has been bullied a-lot, and feels empathy for Neville. :D Stella From susanadacunha at gmx.net Sun Aug 22 00:41:20 2004 From: susanadacunha at gmx.net (Susana da Cunha) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 01:41:20 +0100 Subject: Fireplaces (was: Good Writing (was Why now?)) References: Message-ID: <018201c487e0$d38cf170$562f0dd4@taxi> No: HPFGUIDX 110882 Del wrote: "My personal pet peeve being that if Harry could get his head at GP, and if he didn't intend to take his friends with him to the MoM, and if he was in such a hurry to get to London, then why on Earth didn't he take *all of himself* to GP, and checked on his own whether Sirius was there or not ?" Alice wrote : " I don't think that the fact that he could put his head through *does* mean that he could put the rest of himself through, though. The primary reason is simply that if he could, it seems like Hogwarts would have serious security issues: Slytherins of ill repute could be slinking off to do evil sorts of things, and Seamus Finnegan would be a regular at the Leaky Cauldron." Del replies : "Well no, because all the fires the students can have access to would obviously be monitored. DD would immediately be informed of any student travelling by Floo powder and of their destination." I don't think fireplaces work that way - it's more then just monitoring. If they did, anyone could barge in on someone's home uninvited. Fireplaces must have spells preventing that, the same way you can't send an owl to someone in hiding and follow it (JKR's explanation was: wizards can make themselves unreachable if they want). And in Hogwarts case, the fireplaces in the houses must have spells preventing the exit as well or the students could live without permission. The only canon we have on this is Lupin coming to Snape's office on PoA. Snape throws powder in to the fire and, without sticking his head on the fire, says: "Lupin, I need to see you." - I suppose voice can travel by floo then. After that, Lupin has no problem coming into Snape's office. So, was "Lupin, I need to see you" a password authorization? It seems established that magic is a matter of intent... could be: for someone to get into someone's privet home, there should be an invitation from someone inside the house. The fireplaces at the ministry or other public places don't require invitation (Harry entered a shop by mistake in CS). I wondered how does a wizard get home. For example: Mr. Wesley wants to use the fireplaces at the ministry to get home. Does he have a password? Does he say "The Burrow - Sherbet Lemon"? My solution is this: if Sirius couldn't be found by an owl from the ministry but he could be found by Harry's owl, then a fireplace can by jinxed to let the family in but no one else. Any thoughts? Susana From susanadacunha at gmx.net Sun Aug 22 02:05:12 2004 From: susanadacunha at gmx.net (Susana da Cunha) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 03:05:12 +0100 Subject: Snape and the DADA position (was Re: Will Harry continue to study Divination in book six?) References: Message-ID: <022601c487ec$78194490$562f0dd4@taxi> No: HPFGUIDX 110883 desastreuse wrote: "My pet theory is that Dumbledore, because he constantly professes his trust in Snape, requires just one little thing from Snape in order to shunt him over to the DADA position he so dearly wants. And what is that one little thing Snape needs to do? It's simple: stop applying for the position. The year Snape stops applying for the position when it's open may actually be the year Dumbledore will give it to him because it sends the right subtle message to DD. Perhaps this is the year?" I don't think Snape is quite ready to stop applying to the DADA position. We should ask: why does he want the job? My guess is that he wants to prove to the WW that eliminating the DA as a subject of study is dangerous and irrational. Dangerous because you can only fight what you know. Irrational because knowledge will always be knowledge and knowing how to build atomic bombs doesn't make you a mass murderer. IMO, DD doesn't give him the job because he might feel tempted to show how difficult it is to fight the DA instead of teaching how to fight the DA. I just don't buy that he wants the job because he likes DA. If he does, wouldn't be frustrating to teach DADA? By the way, has anyone ever wondered is it was Snape who jinxed the position? Susana From ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com Sun Aug 22 04:10:02 2004 From: ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com (ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 00:10:02 EDT Subject: Marrietta's betrayal (was Depression ... in OotP - Cho/Ma...) Message-ID: <54.3181f1d4.2e59769a@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110884 Del writes: > It was her friends who were doing illegal stuff. She did *not* deserve > to be punished for setting her own situation straight Signing the sheet didn't mean that you were joining DA. It just meant that you were there at that initial meeting and agreed not to tell. There was nothing that said you had to go to or participate in meetings. It was just a roll sheet for a group of people hanging out together before it was against the rules for groups to form. She wasn't require to be a member of DA. She could have stopped going. As has been said, we don't know what she was thinking. Maybe she wasn't being malicious. Maybe she was trying to help some very misguided people. They have public service announcements on TV that tell teenagers to tell an adult if a friend is in a gang or is using drugs. I don't see where this is any different. 1) Your friend is doing drugs, which is harmful to him/her. 2) If you tell, you're betraying them, but ultimately it's in their best interest. 1) Your classmates are members of the DA. 2) If you tell on them you're betraying them, but you think it's in their best interest. We don't know that Marrietta believes Harry, we just know she's there for Cho. Yes, the Quibbler article came out, but a lot of people still weren't convinced. Umbridge wasn't. Maybe Mariette was a skeptic. Maybe she thought Harry was delusional. That's bad enough, but, not only is he delusional, he's teaching other people DADA. We have a delusional, underage wizard teaching dangerous magic. Even if they don't get hurt, they could still get in trouble, but, lots of kids are taught that if they fess up the punishment won't be as bad. I don't think Mariette set out to hurt anybody or to just save herself. "ReturnOfTheMutt" From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 04:14:45 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 04:14:45 -0000 Subject: Warner Bros. and Harry's survival (was Re: Potions and Book 7) In-Reply-To: <012701c487ce$8bccbd00$562f0dd4@taxi> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110885 > cantoramy wrote: > "Warner Brothers' will not allow its most profitable licensed character, > Harry Potter, to be killed off. He's worth too much, as are Hermione > and Ron. ... WB is in business for one reason--to make money. > They would never do anything to purposely cause themselves a loss-- > unless it was for tax purposes, just like all American corporations!" > Susana: > Well, that is all very true. But if JKR refuses to make a happy ending > what are they to do? Refuse to publish book seven? ---------------------------- Warner Brothers only has the licensing rights to Harry Potter, they do not control the author. And they are not the publishers. The story will end however the story ends and Warner Brothers has no say in it!! Tonks_op From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 04:36:30 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 04:36:30 -0000 Subject: Depression and Harry in OotP -- PTSD In-Reply-To: <00cb01c4878d$5ea47070$6501a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110886 Del wrote : > > But when he's neither angry nor happy nor anything special, I just > > don't see that he's depressed. At least, no more than he was before > > OoP. Now if someone wants to make a case that Harry's been suffering > > from a sort of mild depression right from PS/SS, that's another thing > > entirely and I might agree. -------------------------------------------------- I don't think anyone read the post I did last night. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110801 Harry is not clinically depressed, he has PTSD. Tonks_op From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 04:45:11 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 04:45:11 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore and The End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110887 Danni wrote: > Should Harry have to kill Voldemort, then I think the only way > he could resolve himself to do it is if Voldemort had killed > someone Harry deeply cared about (ie, Dumbledore, Ron, Hermione). snip --------------------------------------- Dumbledore and Harry will not kill anyone. Something else will be the downfall of Voldemort. Harry will die... and come back in a different form.. he and Dumbledore will both be immortal. If I am right... just remember who told you!! Tonks_op From humantupperware1 at yahoo.com.au Sun Aug 22 05:13:35 2004 From: humantupperware1 at yahoo.com.au (humantupperware1) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 05:13:35 -0000 Subject: Harry getting to GP by floo / thestrals (was Re: Good Writing) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110888 > Magda: > > After all the "I've got to get to London!" angst and he's finally > > got his head in the fireplace and he KNOWS how to floo by now - > > and he just uses it like a telephone? > "uath50" wrote: > Harry couldn't send his head because the network was being watched. > How was Harry suppose to get to GP? He couldn't use the thestral to > get there, he would have been spotted. HumanTupperware: (who is rather overwhelmed by the length of those depression posts.......) I've been watching this thread for a little while, and I have a couple of thoughts: First of all, I think if harry had wanted to go to Grimmauld Place by thestral he could have, I mean, they all managed to get to the Ministry without being seen, so surely they could have gotten to GP in the same manner.....but at this point Harry is convinced that Sirius isn't there anyway, based on Kreachers' dodgy advice, so he wouldn't think of going there anyway..... But this is where my major point comes in....he DIDN"T THINK!!!! IMHO, I think the whole point of this Sirius/Harry/MOM mess is that Harry behaved in an impetuous, rash headed manner, and managed to cause the death of the only person close to being family that he had. I think the point of this chapter is to point out to us that Harry is far from omnipotent, he doesn't have all the answers, he doesn't know everything, and through being passionate and reckless, everything goes pear shaped. I remember reading in an interview with JK (sorry I can never find the links to interviews when I want them) shortly before OotP came out, that the person who would die would do so because of mistakes that Harry makes. In keeping with the whole emotional tone of OoTP, it fits that Harry is angry, hormonal, acting like a know it all teenager, and through this "arrogance" (sorry if this sounds harsh, I love Harry too, and also remember exactly what it was like being a teenager!) he makes mistakes and has to learn to live with them. If he is to survive through the next books, he's going to have to grow up pretty damn fast. But at the same time, I think that one of the reasons we love Harry so much is because he is so human. He isn't an amazing wizard master, he doesn't know everything, and he often gets through things only with a lot of help from his friends. This makes him much easier for us to relate to than if he managed everything he has through sheer brilliance...... For me, I don't think he would have learned anything in OoTP if there hadn't been some repurcussions from his rash behaviour and pent up anger. Though I wish him no more tragedy, I think in the next book he will at least be more minful of the consequences of acting before he thinks...... Just my two cents...... HumanTupperware From aoibhneach1 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 05:16:40 2004 From: aoibhneach1 at yahoo.com (Cindy) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 05:16:40 -0000 Subject: Quick to define Harry as "clinically depressed"? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110889 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > In Harry's case, using the beginning of OotP as an example, people are > stunned that Harry is so angry and depressed, but given his life, > everything that has happened to him, depression and anger seem > perfectly normal responses to me. > > You may all ask, how can Harry be so depressed and angry, and I must > ask with equal or more fervor, how can he NOT? >> Steve/b_boymn ******************************************************* Yes, I too have heard people wonder why Harry is so angry in book 5, and I am just astounded that they could even wonder about that. Maybe it is because I, myself, am so familiar with depression, and childhood trauma in a way eerily similar to Harry's; so much so that I can identify with him. Anger was a big part of *my* teenage years, because I was reacting against my helplessness in my younger years. It was a matter of survival - fight back or be a victim. Couple that with Harry's far more (than mine) traumatic events in books 1-4 and it is no wonder that he is so angry and self-absorbed in book 5. I totally understand where he is coming from. It is extremely difficult to explain depression to people who have never experienced it. They may intellectualize it, but they will never, ever know what it is truly like. It manifests itself in different ways in different people. True clinical depression is the result of a chemical imbalance in the brain, and rarely can it be treated successfully without medication. Like a diabetic's pancreas needs insulin, a depressed person's brain needs the missing chemical. Harry may or may not be chronically depressed; we just don't really know. However, my feeling is that he suffers from depression, my opinion - only because I can relate to his reactions. Cindy From kateydidnt2002 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 07:54:09 2004 From: kateydidnt2002 at yahoo.com (kateydidnt2002) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 07:54:09 -0000 Subject: Harry's Depression in OoP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110890 I see it as a combination of PTSD and depression. Whoever said it has to be categorized as exactly one or the other? Emotions are not that simple. Can't depression be a symptom of PTSD? Oddly enough this passage scared me most at the beginning of OotP "So it went on for three whole days. Harry was alternately filled with restless energy that made him unable to settle to anything, during which time he paced his bedroom, furious at the whole lot of them for leaving him to stew in this mess; and with a lethargy so complete that he could lie on his bed for an hour at a time, staring dazedly into space, aching with dread at the thought of the Ministry hearing.....On the fourth night after Hedwig's departure Harry was lying in one of his apathetic phases, staring at the ceiling, his exhausted mind quite blank, when his uncle entered his bedroom. ....Uncle Vernon glared at Harry, clearly suspicious of this lack of argument,...Harry had no particular feeling about the Dursleys leaving. It made no difference to him whether they were in the house or not. He could not even summon the energy to get up and turn on his bedroom light. The room grew steadily darker around him as he lay listening to the night sounds through the window he kept open all the time, waiting for the blessed moment when Hedwig returned.... Harry lay there in a kind of stupor, thinking of nothing, suspended in misery." The apathy accompanying the depression was scary. And while the apathy passed, it was only replaced by anger and accompanying the depression. --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tonks_op" wrote: > Depression in HP in OoP > > I have been reading most of the post about the possibility of Harry > having depression in OoP. I have not seen any post about what I am > about to say. I did not read them all so if someone has already said > this forgive me. > > I was very amazed when I read OoP as to the way that JKR shows Harry > as suffering from PTSD, or Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. It is as > if JKR had talked to a mental health professional for information.. > because she did such a perfect job of it. > > He clearly shows the signs.. I don't have a DSM here.. but he shows > survival guilt, wants to avoid talking about it (with Cho Chang), > hyper viligent, flashbacks (in the form of nightmare), and so on. > JKR shows Harry experiencing exactly like I would expect given what > he has been through. I would be shocked if she hadn't shown these > signs, since any normal person, teen or otherwise, would have this > reaction. Instead of asking anyone for help, Harry does what many > people do, he tries to cope with it on his own. > > So what I am saying is that he is not suffering from Major > Depression, he has PTSD. (Acute Stress Disorder only last for about > 2 weeks. Since it is more that 2 weeks I would say that he has PTSD.) > > Tonks_op From patientx3 at aol.com Sun Aug 22 07:54:17 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 07:54:17 -0000 Subject: Marrietta's betrayal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110891 Del wrote: >>I'm pretty sure that Marrietta did approach Umbridge *that evening*. But I wouldn't be surprised if Umbridge had talked with Marrietta on previous occasions, and had made it clear that Marrietta had better talk. As you said, Umbridge is very good at twisting the truth, so of course she wouldn't mention that she had been blackmailing the girl, for example.<< HunterGreen: And Umbridge was in a position to know all the students who were at the original meeting. Of all those, Marietta would (generally speaking) the easiest to pressure into talking. Then again, it could be that Umbridge wasn't the one pressuring her at all. Her mother, knowing this sort of thing was at one point going on and that her daughter was sort of involved in it, may have been asking her over and over if she knew anything about it. I know teenagers decieve their parents all the time, but that doesn't mean they enjoy it. If she had been caught with the group, I'm sure she would have more to worry about from her family than Ron or Harry or Hermione would. From zendemort at yahoo.co.uk Sun Aug 22 07:13:58 2004 From: zendemort at yahoo.co.uk (zendemort) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 07:13:58 -0000 Subject: Will Harry continue to study Divination in book six? / Harry's marks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110892 > Danni wrote: > ...what I want to know is what else Harry is going to take during > his sixth and seventh years...I believe that McGonagall says that > Harry needs to get x number of NEWTs to go to Auror school or > whatever, and after she tells him his required courses, he still > needs at least one more....I'm thinking it will be Divination, > because she wouldn't throw Firenze in there and make it clear at > the end that both he and Trelawney will be teaching and not have > Harry continue in my opinion... You do bring up an interesting point. Why did she bring Firenze into the picture, and make it clear that both will be teaching? However, I really don't think Harry will study divinations. Actually, I think it might be Ron who goes into Divinations. He seems to have the Inner Eye. Especially now that Firenze is the instructor, I think it just might be Ron's subject. This discussion about Harry's next subjects also brings us to his marks. I wonder if there is any necessary mark to continue divinations. For Transfigurations, it's an E. For Potions, it's an O. I don't think there would be a minimum score for Divinations since Trelawney doesn't believe in examinations. So, that would mean Harry could continue Divinations for NEWT level. "zendemort" From sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com Sun Aug 22 08:00:23 2004 From: sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com (Amey Chinchorkar) Date: 22 Aug 2004 08:00:23 -0000 Subject: Harry and Floo, Continuing Potions and The Clue Message-ID: <20040822080023.13981.qmail@webmail30.rediffmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110893 - --- delwynmarch wrote: - There were *so many* ways in which Harry could have done things - differently ! My personal pet peeve being that if Harry could get - his head at GP, and if he didn't intend to take his friends with - him to the MoM, and if he was in such a hurry to get to London, - then why on Earth didn't he take *all of himself* to GP, and - checked on his own whether Sirius - - Magda: - YES! THANK YOU! I thought I was the only one who went nuts at this - point in OOTP. After all the "I've got to get to London! angst and - he's finally got his head in the fireplace and he KNOWS how to floo - by now - and he just uses it like a telephone???? Even if he did - believe Kreachur that Sirius had gone out, he'd still have been - closer to the MoM if he'd flooed to GP. Amey: But then, if he could use Floo network like that from Hogwarts, what is the point in saying Hogwarts is the safest place? You just have to floo yourself to any fireplace, and bingo you are in . marauders would go mad and also Gred and Forge. IMO, the floo network in Hogwarts is like a telephone system, not a transportation system. - Salit - Okay, not quite a proof, but the phrase "another name for another - potion" suggests that several are described in the HBP book. The - likeliest explanation to that is that Harry manages to continue - studying potions. - DuffyPoo: - Not necessarily, although I am quite certain HP will continue with potions. The - Trio made Polyjuice Potion outside of class, although Hermione, at least, had - heard about it in class. This could be as simple as that. Hermione continues to - take the classes, even though HP and RW do not, and she tells them about a - potion that can do something or other to further their cause. Amey: Yes, what is HBP without Snape and Harry?s loving conversations together??? And then, you won?t have Draco taunting Harry with teacher present? No way, that would take away a lot of fun in the book and also remember, Snape promised to teach the class to *bottle fame, brew glory, even stopper death*, he hasn?t done that as yet. And also, there is McGonall saying that she will help Harry being an Auror if that is the last thing she does, and that means two more years of Potions (hopefully with Snape). - "uath50" - I think that the person that is described, is Luna Lovegood. Who - says that the clue isn't a woman or a girl. Amey: The clue behind the door??? It can?t be a woman, there is a *he* in bracket. And I am sure JKR is not going to mislead us to that extent. The person in the clue is a *he*, and if we read it right, he is HBP or is somehow important. Amey [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From patientx3 at aol.com Sun Aug 22 08:18:34 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 08:18:34 -0000 Subject: Marrietta's betrayal -Higher Moral Authority In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110894 B_Boymn wrote: >>A soldier is required by law to follow orders. His failure to do so can be very harshly punished even to the extent of the death penalty. However, international law has established the each soldier must answer to a higher more universal moral authority. If a soldier is ordered by his superior to commit what he believes to be a war crime or crimes against humanity, then he has both a moral and legal obligation to refuse. If he does not refuse, he can later be prosecuted for those war crimes or crimes against humanity. Of course, Catch-22, if he does refuse, he can also be prosecuted for disobeying orders and other assorted crimes.<< HunterGreen: But does this apply in this situation? Harry wasn't fighting against crimes against humanity or segregation, he was simply teaching other students hexes and curses. For many of the students this probably had more value with passing their OWLs than anything else, since the chances of any of them getting attacked by Voldemort or a DE in the near future are small. Its important for *Harry*, but he already knows them. Even the adults at the Order (Molly at least) were against the group. It may have been best for everyone if Harry had indeed disbanded the group (as much joy as it brought *him*, it did run the risk of getting a large chunk of students expelled and ended up being the reason that Dumbledore left the school). This is not like him giving the quibbler an interview, which *was* fighting against the government. Or him standing up in class telling Umbridge that Cedric was indeed killed by Voldemort. >>So, a common and reasonable morality does take precedence over common law. Obeying the law is the 'easy' choice, just keep your head down, hope for the best, and do what you are told; the choice of non-thinkers and non-doers. Those who think and do, make their choice based on a deeper and more universal sense of right and wrong.<< Well, Marietta didn't really take the easy way out. She was caught between a rock and a hard place. On one side was possible expulsion (and whatever her parents would do to her), and the other was betraying her friends. I think she made the choice based on *a lot* of thought (considering the amount of time between the first meeting and her betrayal), and based on her own morals. From her point of view the government wasn't corrupt, and Harry was telling lies and trying to cause trouble (its quite reasonable that she would believe that). From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Sun Aug 22 08:43:27 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 08:43:27 -0000 Subject: New B-day on JKR's site (Re: The Clue) In-Reply-To: <24.5e67f3f6.2e592e9f@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110895 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, shalimar07 at a... wrote: > Just thought I'd let everyone know that the birthday has changed to > 22/08/04 for Percy Weasley. > > "shalimar07" Actually, that must be 22nd August *1976*.... Carolyn From naama_gat at hotmail.com Sun Aug 22 09:17:19 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 09:17:19 -0000 Subject: Depression and Harry in OotP -- PTSD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110896 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tonks_op" wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > > I don't think anyone read the post I did last night. > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110801 > > Harry is not clinically depressed, he has PTSD. I agree with you (that Hary is not clinically depressed). Harry is a fictional character - his symptoms cannot indicate anything other than the author's intent. Now, we know that in PoA JKR specifically intended the Dementors as a metaphor of depression. She said so in interviews, and it's also clear from the description: they take away the ability to feel or even remember happiness. In OoP Harry is not descreibed as experiencing any such thing. He is angry, upset, sad, frustrated - but nothing like the effect Dementors have. Therefore, JKR did not intend to portray Harry as suffering from depression. I'm not sure whether she specifically intended to portray him as suffering from PTSD, but I do think that the symptoms he shows are closer to PTSD (although I'm not an expert). Also, the fact is that he had gone through a severely traumatic event - not only was he captured and his life threatenend, Wormtail taking his blood and having to see Voldemort rise again - I think it's a form of rape. Add to that the sudden, meaningless death of Cedric... as I've said before, although things will get worse in the WW, I don't think that Harry personally will go through anything as horrific as that. Even Sirius' death, although more painful, hasn't got that off the charts level of horror. Naama From anthyroserain at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 09:18:20 2004 From: anthyroserain at yahoo.com (anthyroserain) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 09:18:20 -0000 Subject: Quick to define Harry as "clinically depressed"? In-Reply-To: <412871A6.22930.7E23AA@localhost> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110897 Dreadnought: > While you may be correct, I find it just slightly disturbing to see > some of the attitudes towards clinical depression that are being > expressed on this list. > Above is one example: "Those who become clinically depressed do so, > in a cyclical fashion regardless of their environment, and have > difficulty finding their way out." > > Too many people here, seem to me to have a very narrow view of what > clinical depression is, of what depression is. And unless Harry > fits their own narrow definition, it's obvious to them he's not > depressed. Katie: First of all, let me please explain that I mean not to cause offense. What follows is (naturally) very much my own opinion, and is not meant as a criticism of your opinion in any way, but rather as a defense of what you characterize as a "very narrow view". I don't think I have a very narrow view of what clinical depression is (Yes, you weren't really talking about me, but I can only speak from my own viewpoint, of course :) ) But I don't like seeing *any* depressive emotions characterized as clinical depression. The fact is that there have to be some guidelines established or those words become meaningless. [snip] > It was, in no way, cyclical. They looked for cycles. There were > none that they could find. Tiny point: I think (though I may be wrong, and please speak up, syroun, if I am) that you may have misunderstood syroun's use of the word "cyclical". (syroun's original quote: "Those who become clinically depressed do so, in a cyclical fashion regardless of their environment, and have difficulty finding their way out.") I think syroun meant it not in the sense of "in cycles" but that it is recurrent if not treated. > My point is that there's no such thing as a single definition, or a > single expression of clinical depression. There are common > characteristics that a lot of clinically depressed people have - > but in virtually any case, there will always be exceptions. > > I'm not saying the lists of symptoms are a bad idea, and I > certainly think its totally valid for someone to use such a list to > try and decide whether or not Harry is depressed - but by the same > token, I think people really need to constantly bear in mind that > these lists of symptoms are *very* generalised. > > I certainly can't say Harry is depressed with anything like 100% > certainty. What I can say is what I see in him matches many of the > symptoms of the depression I suffered, rather closely. There's a > large distinction between those two ideas. Yes, Harry's feelings at times match the feelings of a clinically depressed person, but that's, I think, because those feelings are universal. Any realistic depiction in fiction of a normal, human character, particularly one that stretches through five event-filled books, is bound to show that character feeling depressed at some point. What distinguishes clinically depressed people from others is that they have those feelings most of the time, and without reasonable cause. I don't see that this fits Harry. He has mood swings like any teenager, and he is upset over the very real traumas he has experienced. I think he may well suffer from grief-related depression, but I wouldn't characterize it as chronic or severe. To sum up, I agree with you: I don't think that we can definitively prove or disprove whether Harry is clinically depressed. (I'm not sure JKR would be certain if we asked her!) The list of symptoms is certainly not infallible, but I think most posters who think he isn't depressed don't say this just because he doesn't fit a very narrow set of symptoms, but because there is insufficient evidence in addition to make that conclusion. (A note: You may wonder where I get off saying all this. I'm certainly no expert, but, like quite a few others on this list, I have been clinically depressed and in treatment for several years.) To go back to HP, I experienced a small shock of recognition when reading about Sirius in OOTP, as you did when reading about Harry. The perfectly subjective and slightly hypocritical distinction I draw is that Sirius seems to be in a low mood most of the time and behaves quite differently than Harry. (For what it's worth, I don't think Sirius is bipolar, because his "good moods" never really seem out-of-control or dangerous as they can with mania, and his reckless behavior occurs when he is unhappy or desperate. But, as I've just said, I'm biased about that.) The interior passages JKR writes for Harry show him to be sad and lonely some of the time, but these moods pass and don't seem to dominate his behavior as they do Sirius's. In other words, JKR writes Harry from inside-out, while she writes Sirius from outside- in. If she were writing Harry as a "limited" character, I think far fewer of us would consider him seriously depressed, considering his behavior. But of course that doesn't take into account that he could be the sort of person who hides depression very well... respectfully, Katie From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 22 09:21:12 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 05:21:12 -0400 Subject: Why Harry will still study Potions in book 6... Message-ID: <001001c48829$5ea5b010$9fc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 110898 > DuffyPoo: > Not necessarily, although I am quite certain HP will continue with > potions. The Trio made Polyjuice Potion outside of class, although > Hermione, at least, had heard about it in class. This could be as > simple as that. Hermione continues to take the classes, even though > HP and RW do not, and she tells them about a potion that can do > something or other to further their cause. carodave "Harry has to continue with potions through his NEWTS in order to become an Auror, which he was set to do when he had his career counseling session with McGonagall." DuffyPoo again: Isn't that what I just said? I am quite certain HP will continue with potions if only to continue the running battle with Snape. I don't have as much of a propblem with him achieving Outstanding on his Owl as some others do. He found the written paper difficult and the afternoon practical "not a sdreadful as he had expected it to be" and thought, with luck he avoided a fail. I think lots of people have had those same feelings about papers and practical exams and ended up doing quite well. I was only pointing out that needing a name for another potion did not necessarily indicate that Harry was in potions class. Snape could be forcing him to drink it, for heaven's sake! ;-) Didn't we first learn about Veritaserum when Snape was offering to force it down HP's throat? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From drednort at alphalink.com.au Sun Aug 22 09:28:10 2004 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 19:28:10 +1000 Subject: Essay on Hogwarts as a Public School In-Reply-To: References: <24.5e67f3f6.2e592e9f@aol.com> Message-ID: <4128F3CA.28028.1C6538@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 110899 A few weeks ago I posted a long essay here entitled 'Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry in the Context of the British Public Schools'. I have now annotated and placed that essay online at: http://www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/HSWW.html The essay is changed slightly, but what has changed significantly is the addition of reference quotes. Because many of the books I cited as references in the essay are likely to be quite hard for most people to get hold of, I have set up the page, so if you click on any reference (actually one isn't done yet, but there's over 50 that are), you will be taken to the relevant quote from the book that I am referencing, so people can see the source material in a little bit of detail. Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html (ISTJ) | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 "You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia From drednort at alphalink.com.au Sun Aug 22 09:40:25 2004 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 19:40:25 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Depression and Harry in OotP -- PTSD In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4128F6A9.20377.27998E@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 110900 On 22 Aug 2004 at 9:17, naamagatus wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tonks_op" > wrote: > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > > I don't think anyone read the post I did last night. > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110801 > > > > Harry is not clinically depressed, he has PTSD. > > I agree with you (that Hary is not clinically depressed). Harry is a > fictional character - his symptoms cannot indicate anything other > than the author's intent. Now, we know that in PoA JKR specifically > intended the Dementors as a metaphor of depression. She said so in > interviews, and it's also clear from the description: they take away > the ability to feel or even remember happiness. > In OoP Harry is not descreibed as experiencing any such thing. He is > angry, upset, sad, frustrated - but nothing like the effect Dementors > have. Therefore, JKR did not intend to portray Harry as suffering > from depression. The only major problem I can see with this argument is that it assumes that J.K. Rowling regards depression as something with only one single set of symptoms - and that is something we cannot know. This list has over the last few days rather graphically illustrated the fact that depression can take multiple different forms - that people have quite significantly different views about what depression is and what depression isn't. And at least some of the people here (including myself) are clearly of the opinion that depression can exist with different types of symptoms. It's perfectly possible and plausible that J.K. Rowling shares this belief. She may believe that there are different forms of depression. She may believe that there are different symptoms or groups of symptoms of depression. Or, she could, as you seem to be assuming, believe there is only one form of depression. The major point is, we can't *know* what her views on depression are - and so the argument that the authors intent is what counts, doesn't really prove one thing or the other. > I'm not sure whether she specifically intended to portray him as > suffering from PTSD, but I do think that the symptoms he shows are > closer to PTSD (although I'm not an expert). Also, the fact is that > he had gone through a severely traumatic event - not only was he > captured and his life threatenend, Wormtail taking his blood and > having to see Voldemort rise again - I think it's a form of rape. Add > to that the sudden, meaningless death of Cedric... as I've said > before, although things will get worse in the WW, I don't think that > Harry personally will go through anything as horrific as that. Even > Sirius' death, although more painful, hasn't got that off the charts > level of horror. People talking about PTSD should just bear in mind that PTSD is often - not always, but often - accompanied by depression. It's not an either/or situation. A person can - and fairly often does - have both. 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 b_boymn at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 09:50:34 2004 From: b_boymn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 09:50:34 -0000 Subject: Marrietta's betrayal -Higher Moral Authority In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110901 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" wrote: > B_Boymn wrote: > >> > > If a soldier is ordered by his superior to commit what he believes > to be a war crime or crimes against humanity, then he has both a > moral and legal obligation to refuse. ...<< > HunterGreen: > But does this apply in this situation? Harry wasn't fighting against > crimes against humanity or segregation, he was simply teaching other > students hexes and curses. B_Boymn: You need to separate my general statements from my specific statements. The example of the soldier during wartime simply illustrates that following rules/orders is not guarantee that you are doing what is morally right. You can follow all the rules/orders to the letter and still be held accountable for immoral acts. The general point is that there is a higher moral authority than the immdediate rules that govern us. Also, this is wartime, and the war is not between Harry and Marietta, or even between Harry and mean teacher. Fudge and Umbridge have indeed become corrupted. They have lost their moral perspective and because of it, their moral authority and imperative. They are no longer acting in the best interest of the people they serve, they are acting in their own selfish interest to the eventually extreme detriment of the community at large. Since the impetus behind the various educational decrees was corrupt. Since they acted against the greater good, and to the detriment of the school and it's students, I think those decrees were, in a sense, null and void. They may have been in effect at the time, but they never would have held up under the close examination of a neutral unbias review. In the end, that's pretty much what happened, when it was proven that Voldemort truly was back, all those Educational Decrees became worthless. Umbridge by any reasonable account is a murderer. She didn't send a couple of wizard goons to beat Harry up, and tell him to keep his mouth shut. She sent a couple of Dementors knowing full well what the consequences of that action would be. No matter how much she supports Fudge, or is against Dumbledore, she has absolutely no moral justification for what she did to Harry. And I don't think anyone will convince me that Umbridge thought her actions were morally right. Her actions were wrong and she knew it, but she didn't care as long as she got what she wanted. You, or perhaps someone else, suggested that even higher moral standards are still a matter of opinion. For example, what Voldemort feels is right conflicts in the extreme with what the bulk of the world feels is right. However, I'm not convinced that guys like Voldemort actually feel that torturing and killing muggles, or indiscriminently using the unforgivable curses is right. The truth is, I don't think they care. They know killing is wrong, but the just don't care. They will do what ever they want as long as it serves their greed and lust for power. Evil people know that they are evil, they just don't care. Just so we are clear, I don't think Marietta is evil. > b_boymn/Steve originally said: > > >>So, a common and reasonable morality does take precedence over > common law. Obeying the law is the 'easy' choice, ...; the choice > of non-thinkers and non-doers. Those who think and do, make their > choice based on a deeper and more universal sense of right and > wrong.<< > HunterGreen continues: > > Well, Marietta didn't really take the easy way out. She was caught > between a rock and a hard place. On one side was possible expulsion > ..., and the other was betraying her friends. I think she made the > choice based on *a lot* of thought ..., and based on her own morals. > From her point of view the government wasn't corrupt, and Harry was > telling lies and trying to cause trouble (its quite reasonable that > she would believe that). B_Boymn: Your are /supposing/ her point of view. I will first state that I don't think Marietta did anything morally wrong; her errors were social. And I said before that she was in a very difficult position, but at anytime, she had the option to simply not participate in the DA Club. True, her name was already on the list, but she never would have been caught in the act. Also, as already pointed out, we don't know what forces were brought to bear on Marietta. It may have been intense pressure from her mother. It may have been intense pressure from Umbridge, who we all know can be quite intimidating. Umbridge may have even threatened Marietta's mother's job or threatened Marietta herself. Or, it may have been something a childish as a fight, disagreement, or annoyance with Cho that lead her to betray them out of spite. I think what she did was wrong and misguided, but at the same time, I don't judge her too harshly since I can't see her undelying motivation. Also, upon giving it a great deal of thought, if the DA Club is reformed during the next school year, a belief of which I am a strong supporter in my many posts on the subject, I believe the Marietta will be allowed to continue to be part of the club; although reluctantly at first. Some of that is based on my personal beliefs about how the club will be reformed, but I've already spoken about that and it's too long to add here. Just a few thoughts. Steve/b_boymn (was asian_lovr2 - was bboy_mn) From anthyroserain at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 10:07:26 2004 From: anthyroserain at yahoo.com (anthyroserain) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 10:07:26 -0000 Subject: Good Writing & Death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110902 B_Boymn: > 3.) Sirius's death. Death is rarely satisfying; it rarely comes with > resolution. You're driving down the road one day, satisfied and > content with the world, when some idiot eating a sandwich while > yakking on the cell phone crosses the centerline and snuffs your life > out. No tearful goodbyes, no chance to resolve old issues, no chance > to say 'I love you' or 'I'm sorry'; just gone. > > In addition, I think JKR meant Sirius's death to be a hollow, > pointless, and unsatisfying death. Hargrid tries to make it > 'satisfying' by saying that Sirius died in battle, and that how he > would have liked to go, but, of course, Harry points out that Sirius > wouldn't have like to go to his death by any means. [snip] > But even after combining a common euphemism with the 'Chamber of > Death' we still, as readers, wanted satisfaction, meaning, > justification, explanation, hope, and our beloved Sirius back, so we > did what we do, and that is, come up with alternate explanation and > conspiracy theories to supposed the idea that he was not really dead, > or that he would return by some magical means. Katie: You know, I would find Sirius's death a whole lot less irritating if it made more sense. The thing is, yes, death is unsatisfying, but Sirius's is even unsatisfying as a FICTIONAL death! A more satisfying (but sad!) death might be: 1) Bella mortally wounds Sirius 2) Sirius goes through the veil... 3) ...leaving his body behind. There, you know he's dead. As it is, he's just a living guy who went through the veil! He *never died*! He TRIPPED!(Reminds me of Gollum in LOTR, but that's another story...) If JKR wrote in metaphors, it might be an acceptable death, but she doesn't. HP might have magic in it, but it's recognizably about the real world. It's not really a fable. The other deaths don't seem so bizarre: Harry's parents are killed, and so is Cedric. JKR definitely plays by the rules of fiction, and Sirius's death seems like a big exception. It's such an unsatisfying death for readers: it comes as a complete surprise, it happens through a device that was just introduced a few pages before and never explained, and there's no body left. JKR must know all this. She's either 1) going to have Sirius's "death" become crucial to the story later on, or 2) trying to annoy her readers. As she says she's sorry she "had to do it", and I have faith in her, I trust it's 1)! > As a side note, just to keep the theorists fueled, many of the > searched 'Beyond the Veil' links are about /near/ death experiences. > 'Beyond the Veil' still does mean or imply into the land of the dead, > but most people who go 'beyond the veil' and return, are people who > don't make it all the way. They enter the 'tunnel of light' and are > met there by a friend, beloved relative, or an angel who tells them it > is not their time and that they must return. Theoretically, if you > make it beyond the 'tunnel of light', there is no turning back. This > is typically true in near death experience, but not always so in > Mythological advantures. And this is what gives me hope. "Beyond the Veil" does seem to imply that the veil is a two-way thing. Huh... wonder if this all has anything to do with Voldemort and his kinda-immortality? (I mean, the series did start with the Philosopher's Stone..) D'you suppose the prophecy was a red herring, and not his real interest at the MOM at all? Nah.. knowing this has all been said before, Katie From drednort at alphalink.com.au Sun Aug 22 10:04:58 2004 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 20:04:58 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Quick to define Harry as "clinically depressed"? In-Reply-To: References: <412871A6.22930.7E23AA@localhost> Message-ID: <4128FC6A.3135.3E171C@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 110903 On 22 Aug 2004 at 9:18, anthyroserain wrote: > Dreadnought: > > While you may be correct, I find it just slightly disturbing to > see > > some of the attitudes towards clinical depression that are being > > expressed on this list. > > Above is one example: "Those who become clinically depressed do > so, > > in a cyclical fashion regardless of their environment, and have > > difficulty finding their way out." > > > > Too many people here, seem to me to have a very narrow view of > what > > clinical depression is, of what depression is. And unless Harry > > fits their own narrow definition, it's obvious to them he's not > > depressed. > > Katie: > > First of all, let me please explain that I mean not to cause > offense. What follows is (naturally) very much my own > opinion, and is not meant as a criticism of your opinion in any way, > but rather as a defense of what you characterize as a "very > narrow view". Don't worry, I didn't for a moment believe anyone was trying to cause offence. And, frankly, I also don't have any objection to anyone criticising my opinion on this if they want to, just for the record. > I don't think I have a very narrow view of what clinical depression > is (Yes, you weren't really talking about me, but I can only speak > from my own viewpoint, of course :) ) But I don't like seeing *any* > depressive emotions characterized as clinical depression. The fact > is that there have to be some guidelines established or those words > become meaningless. That's certainly true - and it does become a major problem when any 'depressive emotion' to use your term becomes classified as clinical depression. There do need to be guidelines. But they must be *guidelines* not a straitjacket. Issues of mental health are often not black and white, and definitions need to allow for the shades of grey that often exist. > [snip] > > It was, in no way, cyclical. They looked for cycles. There were > > none that they could find. > > Tiny point: I think (though I may be wrong, and please speak up, > syroun, if I am) that you may have misunderstood syroun's use of the > word "cyclical". (syroun's original quote: "Those who become > clinically depressed do so, in a cyclical fashion regardless of > their environment, and have difficulty finding their way out.") I > think syroun meant it not in the sense of "in cycles" but that it is > recurrent if not treated. Perhaps - but that's not always the case either. I have known numerous sufferers of clinical depression who had only one bout of it. It can be acute as well as chronic. > Yes, Harry's feelings at times match the feelings of a > clinically depressed person, but that's, I think, because those > feelings are universal. Any realistic depiction in fiction of a > normal, human character, particularly one that stretches through > five event-filled books, is bound to show that character feeling > depressed at some point. What distinguishes clinically depressed > people from others is that they have those feelings most of the > time, and without reasonable cause. I don't see that this fits > Harry. He has mood swings like any teenager, and he is upset over > the very real traumas he has experienced. I think he may > well suffer from grief-related depression, but I wouldn't > characterize it as > chronic or severe. Well, my view - and it's not just my view, is that the distinguishing feature (if there is such a thing) of clinical depression isn't that the person is depressed most of the time - but rather that they are depressed as a default state of being. For many people, this will be the same thing - but not always. I'll have to use myself as an example of what I mean, again... I developed clinical depression at age 12, and it persisted until I was about 12. Now from the age of 14-22, I was probably depressed most of the time - it's hard to classify it like that in retrospect. But at the age of 13, I was only depressed a minority of the time. Does that mean I wasn't clinically depressed for that year? No, it doesn't. Why? Because for that one year (or at least 9 months of it) I was lucky enough to be in a simply wonderful, absolutely incredible, ultimately suitable (OK, I'm probably exagerating a bit - but it did save my life) school, where everything almost could have been designed to make me happy. My default state was still depressed. In any situation, when there wasn't something actively around to make me happy, I very rapidly fell into the doldrums. The only reason I wasn't constantly depressed was environmental. The clinical depression was very much, still present, but I wasn't depressed most of the time. Now, this has implications when thinking about Harry - because he has Hogwarts, and I think for him, Hogwarts may well play the same role as my school that year did for me. I think it's much harder to 'diagnose' clinical depression when a person is in a wonderful environment for them. For some people, it's probably a moot point - but for some it makes a real difference. > (A note: You may wonder where I get off saying all this. I'm > certainly no expert, but, like quite a few others on this list, I > have been clinically depressed and in treatment for several years.) Hey, that's pretty much where I'm coming from as well - although I've been lucky enough that I no longer need treatment. I still need to be alert to the return of depression, but for now it's gone. > To go back to HP, I experienced a small shock of recognition when > reading about Sirius in OOTP, as you did when reading about Harry. > The perfectly subjective and slightly hypocritical distinction I > draw is that Sirius seems to be in a low mood most of the time and > behaves quite differently than Harry. (For what it's worth, I don't > think Sirius is bipolar, because his "good moods" never really seem > out-of-control or dangerous as they can with mania, and his reckless > behavior occurs when he is unhappy or desperate. But, as I've just > said, I'm biased about that.) I actually think Sirius as seen in OotP is depressed as well - but it's a different form of depression, one quite different from what I experienced, so I haven't really ventured an opinion on it. > The interior passages JKR writes for Harry show him to be > sad and lonely some of the time, but these moods pass and don't seem > to dominate his behavior as they do Sirius's. In other words, JKR > writes Harry from inside-out, while she writes Sirius from outside- > in. If she were writing Harry as a "limited" character, I think far > fewer of us would consider him seriously depressed, considering his > behavior. But of course that doesn't take into account that he could > be the sort of person who hides depression very well... I've never really argued that Harry is seriously depressed. I just think he could be. It's very hard for me to judge one way or the other - as I say, all I can really venture is that I recognise similarities between what he seems to me to be experiencing, and what I experienced, and I happen to know I was clinically depressed (-8. Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html (ISTJ) | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 "You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From drednort at alphalink.com.au Sun Aug 22 10:04:59 2004 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 20:04:59 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Quick to define Harry as "clinically depressed"? In-Reply-To: References: <412871A6.22930.7E23AA@localhost> Message-ID: <4128FC6B.25656.3E1952@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 110904 On 22 Aug 2004 at 9:18, anthyroserain wrote: > Katie: > > First of all, let me please explain that I mean not to cause > offense. What follows is (naturally) very much my own > opinion, and is not meant as a criticism of your opinion in any way, > but rather as a defense of what you characterize as a "very > narrow view". Don't worry, I didn't for a moment believe anyone was trying to cause offence. And, frankly, I also don't have any objection to anyone criticising my opinion on this if they want to, just for the record. > Katie: > I don't think I have a very narrow view of what clinical depression > is (Yes, you weren't really talking about me, but I can only speak > from my own viewpoint, of course :) ) But I don't like seeing *any* > depressive emotions characterized as clinical depression. The fact > is that there have to be some guidelines established or those words > become meaningless. That's certainly true - and it does become a major problem when any 'depressive emotion' to use your term becomes classified as clinical depression. There do need to be guidelines. But they must be *guidelines* not a straitjacket. Issues of mental health are often not black and white, and definitions need to allow for the shades of grey that often exist. > [snip] > > It was, in no way, cyclical. They looked for cycles. There were > > none that they could find. > > Tiny point: I think (though I may be wrong, and please speak up, > syroun, if I am) that you may have misunderstood syroun's use of the > word "cyclical". (syroun's original quote: "Those who become > clinically depressed do so, in a cyclical fashion regardless of > their environment, and have difficulty finding their way out.") I > think syroun meant it not in the sense of "in cycles" but that it is > recurrent if not treated. Perhaps - but that's not always the case either. I have known numerous sufferers of clinical depression who had only one bout of it. It can be acute as well as chronic. > Katie: > Yes, Harry's feelings at times match the feelings of a > clinically depressed person, but that's, I think, because those > feelings are universal. Any realistic depiction in fiction of a > normal, human character, particularly one that stretches through > five event-filled books, is bound to show that character feeling > depressed at some point. What distinguishes clinically depressed > people from others is that they have those feelings most of the > time, and without reasonable cause. I don't see that this fits > Harry. He has mood swings like any teenager, and he is upset over > the very real traumas he has experienced. I think he may > well suffer from grief-related depression, but I wouldn't > characterize it as > chronic or severe. Well, my view - and it's not just my view, is that the distinguishing feature (if there is such a thing) of clinical depression isn't that the person is depressed most of the time - but rather that they are depressed as a default state of being. For many people, this will be the same thing - but not always. I'll have to use myself as an example of what I mean, again... I developed clinical depression at age 12, and it persisted until I was about 12. Now from the age of 14-22, I was probably depressed most of the time - it's hard to classify it like that in retrospect. But at the age of 13, I was only depressed a minority of the time. Does that mean I wasn't clinically depressed for that year? No, it doesn't. Why? Because for that one year (or at least 9 months of it) I was lucky enough to be in a simply wonderful, absolutely incredible, ultimately suitable (OK, I'm probably exagerating a bit - but it did save my life) school, where everything almost could have been designed to make me happy. My default state was still depressed. In any situation, when there wasn't something actively around to make me happy, I very rapidly fell into the doldrums. The only reason I wasn't constantly depressed was environmental. The clinical depression was very much, still present, but I wasn't depressed most of the time. Now, this has implications when thinking about Harry - because he has Hogwarts, and I think for him, Hogwarts may well play the same role as my school that year did for me. I think it's much harder to 'diagnose' clinical depression when a person is in a wonderful environment for them. For some people, it's probably a moot point - but for some it makes a real difference. > Katie: > (A note: You may wonder where I get off saying all this. I'm > certainly no expert, but, like quite a few others on this list, I > have been clinically depressed and in treatment for several years.) Hey, that's pretty much where I'm coming from as well - although I've been lucky enough that I no longer need treatment. I still need to be alert to the return of depression, but for now it's gone. > Katie: > To go back to HP, I experienced a small shock of recognition when > reading about Sirius in OOTP, as you did when reading about Harry. > The perfectly subjective and slightly hypocritical distinction I > draw is that Sirius seems to be in a low mood most of the time and > behaves quite differently than Harry. (For what it's worth, I don't > think Sirius is bipolar, because his "good moods" never really seem > out-of-control or dangerous as they can with mania, and his reckless > behavior occurs when he is unhappy or desperate. But, as I've just > said, I'm biased about that.) I actually think Sirius as seen in OotP is depressed as well - but it's a different form of depression, one quite different from what I experienced, so I haven't really ventured an opinion on it. > Katie: > The interior passages JKR writes for Harry show him to be > sad and lonely some of the time, but these moods pass and don't seem > to dominate his behavior as they do Sirius's. In other words, JKR > writes Harry from inside-out, while she writes Sirius from outside- > in. If she were writing Harry as a "limited" character, I think far > fewer of us would consider him seriously depressed, considering his > behavior. But of course that doesn't take into account that he could > be the sort of person who hides depression very well... I've never really argued that Harry is seriously depressed. I just think he could be. It's very hard for me to judge one way or the other - as I say, all I can really venture is that I recognise similarities between what he seems to me to be experiencing, and what I experienced, and I happen to know I was clinically depressed. (-8 Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html (ISTJ) | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 "You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From patientx3 at aol.com Sun Aug 22 10:12:12 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 10:12:12 -0000 Subject: Death (was Re: Why now? (other books / series)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110905 MacFoTUK wrote: >>I've for a long time unwillingly thought that Harry might (have to) die at the end. It's a neat way for JKR to make certain the series has 7 books and only 7 books as she says was always planned.<< HunterGreen: I feel the same way, although the idea of Harry dying at the end doesn't bother me. To me a story is never over if the main character is still alive, especially a series like this one. The Flowers in the Attic series is a good example of this, it could have gone on forever if Chris and Cathy hadn't died in the last book. Also, we know the series is over after book seven, so it doesn't matter (IMO) if Harry dies since its the last we're going to hear from him anyway. Its not like the deaths in the middle of the series... MacFoTUK: >> I have to say that my first reading of OotP was definitely coloured by the pre-hype from JKR that someone significant would die. She set up many instances where, variously, one thought Ron, Mr Weasley Sr, Hagrid and only at the end Sirius would be 'the' one to die. Reading this way spoiled for me, to an extent, what I knew even then was a book as well written as any of the others. Although Sirius' death was shocking it would have been even more so to me without the hype. << HunterGreen: I had the opposite experience. I didn't know beforehand that there was going to be a death, and when it happened I was truly shocked and went through the same steps of denial as Harry did. To be honest I was completely pulled out of the book from that point on. I think it might have helped to know ahead of time to expect a death, because then it might not have horrified me as much. However, it would have been annoying to be 'fooled' into thinking it was Hagrid or Mr. Weasley. MacFoTUK: >>I know that after the first read I was left feeling that despite its being a very enjoyable read, OotP was the least of the 5 books since its main plot despite the gorgeously vile Umbridge was to kill Sirius. I always found the prophecy (enigmatic though it remains) a bit of a let down to hang the whole book on, but yes in hindsight I recognise that a lot was revealed or introduced in book 5<< HunterGreen: I felt the same way. The other books were leading up to a big twist, and I felt cheated at the end of OotP (especially since I see the prophecy as completely self-fulfilling). However, on the second read I appreciated and enjoyed it much more, and saw its place in the series a little better. This was the first time I'd ever grieved for a literary character (by nature of this being the only series I've gotten into where a major character dies in the middle), so I had to wait until I was done grieving before I could enjoy the book properly. From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Sun Aug 22 10:14:35 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 10:14:35 -0000 Subject: Percy's B/day & new FLINT? (was New B-day on JKR's site ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110906 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "carolynwhite2" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, shalimar07 at a... wrote: > > Just thought I'd let everyone know that the birthday has changed to > > 22/08/04 for Percy Weasley. > > > > "shalimar07" > > > Actually, that must be 22nd August *1976*.... > > Carolyn Carolyn (again) I just posted the above, but realised I made a mistake, and hasten to correct it before another L.O.O.N. steps in. If Percy's birthday is 22nd August, this means he was born in 1977, not 1976. The reasoning is as follows: The books are dated from Nick's death day, 31st October in CoS. He has been dead 500 years and died in 1492. This means CoS is set in (1492+500) 1992/1993. In POA (1993/4), Percy is in his 7th and final year and sitting his NEWTS. In GOF, Ch 6 (1994/5), he had passed his apparition test 'two weeks ago', which you can't do until you are a WW 'adult', ie 17. If he was 17 in the summer of 1995, this means he was born in August 1977. So that sorts that out then, but in working this out, I came across what I think is yet another dating FLINT. GOF Ch 2 opens on a Saturday morning, with Harry trying to remember his dream about Voldemort. It states quite clearly 'there was still a fortnight to go before he went back to school'. In the opening paragraph of Ch 4, it is even more specific, he was: 'counting the days down to September the first' - the day he goes back to school. Sept 1st in 1995 was a Friday (not a Monday as is stated later). But setting aside the often-made point that she forces all her Sept 1st's onto Mondays, regardless of their real dates, her own internal logic causes additional problems now we know Percy's birthday. For JKR's own dating to work, Harry must have been having his dream on the night of Friday/Saturday 18/19th August (I'm using the real dates here, but they are about 2 weeks before the end of the month). He is then collected by the Weasley's on Sunday 20th August, and they go to the QWC overnight on Monday/Tuesday 21st/22nd. However, the 22nd is now supposed to be Percy's birthday - so this dating must be wrong. The events relating to the QWC have to be taking place on 22nd+2 weeks, ie 4th/5th September, if the comments about Percy passing his apparition test 'two weeks ago' are also true. It is also evident that the kids don't go back to school for about a week after the QWC - 'neither Mr Weasley or Percy was at home much over the following week' (Ch 10), and they are described as getting their things together 'the Sunday evening before they were due to return to Hogwarts'. Well, by now, this has to be Sunday 10th September, not the 1st ! Explanations for this muddle? 1. JKR certainly didn't bother to consult a calendar when writing the books (well, we pretty much know this by now). 2. You can take your apparition test before your 17th birthday. 3. She forgot she'd made Percy's birthday the 22nd August. Even cutting her some slack on the real dates, her internal chronology only really works if his birthday is sometime at the end of July or early August. Carolyn Exasperated yet again by JKR's maths... From catlady at wicca.net Sun Aug 22 10:39:02 2004 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 10:39:02 -0000 Subject: choices / Mama Fridwulfa / Secret Keeper switch Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110907 There were many brilliant posts about Petunia's pact, clinical depression, and human-giant sex. Del wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110468 : << So LV, as LV, cannot be redeemed. Maybe Tom could have been helped, back when he was a kid, but I guess it was already too late by the time he was 15. Which is completely in contradiction with DD's statement about choices. >> People keep referring to DD's statement as 'our choices make us what we are', but that is not in fact what he said. He said our choices SHOW what we are. According to that, TMR's choices show that he is evil, regardless of whether he made those choices because of a mental illness resulting from his physiology or his upbringing, regardless whether they were the only choices available to him under the circumstances. There is an oldish post that explains this better than I ever could, so here it is: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/23598 From: "Aberforth's Goat" 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. Karen wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110586 : << My question is what on earth did his mother see in his father? We know, from the photo scene in GOF that Mr Hagrid Snr was "a tiny man", and if I remember correctly there was no qualification of "compared to Hagrid." We also learned that "size is everything" to giants in OOTP. How would a giantess hope to produce a child of acceptable size when the father was a tiny little wizard? >> We also learned in OoP that even tho' giants can't do magic, they like acquiring magical artifacts. Maybe Fridwulfa thought it would be useful to have a wizard around, who could do magic for her, so she married him as a way of acquiring him. Maybe she also thought her child would be better off as a wizard or witch, doing magic and living in wizarding civilisation, than as even a large giant. mhbobbin wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110713 : << Sirius Black declined to be the Potters' secret keeper because he himself was planning to go into hiding. >> That is not the way I understood it. I understood that the original plan was that the Secret Keeper would also go into hiding, to avoid being caught and tortured to give up the secret. But Sirius's clever idea was that he would pretend to be the Secret Keeper and NOT go into hiding, so that LV would catch and torture him instead of the real Secret Keeper. (Why did he think that he would be less likely to reveal under torture that Peter was the real Secret Keeper than to reveal the Secret?) The real Secret Keeper DID go into hiding. << "I thought it was the perfect plan... a bluff... Voldemort would be sure to come after me, would never dream they'd use a weak, talentless thing like you.... ["] >> << "I persuaded Lily and James to change to Peter at the last moment, persuaded them to use him as Secret-Keeper instead of me.... I'm to blame, I know it.... The night they died, I'd arranged to check on Peter, make sure he was still safe, but when I arrived at his hiding place, he'd gone. Yet there was no sign of a struggle. It didn't feel right. I was scared. I set out for your parents' house straight away. And when I saw their house, destroyed, and their bodies... I realized what Peter must've done... what I'd done...." >> From patientx3 at aol.com Sun Aug 22 10:41:53 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 10:41:53 -0000 Subject: Harry getting to GP by floo / thestrals (was Re: Good Writing) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110908 HumanTupperware: >>I think the whole point of this Sirius/Harry/MOM mess is that Harry behaved in an impetuous, rash headed manner, and managed to cause the death of the only person close to being family that he had. I think the point of this chapter is to point out to us that Harry is far from omnipotent, he doesn't have all the answers, he doesn't know everything, and through being passionate and reckless, everything goes pear shaped.<< HunterGreen: Okay, that's fine, I can accept that Harry would act rash and not think things out, and run off to rescue Sirius despite the many reasons he shouldn't. The last dream he had was real, it would be hard to convince himself that this one wasn't. However, I have a problem with Ron, Hermione, Neville, Ginny, and Luna all coming along as well and none of them stopping to talk Harry out of it. Yes, Hermione tries, but she gives up FAR too easily. What were they planning to do when they got to the DoM if Sirius really was there? Fight Voldemort? They're a bunch of kids, and he (presumably) would have DEs with him who (unlike the reality of OotP) wouldn't trying not to break something that one of them was holding. Before they all grabbed a thestral and took flight, one of them (Hermione being the best canidate) should have grabbed Harry and asked 'What are we going to do when we get there?' A better suggestion than running off to rescue Sirius (which would have failed), would be to attempt to contact Mr. and Mrs. Weasley, or go to St. Mungos and get a hold of McGonnagal (just because she's in the hospital doesn't mean she's incoherent). *Harry* might go straight from thinking Sirius is in trouble to thinking its *up to him* to save Sirius, but I don't see why the rest of the group suddenly had the same muddy thought process. HumanTupperware: >>In keeping with the whole emotional tone of OoTP, it fits that Harry is angry, hormonal, acting like a know it all teenager, and through this "arrogance" (sorry if this sounds harsh, I love Harry too, and also remember exactly what it was like being a teenager!) he makes mistakes and has to learn to live with them. If he is to survive through the next books, he's going to have to grow up pretty damn fast.<< HunterGreen: Sorry, I don't agree with any explanation of Harry's behavior being caused by him 'being a teenager'. Human behavior is just more complicated than that. His frustration and rage in OotP is completely understandable considering what he's being forced to deal with, no matter what his age is. His actions at the end of OotP were in line with him going after the stone himself in SS/PS, not getting a different teacher besides Lockhart to help him in CoS, and not running for a teacher when dog!Sirius dragged Ron under the willow in PoA. When someone is in danger, Harry decides that its up to him to save them (it could be an off-shoot of growing up in a house surrounded by people who didn't care if he lived or died: if he had a problem it was up to him to solve it). I don't think he was acting like a rash *teenager* at the end of OotP, I think he was acting like a rash *person*. Its just in his nature. -- About the floo powder thing, though, during my first read I wondered like Del why Harry didn't just go directly into Grimmauld Place after he found out Sirius needed rescuing. It annoyed me quite a bit in fact. However, I think now I agree with the idea that flooing into the school is not allowed, but seeing how I wasn't the only person who got the wrong idea, it would have been nice if that had been included in the text somewhere. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 22 11:03:25 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 07:03:25 -0400 Subject: Marrietta's betrayal Message-ID: <003401c48837$a5ff3040$9fc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 110909 ReturnOfTheMutt said: "We don't know that Marrietta believes Harry, we just know she's there for Cho. Yes, the Quibbler article came out, but a lot of people still weren't convinced. Umbridge wasn't." DuffyPoo: Oh, I don't believe that at all. I think Fudge was well aware that LV was back ("Finally, he [Fudge] said, with a hint of a plea in his voice 'He can't be back, Dumbledore, he just can't be ...'") but didn't *want* to believe it, and so spent a year in denial and trying to prove DD and HP wrong and at the same time, making the two of them appear delusional. I think the same of Umbridge, as well as many others in the Ministry in particular and the Wizarding World in general. Nobody wanted LV back, it's part of the reason no one speaks his name, even after he's 'gone,' but lots of them, I'm sure, believe he wasn't gone for ever and that he would rear his ugly head sometime. Even Neville's Gran, who so far hasn't appeared to be the sharpest tack in the box, was quoted by Neville, 'My gran's always said You-Know-Who would come back one day." If she believed it, how many hundreds/thousands of others in the WW believed it as well? Del replies: "Cho is right: it *was* a horrible trick on Hermione's part to jinx the list and not tell anyone. Practical, but horrible." Bookworm: "I do agree that is was very sneaky of Hermione to attach a punishment without saying anything. Much more devious than I would have expected her to be." DuffyPoo: I posted some time ago that I thought Hermione could be a candidate for Slytherin. Doesn't Phineas say "Slytherins are brave, yes, but not stupid. For instance, given the choice, we will always choose to save our own necks." When Fred and George shut Montague in the vanishing cabinet, he reappeared quite befuddled and Madam Pomfrey couldn't sort him out, Hermione suggested to Harry and Ron that they go and tell MP so she could cure him. No worries about turning in Fred and George (yes, they had left the school by this point, I think). However, we don't see Hermione jumping right in to help MP sort out Marietta, do we? Because she would have to admit what she'd done to jinx the paper (was it one of those 'illegal' things like Polyjuice Potion?) and would have gotten herself in trouble. We also have a Polyjuiced Hermione in the hospital wing for several weeks before she could be sorted out. Perhaps because she didn't say 'Oh, by the way, Madam Pomfrey, I got this way by taking PP illegally.' She kept her info to herself, so it took MP a while longer to sort out a cure (or perhaps it went away by itself). Brave but not stupid - definitely Hermione. Choose to save our own necks - definitely Hermione in these two situations. A candidate for switching houses (if that rumor is true)? Now, wouldn't that be interesting, Hermione in Slytherin? ;-) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 22 11:11:44 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 07:11:44 -0400 Subject: McMax : Message-ID: <003c01c48838$cf8c21b0$9fc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 110910 McMax : > It's most likely a new character, after all JKR has introduced a > new character in every book so far. I'm guessing it's the new DADA > teacher. uath50 "I think that the person that is described, is Luna Lovegood. Who says that the clue isn't a woman or a girl." DuffyPoo: Luna's already been quite well described in OotP: "She had straggly, waist-length, dirty blond hair, very pale eyebrows and protuberant eyes that gave a a permanently surprised look. ... The girl gave off an aura of distinct dottiness. Perhaps it was the fact that she had stuck her wand behind her left ear for safekeeping, or that she had chosen to wear a necklace of Butterbeer corks, or that she was reading a magazine upside-down." The description from the JKR site indicates that the person described is a male as it uses the masculin pronouns (I'm sure that's the wrong word, English classes were a long time ago) his and he. Such a description belongs, as McMax said, to a new person. The new DADA teacher, McClaggan, whoever he/she turns out to be, a replacement teacher for one who may go missing over the upcoming summer (between OotP and HBP), or a new caretaker. Am I the only one, am I, who will not be surprised if Filch leaves Hogwarts, after his disloyalty to DD? Yes, DD believes in second chances but how many has AF already had? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 22 11:16:20 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 07:16:20 -0400 Subject: Potions and Book 7 Message-ID: <004001c48839$74650f30$9fc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 110911 Bookworm: "If Warner Brothers changed the ending from what JKR wrote they would end up losing money. First, there would be the wailing and gnashing of teeth from the fans. Then all JKR would have to do is express disappointment in the film. Attendance would drop magically." DuffyPoo: Which is why I can hardly believe it JKR when she says she's so taken by whichever movie. If she truly hated PoA for example, would she really say so to the press? I doubt it. She knows what it means to WB and the rest if people don't go to see it based on her opinion. Not to mention the cash that would be missing from her pocketbook if WB decided not to do any more of the movies because they didn't profit on one. However, there was great wailing and gnashing of teeth over the inclusion of so much Arwen and the removal of Tom Bombadill from the FOTR film and it still made a pile of cash. cantoramy wrote: "However, I shall reiterate: Warner Brothers' will not allow its most profitable licensed character, Harry Potter, to be killed off. He's worth too much, as are Hermione and Ron. WB is in business for one reason--to make money. They would never do anything to purposely cause themselves a loss-- unless it was for tax purposes, just like all American corporations!" Susana "Well, that is all very true. But if JKR refuses to make a happy ending what are they to do? Refuse to publish book seven?" DuffyPoo: WB doesn't publish the books. I don't think the publishers will have a problem with any ending JKR comes up with. WB could, however, refuse to make the movie, or, since they have the rights to the movie, make the ending any way they want it to be. JMO. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 22 11:23:52 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 07:23:52 -0400 Subject: Curse Scars Message-ID: <004401c4883a$81251bb0$9fc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 110912 DuffyPoo said: > > I checked the Quotes at HP Lexicon and came up with nothing as to > the error being corrected by JKR. (Not surprising, I seldom find what I'm looking for there.) Darby said: "In Quick Quotes or in the Lexicon? They're two different sites." DuffyPoo now: The Quotes link at the top of the HP Lexicon pages. Where that takes me, I have no idea, but I couldn't find it the quote there. I've had better luck with Google, usually, than that place. Which I would try for this quote if I had any idea what to Google for. ;-) DuffyPoo: > said "never". I > don't know why they didn't correct it. Darby said: "I have been trying to find out the answer to this one. I've been asking the translators that I know if they have had any information given to then -- they get lists of these kinds of changes to incorporate into their work. So far no answer from them. Maybe a letter to Bloomsbury or Christopher Little would do the trick. It's very strange, though, isn't it?" DuffyPoo: I sent an e-mail to Raincoast Books (Canadian Publisher) last week but have heard nothing back as yet. I did note the other day that the newest Raicoast Publications of this book (Jul/Aug 04) still has the same quote "I've heard of curse scars acting as an alarm bell before." If it had been corrected for the US publication, I don't understand why, at this point, it wouldn't also be corrected in the UK/Canadian publications..it's been four years between editions, after all. I really am quite confused - well, that's not the right word - as to why there are so many discrepancies within the books published in different countries. I realize spelling mistakes are going to happen and be corrected, things like Snape taking the Herbology class back to the castle in CoS being changed to Sprout as it should have been, the wand order mix up, are all one thing. Changing unfamiliar words 'fringe' to 'bangs' is quite normal, but it is things like the US version having a description of Dean Thomas and his sorting when the UK/Can versions did not; Sirius' vault number being omitted from the US version; Prof Quirrell refusing to shake hands with HP at the Leaky Cauldron, in the Australian (I think it was) version. I just don't understand why the publishers do this, or why JKR (or any other author) allows it to be done. Are they setting up fans for discussion of trivialities to keep us away from the 'real' issues? ;-P [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From naama_gat at hotmail.com Sun Aug 22 11:33:15 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 11:33:15 -0000 Subject: Depression and Harry in OotP -- PTSD In-Reply-To: <4128F6A9.20377.27998E@localhost> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110913 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Shaun Hately" wrote: >>Harry is a > > fictional character - his symptoms cannot indicate anything other > > than the author's intent. Now, we know that in PoA JKR >>specifically > > intended the Dementors as a metaphor of depression. She said so >>in interviews, and it's also clear from the description: they take away the ability to feel or even remember happiness. > > In OoP Harry is not descreibed as experiencing any such thing. He >>is angry, upset, sad, frustrated - but nothing like the effect >>Dementors have. Therefore, JKR did not intend to portray Harry as >>suffering from depression. > > The only major problem I can see with this argument is that it > assumes that J.K. Rowling regards depression as something with only > one single set of symptoms - and that is something we cannot know. You make a good point. However, here are a couple of quotes from JKR interviews: ------ (From: The Times 30 June 2000 J.K. Rowling, the interview By Ann Treneman) I do not think that these [Dementors] are just characters. I think they are a description of depression. "Yes. That is exactly what they are," she says. "It was entirely conscious. And entirely from my own experience. Depression is the most unpleasant thing I have ever experienced." What does she mean? "It is that absence of being able to envisage that you will ever be cheerful again. The absence of hope. That very deadened feeling, which is so very different from feeling sad. Sad hurts but it's a healthy feeling. It's a necessary thing to feel. Depression is very different." From: Canadian Broadcasting Co. July 2000 J.K. ROWLING INTERVIEW Evan Solomon JK: Um, I was depressed, um, I'd say - would it be 1994 - I did suffer a spell of what I was told was clinical depression. [...] But the Dementors, uh, it's so hard to trace the origin of something. I saw these things and I knew what I wanted them to do, but they became, as I really thought about what they did, I realized that's what I was doing. That's normally the way it happens with me. I don't consciously think 'And now, I will create the personification of depression' but as I'm creating them I realize what I'm doing. You know, what unconsciously is going on. So they create an absence of feeling, which is my experience of depression. It is an absence... E: That is your definition of it. JK: (Nods) Mmm. ----------- It appears, then, that depression is a single thing for her ("That is your definition of it"). After all, she didn't write the HP books as companions to the DSM. Whatever the books are, they are not an exploration or illustrations of various mental disorders in their different guises. To repeat my (hopefully adequately defended) main argument: JKR describes depression in PoA via the Dementors. What Harry goes through in OoP is very different from the effect Dementor have. And since JKR views depression as a single thing, she therefore didn't intend for Harry to be depressed in OoP. Naama, on the verge of using 'ergo'... From drednort at alphalink.com.au Sun Aug 22 12:02:28 2004 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 22:02:28 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Depression and Harry in OotP -- PTSD In-Reply-To: References: <4128F6A9.20377.27998E@localhost> Message-ID: <412917F4.30808.A9AB62@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 110914 On 22 Aug 2004 at 11:33, naamagatus wrote: > You make a good point. However, here are a couple of quotes from JKR > interviews: They are interesting quotes, but I still don't think they resolve the issue. > ------ > (From: The Times 30 June 2000 J.K. Rowling, the interview By Ann > Treneman) > > I do not think that these [Dementors] are just characters. I think > they are a description of depression. "Yes. That is exactly what they > are," she says. "It was entirely conscious. And entirely from my own > experience. Depression is the most unpleasant thing I have ever > experienced." > What does she mean? > "It is that absence of being able to envisage that you will ever be > cheerful again. The absence of hope. That very deadened feeling, > which is so very different from feeling sad. Sad hurts but it's a > healthy feeling. It's a necessary thing to feel. Depression is very > different." Here to me, it's clear she is describing the depression she experienced - as she says. It's also a quite vague definition, I doubt she's describing all of her feelings about depression, because that's not necessary to answer the journalist's questions. > From: Canadian Broadcasting Co. July 2000 J.K. ROWLING INTERVIEW Evan > Solomon > > JK: Um, I was depressed, um, I'd say - would it be 1994 - I did > suffer a spell of what I was told was clinical depression. [...] But > the Dementors, uh, it's so hard to trace the origin of something. I > saw these things and I knew what I wanted them to do, but they > became, as I really thought about what they did, I realized that's > what I was doing. That's normally the way it happens with me. I don't > consciously think 'And now, I will create the personification of > depression' but as I'm creating them I realize what I'm doing. You > know, what unconsciously is going on. So they create an absence of > feeling, which is my experience of depression. It is an absence... > E: That is your definition of it. > JK: (Nods) Mmm. This one is a bit more direct - but even so, a nod and an Mmm to a reporter's rather leading question doesn't tell us a lot. It certainly doesn't tell us that JKR believes what she is describing in a short answer to a journalists question tells the whole story. I don't doubt for a moment that JKR is describing her experience of depression. But I still think it's a huge leap to assume that means this is the only thing she'd say was depression. As a recovered clinical depressive, I can tell you that I would never *dream* of trying to describe in any detail depressive symptoms I didn't experience myself. But by the same token, I would never try to claim that what I experienced is the only form of depression possible. That, to me, would seem the height of arrogance, and potentially extremely cruel. > It appears, then, that depression is a single thing for her ("That is > your definition of it"). After all, she didn't write the HP books as > companions to the DSM. Whatever the books are, they are not an > exploration or illustrations of various mental disorders in their > different guises. No, but they are a series of books that explore human emotion, especially Harry's emotions, in quite a bit of detail at times. It doesn't have to be a diagnostic manual to get it right, or to have insight. > To repeat my (hopefully adequately defended) main argument: JKR > describes depression in PoA via the Dementors. What Harry goes > through in OoP is very different from the effect Dementor have. And > since JKR views depression as a single thing, she therefore didn't > intend for Harry to be depressed in OoP. You could be correct - but I'm still not at all convinced myself. I honestly *really* doubt that J.K. Rowling regards depression as a single thing. In fact, if I said I thought that was at all likely, I think I would be insulting the lady, because her writing to me suggest she understands emotion and depression fairly well. I have no doubt that the Dementors describe the experience JKR has of depression. But I would honestly be very surprised if a writer, who writes emotional content as well as J.K. Rowling does - specifically the emotional content of teenagers, and who is so good at inspiring emotions in her readers, and who therefore must have a pretty good understanding of emotions and feelings, would be so narrow minded as to believe she completely understands depressive illness and all of its emotional implications and experiences for everyone who has suffered it, is suffering it, or will ever suffer it. I also don't think it's the type of thing she's automatically going to discuss in interviews, even if the subject of depression in general comes up. Now, maybe she doesn't regard Harry as depressed. I honestly don't know. If she doesn't, that's fine. She knows him far better than I do. But I think it's stretching a point way too far to *assume* she has a view of depression as a single thing, just because she hasn't explicitly said she doesn't. 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 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 12:45:33 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 12:45:33 -0000 Subject: Fireplaces In-Reply-To: <018201c487e0$d38cf170$562f0dd4@taxi> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110915 I, Del, wrote : "Well no, because all the fires the students can have access to would obviously be monitored. DD would immediately be informed of any student travelling by Floo powder and of their destination." Susana replied : " I don't think fireplaces work that way - it's more then just monitoring. If they did, anyone could barge in on someone's home uninvited. Fireplaces must have spells preventing that, the same way you can't send an owl to someone in hiding and follow it (JKR's explanation was: wizards can make themselves unreachable if they want)." Del replies : My idea and yours are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Just like a door can be permanently closed, permanently open, openable by anyone who wants, or guarded, a fireplace could have different kinds of protection put on it. Susana wrote : " for someone to get into someone's privet home, there should be an invitation from someone inside the house." Del replies : What about when Amos Diggory called on Arthur Weasley one morning ? And more importantly, what about when Sirius popped his head in the Gryffindor fireplace in GoF : there most definitely wasn't any invitation in this case, and I doubt Sirius would know any required password. We probably need more information, I'm not sure we can reach satisfying explanations with what we've got. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 12:52:49 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 12:52:49 -0000 Subject: Marrietta's betrayal In-Reply-To: <54.3181f1d4.2e59769a@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110916 "ReturnOfTheMutt" wrote : " Signing the sheet didn't mean that you were joining DA. It just meant that you were there at that initial meeting and agreed not to tell. There was nothing that said you had to go to or participate in meetings. It was just a roll sheet for a group of people hanging out together before it was against the rules for groups to form. She wasn't require to be a member of DA. She could have stopped going." Del replies : Agreeing not to tell is being an accomplice. Once the DA became illegal, even if Marrietta had stopped going, she would still have been breaking the law by not reporting illegal activities she knew about. Moreover that sheet became much more than just a roll sheet for the first meeting right from the first practice session, when Hermione wrote "Dumbledore's army" on top of it. Even if Marrietta had stopped going, she could have been expelled anyway if the sheet had been found with her name on it. Del From naama_gat at hotmail.com Sun Aug 22 13:30:28 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 13:30:28 -0000 Subject: Depression and Harry in OotP -- PTSD In-Reply-To: <412917F4.30808.A9AB62@localhost> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110917 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Shaun Hately" wrote: > But I think it's stretching a point way too far to *assume* she has > a view of depression as a single thing, just because she hasn't > explicitly said she doesn't. I don't think it's exactly an assumption on my part. She creates creatures who personify depression, and their effects are very specific: everybody in contact with Dementors feels the same thing (albeit in different intensities). I'm not saying that's true in real life. I'm sure, as you say, that different people have different experiences. Still, it's evidence that *for her* it is one thing. > > > You could be correct - but I'm still not at all convinced myself. > > I honestly *really* doubt that J.K. Rowling regards depression as a > single thing. In fact, if I said I thought that was at all likely, > I think I would be insulting the lady, because her writing to me > suggest she understands emotion and depression fairly well. Everybody is limited in some ways by their own experience. You can put yourself in another's shoes, but it requires effort, *and* a pre- existing awareness that the other's experience may be different (therefore requiring the effort to emphathise). If an issue isn't that interesting to you, and you think you have a pretty good idea of its essence, you don't make the effort - you remain with your preconceived notion. > > I have no doubt that the Dementors describe the experience JKR has > of depression. But I would honestly be very surprised if a writer, > who writes emotional content as well as J.K. Rowling does - > specifically the emotional content of teenagers, and who is so good > at inspiring emotions in her readers, and who therefore must have a > pretty good understanding of emotions and feelings, would be so > narrow minded as to believe she completely understands depressive > illness and all of its emotional implications and experiences for > everyone who has suffered it, is suffering it, or will ever suffer > it. That's exactly why I said before "After all, she didn't write the HP books as companions to the DSM. Whatever the books are, they are not an exploration or illustrations of various mental disorders in their different guises." She is not thinking of "depressive illness", or about describing any and every possible variation of it. She is not thinking in that direction, therefore she goes with what she intuitively feels is depression (which is based on her own experience). I'm sure that if you were to discuss the issue with her, force her to think about it, she would agree that her experience of depression is not the only one, that there may be other sets of symptoms. I just don't think that she sat down and thought about depression as a phenomenon different from what she experienced. Naama From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 13:48:48 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 13:48:48 -0000 Subject: Secret Keeper Switch (WAsRe: choices / Mama Fridwulfa / Secret Keeper switch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110918 On the matter of Secret Keeper Switching:- mhbobbin wrote in > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110713 : > > << Sirius Black declined to be the Potters' secret keeper because he > himself was planning to go into hiding. >> > "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: > That is not the way I understood it. I understood that the original > plan was that the Secret Keeper would also go into hiding, to avoid > being caught and tortured to give up the secret. But Sirius's clever > idea was that he would pretend to be the Secret Keeper and NOT go into > hiding, so that LV would catch and torture him instead of the real > Secret Keeper. (Why did he think that he would be less likely to > reveal under torture that Peter was the real Secret Keeper than to > reveal the Secret?) The real Secret Keeper DID go into hiding. > snip snip. CatLady cites two passages in the Shrieking Shack scenes. mhbobbin now: That all may be true once a person is a Secret Keeper. My original Post was was in the context of the Longbottoms and whether it was appropriate for Aurors to go into hiding. My point was that times were so dangerous that even Sirius Black planned to go into hiding. I may be incorrect when I state that Black declined because of this but for canon support of Sirius' original intent and mindset--which may or may not have changed later-- I cite PoA, Chapter Ten: The Marauders' Map. The conversation is the one in the bar that Harry overhears. Per Professor McGonagall: "James Potter told DD that Black would die rather than tell where they were, that Black was planning to go into hiding himself... and yet, DD remained worried." Had this line been utttered by Fudge rather than McGonagall, I would discount it. Likely, McGonagall heard about the conversation between James and DD from DD himself. Once Black switched the SK role with Pettigrew we don't know whether he then went into hiding or not. Given that he was a big risk- taker, he may have chosen to remain where he could be a decoy, leading DEs away from Pettigrew and the Potters. However, the climate that they made these decisions in was so dangerous that even risk-taker Black had been considering hiding. I'm not trying to be overly picky but this sequence of events is still high on my list of favorite mysteries. mhbobbin From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 13:50:30 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 13:50:30 -0000 Subject: Percy's B/day & new FLINT? (was New B-day on JKR's site ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110919 Carolyn wrote : "The books are dated from Nick's death day, 31st October in CoS. He has been dead 500 years and died in 1492. This means CoS is set in (1492+500) 1992/1993. In POA (1993/4), Percy is in his 7th and final year and sitting his NEWTS. In GOF, Ch 6 (1994/5), he had passed his apparition test 'two weeks ago', which you can't do until you are a WW 'adult', ie 17. If he was 17 in the summer of 1995, this means he was born in August 1977." Del replies : Technically, your last sentence is wrong : someone turning 17 in 1995 would be born in 1978, not 1977. However your result is right if you take into consideration that Percy didn't turn 17 during the summer of 1995, but right after the end of PoA, hence during the summer of 1994, according to your calculations. Carolyn wrote : "For JKR's own dating to work, Harry must have been having his dream on the night of Friday/Saturday 18/19th August (I'm using the real dates here, but they are about 2 weeks before the end of the month). He is then collected by the Weasley's on Sunday 20th August, and they go to the QWC overnight on Monday/Tuesday 21st/22nd. However, the 22nd is now supposed to be Percy's birthday - so this dating must be wrong. The events relating to the QWC have to be taking place on 22nd+2 weeks, ie 4th/5th September, if the comments about Percy passing his apparition test 'two weeks ago' are also true." Del replies : One solution is that Percy turned 17 the year before, but was too busy starting work during the QWC summer to take his Apparition exam right away. Or maybe JKR just forgot about Percy's birthday and said "2 weeks" in order to emphasize Percy's pompousness : he took his Apparition test as soon as he turned 17 and has been Apparating every day ever since. How much more pompous can you get ? The answer being twice, when Fred and George do exactly the same thing the very next year ;-) Del, who doesn't remember percy making as loud a crack when Apparating as the twins do. If the loudness of the crack is a sign of how well the wizard masters the spell, it's a compliment to Percy. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 14:18:20 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 14:18:20 -0000 Subject: Depression and Harry in OotP -- PTSD In-Reply-To: <412917F4.30808.A9AB62@localhost> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110920 Shaun wrote : "I have no doubt that the Dementors describe the experience JKR has of depression. But I would honestly be very surprised if a writer, who writes emotional content as well as J.K. Rowling does - specifically the emotional content of teenagers, and who is so good at inspiring emotions in her readers, and who therefore must have a pretty good understanding of emotions and feelings, would be so narrow minded as to believe she completely understands depressive illness and all of its emotional implications and experiences for everyone who has suffered it, is suffering it, or will ever suffer it." Del replies : But then how could she *intentionally* write about something she doesn't know, understands or is even aware exists ? Shaun wrote : " Now, maybe she doesn't regard Harry as depressed. I honestly don't know. If she doesn't, that's fine. She knows him far better than I do." Del replies : Sometimes, it's those people who know someone best who are unable to detect some things about them. JKR knows Harry best indeed, but maybe she is writing him as depressed *without knowing so*. Maybe she's writing him in the way that seems most logical to her, without realising that she is in fact describing a form of depression. Maybe if you were to talk with her and tell her how close Harry's emotional state reminds you of your depression, she'd be surprised and would realise that her idea of Harry indeed corresponds to what some depressed people are like but she didn't know it. In other terms, maybe you and Naama are both right. She might very well not have intended to write Harry as depressed, but it still might be exactly the way she ended up writing him. Unknowingly. As an example, let's imagine that someone someday says that the character of Lockhart is a textbook illustration of some X syndrome. Then someone will point out that it can't be JKR's intention because she wrote that character after someone in particular. But someone else then does some magical research and finds out that lo and behold ! Lockhart's original character was diagnosed with the X syndrome after JKR wrote CoS. In effect, she would have indeed written a character with X syndrome, but she would not have intended to do so. Am I making any sense ? Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 14:43:05 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 14:43:05 -0000 Subject: Secret Keeper Switch (WAsRe: choices / Mama Fridwulfa / Secret Keeper switch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110921 mhbobbin wrote : " Per Professor McGonagall: "James Potter told DD that Black would die rather than tell where they were, that Black was planning to go into hiding himself... and yet, DD remained worried." " Del replies : Which means that things went like that : McG says that DD told her that James had told him that Sirius had told him he intended to go into hiding. Or if you prefer : Sirius told James who told DD who told McG. But I see 3 problems with that : 1. Sirius could have lied to James, to prevent him from worrying. That's improbable though, because it's not in line with his plan to pretend to be SK and to make LV come after him. 2. James could have lied to DD. That one is *very* probable. DD was insisting that James make him, not Sirius, SK. But James had his own reasons not to do so. So in order to get DD off his back, he might simply have told him not to worry because Sirius intended to go into hiding anyway. After all, both Sirius and James must have known that DD would disapprove thoroughly of Sirius's crazy plan. As someone else pointed out, what made Sirius believe he could resist LV ? DD would have been quick to point that out too. 3. DD could have lied to McG. I don't know why he would have done that, but DD has shown repeatedly that he is not to be believed blindy. Followed yes, but believed no. So I'm not sure we can assume that McG had the real version of Sirius's intents. Especially when on the other hand we have Sirius himself telling us first hand that he had no intention to go into hiding. Del From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 15:00:45 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 15:00:45 -0000 Subject: Secret Keeper Switch (WAsRe: choices / Mama Fridwulfa / Secret Keeper switch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110922 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > mhbobbin wrote : > " Per Professor McGonagall: "James Potter told DD that Black would die > rather than tell where they were, that Black was planning to go into > hiding himself... and yet, DD remained worried." " > > Del replies : > Which means that things went like that : McG says that DD told her > that James had told him that Sirius had told him he intended to go > into hiding. Or if you prefer : Sirius told James who told DD who told > McG. > But I see 3 problems with that : > 1. Sirius could have lied to James, to prevent him from worrying. > That's improbable though, because it's not in line with his plan to > pretend to be SK and to make LV come after him. > 2. James could have lied to DD. That one is *very* probable. DD was > insisting that James make him, not Sirius, SK. But James had his own > reasons not to do so. So in order to get DD off his back, he might > simply have told him not to worry because Sirius intended to go into > hiding anyway. After all, both Sirius and James must have known that > DD would disapprove thoroughly of Sirius's crazy plan. As someone else > pointed out, what made Sirius believe he could resist LV ? DD would > have been quick to point that out too. > 3. DD could have lied to McG. I don't know why he would have done > that, but DD has shown repeatedly that he is not to be believed > blindy. Followed yes, but believed no. > > So I'm not sure we can assume that McG had the real version of > Sirius's intents. Especially when on the other hand we have Sirius > himself telling us first hand that he had no intention to go into hiding. > > Del mhbobbin: Whew! you believe these characters are more treacherous than I do! But back to whether or not Sirius went into hiding at this point-- can you direct me to the passage that has Sirius telling us first- hand that he had no intention of going into hiding? And was that before or after he persuaded James to make Pettigrew the Secret Keeper? mhbobbin From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Aug 22 15:02:55 2004 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 22 Aug 2004 15:02:55 -0000 Subject: Reminder - Weekly Chat Message-ID: <1093186975.28.29291.m3@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110923 We would like to remind you of this upcoming event. Weekly Chat Date: Sunday, August 22, 2004 Time: 11:00AM CDT (GMT-05:00) Don't forget, chat happens today, 11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern, 7 pm UK time. Chat times do not change 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 Hope to see you there! From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 16:04:08 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 16:04:08 -0000 Subject: Secret Keeper Switch (WAsRe: choices / Mama Fridwulfa / Secret Keeper switch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110924 mhbobbin: "Whew! you believe these characters are more treacherous than I do! But back to whether or not Sirius went into hiding at this point--can you direct me to the passage that has Sirius telling us first-hand that he had no intention of going into hiding? And was that before or after he persuaded James to make Pettigrew the Secret Keeper?" Del replies : Treacherous, no, just secretive. Just consider how many times we've seen Harry outright lie in order to protect his own agenda. As for the quotes, there are in the Shrieking Shack scene in PoA. I can't give you the page numbers because I don't have the book with me, but I'll paste what Catlady quoted earlier on in this thread : "I thought it was the perfect plan... a bluff... Voldemort would be sure to come after me, would never dream they'd use a weak, talentless thing like you.... ["] "I persuaded Lily and James to change to Peter at the last moment, persuaded them to use him as Secret-Keeper instead of me...." Del From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 16:55:58 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 09:55:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry and Floo, Continuing Potions and The Clue In-Reply-To: <20040822080023.13981.qmail@webmail30.rediffmail.com> Message-ID: <20040822165558.22700.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110925 -Magda: -YES! THANK YOU! I thought I was the only one who went nuts at this -point in OOTP. After all the "I've got to get to London! angst and -he's finally got his head in the fireplace and he KNOWS how to floo -by now - and he just uses it like a telephone???? Even if he did -believe Kreachur that Sirius had gone out, he'd still have been -closer to the MoM if he'd flooed to GP. > > Amey: > But then, if he could use Floo network like that from Hogwarts, > what is the point in saying Hogwarts is the safest place? You just > have to floo yourself to any fireplace, and bingo you are in. > marauders would go mad and also Gred and Forge. IMO, the floo > network in Hogwarts is like a telephone system, not a > transportation system. But this is Umbridge's fireplace - she's headmistress and lord high inquisitor. Her fireplace doesn't have restrictions on it. That's why they went to the effort to use hers. And there's nothing in canon that says that you can only talk at some fireplaces and physically transport at others. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From cruthw at earthlink.net Sun Aug 22 17:03:43 2004 From: cruthw at earthlink.net (caspenzoe) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 17:03:43 -0000 Subject: Why such a point of characters' birthdays? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110926 Sorry if this question has already been addressed, but, I can't help but wonder why, with the exception of Harry and Neville (whose birthdays are, or at least seem at this point to be, pivotal to her plot), JKR seems to feel that it's important to give us the birthdays of the characters in the series. What, for instance, is the point of telling us that today is Percy's birthday? August is not the seventh month in our current calendar or in any Latin or other calendar that I know of. Therefore, this information does not seem to be clue-related (clarifying or muddying) in any way. Likewise, why do we need to know that Fred's and George's birthdays fall on April 1st or that Ron's falls in March? Never, so far (please correct me if I'm wrong) has the celebration of anyone's birthday other than Harry's and Dudley's - oh and NHNick's - ever even been mentioned in canon. Is JKR trying to suggest some character traits based upon astrological significance in revealing the birthdays? This hartdly seems likely given that, in canon at least, she doesn't seem to espouse any belief in such significance; quite the opposite, she pointedly excoriates (through her characters) Trelawney's beliefs in things astrological. On the other hand, given her four Hogwarts houses, suspiciously correspondent to the four astrological elements (fire [Gryffindor, lion, red, Leos Harry & Neville, Aries Fred & George, Leo Percy(?)], earth [Hufflepuff, yellow, Virgo Hermione & Percy (?)], air [Ravenclaw, eagle, blue], and water [Slytherin, snake, green, Pisces Ron]), and her apparent birthday obsession, what on earth is she trying to communicate? Do these so- called "elements" have some alternative alchemical siginifcance I'm unaware of? Thoughts anyone? Caspen From jlawlor at gmail.com Sun Aug 22 17:22:25 2004 From: jlawlor at gmail.com (James Lawlor) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 12:22:25 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why such a point of characters' birthdays? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <96773c8804082210226688c7c6@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110927 On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 17:03:43 -0000, caspenzoe wrote: Caspen: > Sorry if this question has already been addressed, but, I can't help > but wonder why, with the exception of Harry and Neville (whose > birthdays are, or at least seem at this point to be, pivotal to her > plot), JKR seems to feel that it's important to give us the > birthdays of the characters in the series. James: I think it's probably just a matter of fun trivia. I don't expect most of the other birthdays are at all important to the plot, and they would be awkward and pointless to work into the books. Some people just like to know these things, after all. I'm sure she's gotten plenty of letters like "_____ is my favorite character. What is his/her birthday/favorite food/favorite color/etc", and this is her way of answering them. - James Lawlor jlawlor at gmail.com From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 17:25:47 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 17:25:47 -0000 Subject: Secret Keeper Switch (WAsRe: choices / Mama Fridwulfa / Secret Keeper switch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110928 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > mhbobbin: > "Whew! you believe these characters are more treacherous than I do! > But back to whether or not Sirius went into hiding at this point-- can > you direct me to the passage that has Sirius telling us first-hand > that he had no intention of going into hiding? And was that before or > after he persuaded James to make Pettigrew the Secret Keeper?" > > Del replies : > Treacherous, no, just secretive. Just consider how many times we've > seen Harry outright lie in order to protect his own agenda. > > As for the quotes, there are in the Shrieking Shack scene in PoA. I > can't give you the page numbers because I don't have the book with me, > but I'll paste what Catlady quoted earlier on in this thread : > > "I thought it was the perfect plan... a bluff... Voldemort would be > sure to come after me, would never dream they'd use a weak, talentless > thing like you.... ["] > > "I persuaded Lily and James to change to Peter at the last moment, > persuaded them to use him as Secret-Keeper instead of me...." > > Del mhbobbin writes: As to which character is telling the truth, the whole truth or is lying--that certainly is a major plot device in the series. And wouldn't we all like to know about the usual suspects. But I still don't see any reason to doubt what McGonagall said in the Three Broomsticks (chapter ten)--that James had told DD that Sirius was planning to go into hiding. I do not doubt that was the original plan-- that James said it to DD or that DD said it to McG or that Sirius meant it. My original post spoke to the context in which the Secret Keeper decision was made--about whether the Longbottoms might have also gone into hiding. My point was meant to convey that the climate was so dangerous that even Sirius had been considering going into hiding. Sirius tells us first-hand that he would be the one LV would surely go after to get to the Potters. But it is not clear whether Sirius went into hiding or not from these quotes or even from those chapters. Yes, Pettigrew was at a hiding place. Personally, I doubt that Sirius--during the week after Pettigew was made the SK--was at his own place or anywhere he might have easily been found. Since Sirius had originally planned to go into hiding--prior to the big Switch, it would have been logical, IMO, for him to continue with this plan after the Switch. That although he and Pettigew were both in hiding, it is Sirius that LV would be looking for in order to find the Potters. If Sirius actually clarified what he was doing in that week after the Switch, by stating it outright, I haven't found it yet--I have in mind that Sirius said something on this but I can't find it. But my guess is that is not what is important here. I think what was important is how the Secret Keeper decision process was made. Who was under suspicion and who was not. Who felt there was a reason to be hiding and who didn't matter. But then, I've already posted alot about Remus's role in this process so I won't start that up now. mhbobbin From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 17:32:14 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 10:32:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why such a point of characters' birthdays? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040822173214.4228.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110929 --- caspenzoe wrote: > Sorry if this question has already been addressed, but, I can't > help > but wonder why, with the exception of Harry and Neville (whose > birthdays are, or at least seem at this point to be, pivotal to her > plot), JKR seems to feel that it's important to give us the > birthdays of the characters in the series. > What, for instance, is the point of telling us that today is > Percy's birthday? August is not the seventh month in our current > calendar or > in any Latin or other calendar that I know of. Therefore, this > information does not seem to be clue-related (clarifying or > muddying) in any way. Likewise, why do we need to know that Fred's > and George's birthdays fall on April 1st or that Ron's falls in > March? Never, so far (please correct me if I'm wrong) has the > celebration of anyone's birthday other than Harry's and Dudley's - > oh and NHNick's - ever even been mentioned in canon. > > Caspen She's taking pity on all those devoted fans who check her website everyday looking for new information. Alternately, she's giving them crumbs to whet their appetites for more info. Magda (who can never find the stupid bloody #@*%^ door anyway) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo From phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk Sun Aug 22 09:54:57 2004 From: phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk (Kate Harding) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 09:54:57 -0000 Subject: Quick to define Harry as "clinically depressed"? In-Reply-To: <412871A6.22930.7E23AA@localhost> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110930 Dreadnought: > While you may be correct, I find it just slightly disturbing to see > some of the attitudes towards clinical depression that are being > expressed on this list. > Too many people here, seem to me to have a very narrow view of what > clinical depression is, of what depression is. And unless Harry > fits their own narrow definition, it's obvious to them he's not > depressed. Very well said! Like you, I identify so much with Harry's experience. I was stunned the extent to which his feelings mirrored my own. I hope nobody would suggest that I didn't have 'real' depression, simply because mine lasted months rather than years, or because it was qualitatively different from what people think of as depression. (if so, I'm happy to refer them to my doctor!) Depression is so much broader than people think, so much more varied, and so much more common. My experiences were so different from what I had previously thought of as depression that to begin with I didn't use the label. And after the first week or two, I was so functional in public that noone would even have known I was ill unless I told them. It was only as I read more and more that I realised that that was what it had was depression and it was ok to call a spade a spade. The world needs all the understanding we can get about depression, because there is such a tendency for people to think sufferers are malingering or should just snap themselves out of it, and this is a large part of the reason that so many people never get the help they need - not even they can accept that they are genuinely ill. We don't know whether Jo intended Harry to have depression, and ultimately only she can say. But I'm personally sure her writing of him in OotP must have been informed by her own depression - it is *so* clear, so detailed, so insightful, so compassionate. Of course, noone has to agree with me. But that's how it feels to me. psyche From phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk Sun Aug 22 10:01:32 2004 From: phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk (Kate Harding) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 10:01:32 -0000 Subject: Harry's Depression in OoP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110931 kateydidnt2002: > I see it as a combination of PTSD and depression. Whoever said it > has to be categorized as exactly one or the other? Emotions are > not that simple. Can't depression be a symptom of PTSD? psyche: I agree! The label is less important than the experience. kateydidnt2002: > Oddly enough this passage scared me most at the beginning of OotP > "So it went on for three whole days. Harry was alternately filled > with restless energy that made him unable to settle to anything, > during which time he paced his > bedroom, furious at the whole lot of them for leaving him to stew in > this mess; and with a > lethargy so complete that he could lie on his bed for an hour at a > time, staring dazedly into > space, aching with dread at the thought of the Ministry > hearing Harry lay there in a kind of stupor, thinking of > nothing, suspended in misery." psyche: Yes! Thanks for digging that out. It's just the kind of thing I was thinking about when I said some bits of OotP were really hard to read for me. It's just horrible, and so well describes my own experiences. I did a lot of housework and walking while I was ill, because my counsellor said that was a good way to deal with the restless energy that often intersperses the apathy in depression (or insert label of your choice). psyche From stonehaven at hotkey.net.au Sun Aug 22 12:30:14 2004 From: stonehaven at hotkey.net.au (katefrost777) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 12:30:14 -0000 Subject: Curse Scars In-Reply-To: <00af01c47bf4$caa4c850$3bc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110932 With great respect, may I point out that the avarda kedavra curse leaves no scar/trace/mark at all, so maybe we shouldn't assume that Harry's scar is a *curse* scar at all. Other curses leave all sorts of marks/scars (as seen on Moody), but not the AK curse. With his mother's *protection* on him at the time as well, Harry should really not have been marked by LV's AK curse in any way. When the AK curse rebounded back onto LV it may have done something to LV, which in turn caused the scar on Harry. Could the rebounded curse (powerful as it must have been) have split LV in two, with one part of him then colliding with Harry's head and being combined/absorbed into him, thereby creating the scar? If the final word of Book 7 is indeed scar, and with JKR assuring us that we should be thinking more about why LV didn't die at the time he tried to kill Harry (Edinburgh Book Reading) then this particular incident is holding some very deep secrets, and to accept that the scar was just a mark from a curse appears to be a bit too simple. I also note that when DD and Fudge are talking (end of GoF) only Fudge refers to it as a *curse* scar, DD does not. Thanks, love the site, katefrost777 P.S. Can I make a really weird suggestion here: Does anybody imagine the shape of the scar being such that it could be opened up, like two pointy doors? (Apologies to the squeamish) From ctcasares at sbcglobal.net Sun Aug 22 13:51:25 2004 From: ctcasares at sbcglobal.net (tylerswaxlion) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 13:51:25 -0000 Subject: Harry getting to GP by floo / thestrals (was Re: Good Writing) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110933 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "humantupperware1" wrote: > HumanTupperware: (who is rather overwhelmed by the length of those > depression posts.......) > > I've been watching this thread for a little while, and I have a couple of > thoughts: > But this is where my major point comes in....he DIDN"T THINK!!!! IMHO, I > think the whole point of this Sirius/Harry/MOM mess is that Harry behaved in > an impetuous, rash headed manner, and managed to cause the death of the > only person close to being family that he had. I think the point of this chapter is to point out to us that Harry is far from omnipotent, he doesn't have all the answers, he doesn't know everything, and through being passionate and reckless, everything goes pear shaped. I've always been struck by the fact that Harry had a magic mirror tht could have let him talk to Sirius. Yes, it was in his trunk and he was refusing to open it to protect Sirius, but if he *had* used it, Sirius wouldn't be dead. I love "the sneaking into Umbridge's office to use the fireplace" scenario, but Sirius should have asked Harry why he didn't just use the mirror. Harry didn't know about it, but SIRIUS did. On one hand, it feels to me like bad plotting--he didn't open the package and Sirius didn't fill him in on the package b/c then Harry wouldn't have had to use Umbridge's office and wouldn't have talked to Kreacher. On the other, it makes Sirius' loss more painful. It didn't have to happen, and Harry's mistake in not trusting Sirius is to blame. And when he tries to contact Sirius after the Veil...that's just heart- wrenching. Harry didn't just act rashly at the end, charging into the MoM (like a good Griffyndor) he acted rashly in trying to protect his godfather, an adult who really did know better in this circumstance. Tyler's Lion From ctcasares at sbcglobal.net Sun Aug 22 13:58:31 2004 From: ctcasares at sbcglobal.net (tylerswaxlion) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 13:58:31 -0000 Subject: Harry getting to GP by floo / thestrals (was Re: Good Writing) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110934 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" wrote: > I can accept that Harry would act rash and not > think things out, and run off to rescue Sirius despite the many > reasons he shouldn't. The last dream he had was real, it would be > hard to convince himself that this one wasn't. > However, I have a problem with Ron, Hermione, Neville, Ginny, and > Luna all coming along as well and none of them stopping to talk Harry > out of it. Yes, Hermione tries, but she gives up FAR too easily. I think it's a Griffyndor trait. That rash bravery. It's what put Hermione in Griffyndor instead of Ravenclaw, where she seems to belong. Now, Luna *is* a Ravenclaw, but she's loony enough to go along. ;^) What > were they planning to do when they got to the DoM if Sirius really > was there? Fight Voldemort? snip > Before they all grabbed a thestral and took flight, one of them > (Hermione being the best canidate) should have grabbed Harry and > asked 'What are we going to do when we get there?' Which might just take a bit more maturity than any of them have. Tyler's Lion From CariadMel at aol.com Sun Aug 22 15:08:27 2004 From: CariadMel at aol.com (Annette) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 15:08:27 -0000 Subject: McMax : In-Reply-To: <003c01c48838$cf8c21b0$9fc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110935 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > Such a description belongs, as McMax said, to a new person. The new DADA teacher, McClaggan, whoever he/she turns out to be, a replacement teacher for one who may go missing over the upcoming summer (between OotP and HBP), or a new caretaker. Am I the only one, am I, who will not be surprised if Filch leaves Hogwarts, after his disloyalty to DD? Yes, DD believes in second chances but how many has AF already had?> ***** Argus Filch must be one of the most odious charecters created by JKR , even more so than the Dursleys or the Malfoys. They have warped reasons for their prejudices but Filch is just plain nasty.In the first four books he was almost comical in his dislike for the students; however a darker, more sinister side has emerged. In OOTP, he revels in cruelty and he supports the attempt to undermine DD. Is AF a servant of LV? As a Squib he is not eligible to be a DE, but does he have connections to the dark wizards? Why does DD employ this man? This has puzzled me since the obvious choice for caretaker of Hogwarts is Hagrid. As Keeper of Keys he surely has more seniority than Filch. What is Filch's purpose at the school? Apart from keeping Mrs. Norris in a constant supply of mice and gossip. Nettie From susanadacunha at gmx.net Sun Aug 22 15:52:21 2004 From: susanadacunha at gmx.net (Susana da Cunha) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 16:52:21 +0100 Subject: Fireplaces References: Message-ID: <003401c48862$cb4de9b0$0a280dd4@taxi> No: HPFGUIDX 110936 Susana wrote : " for someone to get into someone's privet home, there should be an invitation from someone inside the house." Del replies : "What about when Amos Diggory called on Arthur Weasley one morning ? And more importantly, what about when Sirius popped his head in the Gryffindor fireplace in GoF : there most definitely wasn't any invitation in this case, and I doubt Sirius would know any required password." Yes, I forgot to get in to the 'head only' situation. (I don't have most of my books with me but I think Diggory was a 'head only' - correct me if I'm wrong) Not only Diggory and Sirius could use the floo for a 'phone call', but also Harry could call to Grimaud Palace. I found that particularly odd because the meetings of the order had occurred in the kitchen! If Sirius could pop in and out of the Gryffindor fireplace... I believe fireplaces don't prevent 'phone calls' but simply home invasion. I 'm not at all satisfied with this - I wouldn't want someone getting glimpses at my kitchen wile I eat! But if we stick to what we find in canon, I have to admit it's possible. My remark that voice can travel by floo was actually concerning the 'phone call' issue. Propriety most certainly requires that you don't stick your head into people's houses; instead, you say "(The Burrow) Mr. Wesley, are you there?" and only after a reply you stick your head in the fireplace. I'm most anxious to hear other possibilities regarding propriety and the use of fireplaces. Susana From cantor at vgernet.net Sun Aug 22 18:05:43 2004 From: cantor at vgernet.net (Amy Miller) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 14:05:43 -0400 Subject: Potions and Book 7 Message-ID: <4128E077.3090807@vgernet.net> No: HPFGUIDX 110937 cantoramy wrote: "However, I shall reiterate: Warner Brothers' will not allow its most profitable licensed character, Harry Potter, to be killed off. He's worth too much, as are Hermione and Ron. WB is in business for one reason--to make money. They would never do anything to purposely cause themselves a loss-- unless it was for tax purposes, just like all American corporations!" Susana "Well, that is all very true. But if JKR refuses to make a happy ending what are they to do? Refuse to publish book seven?" DuffyPoo: WB doesn't publish the books. I don't think the publishers will have a problem with any ending JKR comes up with. WB could, however, refuse to make the movie, or, since they have the rights to the movie, make the ending any way they want it to be. JMO. cantoramy: Here is a link to a very good article about JKR, Warner Brothers and the publishers. http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2000/0700-autfinrev-bagwell.html All I can say is there had better be some sort of happy ending! cantoramy 'To Be is To Do' - Socrates 'To Do is To Be' - Plato 'DoBeDoBeDo' - Frank Sinatra From tim at marvinhold.com Sun Aug 22 18:16:10 2004 From: tim at marvinhold.com (Tim) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 18:16:10 -0000 Subject: Gilderoy lockhart - JKR's ex??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110938 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cindy" wrote: > *************************************************** > The same thought occurred to me after reading what JKR said. The > fact that she mentioned having to "endure him for two solid years" > made me very suspicious that it *was* her ex that she was talking > about. Interesting. > > Cindy That thought must of hit alot of us. If I remember correctly there was a news item a couple of years ago where her ex surfaced briefly to claim that JKR got the idea for Harry from him. And (once again if I remember correctly I can't find that item rihgt now), JRK said something like "...he probably tells his friends that he conceived Harry Potter" . Tim From cantor at vgernet.net Sun Aug 22 18:16:44 2004 From: cantor at vgernet.net (cantoramy) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 18:16:44 -0000 Subject: Potions and Book 7 In-Reply-To: <4128E077.3090807@vgernet.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110939 Sorry about that! Try this instead! Go to http://the-leaky-cauldron.org, click on "quotes", then click on 2000 and then "The Australian Financial Review, July 19, 2000" cantoramy From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 18:21:58 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 18:21:58 -0000 Subject: Fireplaces In-Reply-To: <003401c48862$cb4de9b0$0a280dd4@taxi> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110940 Susana wrote : "My remark that voice can travel by floo was actually concerning the 'phone call' issue. Propriety most certainly requires that you don't stick your head into people's houses; instead, you say "(The Burrow) Mr. Wesley, are you there?" and only after a reply you stick your head in the fireplace." Del replies : Oooh, I love this one ! Makes sense. I do agree with you, however, that it is odd that Harry could get his head in the kitchen's fireplace at GP, considering that the Order have their secret meetings there. My best explanation is that nobody who wouldn't be in the Secret could even think of calling on GP, or even if they did, they wouldn't see anything, or something like that. Del From ellyn337 at earthlink.net Sun Aug 22 18:25:10 2004 From: ellyn337 at earthlink.net (mclellyn) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 18:25:10 -0000 Subject: Harry/Voldemort fusion theory Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110941 Gadfly McLellyn wrote: Reading MAN AND HIS SYMBOLS edited by Carl Gustav Jung, I got the idea that symbolically Harry is consciousness and Voldemort is unconsciousness. In essence they are one being badly splintered. This would tie many things together from the Harry Potter books. THE PROPHECY: MAN AND HIS SYMBOLS explains why neither is truly alive while the other survives. They are one being and neither is whole as long as they are divided and not assimilating the important qualities/powers of the other. WHY VOLDEMORT DIDN'T DIE: If Voldemort is the unconscious self then he isn't quite mortal -- hence why he can't die. Voldemort is part of the "collective unconscious" in Jungian terms that is why "He always knows". WHY DUMBLEDORE DIDN'T KILL VOLDEMORT: I believe Dumbledore wants to give Harry the opportunity to become whole with his shadow unconscious -- Voldemort. I believe that Dumbledore may have gone through the uniting of the unconscious shadow with his ego consciousness when he defeated the dark wizard Grindelwald. Now for how I got there. Carl Gustav Jung coined the word synchronicity which loosely means meaningful coincidences. While on vacation, I walked into a used book store. I have had many dreams about bears and wanted an out-of-print book by Joseph Campbell about animal mythology to understand the symbolism of bears. The store had no books by Campbell, but the spine of a book called MAN AND HIS SYMBOLS edited by Carl Gustav Jung jumped out at me. I knew Campbell and Jung were friends from the POWER OF THE MYTH series. I bought it thinking it would be interesting to understand the symbolism in art. After I came home, little did I know synchronicity would hit me between the eyes (I'm surprised I don't have a scar there). I would read the book at night before going to bed, and by day I play the Jim Dale recordings of the Harry Potter books in the background while I work -- like listening to a radio. I happened to be listening to CHAMBER OF SECRETS when these words jumped out at me "Riddle, quiet as a shadow, edged through the door and followed...." (COS p 246). Again, "He could hear echoing footsteps and then a dark shadow moved in front of him." (COS p321). In GOBLET OF FIRE, after Harry dreams of Voldemort he awakens in Trelawny's class, "He couldn't stop himself from looking around, into the shadows behind him; Voldemort's voice had sounded so close...." (GOF, p577). Then in SORCERER'S STONE, "See what I've become? the face said, "Mere shadow and vapor." (p293) (All page numbers will be from the US paperbacks except Order of the Phoenix and Man and His Symbols) The word shadow was jumping out at me because I was reading about it in MAN AND HIS SYMBOLS. To my amazement this book was about dreams (why I was motivated to buy a book in the first place) and how dreams educate our conscious about the shadows in our unconscious. I realize I am not the first to notice that Harry and Voldemort are shadows of each other, but this book gave me a new education on shadows. It also was hitting me between the eyes that Harry's dreams are very significant. MAN AND HIS SYMBOLS was linking dreams and shadows and consciousness and unconsciousness together: "Through dreams one becomes acquainted with aspects of one's own personality that for various reasons one has preferred not to look at too closely. This is what Jung called "the realization of the shadow". p168 "In dreams and myths, therefore, the shadow appears as a person of the same sex as that of the dreamer." p169 . Reading the next few quotes from MAN AND HIS SYMBOLS, I was starting to get the idea that symbolically Harry is consciousness and Voldemort is unconsciousness. This would tie many things together from the Harry Potter books. Speaking of the conscious and unconscious "...implies the existence of two "subjects", or ...two personalities within the same individual......And it is the curse of modern man that many people suffer from this divided personality." p23 . Hmmm curse scar? "Dr. Jung has pointed out that the shadow cast by the conscious mind of the individual contains the hidden, repressed, and unfavorable (or nefarious) aspects of the personality. .......Ego and shadow, although separate, are inextricably linked together in much the same way that thought and feeling are related to each other." p118. "...perhaps the essence of Jung's philosophy in life: Man becomes whole, integrated, calm, fertile, and happy .....when the conscious and unconscious have learned to live at peace and to complement one another." p14 Introduction. THE PROPHECY: MAN AND HIS SYMBOLS explains why neither is truly alive while the other survives. Neither is whole as long as they are divided and not assimilating the important qualities/powers of the other. Therefore, they have to merge -- "live at peace and to complement one another." p14 Introduction. Wholeness, according to MAN AND HIS SYMBOLS, is related to the philosopher's stone. It is interesting that Dumbledore is famous for is work in alchemy (SS p103) as Jung studied and wrote extensively on alchemy too. Alchemy has to do with humans going through trials (by fire?) to become whole. "An old Arabian alchemist, Morienus, said: "....The philosophers stone is extracted from you; you are the mineral, and one can find it in you; ....If you recognize this, the love and approbation of the stone will grow within you." p210 MAN AND HIS SYMBOLS. Another quote, "In medieval symbolism, the "philosopher's stone" ( a pre-eminent symbol of man's wholeness) is presented as a pair of lions or as a human couple riding on lions" p 205-6. Hmmm, interesting that Gryffindor's mascot is a lion. Is the Half Blood Prince the other lion? Is Harry? WHY VOLDEMORT DIDN'T DIE: If Voldemort is the unconscious self it would explain why he knows about everyone's hidden thoughts, can smell lies, fear, and why he isn't quite mortal -- hence why he can't die. Voldemort is part of the "collective unconscious" in Jungian terms that is why "He always knows". WHY DUMBLEDORE DIDN'T KILL VOLDEMORT: Because "Ego and shadow, although separate, are inextricably linked together" p116. Hence he would kill Harry? I think too that Dumbledore wants to give Harry the opportunity to become whole with his shadow unconscious -- Voldemort. I believe that Dumbledore may have gone through the uniting of the unconscious shadow with his ego consciousness when he defeated the dark wizard Grindelwald, and that may be why Dumbledore also has a curse scar (SS/PS p15). Dumbledore tells Voldemort in Phoenix p 814 that "We both know there are other ways of destroying a man, Tom." Maybe you can destroy them by fusing with them -- assimilating their powers. MAN AND HIS SYMBOLS states it this way: "Above all, (Paul Klee, artist) had realized the necessity of not denying evil. "Even evil must not be a triumphant or degrading enemy, but a power collaborating in the whole." p270 . I believe we see this evil being a collaborating power in Dumbledore. He has a frightening and powerful rage that we see in PHOENIX, "An awful voice filled the kitchen, echoing in the confined space, issuing from the burning letter on the table. "REMEMBER MY LAST, PETUNIA." (p 40). Later in the book, "He was so angry," Hermione in an almost awestruck voice. "Dumbledore. We saw him. When he found out Mundungus had left before his shift had ended. He was scary." (p 64). I believe these awful and scary parts of Dumbledore are the Grindelwald within - so to speak. In MAN AND HIS SYMBOLS talks about different types of hero journeys in mythology. One is the Twin archetype which seems to correspond with the conscious and unconscious uniting journey. "Though the Twins are said to be the sons of the Sun, they are essentially human and together constitute a single person. Originally united in the mother's womb, they were forced apart at birth. Yet they belong together, and it is necessary - though exceedingly difficult to reunite them." p113 MAN AND HIS SYMBOLS. Hmmmm, reminds me of what JKR says in interviews on how she knows what is coming for Harry. Reuniting is difficult because we have to accept that we have a different side to our nature. Joseph Campbell described it in POWER OF THE MYTH (page #'s from paperback), "Heaven and hell are within us, and all the gods are within us. ....They are magnified dreams, and dreams are manifestations in image form of the energies of the body in conflict with each other. That is what myth is. Myth is a manifestation in symbolic images, in metaphorical images, of the energies of the organs of the body in conflict with each other......The brain is one of the organs." p46. Hence the placement of Harry's scar? Hence why it hurts so much when he is aware of Voldemort? MAN AND HIS SYMBOLS puts it this way, "Yet in order to sustain his creed, contemporary man pays the price in a remarkable lack of introspection. He is blind to the fact that with all his rationality and efficiency, he is possessed by "powers" that are beyond his control. " p83 According to MAN AND HIS SYMBOLS, some things that need to happen to Harry in the process of merging: "It would be relatively easy if one could integrate the shadow into the conscious personality just by attempting to be honest and to use one's insight. But, unfortunately, such an attempt does not always work. There is such a passionate drive within the shadowy part of oneself that reason may not prevail against it. A bitter experience coming from the outside may occasionally help; a brick, so to speak, has to drop on one's head to put a stop to shadow drives and impulses. At times a heroic decision may serve to halt them, but such a superhuman effort is usually possible only if the Great Man within ( the Self) helps the individual to carry it through." p173. "Only if I remain an ordinary human being, conscious of my incompleteness, can I become receptive to the significant content and processes of the unconscious." p217. Could Harry's passionate drive be he'll never go over to the dark side? Then there are the bitter experiences. In THE ALCHEMISTS TALE by John Granger, he explains in alchemy that there is a black, white, and red phase to alchemy. Black has died. Albus is white in Latin, and Rubeus is red in Latin. Two more deaths? Two more bitter experiences before Harry is conscious of his incompleteness and becomes receptive to the processes of the unconscious? Will the alchemy of Sirius, Dumbledore, and Hagrid form the Great Man within to help Harry "carry it through". Four interesting quotes from MAN AND HIS SYMBOLS about the forces of opposites: "(Greek thinkers) postulated the existence of a sort of life- giving "tension" (tonos), which supports and moves all things." p306 . "for Jung saw that the relationship between the conscious and unconscious mind also forms a complementary pair of opposites." pg 308 "This is that every personification of the unconscious--the shadow......, and the Self -- has both a light and a dark aspect. We saw before that the shadow may be base or evil, an instinctive drive that one ought to overcome. It may, however, be an impulse toward growth that one should cultivate and follow. In the same way the anima and animus have dual aspects: they can bring life-giving development and creativeness to the personality, or they can cause petrification and physical death." page 216. "We can also see that the arrangement of archetypal symbols follows a pattern of wholeness in the individual, and that an appropriate understanding of the symbols can have a healing effect. And we can see that the archetypes can act as creative or destructive forces in our mind; creative when they inspire new ideas, destructive when these same ideas stiffen into conscious prejudices that inhibit further discoveries." pg 304. I believe both Dumbledore and the Weasley twins exhibit the creativeness in the last two quotes, and I believe that is the journey Harry is heading for. In the Weasley twins, the pair of opposites leading to creativity is shown in GOBLET OF FIRE p566 when they are arguing about blackmailing Ludo Bagman for not paying them in real gold. This is ....when the conscious and unconscious have learned to live at peace and to complement one another." p14 Introduction MAN AND HIS SYMBOLS. The twins are mischievous like their hero Dumbledore, but they know where that line is. Their joke shop creativity is also an example of when the dual aspects of the personality that brings "life-giving development and creativeness to the personality". p216 The Weasley twins consciousness and unconsciouness are in balance and it has brought them success. I believe this is Harry/Voldemort's final journey: "In the case of an adult, a sense of completeness is achieved through a union of the consciousness with the unconscious contents of the mind. Out of this union arises what Jung called "the transcendent function of the psyche," by which a man can achieve his highest goal: the full realization of the potential of his individual self." p149 MAN AND HIS SYMBOLS. Hmmm, so Harry can grow old, have twelve children, and become the Minister of Magic? Of course I have given you the dry research version of what might happen. Even if I'm right, it will still be interesting to see how JKR's imagination will accomplish this merger. Will Neville and herbology be instrumental? Mimbelus mimbletonia? Ah, that is a lighter post for the near future. Ok, let the swatting of the gadfly begin. Gadfly McLellyn From cruthw at earthlink.net Sun Aug 22 20:05:00 2004 From: cruthw at earthlink.net (caspenzoe) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 20:05:00 -0000 Subject: Why such a point of characters' birthdays? In-Reply-To: <20040822173214.4228.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110942 > She's taking pity on all those devoted fans who check her website > everyday looking for new information. Alternately, she's giving them > crumbs to whet their appetites for more info. > > Magda (who can never find the stupid bloody #@*%^ door anyway) > So, basically, you and James think that she's just picking birthdays at random to satisfy and/or manipulate her fans? Caspen From CariadMel at aol.com Sun Aug 22 18:51:02 2004 From: CariadMel at aol.com (Annette) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 18:51:02 -0000 Subject: Curse Scars In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110943 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "katefrost777" > If the final word of Book 7 is indeed scar, and with JKR assuring us > that we should be thinking more about why LV didn't die at the time > he tried to kill Harry (Edinburgh Book Reading) then this particular > incident is holding some very deep secrets, and to accept that the > scar was just a mark from a curse appears to be a bit too simple. > ***** The significance of the scar should not be underrated. Indeed it is the mark of the scar and its peculiar shape that identifies who Harry is to the WW. This mark has not been left as a reminder of that fateful day when Lily and James died,its purpose has developed in the books as Harry has become more aware of his destiny.Its ability to provoke nausea and pain in Harry is disturbing, a phenomenon that seems never to have occurred until he set foot in Hogwarts. More than the curious birth mark he thought he had inherited, Harry is now aware of the dangerous link this mark has with LV. Not unlike the DE's armprints. The lightening shape must have a meaning but a portal of some kind ? It certainly has symmetry and maybe holds more secrets than we can guess at. Perhaps a follow on to the HP/LV mindmelt theory postulated before by you? Nettie From dudemom_2000 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 20:33:03 2004 From: dudemom_2000 at yahoo.com (dudemom_2000) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 20:33:03 -0000 Subject: Curse Scars In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110944 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "katefrost777" wrote: > With great respect, may I point out that the avarda kedavra curse > leaves no scar/trace/mark at all, so maybe we shouldn't assume that Harry's scar is a *curse* scar at all. Other curses leave all sorts of marks/scars (as seen on Moody), but not the AK curse. With his mother's *protection* on him at the time as well, Harry should really not have been marked by LV's AK curse in any way. Dudemom_2000 says: I most definitely agree there! Possibly the scar is really the sign of his mother's protection - after all it hurts and tingles and warns him of LV. >katefrost777 says: > When the AK curse rebounded back onto LV it may have done something to LV, which in turn caused the scar on Harry. Could the rebounded curse (powerful as it must have been) have split LV in two, with one part of him then colliding with Harry's head and being > combined/absorbed into him, thereby creating the scar? > Dudemom_200 says: I am inclined to think that the scar became manifest with the attack, visibly showing his mother's protection which may have been invisible till then. I have been torn as to whether LV is actually split into two - certainly there is a connection born from the act of the AK on Harry. Katefrost777 says: > If the final word of Book 7 is indeed scar, and with JKR assuring us that we should be thinking more about why LV didn't die at the time he tried to kill Harry (Edinburgh Book Reading) then this particular incident is holding some very deep secrets, and to accept that the scar was just a mark from a curse appears to be a bit too simple. > Dudemom_2000 says: Looking back at the other books, you can see LV/Riddle already starting to make attempts at immortality - putting himself into a book - this was certainly a long time before he even knew Harry existed. Also looking for and finding the Chamber of Secrets - what could have prompted him to do this? Obviously he was looking for something else. I doubt he would be out looking for it just for the heck of it - it might contain something he needs or wants. He has used the unicorn blood to sustain himself and wants the Sorcerers/Philosophers Stone to gain immortality. Katefrost777 says: > I also note that when DD and Fudge are talking (end of GoF) only > Fudge refers to it as a *curse* scar, DD does not. Dudemom_2000 says: I noticed that too. He has also mentioned to Harry about the scar on his knee. Maybe he is saying that scars aren't always what they appear to be! (rest was snipped) Dudemom_2000 *****\(@@)/***** From patientx3 at aol.com Sun Aug 22 20:50:39 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 20:50:39 -0000 Subject: Marrietta's betrayal -Higher Moral Authority In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110945 B_Boymn: >> I will first state that I don't think Marietta did anything morally wrong; her errors were social. And I said before that she was in a very difficult position, but at anytime, she had the option to simply not participate in the DA Club. True, her name was already on the list, but she never would have been caught in the act.<< HunterGreen: In either case, she still knew that the group still existed, and even if she stopped going to meetings herself, she would probably be able to guess when Cho was going to one. You are correct in saying that we don't know why she went to Umbridge, but I personally think that she believed it was the right thing to do. Even if she wasn't in the position of going to the meetings herself, she still had information about them that she was keeping from other authorities, people that she might not have seen as corrupt (even though they were). I am curious why she kept going to the meetings though... B_Boymn: >>Also, upon giving it a great deal of thought, if the DA Club is reformed during the next school year, a belief of which I am a strong supporter in my many posts on the subject, I believe the Marietta will be allowed to continue to be part of the club; although reluctantly at first. Some of that is based on my personal beliefs about how the club will be reformed, but I've already spoken about that and it's too long to add here.<< HunterGreen: If it is reformed, it will at that point (most likely) be an 'official' club, meaning that if she wanted to join she wouldn't have to worry about getting in trouble for being a member. The whole thing would be de-mystified. After all, they *weren't* training an army against Umbridge and Fudge, they were just learning hexes and curses to defend themselves. I think in that situation, with the class being supported/allowed by the school, if she wanted to join, no one could stop her. Although, if its the same people who were in it the year before, I can't imagine her feeling that welcome. From meidbh at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 21:06:40 2004 From: meidbh at yahoo.com (meidbh) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 21:06:40 -0000 Subject: Why such a point of characters' birthdays? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110946 Caspen wrote: "why do we need to know that Fred's and George's birthdays fall on April 1st or that Ron's falls in March?" Meidbh: April 1st = April Fool's Day, a day for practical jokes, the perfect day for F and G to have as a birthday! Meidbh From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 21:24:40 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 14:24:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why such a point of characters' birthdays? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040822212440.74211.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110947 >> She's taking pity on all those devoted fans who check her website >> everyday looking for new information. Alternately, she's giving >> them crumbs to whet their appetites for more info. >> >> Magda (who can never find the stupid bloody #@*%^ door anyway) > So, basically, you and James think that she's just picking > birthdays at random to satisfy and/or manipulate her fans? > > Caspen Well, I can't speak for James but that's pretty much how I see it. I really doubt that she's giving us astrological hints or something. These little changes and surprise factoids keep people coming back and occasionally she'll give us real info that we can obsess - er, I mean talk - about. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From Batchevra at aol.com Sun Aug 22 21:26:24 2004 From: Batchevra at aol.com (Batchevra at aol.com) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 17:26:24 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Marrietta's betrayal (was Depression ... in OotP - Cho/Ma... Message-ID: <1e6.2871ffcf.2e5a6980@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110948 In a message dated 8/21/04 6:54:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time, delwynmarch at yahoo.com writes: >I understand the feeling, but I have to disagree with the statement. Anarchy lurks around the corner when we start choosing which laws we're going to obey. Moreover, putting any morality over the law is terribly dangerous. After all, isn't it exactly what LV and the DEs are doing ? Their morality isn't ours, but if we claim the right to put our morality over the law, then we automatically grant them the same right. Dangerous, very dangerous. Del< I am going to play devil's advocate here. If there is a law that promotes a lawful killing of a group of people and in that law includes killing people who are hiding some of that group of people then would you obey that law? remember it is anarchy if you choose to disobey that law. There are times when disobeying rules or laws are correct in that the laws are used in a harmful way. The DA was teaching the practical side of DADA, Umbridge was making sure that none of the students were competent in that. The students needed to know how to do the DADA spells in order to pass their OWLS and defend themselves. Also, in passing the OWLS would determine what jobs they were getting after Hogwarts, definitely important. Batchevra [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 21:51:22 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 21:51:22 -0000 Subject: Marrietta's betrayal In-Reply-To: <1e6.2871ffcf.2e5a6980@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110949 Batchevra wrote : "I am going to play devil's advocate here. If there is a law that promotes a lawful killing of a group of people and in that law includes killing people who are hiding some of that group of people then would you obey that law? remember it is anarchy if you choose to disobey that law. " Del replies : I understand what you're trying to say, and my initial answer was that in that case I would *want* anarchy. But then I thought a bit more and I realised that it's just not that simple. History has it that when such laws exist, there are quite a few people who actually like them, a majority of people who refuse to think about them, and a minority only who will fight them. There are several factors which come into consideration, including self-preservation, preservation of one's family and interests, personal connection to the group of people in danger, personal morality, and so on. So my answer is now : I don't know. I *hope* I would find the courage not to obey that law, but I don't know if I would be willing to risk my life and my loved ones' lives. I'm afraid that like many people I would downplay the cruel reality to protect my own little world, at least at first. And to finish, I'll say that when faced with it, anarchy is a terrifying thing for most people. Most people would rather suffer under a wrong rule than risk everything they have in anarchy. Batchevra wrote : " There are times when disobeying rules or laws are correct in that the laws are used in a harmful way. The DA was teaching the practical side of DADA, Umbridge was making sure that none of the students were competent in that. The students needed to know how to do the DADA spells in order to pass their OWLS and defend themselves. Also, in passing the OWLS would determine what jobs they were getting after Hogwarts, definitely important. " Del replies : Now that you mention it, I realised 2 things. First we don't know that Harry checked the curriculum to know which spells he should teach the DA. I'm not sure the Patronus charm, for example, is OWL material. Second, we don't know how bad the non-DA fifth-years did at their DADA practical OWL. Oh, and third : anyone could grab a book and study the charms on their own or with their friends in their common room. They could even enroll the help of the 6th- and 7th.years. The DA were not just about learning some spells, they were mostly about resisting Umbridge. Del From zendemort at yahoo.co.uk Sun Aug 22 08:02:54 2004 From: zendemort at yahoo.co.uk (zendemort) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 08:02:54 -0000 Subject: Marrietta's betrayal -Higher Moral Authority In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110950 > > Del replies : > > I understand the feeling, but I have to disagree with the > > statement. Anarchy lurks around the corner when we start choosing > > which laws we're going to obey. > > > > Moreover, putting any morality over the law is terribly dangerous. > > After all, isn't it exactly what LV and the DEs are doing ? Their > > morality isn't ours, but if we claim the right to put our morality > > over the law, then we automatically grant them the same right. > > Dangerous, very dangerous. > Steve/B_Boymn: > > Equally, there is a problem with blindly following the law. The law > is a matter of opinion and is changing all the time. In addition, > Government, politicians, and therefore law can become corrupt as > would likely be the case if Voldemort wins and takes over. > Once the Quibbler article came out, most of the students changed > their mind about Harry, and at least considered the possibility that > he might be right. However, it is at this time of general enlightenment, > that Marietta choose to betray Harry. I have to wonder why, other > than it was necessary for the story, at that time, did she decided to > go to Umbridge? I have a suspicion, as suggested by others, that outside > forces were putting a great deal of pressure on her, pressure to which > she eventually caved. > > to paraphrase Dumbledore, at some point in our life, we > must choose between that which is right, and that which is easy. Very interesting dilemma... and very good points. On one hand, we must choose what we know as right. On the other, we must also consider what others view as right. We all can agree that different societies, different cultures, even different individuals have dissimilar notions of morality. Law in a true democracy would reflect the beliefs of right and wrong within the society. In this case, the majority of the people have agreed to abide by a certain system of morality. Law in a dictatorship only always one person to differentiate between right and wrong, and sometimes that person might not know the difference. Thus, with Prof. Umbridge, Law is created by a dictatorship with no consent from the governed. Harry is thus breaking laws created by a dictatorship that is cruel and essentially wrong. This is not anarchy, it is simply doing what is right. And frankly, I really don't know which is worse, an evil dictatorship or anarchy? I would not be so quick to judge Marietta. We do not know her, or why she told on the DADA group. We don't even have any idea of what Umbridge told her, or how she approached Umbridge. (And remember her mother works for the MoM, and would know a lot inside information.) Thus, we really don't know what happened or how she came to tell Umbridge. Nor will we ever know, since her memory has been erased. I personally believed that she was coerced to tell. All this time, she didn't say a word, and suddenly she tells on all of them, even her best friend. Hmmm... It would have to be two ways for this to occur: 1) she was always suspicious of Harry and just went along because of Cho. Finally, she decided to do what she felt as right, and notify Umbridge about the group, possibly thinking that Harry was dangerous and that she was helping her friend. 2) She was badgered and forced into telling. We must keep in mind that these characters are still children, and therefore don't often have their own convictions or judgements, but only what their parents tell them. (Which is why I feel dividing them up into separate houses is wrong, and that Draco might not be that bad.) When we are children, we grow and change in the way we think. This is one point I really don't understand about the books. Why aren't any students changing houses? Surely what a person thinks at 11 will change over the years, and be completely different to how that same person thinks at 15. In many cases, enough to be considered for a different house. "zendemort" From thrennish at gmail.com Sun Aug 22 21:59:08 2004 From: thrennish at gmail.com (Thren Summers) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 17:59:08 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why such a point of characters' birthdays? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1ee818a804082214595d2f6cac@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110951 > Caspen > So, basically, you and James think that she's just picking birthdays > at random to satisfy and/or manipulate her fans? Thren: I really disagree with this interpretation, and I'm usually the first one to point out that anything she lets out is a way to keep us interested. But the characters are so real, and the world so rich- why shouldn't they have birthdays? God knows she seems to have back stories and itty bitty details (like middle names) for each character, why not birthdays? I also don't think that they're picked as randomly as all that, but that's neither here nor there. Besides, what's the point of having a cool website if you can't play with the little calendar thingie? :) -- "Whatever is done cannot be undone. But whatever is lost can, sometimes, be found." From cristelmc at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 13:19:52 2004 From: cristelmc at yahoo.com (cristelmc) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 13:19:52 -0000 Subject: Clue Behind the door -- female? (Re: Harry and Floo, Continuing Potions and The Clue) In-Reply-To: <20040822080023.13981.qmail@webmail30.rediffmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110952 > "uath50": > - I think that the person that is described, is Luna Lovegood. > - Who says that the clue isn't a woman or a girl. > Amey: > The clue behind the door??? It can't be a woman, there is a *he* in > bracket. And I am sure JKR is not going to mislead us to that extent. > The person in the clue is a *he*, and if we read it right, he is HBP > or is somehow important. cristelmc: I agree with Amey. Any clue JKR has ever given us has been spot on. It may take some serious homework to figure out sometimes but JKR would never lead us astray. She said the person is a he so he is in fact a he. JKR will not fib about the sex of someone just to lead us off trail. She wouldn't bother with the clues at all if she didn't want us guessing in the right direction. From Batchevra at aol.com Sun Aug 22 22:07:42 2004 From: Batchevra at aol.com (Batchevra at aol.com) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 18:07:42 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Marrietta's betrayal Message-ID: <45.13e704fd.2e5a732e@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110953 In a message dated 8/22/04 5:52:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time, delwynmarch at yahoo.com writes: >Batchevra wrote : " There are times when disobeying rules or laws are correct in that the laws are used in a harmful way. The DA was teaching the practical side of DADA, Umbridge was making sure that none of the students were competent in that. The students needed to know how to do the DADA spells in order to pass their OWLS and defend themselves. Also, in passing the OWLS would determine what jobs they were getting after Hogwarts, definitely important. " Del replies : Now that you mention it, I realised 2 things. First we don't know that Harry checked the curriculum to know which spells he should teach the DA. I'm not sure the Patronus charm, for example, is OWL material. Second, we don't know how bad the non-DA fifth-years did at their DADA practical OWL. Oh, and third : anyone could grab a book and study the charms on their own or with their friends in their common room. They could even enroll the help of the 6th- and 7th.years. The DA were not just about learning some spells, they were mostly about resisting Umbridge. Del< I agree that Harry probably didn't check the curriculum, but some of those spells that we read that he taught them, Stupefy and Expelliarmus were pretty basic. He also used the books that Sirius and Lupin had gotten him for Christmas. The Patronus charm was like a bonus for the group. But they weren't only against Umbridge, they were learning how to defend themselves against Voldemort and that was also stated in the beginning. Batchevra [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From carodave92 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 14:15:50 2004 From: carodave92 at yahoo.com (carodave92) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 14:15:50 -0000 Subject: Marrietta's betrayal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110954 > "ReturnOfTheMutt" wrote : > "She wasn't required to be a member of DA. She could have > stopped going." > Del replies : > Once the DA became illegal, even if Marrietta had stopped going, > she would still have been breaking the law by not reporting illegal > activities she knew about. Even if Marrietta had stopped > going, she could have been expelled anyway if the sheet had been > found with her name on it. But it is interesting that she continued to attend meetings throughout the year...especially when it seemed to present such a moral dilemma to her... carodave From b_boymn at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 22:17:03 2004 From: b_boymn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 22:17:03 -0000 Subject: Harry getting to GP by floo / thestrals (was Re: Good Writing) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110955 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tylerswaxlion" wrote: > Tyler's Lion: > > ...edited... > > I've always been struck by the fact that Harry had a magic mirror > tht could have let him talk to Sirius. Yes, it was in his trunk and > he was refusing to open it to protect Sirius, but if he *had* used > it, Sirius wouldn't be dead. > > I love "the sneaking into Umbridge's office to use the fireplace" > scenario, but Sirius should have asked Harry why he didn't just use > the mirror. Harry didn't know about it, but SIRIUS did. > > On one hand, it feels to me like bad plotting--he didn't open the > package and Sirius didn't fill him in on the package b/c then Harry > wouldn't have had to use Umbridge's office and wouldn't have talked > to Kreacher. b_boymn: Let's look at the sequence of event in that conversation between Harry and Sirius & Lupin. The initial reaction by Sirius and Lupin is that something must be disasterously wrong for Harry to contact them so directly. They both seem in a bit of a panic. Then Harry tells them he /called/ to talk about his dad, and that really throws them for a loop; I have to believe they are caught completely off guard by this. Then Harry tells them the story of 'Snape's Worst Memory', and Sirus & Lupin are suitably embarassed by their own actions as young teenagers. Just as that aspect of the conversation is winding down and there is the possibility of an opening in which Sirius can mention the mirror, Harry say that Snape stopped giving him Occlumency lesson, and they are distracted by the shock of that revelation. Before that can be resolved, Harry hears Flich coming toward Umbridge's office and the conversation is cut short. I have no doubt that Sirius did wonder and fully intended to ask why Harry wasn't using the mirror, but everytime an opening came, JKR created another distraction until finally the discussion was cut short. Others may see this as sloppy writing, but I think she masterfully crafted a sequence of 'almost there' events. The opportunity for Sirius to ask was /almost there/ several times, but didn't quite fully present itself. It's a matter of suspense, tension, and compounding the mystery. > > On the other, it makes Sirius' loss more painful. It didn't have to > happen, and Harry's mistake in not trusting Sirius is to blame. And > when he tries to contact Sirius after the Veil...that's just heart- > wrenching. > > Harry didn't just act rashly at the end, charging into the MoM (like > a good Griffyndor) he acted rashly in trying to protect his > godfather, an adult who really did know better in this circumstance. > > Tyler's Lion B_Boymn: Open any newspaper or watch any news broadcast and you will see that it is full of teenagers acting rashly. Teenagers are impulsive; they are far more inclined to ask 'what now?' than to ask 'what next?'. They live very much in the moment and act with very little foresight. It's not in the nature of teens to look ahead and ponder the potential consequences of their actions. Also, teens are far more likely to engage in 'group think'; to act with a group mentality rather than engage in independant thinking. Example: at the moment, flying the car to Hogwarts made perfect sense, but the minute McGonagall asks them why they didn't send an owl, they see how flawed the plan was. As a general group, teens are fairly proficient in hindsight, but seriously flawed in foresight. I think if they had had a reasonable degree of foresight, even if they chose to go to the Ministry, they would have sent one person to Grimmauld Place to get help. But like I said, foresight is not a real strong point with teens. Steve/b_boymn (was asian_lovr2, was bboy_mn) From marmys at bellsouth.net Sun Aug 22 14:51:08 2004 From: marmys at bellsouth.net (Marleen) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 10:51:08 -0400 Subject: Harry didn't think (was Re: Harry getting to GP by floo / thestrals) References: Message-ID: <00df01c48857$75648230$0100a8c0@marmyscomputer> No: HPFGUIDX 110956 HumanTupperware wrote: But this is where my major point comes in....he DIDN'T THINK!!!! IMHO, I think the whole point of this Sirius/Harry/MOM mess is that Harry behaved in an impetuous, rash headed manner, and managed to cause the death of the only person close to being family that he had. I think the point of this chapter is to point out to us that Harry is far from omnipotent, he doesn't have all the answers, he doesn't know everything, and through being passionate and reckless, everything goes pear shaped. >snip< Marmy replies: I so agree. When you look at all the heroic events that Harry has done...you see how well he has succeeded. Even though he had help, he was beginning to get pretty good at that saving thing. I think he "did" enjoy it somewhat. The only reason he was able to produce a Corporeal Patronus was because he thought of losing Sirius. So with that mindset, he wasn't going to give up on saving Sirius. I think adrenaline took over and he didn't "THINK" -like you said. JKR always wants to remind us, that even though these people can do "magic" they are still Human Beings. And Human Being Teenagers are in a class by themselves. Magic or not!!!! From sixsunflowers at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 15:12:43 2004 From: sixsunflowers at yahoo.com (Bill and Diana Sowers) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 15:12:43 -0000 Subject: Good Writing & Death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110957 Katie wrote in 110902: >And this is what gives me hope. "Beyond the Veil" does seem to imply that the veil is a two-way thing. >Huh... wonder if this all has anything to do with Voldemort and his >kinda-immortality? (I mean, the series did start with the >Philosopher's Stone..) D'you suppose the prophecy was a red herring, >and not his real interest at the MOM at all? Nah.. I think that even though JKR has set this story in a "magical" world, she will not make anything magical about death. Dead is dead. One of the underlying themes of the books is that, although we do lose the physical presence of those we love who die, a part of them remains within us in our hearts/minds/etc. Dumbledore says this to Harry regarding his parents. You feel it in the pained questions of Cedric's mother or Hagrid's tearful remembrances of his father. Harry is in the first throes of grief at the end of Book 5.... Denial, wishing there were some way to bring Sirius back, not wishing to be around others and yet finding some sort of peace in the words of someone who understands his feelings, Luna... all signs of initial grief. I think Book 6 and Book 7 will working through his grief and finding some sort of peace as well. As for the absence of a body. There are many parents/spouses/children who are never able to retrieve the body of their loved one in a war. This was true of the Viet Nam War and is true of many other battles. The "shadow" of Cedric asks Harry to return his body to his parents. Harry is not given that resolution. There is always the wish that a loved one will suddenly turn up... but it rarely happens. I just can't see JKR doing that. As Lupin says to Harry... "He's gone." I can understand the feelings of readers who want Sirius to return, healthy and renewed, ready to continue the fight. I liked the character and was saddened at his death. But I will be unhappy if JKR brings him back to life. It just doesn't work that way and it would ring hollow for those of us who have stood at graves and buried our loved ones and those who have waited for someone to return from war and never seen their loved one, alive or dead, again. >knowing this has all been said before, It has been but you said it very well, Katie.... clearly reasoned and succinctly put. I understand your reasoning but just don't agree. Bill Sowers From linda_gaunt at yahoo.co.uk Sun Aug 22 17:59:08 2004 From: linda_gaunt at yahoo.co.uk (Linda Gaunt) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 17:59:08 -0000 Subject: FF: The End/Scar (last line) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110958 As I don't post here very often, and have so many e-mailed messages from this group, that I can't possibly read them all, forgive me if this is a subject already covered. I see posts about the ending of book 7, and I have heard that the last word is going to be "Scar". I thought you may be interested in the Fanfiction I posted, when this discussion came up on the forum on Danradcliffe.co.uk:- Apologies for being negative about poor Harry, but I agree with Dan's well-publicised theory about Harry dying in book 7. As for the last lines, how about "But Harry never left his home, his Hogwarts', for that very same night, in Gryffindor Tower, many of the students clearly saw the ghost of a teenage boy with a tell-tale lightning scar." That was so sad, that I decided to think up a happier ending, which goes like this:- Of course it could be that Dumbledore has saved some of the Elixir of Life, and the ending could be more like this "A great sadness fell over the Great Hall that night. He-who-shall-not-be-named had gone for good, but Harry Potter had gone too. He had made the ultimate sacrifice - one life to save thousands. No-one felt like eating the plates of food that magically appeared. Even at the Slytherin table there was silence, save for many a muffled sob. Hermione was sobbing quietly and Ron was looking, with tears in his eyes, at the empty space on the bench next to him, when Dumbledore began to speak. For once no-one took any notice of the wise old wizard, he had let Harry fight the Dark Lord alone, why should they listen to him. No-one heard him explain about the Elixir of Life, how drinking a small amount actually enables you to cheat death. It wasn't until they heard him say 'Harry Potter truly is the boy who lived' that anyone heard a word he was saying. Tears of sadness quickly turned to tears of joy, when the door to the great hall flew open revealing one very famous young wizard, sporting a huge grin, untidy hair, green eyes, and that famous tell-tale lighning scar!" I think I prefer the second ending! "Linda Gaunt" From suedepatch at hotmail.com Sun Aug 22 19:44:02 2004 From: suedepatch at hotmail.com (danni_yetman) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 19:44:02 -0000 Subject: Voldemort at the MoM Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110959 Now, as I'm very new to this group, I haven't read all the posts....not will I ever probably get through all of them, although I am definitely trying. Something I've been thinking about (and please forgive me if I'm rehashing as really over-talked about idea) is Voldemort at the MoM. The DEs make fun of Harry for thinking Voldemort could just walk into the MoM (or something like that....my books are across the ocean right now) to get the Prophecy, but isn't that what he does in the end? I'm really confused about how Harry and the gang don't see anyone when they first go into the Ministry, then Voldemort shows up and still no one is around, and then he disapparates or whatever, and suddenly people are all around in their pyjamas! Whatever magic was done to make Harry's path clear to get through the MoM to the DoM without any real difficulties, why couldn't that be done for Voldemort? Usually I'm not a fan of why didn't characters do this or that questions...but this one is getting too me... So, any theories/ideas? Do you think this will be something JKR will get to later in the series? Or did I miss something really big, and consequently will feel like a big idiot after this? Cheers, Danni From neil.zoe.collishaw at ntlworld.com Sun Aug 22 20:37:09 2004 From: neil.zoe.collishaw at ntlworld.com (zoe0coll) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 20:37:09 -0000 Subject: Fireplaces In-Reply-To: <003401c48862$cb4de9b0$0a280dd4@taxi> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110960 Susana wrote: > " for someone to get into someone's private home, there should be > an invitation from someone inside the house." I believe that the fact that Harry can pop his head through to GP is due to the fact that he has been given the secret information regarding 12 Grimmauld Place (on the slip of paper written by Dumbledore) which someone showed to Harry when Moody, Lupin, Tonks etc. first took him there in OOTP. As he knows the place exists and has been specifically invited, he can go there, or talk through that fireplace. Anyone who did not know this information would not be able to go there. Also in GOF Arthur Weasley has to have the Dursleys' fireplace connected to the floo network for the afternoon, so you couldn't just go to any fireplace, it has to be connected, and you have to know where you're going - as Harry didn't really understand the principle in COS - and said the name slightly wrong, he ended up in Knockturn Alley instead of Diagon Alley. As to how Sirius got his head to the Gryffindor fireplace, I'm not sure, surely the fireplaces should be protected, or Sirius would have been able to get in that way in POA! I wonder however whether Dumbledore has given him permission, and worked some magic allowing it, as he would understand Sirius's need to have some means of contacting Harry. Just my opinion Zoe C From HxM_fan at hotmail.com Sun Aug 22 19:31:55 2004 From: HxM_fan at hotmail.com (Valrie Brabon) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 21:31:55 +0200 Subject: An out-there Snape theory? References: <1092577408.10935.21773.m12@yahoogroups.com> <003c01c48705$a400f950$562f0dd4@taxi> <00be01c487a5$629349f0$562f0dd4@taxi> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110961 Susana said: I have trouble believing Snape would fall in love with a muggle or even a muggle-born. As I was saying, in Snape's worst memory we see him call Lily a mud blood, which is an indication that he did believe the mud blood/pure blood prejudice. I also believe that "someone he loved" might not be a wife at all. It could just be his friends (other DEs). Or maybe he was disappointed in "someone he loved (Lucius?). I don't think it would take something as big as a wife's death to stray him from the DEs. If you imagine yourself among the DEs, you can imagine seeing lots of 'little' things that pile up to 'this is wrong!' - "George" and "GEORGE'S SISTER DIANA" theories (that can be found in Fantastic Posts and were to find them, under Hypothetic Alley). As for the wife matter, JKR said in an interview (can't remember which): "Who would want Snape in love with him?" (not an exact quote) I thought "only another DE" but come to think of it... IMO, Snape is absolutely capable of loving someone, but it would take a very 'special' woman to love him back! =============== Yes, but well. If he had fallen in love with a muggle, this is maybe why he left the DEs. There's here in Belgium and France, this true story very well known of that guy who was a pure racist and joined a Nazi (Skin-Head) band. And one day, he fallen in love with an Arab girl he met by hasard... and left the band. This may be possible as well as in real life, but even more possible in books, since in books, all is possible, lol. * S P O I L E R S * As far as calling Lily "Mudblood", okay. It may because he was a Slytherin and proud of it, and we know how much young people are easily influenced by people they like/are around them. (I know what I'm talking about, I also been idiot while my teenage years, such as "enjoying" music that I never truly liked, to be accepted among others and all. And now, I listen the music I love, and lots people rejects me, lol.) But he also may have fallen in love with some DE chick. And she maybe got killed for some reason, and Snape realised. Anyway, despite he was bullied on at school and stuff, something else DID happen to make him as harsh and bitter, when we compare his attitude at 15 or 16, and at 36, he's more secret now. Okay, occulmens is one of the reasons, but there's something else. And that something is the reason of his leaving the DEs... But... WHY did he put *THIS* memory in the pensieve? Was he ashamed? (underwear being dirty, or removed in front of crowd) Maybe something IMPORTANT happened just after the moment Harry got caught by Severus while watching the scene? Or maybe.... just to make Harry believing his father was a perfect guy/hero/etc and not show him the truth for the pleasure of annoying Harry with 'evil lies' about his father? (Enjoying picking on Harry) We'll anyway discover it, unless JKR is one of those evil author who enjoys letting unanswered questions to the end of her stories to let us interpret freely some stuff that could have happened and all... *thinks about Ringu* Anyway, I don't disagree at all with those theories, I also think they're VERY possible, but I have a HUGE default. I'm too much of a romantic chick loving "forbidden and dark love" that ends up badly... Hehehe... Valy. From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 23:35:17 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 23:35:17 -0000 Subject: Good Writing & Death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110962 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "anthyroserain" wrote: > B_Boymn: > > > 3.) Sirius's death. Death is rarely satisfying; it rarely comes > with resolution. ((snip snip)) No tearful goodbyes, no chance to resolve old issues, no chance to say 'I love you' or 'I'm sorry'; just gone. In addition, [snip] But even after combining a common euphemism with the 'Chamber of Death' we still, as readers, wanted satisfaction, meaning, justification, explanation, hope, and our beloved Sirius back, so we did what we do, and that is, come up with alternate explanation and conspiracy theories to supposed the idea that he was not really dead, or that he would return by some magical means. > > > Katie: > > You know, I would find Sirius's death a whole lot less irritating if it made more sense. The thing is, yes, death is unsatisfying, but > Sirius's is even unsatisfying as a FICTIONAL death! (snip snip) > > If JKR wrote in metaphors, it might be an acceptable death, but she doesn't. HP might have magic in it, but it's recognizably about the real world. It's not really a fable. The other deaths don't seem so bizarre: Harry's parents are killed, and so is Cedric. JKR definitely plays by the rules of fiction, and Sirius's death seems like a big exception. > > It's such an unsatisfying death for readers: it comes as a complete surprise, it happens through a device that was just introduced a few pages before and never explained, and there's no body left. JKR must > know all this. She's either 1) going to have Sirius's "death" become crucial to the story later on, or 2) trying to annoy her readers. As she says she's sorry she "had to do it", and I have faith in her, I trust it's 1)! (big snip) Theoretically, if you make it beyond the 'tunnel of light', there is no turning back. This is typically true in near death experience, but not always so in Mythological advantures. mhbobbin cannot resist adding even though it's been discussed before: This was a diappointing death--not just for what it means to the fictional characters but because we're all left with so much foreshadowed. Yes, yes, the point is made about death being senseless etc. It's been made no matter what the outcome of Books Six and Seven. And she should have written a better death scene if she did not plan to build on it. Few deaths occur in a context with such interesting, symbolic props: an entrance to the Other World, a three headed dog and a pomegranate. Again, if she's not building to something, she's making us carry alot of extra weight in red herring. I don't even want to guess whether Sirius is coming back or not. Examples in Classical Mythology do not usually end with the Recently Departed living back on earth happily. But why put the props from Classical Mythology there at all? I just hope that Sirius --and Harry if he journeys there--doesn't eat the food they serve beyond the veil. mhbobbin From b_boymn at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 23:35:41 2004 From: b_boymn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 23:35:41 -0000 Subject: Filch and other unsavory Characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110963 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Annette" wrote: > > > ***** Argus Filch must be one of the most odious charecters created > by JKR , even more so than the Dursleys or the Malfoys. They have > warped reasons for their prejudices but Filch is just plain > nasty.... In OOTP, he revels in cruelty and he supports the attempt > to undermine DD. ... Why does DD employ this man? > > This has puzzled me since the obvious choice for caretaker of > Hogwarts is Hagrid. As Keeper of Keys he surely has more seniority > than Filch. What is Filch's purpose at the school? Apart from > keeping Mrs. Norris in a constant supply of mice and gossip. > > Nettie b_boymn: When asked about Snape, JKR said (greatly paraphrased) that Dumbldedore keeps Snape around because he knows that there are all kinds of lessons to be learn in life, and that the best of them don't necessarily come out of books. Plus, there are always the memories. In years to come, and in all likelihood at this very moment, former Hogwart's students are raising a tankard of ale and laughing uproariously, as they exchange stories not of good times, but of horrendous encounters with Filch, Snape, and Peeves. These are the memories and life lessons that will endure far longer than facts and figures from Prof. Binn's lectures on the Giant Wars and Goblin Uprisings. As an author, I think JKR included nasty and somewhat ambiguous characters to prevent the Disneyfication (happiest place on earth) of Hogwarts. One could say, she presents Hogwarts warts and all. I was thinking last night of an alternate way that the Umbridge's monitoring of Tralawney could have played out. I frequently do this as it stimulates my mind and frequently inspires potential fanfic plots. The insight I gained from this excesize is that Harry finds Hogwarts a very conflicting place. At once, he finds in the most comfortable place, the place, by his own admission, that feels more like home than any other. But at the same time, Hogawrts is a painful place; a place where he has suffered much misery. The bulk of the student body is frequently against him, he endures their stares, mumblings, and rumors, he has suffered many humiliations at the hands of Malfoy, every years something majorly bad happens to him. Filch is miserable, Snape is horrendous, Binns is painfully boring, Umbridge in criminal, McGonagall is strict, he's alway in trouble, etc... etc... etc.... In summary, Harry both feels at home and very much alienated at Hogwarts. It's due to characters like Filch that Hogwarts is a complex, intriguing, interesting, and conflicted place for the many mysteries to unfold. In closing, I think Dumbledore understands Filch's own conflicted nature, and will forgive and forget. Just a few thoughts. Steve/b_boymn From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 22 23:37:56 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 23:37:56 -0000 Subject: Good Writing & Death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110964 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Bill and Diana Sowers" wrote: >> I think that even though JKR has set this story in a "magical" > world, she will not make anything magical about death. Dead is > dead. Alla: I disagree. There are voices behind the Veil, so there is already something magical about Death in JKR world. Yes, from the POV of religious person, it is nothing magical, but from atheist POV, such thing cannot happen. Yes, no spell can bring back the dead, but what if Sirius is not "properly dead"? I know that it is highly unlikely that he will return in the human form, but at the same time, I think high possibility exists of him returning in SOME form. I will not stop loving the books if that will not happen, but I would welcome such plot twist. > Bill: > I can understand the feelings of readers who want Sirius to return, > healthy and renewed, ready to continue the fight. I liked the > character and was saddened at his death. But I will be unhappy if > JKR brings him back to life. It just doesn't work that way and it > would ring hollow for those of us who have stood at graves and > buried our loved ones and those who have waited for someone to > return from war and never seen their loved one, alive or dead, again. >\ Alla: I don't think that if JKR brings Sirius back in any form, it will cheapen the meaning of "death". We already had several important "deaths" in the books, such as Potters and Cedric to less extent. JKR obviously stated that they are dead. If Sirius was not "properly dead", I will not consider it a "cheap plot twist". From cruthw at earthlink.net Sun Aug 22 23:43:36 2004 From: cruthw at earthlink.net (caspenzoe) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 23:43:36 -0000 Subject: Why such a point of characters' birthdays? In-Reply-To: <1ee818a804082214595d2f6cac@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110965 > > Caspen > > So, basically, you and James think that she's just picking birthdays > > at random to satisfy and/or manipulate her fans? > > > Thren: > > I really disagree with this interpretation, and I'm usually the first > one to point out that anything she lets out is a way to keep us > interested. But the characters are so real, and the world so rich- why > shouldn't they have birthdays? God knows she seems to have back > stories and itty bitty details (like middle names) for each character, > why not birthdays? I also don't think that they're picked as randomly > as all that, ...."> That's not my position. I don't really have one; just asking. So, Thren, if you don't think that "they're picked as randomly as all that, ...," why, and how do you think they are picked? Given the amount of time and attention that other seemingly (to some) trivial details get here (someone posted a whole theory at least involving, if not based upon, Hermione's announced, whether random or not, birthday here, not too long ago), what are we to make, if anything of this latest announcement of Percy's birthday (Happy Birthday Percy, despite your recent flirtations with the dark side, or at least ignorance! Yay!)? Caspen From juli17 at aol.com Mon Aug 23 00:39:50 2004 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 20:39:50 EDT Subject: Dumbledore and The End Message-ID: <78.5eedd153.2e5a96d6@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110966 Tonks wrote: > Dumbledore and Harry will not kill anyone. Something else will be > the downfall of Voldemort. Harry will die... and come back in a > different form.. he and Dumbledore will both be immortal. > > If I am right... just remember who told you!! > > Tonks_op > The theory that Harry will die but will come back in a different form seems to be fairly popular. But I haven't read any theories on *what* form the immortal Harry would take. The only beings who "survived" their deaths in the WW so far are ghosts (an empty and unhappy existence from what we've seen), and the vapor being that was Voldemort. I can't either of those existences being very satisfying for Harry or for the readers. Granted, we haven't seen what happens beyond the veil, but if it is a heaven-like existence--Harry reunited with his parents and Sirius-- I don't know that I'd find such an ending completely satisfying either, if only because of its conventionality. Any other alternative immortal form theories out there? Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From juli17 at aol.com Mon Aug 23 00:40:17 2004 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 20:40:17 EDT Subject: Good Writing & Death Message-ID: <1df.28b7dff2.2e5a96f1@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110967 Katie said: > It's such an unsatisfying death for readers: it comes as a complete > surprise, it happens through a device that was just introduced a few > pages before and never explained, and there's no body left. JKR must > know all this. She's either 1) going to have Sirius's "death" become > crucial to the story later on, or 2) trying to annoy her readers. As > she says she's sorry she "had to do it", and I have faith in her, I > trust it's 1)! > When JKR says she had to do it, I've always assumed she needed Sirius *out of the way* to somehow assist the story; for instance, I thought the purpose might be to move Lupin into the position of Harry's closest mentor and substitute father figure. Now I'm wondering if she needed Sirius to die so *he* could accomplish something, something that could only be done from "beyond the veil." I don't know what that would be, but JKR has said Sirius will figure into the story again (at least, I recall some comment along those lines). So I think #1 will come to pass, and in the process we'll find out more about what happens beyond the veil. Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From juli17 at aol.com Mon Aug 23 00:46:35 2004 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 20:46:35 EDT Subject: Why such a point of characters' birthdays? Message-ID: <159.3d23c35c.2e5a986b@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110968 >She's taking pity on all those devoted fans who check her website >everyday looking for new information. Alternately, she's giving them >crumbs to whet their appetites for more info. > >Magda (who can never find the stupid bloody #@*%^ door anyway) > So, basically, you and James think that she's just picking birthdays at random to satisfy and/or manipulate her fans? Caspen JKR has said she's filled notebooks with details about the lives of her characters. Remember, she wrote out Dean Thomas' whole life story. It's common for authors to imagine backstories for their characters, and I imagine in JKR's case that included birthdays. Now she's simply sharing a few of those details, not to manipulate her fans, but probably as a gesture of good will and gratitude. After all, while she deserves every bit of credit for the fascinating world she created, it's the readers who have made it--and her--so successful. I think she appreciates that, and gives back a little by sharing bits and pieces with us. (And I think she genuinely enjoys doing it too!) That's my opinion anyway, Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Nrsedany2be at aol.com Mon Aug 23 01:48:01 2004 From: Nrsedany2be at aol.com (Nrsedany2be at aol.com) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 21:48:01 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Percy's B/day & new FLINT? (was New B-day on JKR's si... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110969 Or in the summer of 1994 Percy turned 18, in order for him to have turned 17 in the 4th book he would have graduated school a year early and that means he entered in a year early, which we know not to be true and I don't think that Hogwarts allows people to graduate early no matter how many classes they take in 1 year. Percy may have been too busy in the previous summer before his 7th year to take the test because he turned 17 2 weeks before classes started. Whereas F&G were 17 in April and took the test the summer after before their 7th year. Danielle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From psychmonky at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 01:01:18 2004 From: psychmonky at yahoo.com (psychmonky) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 01:01:18 -0000 Subject: harry after school Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110970 Forgive me if this has already been discussed, but my theory is that Harry doesn't die at the end but instead goes on to teach Defense Against the Dark Arts. Why else would JKR put such an emphasis on there being a different teacher every year? We know he's good at the subject and after OoP he has experience teaching it. We also know that either he or Voldy must die and who better to teach the subject than the person who got rid of the worst wizard for a century? "psychmonky" From psychmonky at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 00:47:40 2004 From: psychmonky at yahoo.com (Scott Campbell) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 17:47:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Good Writing & Death In-Reply-To: <1df.28b7dff2.2e5a96f1@aol.com> Message-ID: <20040823004740.16765.qmail@web51504.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110971 It's possible that Sirius had to die to fulfill another prophecy of which we do not yet know. Didn't Harry hear a partial prophecy? "Scott" From slithy_toves19 at yahoo.ca Mon Aug 23 01:08:09 2004 From: slithy_toves19 at yahoo.ca (slithy_toves19) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 01:08:09 -0000 Subject: Good Writing & Death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110972 > > Alla said: > > Yes, no spell can bring back the dead, but what if Sirius is > not "properly dead"? > > > I know that it is highly unlikely that he will return in the human > form, but at the same time, I think high possibility exists of him > returning in SOME form. > and in a later post, Alla again: > > I don't think that if JKR brings Sirius back in any form, it will > cheapen the meaning of "death". > > We already had several important "deaths" in the books, such as > Potters and Cedric to less extent. JKR obviously stated that they > are dead. > > If Sirius was not "properly dead", I will not consider it a "cheap > plot twist". Now me, slithy_toves19: I have to agree. After all, the first deaths in the books - those of James and Lily Potter, haven't been as "final" as they would be in the non-magical world. Their images appeared in the Mirror of Erised, and their "echoes" spoke during Harry's fight with Voldy in GoF. While they are truly dead, in the magical world it seems that chances of them having some kind of contact (even if only as a weak echo) is very possible. I don't see why the same type of thing isn't possible with Sirius, even if he is "properly dead". Sharon From spaced_out_space_cadet at hotmail.com Mon Aug 23 02:02:20 2004 From: spaced_out_space_cadet at hotmail.com (spacedoutspacecadet) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 02:02:20 -0000 Subject: The Veil Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110973 Hello All, I'm sure that this has been covered before but I, like many others was horrified by the death of Sirius Black, a character that quickly became a favorite of mine. This is to do with the Veil (again I'm sure someone has pointed this out before, but I'm new so bear with me!) Has anyone considered the fact that both Dumbledore and Percy Weasley have the name Percival, which comes with the meaning to 'peirce the veil', can this mean that they may possibly be able to bring someone back from beyond the veil? Another interesting thought, and I only just picked up on this (i REALLY need to read OotP again!) only Harry and Luna who are close to the veil can hear the voices behind it. Neville is not near them at the time. I thought that it was interesting that only those who had seen death could hear it. Anyway am interested in any thoughts! Spaced Cadet From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Aug 23 06:52:38 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 06:52:38 -0000 Subject: Harry getting to GP by floo / thestrals (was Re: Good Writing) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110974 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tylerswaxlion" wrote: Tyler's Lion: >I've always been struck by the fact that Harry had a magic mirror > tht could have let him talk to Sirius. Yes, it was in his trunk > and he was refusing to open it to protect Sirius, but if he *had* > used it, Sirius wouldn't be dead. > On one hand, it feels to me like bad plotting--he didn't open the > package and Sirius didn't fill him in on the package b/c then Harry > wouldn't have had to use Umbridge's office and wouldn't have talked > to Kreacher. > > On the other, it makes Sirius' loss more painful. It didn't have to > happen, and Harry's mistake in not trusting Sirius is to blame. And > when he tries to contact Sirius after the Veil...that's just heart- > wrenching. Geoff: I have pasted a section of message 73882: ============================================================ --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "threadbareowl" wrote: > Hi everyone, I'm a long-time HP fan, first time poster. After > reading OOP a few times, I had these burning questions and/or > comments - if they are highly repetitive, forgive me. > 1. Sirius gave Harry a mirror to use in case of emergency, and in > an emergency, Harry doesn't use it! Geoff: Two reasons. First, from OOTP Chapter 24 where Harry and the others are leaving to get the Knight Bus: (Sirius) "I want you to take this, he said quietly, thrusting a badly wrapped package ....... into Harry's hands. "What is it?" Harry asked. "A way of letting me know .... No, don't open it in here...."said Sirius ...... "OK", said Harry, stowing the package away ..... but he knew he would never use it .... It would not be he, Harry, who lured Sirius from his place of safety, ie HP didn't want to compromise SB's safety. Second, from the last chapter: Harry ..... noticed a badly wrapped package lying in a corner of it (his trunk). He could not think what it was doing there ..... He realised what it was within seconds. Sirius had given it to him inside the front door of number twelve Grimmauld Place. ie Harry had completely forgotten about it. It had been given at a time when everybody was rushing around in ever decreasing circles getting ready. ======================================================== Harry, as I said, had clean forgotten about it. Sirius gave to mirror to Harry in a rush at the beginning of January. The events leading to Sirius' death occur about six months later. Harry has had a roller coaster time over that period and has been through the wringer emotionally. I see nothing stupid about him not using the mirror - as I said, it was in the bottom of his trunk and hw had just forgotten about it; we all do it from time to time - even in the real world! Geoff Who has just launched his website showing the delights of his home area www.aspectsofexmoor.com From patientx3 at aol.com Mon Aug 23 07:53:51 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 07:53:51 -0000 Subject: Why such a point of characters' birthdays? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110975 Caspen >> if you don't think that "they're picked as randomly as all that, ...," why, and how do you think they are picked? Given the amount of time and attention that other seemingly (to some) trivial details get here (someone posted a whole theory at least involving, if not based upon, Hermione's announced, whether random or not, birthday here, not too long ago), what are we to make, if anything of this latest announcement of Percy's birthday (Happy Birthday Percy, despite your recent flirtations with the dark side, or at least ignorance! Yay!)?<< HunterGreen: She could have come up with the birthdays a long time ago when she originally created the characters, it just never was important enough to mention before. In the case of Hermione and the twins, for example, there has been times in the text of the books that their birthdays are mentioned (Hermione's in PoA and Fred & George's in GoF), which would suggest that she had come up with at least some of the birthdays beforehand. Its not an uncommon thing for authors to come up with all of the information about their important characters, even the information that isn't important (like birthdays and middle names). Including that on the website is just for fun, it has no bearing on anything. From jrodenbach at indemand.com Mon Aug 23 09:16:33 2004 From: jrodenbach at indemand.com (scoobytorch) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 09:16:33 -0000 Subject: Harry/Voldemort fusion theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110976 I think it's safe to say that JKR is familiar with Jung's work. I've haphazardly paging through "Memories, Dreams, Reflections" lately and two of the dreams that Jung describes really jumped out at me. In the first dream he is in a meadow when he notices a hole in the ground with a stone staircase leading down. Hesitantly he descends and finds a doorway at the bottom, covered by a curtain. He pushes aside the curtain to see what is inside. "I saw before me in the dim light a rectangular chamber about thirty feet long. The ceiling was arched and of hewn stone. The floor was laid with flagstones, and in the center a red carpet ran from the entrance to a low platform. One this platform stood a wonderfully rich golden throne. I am not certain, but perhaps a red cushion lay on the seat. It was a magnificent throne, a real king's throne in a fairy tale. Something was standing on it, which I thought at first was a tree trunk twelve to fifteen feet high and about on and a half to two feet thick. It was a huge thing, reaching almost to the ceiling. But it was of a curious composition: it was made of skin and naked flesh, and n top there was something like a rounded head with no face and no hair. On the very top of the head was a single eye, gazing motionlessly upward." p. 13 Jung was terrified of this "thing" and afraid to go to sleep for several nights after the dream. A giant, threatening phallus in an underground stone chamber? Sounds familiar... And another dream, after he had begun to study Alchemy as an adult. "I dreamed once more that my house had a large wing which I had never visited. I resolved to look at it, and finally entered. I came to a big double door. When I opened it, I found myself in a room set up as a laboratory. In front of the window stood a table covered with many glass vessels and all the paraphernalia of a zoological laboratory. This was my father's workroom. However, he was not there. On shelves along the walls stood hundreds of bottles containing every imaginable sort of fish. I was astonished: so now my father was going in for ichthyology!" p. 213 The labratory with glass vessels on the desk, and bottles of fish lining the walls sound like Snape's classroom or office to me. All it needs is some slimy things in jars, instead of fish. "As I stood there and looked around I noticed a curtain which bellied out from time to time, as though a strong wind were blowing." p. 213 He sends a young man into the room behind the curtain to see if a window was open. The young man returned some time later claiming the room was haunted. Then dream Jung himself goes into the room, and discovers that it's his mother's room. His mother had been dead for some time, and in this room she was visited by spirits. The curtain reminds me of The Veil. It's interesting that Jung goes through the curtain and discovers that behind it is a place for visiting with spirits. I'll have to re-read your post when I'm more awake, but I wanted to mention these other Jung connections for now. Julie From spaced_out_space_cadet at hotmail.com Sun Aug 22 23:59:49 2004 From: spaced_out_space_cadet at hotmail.com (spacedoutspacecadet) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 23:59:49 -0000 Subject: Suggestions please: Mysteries In-Reply-To: <904ncf+9afk@eGroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110977 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jim Flanagan" wrote: > More mysteries, minor and major: > > Why did Gringott's Bank release money from Sirius' vault when he was > a hunted fugitive? Shouldn't they have told the MoM what he was up > to? > > Does the money in Gringott's vaults earn interest? > > Where did Snape go and what did he do at the end of GoF? Did he try > to get back into V's good graces, or what? > > Why was Draco alone in the woods after the Quidditch WC? Was he > there with the intention to meet up with Harry, Hermione, and Ron? > Was he actually trying to be helpful when he told Hermione to "keep > that bushy head down"? Ok, am a little nervous, this is the first time that I have posted anything!! But I have a couple of theories about what you wrote, so here goes! With Sirius getting gold from his vault, I know that Crookshanks went for him, but I really don't think that the Goblins would have cared what the MoM would have to say about it. We hear so much about Goblin rebellions and the like, I think they are a bit like Dumbledore, they run their bank in whatever manner they like without regard to the Ministry. With Snape, I don't think that he tried to get back into the good graces of LV, I remember LV saying (and this isn't a quote b/c I don't have my book with me!) that he feared one (Snape) had left him forever and then he told the other 'loyal' death eaters not to worry because he would pay. He also makes a reference to Karkaroff (I know I spelt that wrong!) fleeing when he felt the mark burn. I think that Snape went off to spy in some capacity, he may also be an unregistered animagus, jealousy at James and Sirius would most likely have led him to also accomplish this feat, and he is ofter referred to as an over-sized bat. So that is one idea about that. Draco waiting in the forest could be as innocent as his father telling him to wait out of the way (though he doesn't really seem the type to obey orders such as this but if it came from his father...) I know many many Draco and Hermione shippers were overjoyed at his concern for her, lol. At first I thought it was a coincidence but then the great JKR doesn't really do anything just because... so I'm still not sure about that one. Your other questions have got me thinking, and if I caome up with any other possible answers I will let you know! :) Wow, that wasn't so hard! Hope my first post was ok! :) Space Cadet From lilyp at superig.com.br Mon Aug 23 02:48:01 2004 From: lilyp at superig.com.br (lilypo2007) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 02:48:01 -0000 Subject: Why such a point of characters' birthdays? In-Reply-To: <20040822173214.4228.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110978 Caspen: > > What, for instance, is the point of telling us that today is > > Percy's birthday? Lilyp I think there are some information linked to the birthdays. For instance, now we know that Percy was 17 just a week before going back to Hogwarts to his seventh year there. That's why he couldn't have his apparation exam and had to wait the next summer. The twins were 17 in April and had the whole month of July to prepare for the exam and do it. They were able to apparate before going back to Hogwarts. That means Ron will probably be able to apparate at the beginning of book seven. Harry as well. But Hermione will not, because she will be 17 only on Sept 19th. That also mean Ron will be of age in the end of Hp and the HBP, Harry will be of age only at the beginning of book seven and Ginny will be of age only after the trio leaves Hogwarts. From ctcasares at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 23 03:18:07 2004 From: ctcasares at sbcglobal.net (tylerswaxlion) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 03:18:07 -0000 Subject: Percy's B/day & new FLINT? (was New B-day on JKR's si... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110979 Danielle wrote: >Percy may have been too busy in the previous summer before his 7th > year to take the test because he turned 17 2 weeks before classes started. > Whereas F&G were 17 in April and took the test the summer after before their 7th > year. Perhaps the test is only administered a few times a year--say on the equinoxes and solstices. Percy would have just missed the summer solstice test time, and then he would have been at school and busy preparing for NEWTS. Maybe it's like the bar, and people often fail the test the first time or two. I think it's easy enough to fanwank the birthday and the Apparations test. I just can't wait to see if Percy comes around and apologizes in book 6 or if he's still such a pompous jerk. If there's a new MoM, will Percy be swept out with the old administration? Will Percy stay loyal to Fudge? What kind of relationship, if any, did he have with Umbridge? I bet JKR has even written chapters of the stuff, but never included it b/c it wasn't relevant. But I think she does imagine the "lives" of all her characters, whether or not she publicizes it to anyone else. That's how she knows their middle names and birthdays. TL From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 06:44:34 2004 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 06:44:34 -0000 Subject: The Veil In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110980 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "spacedoutspacecadet" wrote: > I'm sure that this has been covered before but I, like many others > was horrified by the death of Sirius Black, a character that quickly > became a favorite of mine. > > This is to do with the Veil (again I'm sure someone has pointed this > out before, but I'm new so bear with me!) Has anyone considered the > fact that both Dumbledore and Percy Weasley have the name Percival, > which comes with the meaning to 'peirce the veil', can this mean > that they may possibly be able to bring someone back from beyond the > veil? Just to let you know that the "veil" is alluded to in many masonic beliefs/rituals...originally the "veil" is strung across two "stone" wands(the arch) and is symbolic on passing on to the next "step"... (some masonics say the "step" is death...others say, "traveling on to a higher spiritual plane"..most, if not all masonic temples believe traveling through the veil under an arch represents traveling from one sort of being into another). Perhaps it's an existential thing--being of itself/being in itself sort of thing. Some things we may hope Harry and ALL learn from Sirius' death...Harry will no longer stay locked up to the point that he can only make rash decisions--hence OOP members showing up at Kings Cross at the end of OOP...(DD kept Harry "locked up away from Hogwarts...and Umbridge kept him locked IN Hogwarts---neither proved a success...) I hate to say this but one thing Harry learned was that some things are worth dying for.(Harry may blame himself for Sirius' death, but neither he nor DD says it was a death in vain.) We, as readers will probably garner more in this theory based mainly on Neville, but also upon the others who have had losses due to Voldemort and his followers. And the certain thing we can all be sure off...if anything is written in a book about the "veil"...if Hermione ever overcomes her fear of it...we'll be hearing about what she has read about it...AND if we cannot count on Hermione...then we'll have to settle for Luna's information on "the veil" and take it with a grain of salt... Doddie From romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 08:34:07 2004 From: romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com (romuluslupin1) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 08:34:07 -0000 Subject: Why didn't the Longbottoms go into hiding? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110981 > mhbobbin writes: that makes sense that they had a job to do. Except > that at the time LV goes after the Potters he seems to have been > **winning** the war so it also wouldn't be surprising to learn that > ones who feared they specifically might be targeted might not stick > around to find out. LV was picking off OotP members one by one. And > Sirius Black declined to be the Potters' secret keeper because he > himself was planning to go into hiding. I won't let your speaking ill of the dead go unpunished! ;-) As I read it, Sirius didn't turn down the SK job out of cowardice (that's the way it sounds in your post. If you didn't mean that, I apologize), he did it out of cleverness (however ill fated). He was planning to go into hiding as the *official* SK while Peter (who was also going to hide out) and the Potters (who were protected by the SK charm) went on their merry ways. I figured Sirius was planning to go somewhere leaving a trail a mile large for the DE to follow, then trasform into Padfoot in order to mud the trail and then apparate, fly or whatever to Bora Bora (or wherever else he spent the time between POA and GOF). I bet Uncle Alphard left him a summer house in the Tropics or something. Romulus Lupin, always ready to defend poor, maligned Sirius. From romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 08:48:13 2004 From: romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com (romuluslupin1) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 08:48:13 -0000 Subject: James' Invisibility Cloak (was Alastor, and James' money, and godmother/marr In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110982 Romulus Lupin: > > > > > > Ok, things might be different in the Potterverse, > > > but I thought you could only inherit from someone > > > who was dead, right? > > > [But James had the cloak while he was at school, > > > at which time James's father was still alive.] > > Potioncat: > > > > I think JKR used the word inherit as in "passed down." > > Sometimes parents pass down family heirlooms to their > > children while the children can use them, or after > > the parent doesn't really have a need for the heirloom. > > > > Perhaps the Potters are a long line of rule breakers > > and it is family tradition to give the son the IC > > while at school. > Matt: > Or perhaps, as with the snitch in the Pensieve scene, James nicked the > invisibility cloak to use while at school. He could always have > legitimately inherited it later on. Romulus Lupin now. Thanks for your responses. I like Potioncat's explanation (English isn't my first language and sometimes I miss nuances), while I don't think Matt's theory is viable. I mean, you could nick a snitch for a few hours without being caught, but I don't think you can nick an IC for 7 years and get wayay with it. His parents would have noticed the cloak was missing, sooner or later. By the way, is it just me, or did JKR change her mind as to James' position on the team? I always thought that her answer "he was a chaser" was a spur-of-the-moment thing. Then she either thought of the Pensive scene and told Kloves (sp?) James was a seeker, or she liked Kloves' interpretation and dreamed up the pensive scene. Romulus Lupin, trying to catch up with the million posts on this site From romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 09:31:46 2004 From: romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com (romuluslupin1) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 09:31:46 -0000 Subject: An out-there Snape theory? In-Reply-To: <003c01c48705$a400f950$562f0dd4@taxi> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110983 > Remulus Lupin wrote: > >We know there is *one* DE LV (had) killed because he refused to > >follow orders. What if he ordered Reggie to marry a nice, pureblood, > >female DE (or DE relative) and he was zapped. *This* is why Severus > >turned traitor on his former master, that's the story he told DD. He > >loved Regulus, the only one who loved him back, and he died because > >of that love. Regulus became a DE to make Snape happy and this caused > >his death. No wonder Severus wants revenge against LV and his > >henchmen. All in my opinion, of course. > > "Susana da Cunha" wrote: > Actually, I always thought the story Snape told DD involved the death of > someone he loved by the hands of the DE's. But I picture his wife: one of > the old Slytherin gang who joined the DE along with the others but without > real conviction and then tried to back out and was killed. The only canon to > support this is the fact that Snape always wears black. Romulus Lupin: Actually, my Regulus/Severus ship came from someone thinking a Severus/Sirius ship was viable, and I leapt from there. JKR implied nobody would want Severus, and I guess this is for his past as a DE. I know a lot of posters don't think SS could have participated in all DE activities, but I don't agree. I'm sure *all* DE are tested on their willingness to use Unforgivables and participate in Muggle torture even before they're marked. And he bears the mark. That's why I don't think someone would become a DE "without real conviction". Susana de Cuhna > I think your theory is out-there only because if Regulus and Snape's stories > are one and the same then might seem like an isolated case within the DE's. > And I'm sure there were several cases like of the kind. > Romulus Lupin. I never said theirs was a -once-in-a-lifetime occurrence. There may have been a lot of similar cases, we only know about Regulus because he's related to one of the characters. I'm not even saying I really believe in my theory (I actually wrote it as a joke, mostly), but the mnore I think about it, the more I believe it. Romulus Lupin, who usually abstains from Snape's threads because he doesn't like the potion master much From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Aug 23 10:50:37 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 10:50:37 -0000 Subject: James' Invisibility Cloak (was Alastor, and James' money, and godmother/marr In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110984 Potioncat wrote snip > > > Perhaps the Potters are a long line of rule breakers > > > and it is family tradition to give the son the IC > > > while at school. > > > Matt: > > Or perhaps, as with the snitch in the Pensieve scene, James nicked the invisibility cloak to use while at school. He could always have legitimately inherited it later on. > > > Romulus Lupin now. > snip I mean, you could nick a snitch for a few hours without being caught, but I don't think you can nick an IC for 7 years and get wayay with it. His parents would have noticed the cloak was missing, sooner or later. > Potioncat: Actually, I like Matt's idea better. Even if his Dad missed it, what legitmate reason could he have for using it? Can't you see the conversation now? "Son, have you seen my IC?" "Gee, no Dad. What do you need it for? Maybe Mum has it..." Potioncat (just joking folks!) From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Aug 23 11:53:09 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 11:53:09 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110985 Well, I picked a bad week to go on vacation. All sorts of Harry Potter happenings occurred while I was at the "other" Magic Kingdom. I've been fighting a losing battle to catch up on the posts. I've skimmed some and skipped some, but I expected to see more from the Edinburgh Festival. Here are two quotes that caught my eye. Quotes from the Edinburgh Book Festival: Also, will we see more of Snape? You always see a lot of Snape, because he is a gift of a character. I hesitate to say that I love him. [Audience member: I do]. You do? This is a very worrying thing. Are you thinking about Alan Rickman or about Snape? [Laughter]. Isn't this life, though? I make this hero?Harry, obviously?and there he is on the screen, the perfect Harry, because Dan is very much as I imagine Harry, but who does every girl under the age of 15 fall in love with? Tom Felton as Draco Malfoy. Girls, stop going for the bad guy. Go for a nice man in the first place. It took me 35 years to learn that, but I am giving you that nugget free, right now, at the beginning of your love lives. Apart from Harry, Snape is my favourite character because he is so complex and I just love him. Can he see the Thestrals, and if so, why? Also, is he a pure blood wizard? Snape's ancestry is hinted at. He was a Death Eater, so clearly he is no Muggle born, because Muggle borns are not allowed to be Death Eaters, except in rare circumstances. You have some information about his ancestry there. He can see Thestrals, but in my imagination most of the older people at Hogwarts would be able to see them because, obviously, as you go through life you do lose people and understand what death is. But you must not forget that Snape was a Death Eater. He will have seen things that Why do you love him? Why do people love Snape? I do not understand this. Again, it's bad boy syndrome, isn't it? It's very depressing. [Laughter]. One of my best friends watched the film and she said, "You know who's really attractive?" I said, "Who?" She said, "Lucius Malfoy!" End of Quote I suppose I should have snipped a little, but for the first post I thought I'd better leave everything in. Where are all the Snape foes? Where are all the Snape fans? Twice in one interview JKR made a comment about not loving Snape. If she keeps this up I might start to believe her! What do the rest of you think? Are we to take it that he's really a horrible man who is useful in the fight against LV...and nothing more? And she's answered fairly closely a question that came up a while ago, "How involved was he with the Death Eater activities?" Of course it could be argued that she says, "he'll have seen things that " But what I found interesting was the clue about his being a pure blood. I took her answer to mean that he isn't Muggle-born, but that one of his parents might be. (I'd vote for his mother.) Did anyone else read it that way? It could just as easily mean that yes, he is pure blood. But why not just say that? BTW, didn't someone from this group attend this interview (Laura?) Do I recall correctly that she asked the second question I've quoted? I also saw a report on Mugglenet from someone who attended the session. That writer says she asked JKR a question about Ginny and was given an answer. The answer, if this were genuine, would be significant to our devious minds. But I hesitate to take one person's word. Opinions? Potioncat who thinks JKR lost a lot of credibility when she answered "You always see a lot of Snape " ;-) From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 12:32:30 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 12:32:30 -0000 Subject: Suggestions please: Mysteries In-Reply-To: <90474l+3tld@eGroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110986 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve Vander Ark" wrote: > Hey, gang... > > I'm working on updating and upgrading the Mysteries section of the > Lexicon. I'd like to list Top Mysteries, the ones that keep us all > wondering and posting. Neri: JKR had recently added two big mysteries: *Why didn't LV die when the rebounded AK hit him? *Why didn't DD try to kill LV in the MoM battle? The advantage of these mysteries is that they are guaranteed to be original mysteries, of the kind that is solved in the end. My own pet mystery lately was: *Who really pronounces the name "Voldemort" in the books? Pettigrew, Crouch Jr. and Crouch Sr. all pronounce it once, which is very out-of-character. I found some evidence that all three cases are editorial mistakes: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/109098 So I think it is not exactly a mystery but more of an inconsistency. It also stands some chance of being resolved soon, since per your "what's new" from June 19, JKR is sending out revisions to editing and translating teams, and she seems to be advancing towards the end of PoA, where the first of these suspected mistakes occur. Neri From bibphile at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 12:36:16 2004 From: bibphile at yahoo.com (bibphile) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 12:36:16 -0000 Subject: Hagrid's potential off-spring (was re: Hagrid's parents) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110987 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "caspenzoe" wrote: > > > Let's take it a step further: > > > > What do the laws of genetics say about the potential products of a > > Hagrid/Mme Maxime pairing? Assuming that both Hagred and Maxime are > > 1/2 giant, couldn't this produce some purely genetically giant off- > > spring, as well as some purely genetically human off-spring, and/or > > any combination in between? Salit wrote: > The answer may be "None". the product of a horse and donkey's mating > is a mule. While perfectly capable animal otherwise, it is generally > sterile. > True. But Fleur seems to be one quarter Veela. If so then one of her parents must be half-Veela and non-sterile. I guess she could be half-Veela though. bibphile From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Mon Aug 23 13:13:30 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:13:30 -0000 Subject: Percy's B/day & new FLINT? (was New B-day on JKR's site ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110988 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "carolynwhite2" wrote: > In POA (1993/4), Percy is in his 7th and final year and sitting his > NEWTS. In GOF, Ch 6 (1994/5), he had passed his apparition test 'two > weeks ago', which you can't do until you are a WW 'adult', ie 17. > > If he was 17 in the summer of 1995, this means he was born in August > 1977. > For JKR's own dating to work, Harry must have been having his dream > on the night of Friday/Saturday 18/19th August (I'm using the real > dates here, but they are about 2 weeks before the end of the month). > He is then collected by the Weasley's on Sunday 20th August, and they > go to the QWC overnight on Monday/Tuesday 21st/22nd. However, the > 22nd is now supposed to be Percy's birthday - so this dating must be > wrong. The events relating to the QWC have to be taking place on > 22nd+2 weeks, ie 4th/5th September, if the comments about Percy > passing his apparition test 'two weeks ago' are also true. > Carolyn > Exasperated yet again by JKR's maths... The only evidence we have for the cut-off date is that it is somewhere between Ginny's and Angelina's bdays... Aug and Oct? respectively (I need my books back!). I think we are _ALL_ certain that summer birthdays are like Harry's, i.e. you turn 10+x before your xth year. ...this was guessed by another replier, but in fact, this is simply known to be true. So Percy would have turned 17 in the PoA timeframe, and turned 18 sometime around GoF's QWC. So why the delay? Well, we only know 3 newly licensed apparators, and they are all Weasleys... but we still don't know details about training and fees. I can quite _easily_ surmise that Percy had to save up to pay for all or some of his fees, hence waiting until after we was working at the MoM, while the twins were able to dip into Harry's investment (good way to get away from Molly to make preparations and all). This _is_ a little fishy because of the Egyptian trip, but perhaps it's just a household rule; isn't Molly not the biggest fan of apparating? But, given that Percy only had a week before his 7th year to learn and test (and he was too busy writting Penelope probably), it makes sense that he would not accomplish it before school, and therefore put it off until the next summer. Josh From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Mon Aug 23 13:21:05 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:21:05 -0000 Subject: The Veil In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110989 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "spacedoutspacecadet" wrote: > Another interesting thought, and I only just picked up on this (i > REALLY need to read OotP again!) only Harry and Luna who are close > to the veil can hear the voices behind it. Neville is not near them > at the time. I thought that it was interesting that only those who > had seen death could hear it. Well, there's _something_ wrong in your thought, 'cause Neville had seen death remember? His granddad, hence him seeing the thestrals. Neville and Ginny were entranced by the veil, so perhaps they either didn't comment on the voices, or were too far away... or there's something else connecting these various things. Josh From entropymail at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 13:32:52 2004 From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:32:52 -0000 Subject: The Veil In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110990 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "doddiemoemoe" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "spacedoutspacecadet" > wrote: > > I'm sure that this has been covered before but I, like many others > > was horrified by the death of Sirius Black, a character that > quickly became a favorite of mine. > > This is to do with the Veil , can this mean > > that they may possibly be able to bring someone back from beyond the veil? I've believed for quite some time that Sirius is not dead (JKR's tears to the contrary notwithstanding). In fact, I believe that DD was looking for a way to get rid of Sirius for a while, and faking Sirius' death turned out to be a viable option. In fact, you can find lots of good discussion about it under a thread entitled "Faking Sirius's Death?". However, I wasn't quite sure just how the veil worked, and what happened to Sirius after he fell through. But I stumbled over this the other day. It's Hermione musing over how those hats of Fred and George's make heads vanish: "How do those hats work, then?...I mean, obviously it's some kind of Invisibility Spell, but it's rather clever to have extended the field of invisibility beyond the boundaries of the charmed object...I'd imagine the charm wouldn't have a very long life, though..." We all know that JKR rarely has Hermione idly "muse" about things unless they're important. We've always assumed that the veil was genuine, but what if it is just an "incredible simulation"? Through Hermione, JKR seems to have just given us a very plausible explanation of the mechanics behind the veil . It goes a long way towards explaining what happened to Sirius, and why Harry may have heard "Ron's" voice behind it earlier. As I see the scenerio, the Order has recruited Fred and George's little "trick" for the veil, charming it to make anyone behind it disappear for a while. Fred, George, or any of the other Weasleys would have been "invisibled" behind the veil (where ARE those Weaslies anyway? Remember that Harry heard whispering behind the veil, sounding quite a bit like Ron?). They awaited Sirius' big exit. Sirius is hit by a discreet but carefully placed jet of light, surreptitiously sent by an Order member, then overacts his big scene by looking shocked, arching slowly-slowly, then falling through the veil. Ahhh, it's all coming together. :: Entropy :: From quigonginger at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 13:54:12 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:54:12 -0000 Subject: Good Writing (was Why now?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110991 > Del wrote: (snip) > ! My personal pet peeve being that if Harry could get his head at GP, > and if he didn't intend to take his friends with him to the MoM, and > if he was in such a hurry to get to London, then why on Earth didn't > he take *all of himself* to GP, and checked on his own whether Sirius > was there or not ??? (snip the rest) Ginger ponders: Sorry for getting in late on this, but it just popped into my head. I am pretty sure I have read all the posts on this thread, but if anyone else has thought the same, and posted it, please accept my apologies. If I am understanding this correctly, we are wondering why Harry didn't *go* to GP rather than just chat with Kreacher. Well, Hermione planned the chat just to check on Sirius, not as a means of transport. I can see why Harry wouldn't want to go completely into GP just to check and see if Sirius was there. If he had gone in full- body, he wouldn't have known what was going on at Hogwarts. Most importantly, he wouldn't have known if DU was returning to her office. Had he gone in, searched the house, and then returned, he was risking coming back to DU rather than just Hermione (who would have been having a hard time explaining why she was lurking there). And he would have had no way of finding out what the scene in the office was without sticking his head in the fireplace to check first. Had things worked out, (no DU showing up) Harry would have gotten the false info from Kreacher, and then, believing Sirius to be in danger, would have gotten down to the task of figuring out how to get to London. If the fireplace was good for extra-Hogwartian transport (and I am among those who suspect not) then the answer would have been staring them in the face. In summary-I think that they weren't *looking* for a means of getting to London at that moment, merely a means of talking to someone at GP. And if all you intend to do is chat, then best keep your buttocks in the country in which it belongs. Especially if you can hear what is going on at both ends. Ginger, who doesn't mean to imply that Harry can hear through his buttocks. From CariadMel at aol.com Mon Aug 23 13:08:29 2004 From: CariadMel at aol.com (Annette) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:08:29 -0000 Subject: The house points hour-glasses Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110992 The points awarded to Griffindor and Ravenclaw are represented by rubies and sapphires. ( OOTP, UK hardback p. 751)My guess is that he Slytherin hourglass contains emeralds but what precious stones do Hufflepuffs collect? They should be yellow or black, in keeping with the house colours, any guesses? I'm new to the wonderful world of Potterania, please feel free to snort at my ignorance or maybe, be so kind as to pander to my thoughts. Thanx , Nettie From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 13:43:04 2004 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:43:04 -0000 Subject: Is Percy a Spy? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110993 Hello, my second post here... Due to JKR's site congratulating Percy on his Birthday, I've read many comments (not in this site) theorizing that Percy could be a spy for the Order. Forgive me if this has been discussed before, but I run a search and nothing came up. As I said, many people think that Percy is actually spying for the Order of Phoenix. I can see why they think so, it could really be a very smart plot twist. But I can't help seeing too many plot holes with that theory. Let's assume that Percy is in fact working under DD's orders. These are my doubts: 1) Why is he keeping that information secret to the rest of the Order members, including Arthur and Molly? 2) If Molly knows about it, why then did she get soooo upset when Percy returned her sweater? 3) If everybody in the Order knows Percy is a spy, except the 'children', why would Percy write that wretched letter to Ron about Harry? 4) What was the gain/profit of that letter? 5) If Percy is indeed a spy, why didn't he warn DD about them 'visiting' Hogwarts when the DA was discovered? Why didn't he warn DD about the change of time for the trial hearing? (after all, the rest of the Wizengammot whatever members were all there in time, Percy must have known about this change in schedule well in advance to warn DD, yet DD was late, barely made it) 6) If nobody knows he is a spy but DD, why keep it secret when everybody, including the 'children' know about Snape being a spy to Voldemort? I am sure there are more holes there, but for now I'll post these. What do you think? Marcela From ms-tamany at rcn.com Mon Aug 23 14:25:52 2004 From: ms-tamany at rcn.com (Tammy Rizzo) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 10:25:52 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The house points hour-glasses In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4129FE70.1020700@rcn.com> No: HPFGUIDX 110994 Annette wrote: > The points awarded to Griffindor and Ravenclaw are represented by >rubies and sapphires. ( OOTP, UK hardback p. 751)My guess is that he >Slytherin hourglass contains emeralds but what precious stones do >Hufflepuffs collect? They should be yellow or black, in keeping with >the house colours, any guesses? > >I'm new to the wonderful world of Potterania, please feel free to >snort at my ignorance or maybe, be so kind as to pander to my >thoughts. > >Thanx , Nettie > > > Well, my father was a jeweler for a while, so I'm somewhat familiar with precious and semiprecious gemstone colors. Topaz is a yellowish golden-brown, so that might work for Hufflepuff. Citron is a yellowish green, and that might be workable, in contrast with the rubies and sapphires and conjectured emeralds, but I don't think it would quite fit. Jet is jet black, basically faceted coal, but could be used. I know there is a truly yellow gemstone, but the name escapes me right now -- Dad hasn't dabbled in jewelry for about twenty years now. -- *** Tammy Rizzo ms-tamany at rcn.com From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 23 14:38:45 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 10:38:45 -0400 Subject: Percy's B/day & new FLINT? Message-ID: <001a01c4891e$e5a9a120$1e62d1d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 110995 Danielle "Or in the summer of 1994 Percy turned 18, in order for him to have turned 17 in the 4th book he would have graduated school a year early and that means he entered in a year early, which we know not to be true and I don't think that Hogwarts allows people to graduate early no matter how many classes they take in 1 year. Percy may have been too busy in the previous summer before his 7th year to take the test because he turned 17 2 weeks before classes started. Whereas F&G were 17 in April and took the test the summer after before their 7th year." DuffyPoo: This is exactly what I was just going to post. The Aug 22 of GoF was Percy's 18th birthday. He'd waited until then to take the apparition test, as Danielle said, because it was only two weeks until the start of term at Hogwarts after he turned 17. Also, you know Percy, he'd have to make sure he'd get his licence on the first try! ;-) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 14:47:12 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:47:12 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110996 Potioncat wrote: Where are all the Snape foes? Where are all the Snape fans? Twice in one interview JKR made a comment about not loving Snape. If she keeps this up I might start to believe her! What do the rest of you think? Are we to take it that he's really a horrible man who is useful in the fight against LV...and nothing more? And she's answered fairly closely a question that came up a while ago, "How involved was he with the Death Eater activities?" Of course it could be argued that she says, "he'll have seen things that " But what I found interesting was the clue about his being a pure blood. I took her answer to mean that he isn't Muggle-born, but that one of his parents might be. (I'd vote for his mother.) Did anyone else read it that way? It could just as easily mean that yes, he is pure blood. But why not just say that? vmonte responds: I also found her comments about Snape to be very interesting. Have we really been given hints to his ancestry? (I'm going to have to look more carefully.) What story did he give Dumbledore? And did he lie? You think he has a muggle parent like Tom Riddle? Or is he pureblood with vampire ancestry. Maybe he is a decendant of Vlad the Impaler...haha From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Aug 23 14:48:00 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:48:00 -0000 Subject: Is Percy a Spy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110997 Marcela wrote: > Hello, my second post here... > > Due to JKR's site congratulating Percy on his Birthday, I've read > many comments (not in this site) theorizing that Percy could be a > spy for the Order. Forgive me if this has been discussed before, snip Let's assume that Percy is in fact working under > DD's orders. These are my doubts: > > 1) Why is he keeping that information secret to the rest of the > Order members, including Arthur and Molly? Potioncat: DD keeps a lot of things to himself. He might feel it safer not to let Percy's family know, especially since a feeling of animosity would be necessary for Percy's cover at the MoM. Marcela: > 2) If Molly knows about it, why then did she get soooo upset when > Percy returned her sweater? Potioncat: Either she knows and is a good actress, or she doesn't know. Marcela: > 3) If everybody in the Order knows Percy is a spy, except > the 'children', why would Percy write that wretched letter to Ron > about Harry? potioncat: Well, he could have been saying something else in a way that wouldn't give it away if it fell in the wrong hands. But darned if I could figure it out and I was able to read it more than once. And again maybe everyone in the Order doesn't know. Marcela: snip > 5) If Percy is indeed a spy, why didn't he warn DD about > them 'visiting' Hogwarts when the DA was discovered? Why didn't he warn DD about the change of time for the trial hearing? (after all, the rest of the Wizengammot whatever members were all there in time, Percy must have known about this change in schedule well in advance to warn DD, yet DD was late, barely made it) Potioncat: I think it's very possible he did warn him. DD wouldn't have announced it to the Wizards at the Hearing. He may also have known about the "visit" concerning the DA...he certainly seemed to have a plan for it. Marcela: > 6) If nobody knows he is a spy but DD, why keep it secret when > everybody, including the 'children' know about Snape being a spy to Voldemort? Potioncat: Yeah, and I'm sure Snape is thrilled about that one. Perhaps because it's easier for Percy to maintain his cover if the family doesn't know? I don't know if Percy is a spy or if Percy is just finding his way in the great scheme of things. I don't think he is evil. And when he comes around, Arthur and Molly will give him a new robe and kill the fatted calf. Great post, by the way. Potioncat From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 15:05:04 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 15:05:04 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110998 I vmonte wrote: I also found her comments about Snape to be very interesting. Have we really been given hints to his ancestry? (I'm going to have to look more carefully.) What story did he give Dumbledore? And did he lie? You think he has a muggle parent like Tom Riddle? Or is he pureblood with vampire ancestry. Maybe he is a decendant of Vlad the Impaler...haha vmonte again: Oh, by the way, Vlad's father belonged to a society called the "Order of the Dragon." http://hjem.get2net.dk/the_cellar/dracula.htm From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Mon Aug 23 15:07:00 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 15:07:00 -0000 Subject: The house points hour-glasses In-Reply-To: <4129FE70.1020700@rcn.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 110999 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Tammy Rizzo wrote: > Annette: > > The points awarded to Griffindor and Ravenclaw are represented by > > rubies and sapphires. ( OOTP, UK hardback p. 751)My guess is that > > the Slytherin hourglass contains emeralds but what precious > > stones do Hufflepuffs collect? They should be yellow or black, in > > keeping with the house colours, any guesses? > Tammy: > Well, my father was a jeweler for a while, so I'm somewhat familiar > with precious and semiprecious gemstone colors. Topaz is a > yellowish golden-brown, so that might work for Hufflepuff. Citron > is a yellowish green, and that might be workable, in contrast with > the rubies and sapphires and conjectured emeralds, but I don't > think it would quite fit. Jet is jet black, basically faceted > coal, but could be used. I know there is a truly yellow gemstone, > but the name escapes me right now > -- Dad hasn't dabbled in jewelry for about twenty years now. Poking around, the golden or black variation of a sapphire would work, lemon quartz, the honey-yellow variation of dendritic opalite, and amber. However, I'd probably go with topaz, as it's yellow color is the classical color, and it's another birthstone... same as the other 3. Josh From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 15:31:33 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 15:31:33 -0000 Subject: Is Percy a Spy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111000 Marcela wrote : " 3) If everybody in the Order knows Percy is a spy, except the 'children', why would Percy write that wretched letter to Ron about Harry? 4) What was the gain/profit of that letter?" Del replies : For that matter, I can't figure out what was the point of that letter *in any case*. If Percy was trying to send a secret message to the Trio, then he failed miserably (unless Hermione's strange reaction has to do with the fact that she caught something in the letter that the boys missed). If Percy was genuine, then what was the point of the letter ? It didn't tell us anything we didn't know yet or wouldn't learn anyway. The only obvious reason for that letter is to show to the Trio firsthand how far Percy had strayed. And I don't like that reason :-) Del From earendil_fr at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 15:52:05 2004 From: earendil_fr at yahoo.com (earendil_fr) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 15:52:05 -0000 Subject: The house points hour-glasses In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111001 > Nettie wrote: > The points awarded to Griffindor and Ravenclaw are represented by > rubies and sapphires. ( OOTP, UK hardback p. 751)My guess is that he > Slytherin hourglass contains emeralds but what precious stones do > Hufflepuffs collect? They should be yellow or black, in keeping with > the house colours, any guesses? Earendil: Just wanted to point out that emeralds for Slytherin hourglass isn't speculation, it's correct and mentioned once in OotP. I'm at work at the moment so I can't give any page number, but I'm quite certain of it since I came across it a couple of days ago during a reread. It's mentioned when HP discovers that Draco (as a member of the Inquisitorial Squad) was given the right to take House points from fellow students: he sees stones going up the Gryffindor hourglass while the Slytherin hourglass gets fuller and fuller of emeralds. As for the Hufflepuff stones, my first thought would be topaz, like some others mentioned. Earendil. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 16:03:02 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 16:03:02 -0000 Subject: Gilderoy lockhart - JKR's ex??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111002 Salit wrote : " I think there is a strong possibility that the character was based on none other than her ex-husband." Del replies : I just came accross that page : http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/uk/newsid_3591000/3591652.stm in CBBC Newsround, where JKR categorically refutes this specific claim. Sorry. Del From HPGroup at colinogilvie.co.uk Mon Aug 23 16:12:49 2004 From: HPGroup at colinogilvie.co.uk (Colin O) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 17:12:49 +0100 Subject: Book 6 Title Message-ID: <412A1781.50406@colinogilvie.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 111003 According to "The Leaky Cauldron" the title for Book 6 is "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince" not "Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince" as per the use of half-blood in the books. -- Regards, Colin From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 16:17:33 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 16:17:33 -0000 Subject: harry after school In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111004 psychmonky wrote: " my theory is that Harry doesn't die at the end but instead goes on to teach Defense Against the Dark Arts." Del replies : Sorry, but JKR said that someone in Harry's class would indeed go on to become a teacher, but that it was neither Harry nor who-we-would-think (Hermione ?) Del From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Aug 23 16:24:50 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 16:24:50 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111005 vmonte: > You think he has a muggle parent like Tom Riddle? Or is he pureblood > with vampire ancestry. Maybe he is a decendant of Vlad the > Impaler...haha > Potioncat: Well, I was thinking perhaps his mother was a muggle-born witch, and his father a Pure-blood. But who knows? > vmonte again: > > Oh, by the way, Vlad's father belonged to a society called the "Order > of the Dragon." > > http://hjem.get2net.dk/the_cellar/dracula.htm Potioncat: I'm really sorry I read that... Gulp. But anyway, Vlad sounds more like Draco than Severus. Potioncat :-) From mnaperrone at aol.com Mon Aug 23 16:32:42 2004 From: mnaperrone at aol.com (mnaper2001) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 16:32:42 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111006 Potioncat: > I suppose I should have snipped a little, but for the first post I > thought I'd better leave everything in. > > Where are all the Snape foes? Where are all the Snape fans? Twice > in one interview JKR made a comment about not loving Snape. If she > keeps this up I might start to believe her! What do the rest of you > think? Are we to take it that he's really a horrible man who is > useful in the fight against LV...and nothing more? Ally: I'm not sure. Given her references to girl's having crushes on Tom Felton and a friend thinking Lucius was hot, I think what she's responding to is the sort of romantic crush many fans have for Snape - those who think Snape will turn out to have a heart of gold and everything nasty he does is just a front to keep up his cover. As someone who loves Snape but sees him as inherently mean and doesn't want to date him (now Alan Rickman, that's another story), I was a little put off by these comments. I love the idea of a petty, nasty guy fighting for the side of the good (especially when he gets such great lines) and would be disappointed if she was trying to tell us Snape is going to end up doing something bad. But I really do suspect she just wants to remind folks he's not a cream puff at heart as opposed to suggesting that he's going to do something evil. He's complex and he's great. If she's going to have it turn out that he was a bad guy all along, how could she say in the same breath that he's a "gift of a character?" To me, he's much less of a gift and much less interesting if he's a villian. Potioncat: > But what I found interesting was the clue about his being a pure > blood. I took her answer to mean that he isn't Muggle-born, but > that one of his parents might be. (I'd vote for his mother.) Did > anyone else read it that way? It could just as easily mean that > yes, he is pure blood. But why not just say that? Ally: I would bet on this. It was suspicious that she only ruled him out as a muggle-born. I could see him being a half blood. It would make sense that he had some connection to muggle world given his use of the muggle logic puzzle. (but then I thought Tom Riddle was the HBP, so what do I know?) What I also thought was a clue was her quote "Snape WAS a death eater." (my emphasis) To me, this reaffirms his current allegiances to DD. From Kadoo96801 at aol.com Mon Aug 23 17:05:04 2004 From: Kadoo96801 at aol.com (Kadoo96801 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:05:04 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Digest Number 5136 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111007 Tammy Rizzo says: > I know there is a truly yellow gemstone, but the name escapes me right now > Does anyone know the birhtstone of Novemeber? Thats very yellow, is it Amethest i think? Hufflepuffs main color is definately yellow, because don't slytherins share black with them as the color? I doubt the Hufflepuffs, with the very Jolly Fat Friar and Prof Sprout, would take pride in the dark and scary black jewels.... just a thought, PoPo [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 17:41:13 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 17:41:13 -0000 Subject: Gilderoy lockhart - JKR's ex??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111008 Salit wrote: I think there is a strong possibility that the character was based on none other than her ex-husband." Del replies : I just came accross that page : http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/uk/newsid_3591000/3591652.stm in CBBC Newsround, where JKR categorically refutes this specific claim. Sorry. Hi Del, How strange that this article has today's date on it? Did someone read Salit's post? Are their journalists that belong to the HPFGU's group? Vivian :) From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Aug 23 18:34:38 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 18:34:38 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111009 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > > Where are all the Snape foes? Where are all the Snape fans? Twice in one interview JKR made a comment about not loving Snape. If she keeps this up I might start to believe her! What do the rest of you think? Are we to take it that he's really a horrible man who is useful in the fight against LV...and nothing more? > I think she's teasing her sophisticated fans, while being a little bit worried about the naive ones. I think she understands perfectly well that fear, especially make-believe fear, can be an aphrodisiac, but she also knows that it's far better to have a loving RL relationship with a gentleman of sterling character while daydreaming a bad-boy fantasy or two, than the other way around. Pippin From erinellii at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 19:03:26 2004 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (Erin) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 19:03:26 -0000 Subject: November birthstone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111010 Kadoo96801 at a... wrote: > > Does anyone know the birhtstone of Novemeber? Thats very yellow, is it Amethest i think? Hufflepuffs main color is definately yellow, because don't slytherins share black with them as the color? Erin: It's topaz. Hufflepuff colors are yellow and black. Slytherin's are green and silver. --Erin From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Aug 23 19:17:00 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 19:17:00 -0000 Subject: Good Writing (was Why now?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111011 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "quigonginger" wrote: > > Del wrote: > (snip) > > ! My personal pet peeve being that if Harry could get his head at GP, and if he didn't intend to take his friends with him to the MoM, and if he was in such a hurry to get to London, then why on Earth didn't he take *all of himself* to GP, and checked on his own whether Sirius was there or not ??? (snip the rest) > > Ginger ponders: I can see why Harry wouldn't want to go completely into GP just to check and see if Sirius was there. < Especially because Harry hates floo travel. This is the reason that working the reason floo travel isn't used to get to and from Hogwarts into the story would be awkward for me. Harry just isn't going to ask someone, "Why don't we floo?" The question would have to be given to another character. I always find it a little jarring when Harry pays attention to a conversation which tells him things he's never been curious about, like how to pronounce Hermione or why she isn't in Ravenclaw. I appreciate the information, but it takes me out of the story a little. But nobody ever thinks of leaving Hogwarts by floo...Fudge doesn't even suspect it when Dumbledore vanishes from his office via Phoenix nor does Voldemort consider it as a means of kidnapping Harry in GoF. I think the fireplaces at Hogwarts have enough magic in them to know they shouldn't allow people to use them for transport off campus. We've heard often enough how strongly Hogwarts is protected. It just doesn't make sense to me that the floo network would be ignored. Dumbledore, and only Dumbledore, is able to floo into his office fireplace from Outside, as far as we've seen. Likewise there's a whole lot of to-ing and fro-ing from GP, via foot travel, Knight bus, and broomstick, but nobody uses the floo network, even to go to St Mungo's. Harry doesn't know what security devices are on the fires at GP, he doesn't know whether it's even possible to floo out of Hogwarts. It's not a good time to experiment--what if he splinched? Sirius using the fires is a special case because he is in correspondence with Dumbledore. If students could ordinarily use the fires to communicate with people, they'd be doing it constantly, trying to get money and treats from home and talking to their friends off campus or in other Houses. Would Narcissa bother to send treats to Draco by owl if she could just pass them through the fire? Should we be expecting an invasion of DE parents via the Gryffindor fire? Sirius certainly wouldn't have had to try to slash his way through the Fat Lady or have Crookie steal the passwords for him if he could have flooed into the Gryffindor Common Room. As for Amos Diggory, he's a neighbor of the Weasleys as well as a colleague of Arthur's. It's perfectly logical that whatever security there is on fireplaces would allow him to drop in, just as I know the gate codes to my friends' houses. Pippin From pt4ever at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 19:21:49 2004 From: pt4ever at yahoo.com (JoAnna) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 19:21:49 -0000 Subject: November birthstone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111012 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Erin" wrote: > Kadoo96801 at a... wrote: > > > Does anyone know the birhtstone of Novemeber? Thats very yellow, > is it Amethest i think? Hufflepuffs main color is definately yellow, > because don't slytherins share black with them as the color? > > > Erin: > It's topaz. Hufflepuff colors are yellow and black. Slytherin's are > green and silver. > > --Erin JoAnna: Topaz is more orange than yellow, however. Topaz is my birthstone (my b-day is November 3) so I have a lot of topaz jewelry. Granted, since I'm not swimming in Galleons, all my topaz jewelry is cubic zirconia. I have no idea if a "true" topaz is more yellow than orange, but I'd imagine they look similar. Despite the fact that it's not a "true" yellow, I could see it being the stone for Hufflepuff's hourglass, since there are no truly yellow gemstones. What about yellow diamonds? IIRC, there is such a thing. Or what about onyx? I don't know if it can be considered a gemstone, but since the Hufflepuff colors are yellow and *black*... it's a possibility, anyway. - JoAnna From jlawlor at gmail.com Mon Aug 23 19:26:44 2004 From: jlawlor at gmail.com (James Lawlor) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:26:44 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why such a point of characters' birthdays? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <96773c880408231226360e1903@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111013 Caspen: > So, basically, you and James think that she's just picking birthdays > at random to satisfy and/or manipulate her fans? James: Well, I wouldn't say manipulate, but satisfy, perhaps. I guess another way to put it would be she doesn't necessarily think it's important to tell us, but she likes to anyway. It certainly wouldn't surprise me if she did put thought into picking the birthdays - lining them up with astrological signs and character traits and such, but it's not something I would think of as important. We know Harry's birthday is important to the plot, and Neville's as well. Aside from that, I can't imagine that any others are crucial. The birthdays of Harry, Ron, Hermione, and maybe Neville, Luna, and Ginny will probably have some effect on the storyline in regards to apparation licenses and coming of age (as mentioned elsewhere in the thread), but aside from that, I'd say just for fun. - James Lawlor jlawlor at gmail.com From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Mon Aug 23 19:30:15 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 19:30:15 -0000 Subject: Percy's B/day & new FLINT? In-Reply-To: <001a01c4891e$e5a9a120$1e62d1d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111014 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: Danielle "Or in the summer of 1994 Percy turned 18, in order for him to have turned 17 in the 4th book he would have graduated school a year early and that means he entered in a year early, which we know not to be true and I don't think that Hogwarts allows people to graduate early no matter how many classes they take in 1 year. DuffyPoo: This is exactly what I was just going to post. The Aug 22 of GoF was Percy's 18th birthday. He'd waited until then to take the apparition test, as Danielle said, because it was only two weeks until the start of term at Hogwarts after he turned 17. Carolyn: Ok, I accept the only way to make sense of the apparition business is that Percy is 18 in the summer of 1994 instead of 17, as I originally suggested in my post: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110906 However, I still have little faith in JKR's maths. Would you agree that a fortnight has 14 days, for instance, even in the WW? The opening chapter of GOF Ch 2 opens on a Saturday morning, with Harry trying to remember his dream about Voldemort. It states quite clearly 'there was still a fortnight to go before he went back to school'. In Ch 3, Mrs Weasley invites him for 'the rest of the summer holidays', and at the opening of Ch 4, it is reiterated that he was 'counting the days down to September the first'. So this means that the action in Ch 2 starts on the 18th August? Erm, no... The events that are then narrated only take up 9 days, and mysteriously omit to mention Percy's birthday, as follows: Saturday 23rd Harry wakes up remembering his dream, writes to Sirius, receives Weasley invite. Sunday 24th Harry is collected by Weasleys via fireplace Monday/Tuesday 25th/26th Harry goes with Weasleys to QWC Wednesday 27th- Sunday 31st Trouble at Ministry - 'neither Mr Weasley or Percy was at home much over the following week' (Ch 10); Mrs Weasley says 'Your father hasn't had to go into the office at weekends since the days of You- Know-Who'. Sunday 31st They are described as getting their things together 'the Sunday evening before they were due to return to Hogwarts'. Monday, 1st September They leave for the Hogwarts Express See what I mean? Harry doesn't have a fortnight to go before getting back to Hogwarts, in fact, it is only a week. If, on the other hand, you want to argue he stays at the Weasley's longer than that, you get stuck on the birthday issue. As far as I know, there are only 10 days between the date of Percy's supposed birthday on the 22nd August and 31st August. If Harry had been with them a fortnight, they would have had to have mentioned celebrating Percy's birthday sometime between Harry joining them and leaving for school, wouldn't they? Too good an opportunity for Percy jokes to ignore, surely? One can only speculate hopefully on the present the twins might have given him for his 18th birthday. As it is, we have to go along with the fact that Percy's birthday was apparently on the Friday before Harry joined them, and no one bothered to mention this fact, although there was time to have a joke about Percy passing his apparition test two weeks before. Sorry, something's been fixed up here. Either a slip up in her elapsed time covering the time Harry was at the Weasleys, or a mistake about when you are allowed to take your apparition test, or a mistake over Percy's birthday/age. Take your pick. Carolyn From suedepatch at hotmail.com Mon Aug 23 15:09:52 2004 From: suedepatch at hotmail.com (danni_yetman) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 15:09:52 -0000 Subject: harry after school In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111015 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "psychmonky" wrote: > Forgive me if this has already been discussed, but my theory is that > Harry doesn't die at the end but instead goes on to teach Defense > Against the Dark Arts. Why else would JKR put such an emphasis on > there being a different teacher every year? We know he's good at the > subject and after OoP he has experience teaching it. We also know > that either he or Voldy must die and who better to teach the subject > than the person who got rid of the worst wizard for a century? > > "psychmonky" I like that idea, but I believe I read in an interview (or perhaps this is hearsay...you can tell anymore!) that JKR said one of the characters would go on to teach at Hogwarts, but that it wouldn't be Harry, and I also think that she said it wouldn't be Ron or Hermione either. If I was to hazard a guess I would say Neville. What do you think? Danni From adragh at bcpl.net Mon Aug 23 15:35:36 2004 From: adragh at bcpl.net (adragh) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 15:35:36 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111016 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > I suppose I should have snipped a little, but for the first post I > thought I'd better leave everything in. > > Where are all the Snape foes? Where are all the Snape fans? Twice > in one interview JKR made a comment about not loving Snape. If she > keeps this up I might start to believe her! What do the rest of you > think? > Snape fan here. He's is a wonderfully complex character, but if he were real he'd not be a very good life partner. On the other hand, fiction, by its very definition, is not real. I think a lot of fans who get carried away by 'bad boys' do so with the fantasy that they themselves would be the catalyst to changing their object of lust. It's fantasy all around. > >Are we to take it that he's really a horrible man who is > useful in the fight against LV...and nothing more? I don't think any of her characters are mere 'throwaways.' And in particular Snape is far too well developed to be anything definable as 'nothing more than.' > > But what I found interesting was the clue about his being a pure > blood. I took her answer to mean that he isn't Muggle-born, but > that one of his parents might be. (I'd vote for his mother.) Did > anyone else read it that way? It could just as easily mean that > yes, he is pure blood. But why not just say that? > So Snape as the HBP? ;) > > Potioncat who thinks JKR lost a lot of credibility when she > answered "You always see a lot of Snape " ;-) 'Them's fightin' words, varmint!' (to quote Yosemite Sam). I always want to see more Snape. But beyond that, I have to wonder how the author can lose credibility when it's her work and she's damn good at it too! PCV From snapesangel2002 at yahoo.co.uk Mon Aug 23 16:25:16 2004 From: snapesangel2002 at yahoo.co.uk (laura) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 16:25:16 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111017 Potioncat wrote: > And she's answered fairly closely a question that came up a while > ago, "How involved was he with the Death Eater activities?" > Of course it could be argued that she says, "he'll have seen > things that " How I wish she'd finished that sentence! Someone ask her that if they get the chance...exactly what has Snape *seen* as a DE? I had a feeling Snape could see Thestrals, and from the interview I think we can assume it was because of what he's seen as a DE. If so, the death (s) Snape has witnessed must have been murder, no accident or natural death. So whose murder has he seen? Muggles'? Relatives of magical characters we know? The Prewetts for example, or Regulus Black, or even the Potters? What do you think? Potioncat again: > But what I found interesting was the clue about his being a pure > blood. I took her answer to mean that he isn't Muggle-born, but > that one of his parents might be. (I'd vote for his mother.) Did > anyone else read it that way? It could just as easily mean that > yes, he is pure blood. But why not just say that? I always imagined Snape to be from a long line of pure-blood wizards, mainly because 1) He's head of Slytherin, 2) He was a DE, and 3) He always dresses in traditional wizards' robes. But when it was revealed that Voldemort himself was a half-blood, it made me wonder about the other DE's and their 'purity' of blood. It wasn't until OotP though, when we see the Black family tapestry that I began to doubt my first assumption of Snape's ancestry. If Snape was a 'pure- blood', then surely his name would have leapt out at Harry from the tapestry, along with the Malfoys and the Lestranges. I find it *very* interesting that JK didn't answer fully about Snape's ancestry. To be honest, I expected her to say "yes, he's a pure-blood" and that would be the end of it. Instead we're told his ancestry 'is hinted at', and that he's 'clearly no muggle-born'. It could be just me looking too much into this, but I normally take a non- or half-answer from JK to mean that it's important to the plot, and will be revealed later on. At the moment I'm convinced Snape's a half-blood, that is, one magical and one non-magical parent. But why this could be important I haven't figured out yet...something to do with why he joined or left the DE's perhaps? Also interesting was the bit about muggle-borns allowed to be DE's only in exceptional circumstances....I'll bet anything Peter Pettigrew is muggle-born, the exceptional circumstance being that he could hand LV the Potters. > BTW, didn't someone from this group attend this interview (Laura?) > Do I recall correctly that she asked the second question I've > quoted? Yep...it was me ;) I had great difficulty choosing those questions. I knew I was going to ask something about Snape, but then I knew it was pointless asking something really juicy like "Where exactly did Snape go in GoF when DD said 'you know what I must ask you to do....'" or "Precisely how does Snape find out what LV is saying to his DE's?". I really thought I'd get straight answers to the questions I finally chose, they didn't seem that important to the plot and I was just curious. Now they've got me thinking hard..... > Potioncat who thinks JKR lost a lot of credibility when she answered "You > always see a lot of Snape " ;-) Hear hear! Laura* From griffin782002 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 17:37:08 2004 From: griffin782002 at yahoo.com (sp. sot.) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 10:37:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Digest Number 5136 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040823173708.32567.qmail@web90009.mail.scd.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111018 > Kadoo96801 at aol.com wrote: > Does anyone know the birhtstone of Novemeber? Thats very yellow, is it > amethyst I think? Hufflepuffs main color is definately yellow, because don't > Slytherins share black with them as the color? I doubt the Hufflepuffs, > with the very Jolly Fat Friar and Prof Sprout, would take pride in the dark > and scary black jewels.... > just a thought, > PoPo Griffin782002: Erm...amethyst is purple. It has no relation to any of colours that Hogwarts houses have. And the Slytherin colours are green and silver, only Hufflepuff has black. Yellow is one of the typical topaz colours. Griffin782002 From musicofsilence at hotmail.com Mon Aug 23 20:51:43 2004 From: musicofsilence at hotmail.com (lifeavantgarde) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 20:51:43 -0000 Subject: The house points hour-glasses In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111019 >>>>Nettie wrote: The points awarded to Griffindor and Ravenclaw are represented by rubies and sapphires. ( OOTP, UK hardback p. 751)My guess is that he Slytherin hourglass contains emeralds but what precious stones do Hufflepuffs collect? They should be yellow or black, in keeping with the house colours, any guesses?<<<< >>>Earendil: Just wanted to point out that emeralds for Slytherin hourglass isn't speculation, it's correct and mentioned once in OotP. I'm at work at the moment so I can't give any page number, but I'm quite certain of it since I came across it a couple of days ago during a reread.<<< Stefanie: Quite right, Earendil: "Even as they watched, stones flew upwards, reducing the amounts in the lower bulbs. In fact, the only glass that seemed unchanged was the emerald-filled one of Slytherin." (OotP 28 [Apologies for not having a page number...I'm looking at a PDF of the book. It's right at the beginning]) Also, this thread spurred me to look a bit into the folklore of the stones used. The lore on gemstones out there is muddled, but I've seen Topaz associated on more than one site with fidelity as well as giving the wearer the ability to become invisible in an emergency. Emeralds are associated with providing the wearer with success as well as endowing certain clairvoyant properties. It is allso associated with rebirth. Sapphires seem to be prized by priests and monks and the like as they are fabled to encourage clarity of mind. Ruby legend states that the gem can be used to warn the wearer of danger (if the stone darkens, the wearer's life is rumored to be threatened) Now, of all the legends, Sapphires seemed to be most congruent with the house it is assigned to. If Hufflepuff is in fact topaz, the attribute of symbolizing fidelity carries strains of the house's reputation for loyalty. What of emeralds and rubies? Could the rubies in Gryffindor's Sword carry these mystical powers (perhaps aiding Harry later on?) Will a Slytherin show a penchant for true Seerdom? Is all of this mythical hogwash? Any one else have any other legends to add to the mix? Stefanie Who had the mad desire to become a gemologist when she was an ickle Kindergartener From bamf505 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 20:54:17 2004 From: bamf505 at yahoo.com (Metylda) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:54:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Book 6 Title In-Reply-To: <412A1781.50406@colinogilvie.co.uk> Message-ID: <20040823205417.41547.qmail@web12303.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111020 --- Colin O wrote: > According to "The Leaky Cauldron" the title for Book > 6 is "Harry Potter > and the Half-Blood Prince" not "Harry Potter and the > Half Blood Prince" > as per the use of half-blood in the books. > > -- > Regards, > > Colin My problem with that thinking, is that Jo posted it to the website without the hyphens. So, until JKR posts that it should be 'Half-Blood' instead of 'Half Blood', I'll use it without the hyphen. Ta! bamf ===== "Why, you speak treason!" -Maid Marian "Fluently!" -Robin Hood -The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) Cub fans are not normal. _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Aug 23 20:57:15 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 20:57:15 -0000 Subject: Marrietta's betrayal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111021 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "carodave92" wrote: > But it is interesting that she continued to attend meetings throughout the year...especially when it seemed to present such a moral dilemma to her...< If people can stand to hear just a little more about this, I think it's also interesting that the curse didn't activate at once. You'd think, if Marietta had spoken to Umbridge with the intention of selling out her friends, that it would have. Here's the canon: [Umbridge speaking] "...Miss Edgecomb here came to my office shortly after dinner this evening and told me she had something she wanted to tell me. She said that if I proceeded to a secret room known as the Room of Requirement, I would find out something to my advantage. I questioned her a little further, and she admitted that there was to be some kind of meeting there. Unfortunately, at that point this hex," she waved impatiently at Marietta's concealed face, "came into operation and upon catching sight of her face in my mirror the girl became too distressed to continue." I believe someone has already pointed out that Umbridge's method of questioning Marietta "a little further" was unlikely to have been benign. We've seen that Umbridge resorts to coercion very quickly. You have to wonder if that's where the rest of Snape's fake veritaserum went, and if Shacklebolt didn't zap Marietta's memory to keep that from being discovered as well. But I think it's also noteworthy that the hex doesn't come into operation as soon as Marietta starts telling Umbridge about the Room of Requirement. What if that's because at that point Marietta didn't have any intention of betraying her friends? Maybe she hoped that if Umbridge started watching the room, the DA would have to call off the meetings, at least until they found a safer place to meet? I can see where the publication of the Quibbler story and Cho's date with Harry could have put Marietta in a horrible position. After all, Marietta's mum probably knows who Marietta's best friend is, and Cho and Harry didn't make a secret of their date. We've also seen that gossip about Harry's love life is of interest even to adults. If the word got back to Madame Edgecomb, I can see her forcing her daughter to promise her that she isn't having anything to do with that Potter boy, on pain of being forbidden to associate with Cho. And I can see Cho not being above a little emotional blackmail herself and telling Marietta that if she won't support Harry, then she, Cho, won't want to be friends anymore. Now Marietta's having to lie to her mum, and she's in danger of losing her best friend too. If only the DA weren't meeting! Well, they won't be able to meet if they lose their hiding place, will they? Marietta probably didn't count on being interrogated further. She could have planned to warn her friends before Umbridge caught them without, of course, giving herself away as the informant. But Hermione's jinx made that impossible. Pippin From mochajava13 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 21:04:43 2004 From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 21:04:43 -0000 Subject: Why now? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111022 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith wrote: > JKR seems to be giving us a lot of information and hints lately. > > I wonder why? > > Why now, when the sixth book is approaching completion? > Kneasy I think you just answered your own question. Book six is probably very close to completion, so she has more time to do other things, such as promote the new book. Honestly, she really hasn't disclosed anything new. We now know Ginny's full name and that we'll see a new minister at some point in the series (which could be at the very end of book seven). We know the name of book six and we've got about one sentence of character description. That's not a lot of information! I think she's getting ready to send book six off to the editors, probably within the next couple of months. Sarah From mochajava13 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 21:19:30 2004 From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 21:19:30 -0000 Subject: Marrietta's betrayal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111023 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > If people can stand to hear just a little more about this, I think > it's also interesting that the curse didn't activate at once. You'd > think, if Marietta had spoken to Umbridge with the intention of > selling out her friends, that it would have. > I believe someone has already pointed out that Umbridge's > method of questioning Marietta "a little further" was unlikely to > have been benign. > But I think it's also noteworthy that the hex doesn't come into > operation as soon as Marietta starts telling Umbridge about the > Room of Requirement. What if that's because at that point > Marietta didn't have any intention of betraying her friends? Maybe > she hoped that if Umbridge started watching the room, the DA > would have to call off the meetings, at least until they found a > safer place to meet? > > I can see where the publication of the Quibbler story and Cho's > date with Harry could have put Marietta in a horrible position. > After all, Marietta's mum probably knows who Marietta's best > friend is, and Cho and Harry didn't make a secret of their date. If the word got back to Madame Edgecomb, I can > see her forcing her daughter to promise her that she isn't having > anything to do with that Potter boy, on pain of being forbidden to > associate with Cho. And I can see Cho not being above a little > emotional blackmail herself and telling Marietta that if she won't > support Harry, then she, Cho, won't want to be friends anymore. > Pippin Wow, that's a lot of supposition here! First off, who knows if Marietta ever told her mother anything? And even if Marietta's parents told Marietta to not associate with Cho, so what? Marietta's away at boarding school. There's not much her parents can do to force her to stop being friends with Cho. We don't even know if Marietta told anyone. All we know is that Marietta went to tell Umbridge something. Marietta didn't notice the spots until she said that there's a secret group, but the curse might have set in earlier. Plus, we only know that Marietta and Cho are good friends at school, who knows if Marietta tells her parents anything about her friendships at school. Also, we don't know exactly what the conditions of the curse were. Seamus wasn't at the first meeting, but he was at the last one. Someone had to have told him about the meetings, and no one else had spots on their face. So what set off the curse? Telling Umbridge or telling any authority figure? My biggest problem with Marietta's betrayal is that she could have, and should have, told someone else besides Umbridge. The normal protocol at Hogwarts is to go first to the Head of House, who will then deal with the situation and bring the student to the Headmaster if necessary. And Dumbledore was headmaster at the time. But there's no indication that Marietta told Flitwick about the group. If Marietta told Umbridge out of some type of concern or coersion, she should have gone to Flitwick first. In my opinion, the fact that Marietta told Umbridge, not Flitwick or even Dumbledore, points to Marietta tattling out of spite. Sarah From snow15145 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 21:23:53 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 21:23:53 -0000 Subject: The house points hour-glasses In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111024 In reading the posts on the gems for each Hogwarts house, I decided to look up colored gems and stumbled upon the following site, http://www.enchantedencounters.com/colors.htm, which gives descriptions of each color as if it were a person's personality. Very interesting if you look up the house colors (links at the bottom of main page), they somewhat depict the students of each house. This short story on the main page, author unknown, sounded to me like the four founders when they began to fight over whom to teach: Once upon a time the colors of the world started to quarrel: all claimed that they were the best, the most important, the most useful, the favorite. GREEN said: "Clearly I am the most important. I am the sign of life and of hope. I was chosen for grass, leaves, trees--without me, all animals would die. Look out over the countryside and you will see that I am in the majority." BLUE interrupted: "You only think about the Earth, but consider the sky and sea. It is the water that is the basis of life and drawn up by the clouds from the deep sea. The sky gives space and peace and serenity. Without my peace, you would all be nothing." YELLOW chuckled:"You are all so serious. I bring laughter, gaiety, and warmth to the world. The sun is yellow, the moon is yellow, the stars are yellow. Every time you look at a sunflower, the whole world starts to smile. Without me, there would be no fun." ORANGE started next to blow her temper. "I am the color of health and strength. I may be scarce but I am precious for I serve the needs of human life. I carry the most important vitamins. Think of carrots, pumpkins, oranges, mangos, and pawpaws. I don't hang around all the time, but when I fill the sky at sunrise or sunset, my beauty is so striking that no one gives another thought to any of you". RED could stand it no longer. He shouted out: "I am the ruler of all of you! I am blood! Lifes blood! I am the color of danger and of bravery. I am willing to fight for a cause. I bring fire to the blood! I am the color of passion and of love, the red rose, the poppy and the poinsettia. Without me, the earth would be as empty as the moon!" PURPLE rose up to his full height. He was very tall and spoke with great pomp: "I am the color of royalty and power. Kings, chiefs, and bishops have always chosen me for I am a sign of authority and wisdom. People do not question me, they listen and obey". Finally, INDIGO spoke, much more quietly than all the others, but with just as much determination: "Think of me. I am the color of silence. You hardly notice me, but without me you all become superficial. I represent thought and reflection, twilight and deep water. You need me for balance and contrast, for prayer and inner peace." And so all the colors went on boasting and quarreling, each convinced of their own superiority. Soon, their quarreling became louder and louder. Suddenly there was a startling flash of bright lightening! Thunder rolled and boomed! Rain started to pour down relentlessly. The colors crouched down in fear drawing close to one another for comfort. In the midst of the clamor, RAIN began to speak: "You foolish colors, fighting amongst yourselves, each trying to dominate the rest. Don't you know you were each made for a special purpose, unique and different? Join hands with one another and come to me." Doing as they were told, the colors united and joined hands. The rain continued: "From now on, when it rains, each of you will stretch across the sky in a great bow of colors as a reminder that you can all live in peace. The rainbow is a sign of hope for tomorrow". And so, whenever a good rain washes the world, and a rainbow appears in the sky, let us remember to appreciate one another. ~*~ Author Unknown ~~~Based on a Native American Legend~~~ Sounds like the school houses have to come together to unite wait we already knew that from the sorting hat's new song. JKR uses a lot of color descriptions throughout her books and this site gives an awful lot of magical properties for each color along with which gems represent each color. Check it out! Snow From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 23 21:48:24 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 17:48:24 -0400 Subject: Is Percy a Spy? Message-ID: <002401c4895a$eac111c0$4f62d1d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 111025 Marcela: "I am sure there are more holes there, but for now I'll post these. What do you think?" DuffyPoo: Percy is not in the Order so he would have a hard time being a spy for them. He can't even be spying 'on' the Order as he has no contact whatever with his family, or anyone close to DD (as of the end of OotP). As he was working directly for Fudge it's doubtful he had much contact with either Tonks or Kingsley. JMO What direction his life is going to take in the next two books is anyone's guess -- well except JKR. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 21:50:26 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 21:50:26 -0000 Subject: Marrietta's betrayal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111026 Sarah wrote : "Wow, that's a lot of supposition here!" Del replies : Yes it is, but just because it's not as simple as "Marrietta told because she's a bad girl" or "Marrietta had no reason to tell so she shouldn't have" doesn't make it untrue. In RL, things are rarely simple. And quite often even less so in the Potterverse. Sarah wrote : "Marietta's away at boarding school. There's not much her parents can do to force her to stop being friends with Cho." Del replies : Just because the Trio doesn't fall in that category doesn't mean that there aren't any kids who care about not betraying their parents' *trust*. Even, yes, if it means betraying their friends' trust. You say we don't know this or that, and I agree. But we don't know that this or that isn't true either. The point is, we don't know *anything*, so how can we come to any conclusion and condemn Marrietta so easily ? Sarah wrote : "My biggest problem with Marietta's betrayal is that she could have, and should have, told someone else besides Umbridge. The normal protocol at Hogwarts is to go first to the Head of House, who will then deal with the situation and bring the student to the Headmaster if necessary. And Dumbledore was headmaster at the time. " Del replies : Except that this was not a matter of concern to the Headmaster but to the High Inquisitor. The normal protocol has been abolished in effect by the Educational Decrees. Del From MadameSSnape at aol.com Mon Aug 23 22:07:17 2004 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 18:07:17 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111027 In a message dated 8/23/2004 3:47:54 PM Eastern Daylight Time, snapesangel2002 at yahoo.co.uk writes: Potioncat wrote: > And she's answered fairly closely a question that came up a while > ago, "How involved was he with the Death Eater activities?" > Of course it could be argued that she says, "he'll have seen > things that?" How I wish she'd finished that sentence! Someone ask her that if they get the chance...exactly what has Snape *seen* as a DE? ================ Sherrie here: Maybe it's just me, but I got the impression that that particular change of subject was VERY deliberate. IMHO, she was on the very verge of letting out some information - but caught herself and took a detour. I don't think that that's information she wants to let out just yet. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 22:09:07 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 22:09:07 -0000 Subject: Marrietta's betrayal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111028 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > If people can stand to hear just a little more about this, I think > it's also interesting that the curse didn't activate at once. You'd > think, if Marietta had spoken to Umbridge with the intention of > selling out her friends, that it would have. Here's the canon: > > [Umbridge speaking] "...Miss Edgecomb here came to my office > shortly after dinner this evening and told me she had something > she wanted to tell me. She said that if I proceeded to a secret > room known as the Room of Requirement, I would find out > something to my advantage. I questioned her a little further, and > she admitted that there was to be some kind of meeting there. > Unfortunately, at that point this hex," she waved impatiently at > Marietta's concealed face, "came into operation and upon > catching sight of her face in my mirror the girl became too > distressed to continue." > > I believe someone has already pointed out that Umbridge's > method of questioning Marietta "a little further" was unlikely to > have been benign. We've seen that Umbridge resorts to > coercion very quickly. You have to wonder if that's where the rest > of Snape's fake veritaserum went, and if Shacklebolt didn't zap > Marietta's memory to keep that from being discovered as well. Alla: Well, Pippin, the problem I see here is that canon so far seems to clearly point ou that Marietta comes to Umbridge first, so I have a lot of trouble seeing her intentions as honorable. Yes, absolutely, Umbridge could have coerced her, blackmailed her, tortured her, anything, BUT all of that happened after she came to Umbridge to tell about DA meetings and that as I said earlier precludes me from having sympathy for Marietta. Do we have any canon about any discussions between Umbridge and Marietta prior to that? I don't recall any, but maybe somebody else does. Again, I don't think that one bad decision makes Marietta a horrible person, but I am having a lot of trouble justifying that decision. I just hope that in the future she figures out that Umbridge is not the person to be loyal to. Whether she will be allowed to attend DA? I think Harry is forgiving enough and he will say yes. > Sarah wrote : > "Wow, that's a lot of supposition here!" > > Del replies : > Yes it is, but just because it's not as simple as "Marrietta told > because she's a bad girl" or "Marrietta had no reason to tell so she > shouldn't have" doesn't make it untrue. In RL, things are rarely > simple. And quite often even less so in the Potterverse. > Alla: Del, what does Sarah's remark has to do with whether things are simple or not in RL? :o) I took it as her reasonable questioning of Pippin's lack of canon to support her speculation. (Sorry, Pippin! :)) From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 23 22:10:06 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 18:10:06 -0400 Subject: Percy's B/day & new FLINT? Message-ID: <003e01c4895d$f3012980$4f62d1d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 111029 Carolyn said: "However, I still have little faith in JKR's maths. Would you agree that a fortnight has 14 days, for instance, even in the WW?" DuffyPoo: I have no faith in her math skills, or mine either for that matter. ;-) Perhaps HP's indicating that there was 'still a fortnight to go before he went back to school" was just a rounding off on his part. From today, there is just over a week until Sep 1st, but if the 31st had fallen on, say, Thurs this year instead of Tues, I might call it a fortnight. Close enough to a fortnight. Carolyn said: "If Harry had been with them a fortnight, they would have had to have mentioned celebrating Percy's birthday sometime between Harry joining them and leaving for school, wouldn't they? Too good an opportunity for Percy jokes to ignore, surely? One can only speculate hopefully on the present the twins might have given him for his 18th birthday." DuffyPoo: JKR said, "But I've never focused on their birthdays yet --there hasn't been room!" She was talking about Ron and Hermione, specifically, and that we see them give HP gifts on his birthday but haven't seen him give any in return. You and I might not have minded a few more lines about Percy's birthday and F&G's jokes, etc., but it may be that her publishers might have objected, as it was they who took out the one line giving Dean Thomas' description in PS.(UK/Can versions). I presume you're speculating as to adding the actual dates. I think that is part of the problem. JKR didn't, I believe, mean to have anything dated to actual calendars. Carolyn said: "Wednesday 27th- Sunday 31st Trouble at Ministry - 'neither Mr Weasley or Percy was at home much over the following week' (Ch 10); Mrs Weasley says 'Your father hasn't had to go into the office at weekends since the days of You- Know-Who'." DuffyPoo: This is only five days...not a week. I think you have to back yourself up to start Sat on the 21st in order to get that last week to work. That makes your total 11 days, I think, and close enough, possibly, for HP to think he has a 'fortnight' until school starts. Just because there is no Sat the 21 in 1994 on our calendar, doesn't mean it isn't there in JKR's world. That would mean the pickup at 4 Privet Drive happened on Aug 22. At dinner that night Percy was drinking elderflower wine (I think) and they had homemade strawberry ice cream for dessert. Maybe that was Percy's birthday request, and now he's grown up and working for the MoM he doesn't want a fuss made over a birthday, besides, he was too busy with his cauldron bottom report. ;-) Perhaps that little * between sections indicates a few days missing that would bring the days up to a fortnight. After all, we don't get a detailed description of everything that happens every day throughout the school year. In OotP Hermione and Ron propose to Harry that he teach DADA, and that buisness ends a chapter. The next chapter starts "two whole weeks after her original suggestion" had elapsed before Hermione mentions DADA to Harry again. Interesting that here JKR uses "two whole weeks" instead of the word fortnight. Just to add to the mix, Harry clearly indicates his scar hurting in the early hours of Saturday morning, the day the letter from Molly arrived, inviting him to come and stay. On Tues, when they returned from the QWC, he tells Hermione and Ron that it hurt on Sunday morning. Harry also says "I hoped he'd [Sirius] would get back to me quickly" (after he'd written him about the scar hurting). This was still only Tues after he'd sent the letter on Saturday, and he pretty much knew Sirius was out of the country as the bird that brought the last letter was delivered by "large, brightly coloured, tropical birds." Personally, I just don't take it all that seriously. I never noticed that Sept 1 and Sept 2 were both Mondays until I'd read GoF at least a dozen times. It doesn't make one particle of difference to the story (that I can see) or my enjoyment of it. DuffyPoo [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Zarleycat at aol.com Mon Aug 23 22:36:40 2004 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 22:36:40 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111030 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > Where are all the Snape foes? Where are all the Snape fans? Twice > in one interview JKR made a comment about not loving Snape. If she > keeps this up I might start to believe her! What do the rest of you > think? Are we to take it that he's really a horrible man who is > useful in the fight against LV...and nothing more? Marianne: Well, JKR has in the past called Snape a horrid person and also described him as an abusive teacher. So, I do think she would not like a lot of his characteristics were he to be a real flesh and blood figure. In that sense alone, it doesn't surprise me that she may wonder why legions of people adore Snape. But, as the creator of this person, she has wisely not let him become a caricature bad guy and I'd think she must appreciate that her creation has struck a chord with so many readers. Potioncat: > And she's answered fairly closely a question that came up a while > ago, "How involved was he with the Death Eater activities?" > Of > course it could be argued that she says, "he'll have seen > things > that " Marianne: As someone who apprecieates the character of Snape, but who has absolutely no warm, fuzzy feelings about him, I will be highly disappointed if his DE career is revealed as something he participated in on the sidelines. I don't want his role to have been as witness, as simply having "seen things that..." I want to find out that he jumped in whole-heartedly with both feet, took part in various bouts of mayhem and murder and then came to have some sort of epiphany that made him change course. If, as JKR has hinted earlier, there is a redemptive pattern to Snape, then he's got to have done something that requires redemtion. Marianne From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Aug 23 22:50:01 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 22:50:01 -0000 Subject: Marrietta's betrayal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111031 > Alla: > > Well, Pippin, the problem I see here is that canon so far seems to clearly point out that Marietta comes to Umbridge first, so I have a lot of trouble seeing her intentions as honorable.< If Marietta's goal was to stop the meetings, then telling Flitwick or Dumbledore wouldn't do the trick. I wouldn't myself go as far as saying her behavior was honorable. But it needn't have been deliberately dishonorable either. A mistake,as Cho put it. I see it as Marietta not liking the choice she was being asked to make, and trying to put herself in a position where she wouldn't have to make it. I wouldn't be surprised if JKR intends to show us that refusing to choose between good and evil can be just as much a mistake as choosing poorly. Marietta isn't the only person who has made that error. Lupin comes to mind. JKR may have a very good reason for showing us that refusing to choose could lead to betrayal. My line of thought *is* highly speculative, but IMO, it's even more speculative to say that Marietta acted out of spite. According to Cho, Marietta is a lovely person, and Cho isn't someone who likes spiteful people. Look at the other people she likes: Harry and Cedric. You can't find nicer people than them. Pippin From snow15145 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 23:03:51 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 23:03:51 -0000 Subject: Why now? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111032 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mochajava13" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith > wrote: > > JKR seems to be giving us a lot of information and hints lately. > > > > I wonder why? > > > > Why now, when the sixth book is approaching completion? > > Kneasy > > I think you just answered your own question. Book six is probably > very close to completion, so she has more time to do other things, > such as promote the new book. Honestly, she really hasn't disclosed > anything new. We now know Ginny's full name and that we'll see a > new minister at some point in the series (which could be at the very > end of book seven). We know the name of book six and we've got > about one sentence of character description. That's not a lot of > information! I think she's getting ready to send book six off to > the editors, probably within the next couple of months. > Sarah Snow: I agree with you Sarah! I became a bit suspicious about the book being almost completed ever since the World Day chat back in March when JKR was asked when the 6th book would be released and she replied, " that's down to my publishers". My suspicions became more intense when JKR answered questions at the Edinburgh Festival, such as: Out of all your books, which one is your favourite? "I would like to say that it is probably Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, although at the moment-it is unfair of me to say it-Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince is my favourite book. Sorry, I am the only one who has read it and I think it is rather good. I am normally like this when I write a book. Usually when I am just over halfway I normally love it, but by the time I finish it I completely despise it and think it is worthless rubbish. At the moment, I really like how the sixth book is going. A lot happens in the sixth book and a lot of questions are answered " She says book 6 is her favorite and she has already read it, not read it so far, but read it and feels it is rather good. She says that she usually only feels that she loves it midway through but not the case this time because the ending to this sentence says that when she is finished she ends up despising it and feeling it is worthless. If she felt book 6 might end up the way she had felt about her previous books that she is comparing, that is worthless by the end, why would she make such an acute evaluation of book 6 in the manner she has unless this book was done or very near. Very suspicious to me but then I ask myself why if she is done with the book has she not released it? One of the last questions asked of her has a bit of the possible answer: What will the seventh book be called? "But I am not going to tell you, I'm sorry. You have no idea of the trouble that I would be in if I did. My agent would have me hunted down and killed, so I am not going to say." What kind of trouble would she be in? If she can't tell anyone what the name of book seven is because she would be in trouble then maybe she can't release book six for the same type of reason. When JKR asked to have no time restraints in finishing the fifth book her publishers may have received the same allowance in releasing the books. Look at this quote about the release of the 5th book from BBC News June 2003: JEREMY PAXMAN: So you didn't have writer's block. The reason this book has been - what three years.... Three years since the last one isn't it? Why has it taken so long? JK ROWLING: Well it hasn't. JEREMY PAXMAN: Huh? JK ROWLING: Well it hasn't. The book didn't take that long. The questioning changed course after this answer. It is most certainly up to JKR's "publishers" to actually release the golden egg. Look at it from a publisher's point of view; in the time between her books, book sales go up immensely. If the publishers are in control of the sale of the book they would wait until sales start to slack off before hitting the public again with what is an enormous and immediate profit for them. Why would a woman whose utmost priority are her children, and then her book, involve herself in a web site that contains enough information to fill a book itself unless she is attempting graciously to compromise for the lack of book 6's release because her publishers have not given permission for releasing it. Just my opinion Snow From dontask2much at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 23:24:41 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (rebecca) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 19:24:41 -0400 Subject: Ginny & Cats (was Snape and the Edinburgh Festival) References: Message-ID: <012e01c48968$5e9b80f0$6501a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 111033 >From: "potioncat" I also saw a report on Mugglenet from someone who attended the session. That writer says she asked JKR a question about Ginny and was given an answer. The answer, if this were genuine, would be significant to our devious minds. But I hesitate to take one person's word. Opinions?> charme: I read that post on Mugglenet too, and thought the same thing. My bet is that although Harry, Hermoine, and Ron are reportedly (by JKR in one of chats) not going to become Animagus, I bet Ginny does. JKR is a good compartmentalizer in her answers, so if the question were posed differently, say "Is it possible Ginny will become an Animagus?" I bet the answer would have been yes :) I have high hopes for Ginny in the books ahead - I believe that we were given a huge clue when Molly tried to get rid of the boggart in OoP. If you look closely, the only "bodies" Molly sees are the men in her family, and not Ginny. In-terest-ing, my dear Watson. charme From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 23:30:46 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 23:30:46 -0000 Subject: Why didn't the Longbottoms go into hiding?/Secret Keeper Switch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111034 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "romuluslupin1" wrote: > > mhbobbin writes: that makes sense that they had a job to do. Except > > that at the time LV goes after the Potters he seems to have been > > **winning** the war so it also wouldn't be surprising to learn that > > ones who feared they specifically might be targeted might not stick > > around to find out. LV was picking off OotP members one by one. And > > Sirius Black declined to be the Potters' secret keeper because he > > himself was planning to go into hiding. > > > I won't let your speaking ill of the dead go unpunished! ;-) > > As I read it, Sirius didn't turn down the SK job out of cowardice > (that's the way it sounds in your post. If you didn't mean that, I > apologize), he did it out of cleverness (however ill fated). He was > planning to go into hiding as the *official* SK while Peter (who was > also going to hide out) and the Potters (who were protected by the SK > charm) went on their merry ways. I figured Sirius was planning to go > somewhere leaving a trail a mile large for the DE to follow, then > trasform into Padfoot in order to mud the trail and then apparate, > fly or whatever to Bora Bora (or wherever else he spent the time > between POA and GOF). I bet Uncle Alphard left him a summer house in > the Tropics or something. > > Romulus Lupin, always ready to defend poor, maligned Sirius. mhbobbin now, (crying out poor maligned Sirius doesn't need defense from me!): This thread was kidnapped by another thread, which had to do with the big Secret Keeper Switch. In a Thread on Sunday, labeled """Secret Keeper Switch""" mhbobbin wrote this, also applicable here: My original Post was was in the context of the Longbottoms and whether it was appropriate for Aurors to go into hiding. My point was that times were so dangerous that even Sirius Black had planned to go into hiding--even prior to becoming the Secret Keeper. Not because he was a coward but out of prudence. Ostensibly many wizards went into hiding as LV was at the height of his powers before Godrics Hollow. Better to be in hiding and be ready to fight another day. I was incorrect in my statement that Sirius wanted to decline the SK job so he could go into hiding--I was only focused on the concept that EVEN Sirius was planning to go into hiding so why couldn't Aurors hide their baby? I cite PoA, Chapter Ten: The Marauders' Map. The conversation is the one in the bar that Harry overhears. Per Professor McGonagall: "James Potter told DD that Black would die rather than tell where they were, that Black was planning to go into hiding himself... and yet, DD remained worried." I read this line as Black was already planning to go into hiding, therefore, it would be a simple matter for him to be the Secret Keeper. Others read it as Sirius was ready to be the Secret Keeper and then go into hiding. Either way, it makes my original point about wizards taking precautionary steps in a dangerous time. Once Black switched the SK role with Pettigrew we don't know whether Black then went into hiding or not. Given that he was a big risk- taker, he may have chosen to remain where he could be a decoy, leading DEs away from Pettigrew and the Potters. Or both Pettigrew and Black went into hiding, knowing that LV would be looking for Black rather than the rat. My personal belief is that Sirius made himself scarce. Alas, I don't think that is what is most important here. I think the decision process that led up to the fateful decision to make Pettigrew the Secret Keeper--including the roles of the Potters, Sirius, Peter and Remus (who Black admits to suspecting was the spy) was what is critical to this part of the story. There are few moments where the entire story hinges on a decision and I believe the decision to make Pettigrew the Secret Keeper --and everything that led up to it and the immediate aftermath--is what is most critical here. mhbobbin From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 00:06:22 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 17:06:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040824000622.28008.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111035 > Where are all the Snape foes? Where are all the Snape fans? > Twice in one interview JKR made a comment about not loving Snape. > If she keeps this up I might start to believe her! What do the > rest of you think? Snape will always have my undying gratitude for being the first character in the series who had some three-dimensional depth to him. He won my respect with his potions trick which Hermione described more as a logic puzzle and more than the average wizard was capable of. He still strikes me as the one wizard who cut make it in the muggle world once he figured out the traffic signs and the currency. Moreover, he's a nice change from the well-intentioned but mostly ineffective males that usually surround Harry. All of them caring for him and deeply concerned but sometimes you just want somebody to crack the whip and get the ducks all lined up in a row. One way that JKR could make the next book shorter than OOTP would be for Snape to pick up Harry at the Dursley's. There'd be none of the usual taking 200 pages to get to Platform 9.75; Harry would be packed, primed, strapped to a broomstick and Fed-Exed to Hogwarts by page 40, tops. Yup, the Snarky Git is a keeper, definitely. Hope he doesn't get killed until halfway through Book 7. Magda _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush From erikal at magma.ca Tue Aug 24 00:53:28 2004 From: erikal at magma.ca (Erika L.) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 20:53:28 -0400 Subject: Harry/Voldemort fusion theory Message-ID: <00ce01c48974$c5ebe7c0$3a8b1a40@hppav> No: HPFGUIDX 111037 Julie wrote: >I think it's safe to say that JKR is familiar with Jung's work. I've >haphazardly paging through "Memories, Dreams, Reflections" >lately and two of the dreams that Jung describes really jumped out >at me. >The curtain reminds me of The Veil. It's interesting that Jung goes >through the curtain and discovers that behind it is a place for >visiting with spirits. > >I'll have to re-read your post when I'm more awake, but I wanted >to mention these other Jung connections for now. It's true that there are interesting similarities between JKR's writing and certain passages of Jung. However, in the spirit of Jung, couldn't we just say that those similarities represent archetypal motifs? The idea of the Veil is not something invented by either Jung or JKR, nor is it obscure enough that Rowling would have to be familiar with it due to Jung's writings. I do think there's a lot of archetypal material in the HP books, but that doesn't mean there's any *direct* influence. After all, they're both in a way drawing from the same sources; Rowling, like Jung, has read a great deal of mythology as well as folk and fairy tales. Just my two knuts, Erika (Wolfraven) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From CariadMel at aol.com Mon Aug 23 16:53:21 2004 From: CariadMel at aol.com (Annette) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 16:53:21 -0000 Subject: Filch and other unsavory Characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111038 . Steve writes: In years to come, and in all > likelihood at this very moment, former Hogwart's students are raising > a tankard of ale and laughing uproariously, as they exchange stories > not of good times, but of horrendous encounters with Filch, Snape, and > Peeves. These are the memories and life lessons that will endure far > longer than facts and figures from Prof. Binn's lectures on the Giant > Wars and Goblin Uprisings. > > As an author, I think JKR included nasty and somewhat ambiguous > characters to prevent the Disneyfication (happiest place on earth) of > Hogwarts. One could say, she presents Hogwarts warts and all. > ******** nettie: I'm glad that we have this multitude of charecters on which to draw that influence Harry. Apart from the fact that JKR has the talent to write and describe such colourful people I think they have each apart to contribute to Harry's memory and his own personality. They are all part of life's rich tapestry! >Harry finds Hogwarts a > very conflicting place. At once, he finds in the most comfortable > place, the place, by his own admission, that feels more like home than > any other. But at the same time, Hogawrts is a painful place; a place > where he has suffered much misery. The bulk of the student body is > frequently against him, he endures their stares, mumblings, and > rumors, he has suffered many humiliations at the hands of Malfoy, > every years something majorly bad happens to him. Filch is miserable, > Snape is horrendous, Binns is painfully boring, Umbridge in criminal, > McGonagall is strict, he's alway in trouble, etc... etc... etc.... > > In summary, Harry both feels at home and very much alienated at Hogwarts. ********** Yes , this is another of my feelings which you have expressed so well. Hogwarts is no Utopia for Harry, it is a challenging and threatening environment. A boy wizard , with no knowledge of his past is suddenly lurched into this magical world and has few real friends to turn to. A steep learning curve indeed. Hogwarts School, although a refreshing change from Privet Drive,has it's own pecking order and Harry still has to fight for his rights. nettie From snipsnapsnurr at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 19:21:26 2004 From: snipsnapsnurr at yahoo.com (snipsnapsnurr) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 19:21:26 -0000 Subject: Mundungus Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111039 I'm fairly new here, so I don't know if this has been mentioned before. The word "Mundungus" was unfamiliar to me and I just assumed it was a made-up name, maybe combining "mundus" (world) and "dung" (dung). But i ran across it in a Patrick O'Brien novel recently, and it is a type of tobacco apparently. I'm not sure what characteristics it has. In the O'Brien book the character bought it while in the Mediterranean, so I'm thinking it may be African, which is typically very strong flavored, which would fit with Mundungus the character in HP. Or maybe it is Royal Navy slang. Does anyone know anything about this? Thanks in advance. SnipSnapSnurr From porcupine88 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 20:57:05 2004 From: porcupine88 at yahoo.com (brandy) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 20:57:05 -0000 Subject: Is Percy a Spy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111040 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "templar1112002" wrote: > Hello, my second post here... Hello, my first post here! I personally doubt that Percy is a spy - mainly because if he were a spy, he'd be useless now that the Ministry is on the Order's side. Snape will be useful til the very end, assuming his cover isn't blown. But what is Percy going to do now, if the people he's spying on no longer need to be spied on? Plus, he showed many signs of loyalty to the Ministry over all else in GoF, before the Order was even reconvened. Given his personality and history, his role in OoP makes sense without having to think he's a spy. -Brandy From porcupine88 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 21:13:48 2004 From: porcupine88 at yahoo.com (brandy) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 21:13:48 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111041 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > Where are all the Snape foes? Where are all the Snape fans? Twice > in one interview JKR made a comment about not loving Snape. If she > keeps this up I might start to believe her! What do the rest of you > think? Are we to take it that he's really a horrible man who is > useful in the fight against LV...and nothing more? So she doesn't want us to like him, yet made quite a big deal about making us more sympathetic toward him in OoP. I'm a Snape fan, but not just because he's the bad boy (and not *just* because he's played by Alan Rickman either, but my my my does that ever help). She's made him a really intriguing character, and given him enough good points that you can't help but wonder what other good things might be hiding below the surface. I don't think he'll ever be a truly nice person, or one that could be described as a "great guy," but he seems to have a sense of honor and loyalty that you just have to admire. I'm not sure a romance would be terribly in-character for him right now (though of course JKR won't say that there WON'T be one), but I would really like to see him with a close friend, to see how he acts when his guard is let down. Because he really gives off the feeling of having a facade, but one that he's worn for so long that it's become a part of his personality. It still seems to only be the surface though, and it's awfully fun to wonder what lies beneath - if he's even capable of accessing that anymore. Either way, no matter how much we learn about his deep dark secrets and hidden past and true personality, I'm sure he'd never be the kind of guy you'd want to marry. Besides, I'm already betrothed to Alan Rickman's voice. -Brandy From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Mon Aug 23 21:17:25 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Brenda) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 21:17:25 -0000 Subject: Is Percy a Spy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111042 Marcela wrote: > Due to JKR's site congratulating Percy on his Birthday, I've read > many comments (not in this site) theorizing that Percy could be a > spy for the Order. > Luckdragon: While anything is possible: In an interview JKR was asked "Is Percy acting of his own accord in OOTP. JKR replied "I'm afraid so". Jo could have simply responded "yes" or "no", but "I'm afraid so" makes one think it is not for a good reason. From elrond at paradise.net.nz Mon Aug 23 22:10:59 2004 From: elrond at paradise.net.nz (Michael Chance) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 10:10:59 +1200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Gilderoy lockhart - JKR's ex??? References: Message-ID: <001101c4895e$5184b800$525f4fcb@locxvcym> No: HPFGUIDX 111043 From: "vmonte" > How strange that this article has today's date on it? Did someone > read Salit's post? Are their journalists that belong to the HPFGU's > group? > That's exactly what I thought, when I read an article in today's DomPost (the daily newspaper for Wellington, New Zealand). But this article says that Lockhart *is* based upon her ex-husband. They've also had previous articles on the names of the 6th book - starting with The Pillar title - that came out very quickly after being discussed on this mailing list, so I have always wondered if there were journalists on this list using the information to write articles without checking their facts first! :) Michael From cdayr at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 22:14:59 2004 From: cdayr at yahoo.com (cdayr) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 22:14:59 -0000 Subject: Who stuns Sirius? (was Re: The Veil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111044 > Entropy wrote: > I've believed for quite some time that Sirius is not dead (JKR's tears > to the contrary notwithstanding). In fact, I believe that DD was > looking for a way to get rid of Sirius for a while, and faking Sirius' > death turned out to be a viable option. In fact, you can find lots of > good discussion about it under a thread entitled "Faking Sirius's Death?". > CDR: Apologies if this has been previously discussed ad nauseum- and if so let me know what posts to read! I searched all I could stand, even to find the posts you referred to, and couldn't find `em. Any specific #s? I've been thinking a lot about ol' Sirius lately, and this last post got me going Like you, I'm convinced Bellatrix did not kill Sirius. Unlike you, I do think he is dead, and I think he may have been killed by a member of the Order. Here's why: 1) The moment of death "Harry saw Sirius duck Bellatrix's jet of red light: He was laughing at her. "Come on, you can do better than that!" he yelled, his voice echoing around the cavernous room. The second jet of light hit him squarely on the chest. The laughter had not quite died from his face, but his eyes widened in shock." (OotP, 35) We do not see Bella send this second jet of light, neither does Harry or Sirius. It comes out of nowhere. She was no longer on the attack, his defenses were lowered, and someone else stunned him with that second jet. He is surprised and shocked- perhaps he saw who did it? 2) Bella tells Harry she didn't do it "'Come out, come out, little Harry!' she called in her mock-baby voice, which echoed off the polished wooden floors. `What did you come after me for, then? I thought you were here to avenge my dear cousin!'" (OotP, 36) Bella implies that she did not kill Sirius- she doesn't understand why Harry is chasing her when the real killer is still downstairs. Why wouldn't she be gloating about her victory? Which brings me to 3) Bella doesn't brag Bella has the chance to tell LV that she killed Sirius, but she doesn't: "'Master, I am sorry, I knew not, I was fighting the Animagus Black!' sobbed Bellatrix, flinging herself down at Voldemort's feet as he paced slowly nearer." "Fighting", not "killing." Seeing as she is in serious peril, you would think she would announce her latest success at defeating one of LV's enemies to him, but she doesn't. Okay, so if Bella didn't do it, who did it, and why? There are only a few suspects who were not busy, injured, or tied up when Sirius is stunned. Most of the DE's are being held in Dumbledore's spells. Tonks and Moody are both seriously injured, Tonks is out cold. Neville cannot articulate a spell. That leaves Lupin, Kingsley, Harry, Dumbledore, and maybe a stray DE free to secretly send a stunner at Sirius. I feel pretty sure it wasn't Harry. Although all you ESE!Lupin theorists might wanna grab this one as further proof for your arguments, why would Lupin have been spending all that time with Sirius at GP, alone, tons of chances to do him in in some logical way, and then suddenly act now. Nope, not Lupin. (Please, JKR, not Lupin) I don't know what to say about Kingsley. We know from the Marietta incident that he is quite capable of sending a sneaky spell through a crowd undetected. He does face huge personal and professional problems if it is revealed that he has known where Sirius is all this time and has been lying to the ministry. And today his name, KINGsley, has been on my mind in connection with royalty and the HBP. But really, I just don't think it was him either. But maybe? I think it was Dumbledore. I think the big realization that DD comes to at the end of OotP has huge implications for how he is going to deal with Harry in the future. He will no longer be able to protect him from the harsh reality of the war and of his role in this epic struggle. In effect, he believes that by caring too deeply for Harry, he has created incredibly risky situations. He needs to stop putting Harry's feelings first and do what has to be done. He also realizes that Sirius is a big liability to the security of the Order. He takes too many risks. More importantly, LV now knows that he has a huge weapon against Harry, the person he cares about as "father and brother." DD realizes that he must separate Harry from Sirius, both for the safety of the order and the success of the fight. By killing Sirius, DD actually dredges up in Harry the intensity of emotion that makes it possible for him to defend himself against LV's possession. It is only when Harry starts thinking about Sirius ("And I'll see Sirius again " (OotP, 36)) that Voldemort can no longer possess him and has to flee. Later DD says to Harry, "On the contrary the fact that you can feel pain like this is your greatest strength." (OotP, 37) IMO, Dumbledore sees that by protecting Harry, he has lessened his ability to feel the deep pain and love that will eventually be LV's downfall. DD kills Sirius in a very painless and easy manner, but a manner in which he activates Harry's "greatest strength." I don't think DD is ESE- I just think that he realized Sirius had to be a sacrifice to raise Harry's love/heart/passion to a new, higher level. Harsh, eh? But what do you all think? CDR ? Who has lurked for months but only posted once before, and still wants to talk about Hagrid, Riddle, and "the traveler" in CoS if anyone wants to (106761)! From aoibhneach1 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 00:21:57 2004 From: aoibhneach1 at yahoo.com (Cindy) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 00:21:57 -0000 Subject: Mrs Figg, cabbage and Polyjuice Potion Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111045 I was wondering - this may have been discussed before, I don't know - but why does Mrs. Figg's house smell of cabbage (SS p.22), and the Polyjuice potion tastes like cabbage (CoS p.216)? Could Mrs Figg be using polyjuice for some reason? Or maybe, I've missed something in reading the books (not as familiar with them as most people here). Cindy From navarro198 at hotmail.com Tue Aug 24 01:07:52 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 01:07:52 -0000 Subject: November birthstone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111046 Kadoo96801 at a... wrote: Does anyone know the birhtstone of Novemeber? JoAnna: Topaz is more orange than yellow, however. Topaz is my birthstone (my b-day is November 3) so I have a lot of topaz jewelry. Granted, since I'm not swimming in Galleons, all my topaz jewelry is cubic zirconia. I have no idea if a "true" topaz is more yellow than orange, but I'd imagine they look similar. Despite the fact that it's not a "true" yellow, I could see it being the stone for Hufflepuff's hourglass, since there are no truly yellow gemstones. Bookworm: A search on 'yellow gemstone' came up with Yellow Tourmaline, sapphires, diamonds, citrine, as well as topaz and a bunch of types I didn't recognize. Except for citrine, we usually associate the others with different colors. Including topaz. Topaz can come in a variety of shades and colors. According to a website I found, topaz is Orange, yellow, brown, light blue to deep sky-blue, pink, colorless, white, light purple, greenish-blue, green. The site (http://www.minerals.net/gemstone/gemstone/topaz/topaz.htm) also says: Topaz is a gemstone of all colors, and its most valuable color is a golden orange-yellow, called "imperial topaz". So it might fit Hufflepuff's colors, and if valuable, is in keeping with the rubies/sapphires/emeralds of the other houses. Ravenclaw Bookworm From dontask2much at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 01:18:37 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 21:18:37 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Mundungus References: Message-ID: <00f901c48978$4977b800$6501a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 111047 From: "snipsnapsnurr" > I'm fairly new here, so I don't know if this has been mentioned > before. The word "Mundungus" was unfamiliar to me and I just assumed > it was a made-up name, maybe combining "mundus" (world) and "dung" > (dung). But i ran across it in a Patrick O'Brien novel recently, and > it is a type of tobacco apparently. I'm not sure what > characteristics it has. In the O'Brien book the character bought it > while in the Mediterranean, so I'm thinking it may be African, which > is typically very strong flavored, which would fit with Mundungus > the character in HP. Or maybe it is Royal Navy slang. Does anyone > know anything about this? Thanks in advance. > charme: Definition from Websters 1913: Definition: \Mun*dun"gus\, n. [Cf. Sp. mondongo paunch, tripe, black pudding.] A stinking tobacco. Kinda fits with 'Dung, don't you think? Especially fitting with the pipe he smokes, however there is a duality to the name. Black pudding is essentially congealed pig's blood in a length of intestine. Either way, it's not very appealing, is it? charme From navarro198 at hotmail.com Tue Aug 24 01:24:31 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 01:24:31 -0000 Subject: Ginny & Cats (was Snape and the Edinburgh Festival) In-Reply-To: <012e01c48968$5e9b80f0$6501a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111048 From: "potioncat" I also saw a report on Mugglenet from someone who attended the session. That writer says she asked JKR a question about Ginny and was given an answer. The answer, if this were genuine, would be significant to our devious minds. But I hesitate to take one person's word. Opinions?> Bookworm: I just did a search on the name Ginny in JKR's transcript and nothing turned up. What were the circumstances of her asking the question - while standing in line, book signing, ? charme: I have high hopes for Ginny in the books ahead - I believe that we were given a huge clue when Molly tried to get rid of the boggart in OoP. If you look closely, the only "bodies" Molly sees are the men in her family, and not Ginny. In-terest-ing, my dear Watson. Bookworm: Charlie wasn't shown, either. Harry saw Ron, Bill, Mr. Weasley, the Twins, Percy, Harry. Of course, Mrs. Weasley could have seen either or both before Harry arrived. But what is unseen is usually as important as what is seen... Ravenclaw Bookworm From navarro198 at hotmail.com Tue Aug 24 01:30:59 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 01:30:59 -0000 Subject: Is Percy a Spy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111049 Brandy wrote: ...now that the Ministry is on the Order's side. Bookworm: Are you sure? The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend. There are a number of us who have questions about Fudge's true allegiance. Is he just a weakling who is scared to death? Is he an agent for Voldemort? Is he a closet DE? Too many opinions, not enought clues. Ravenclaw Bookworm From dzeytoun at cox.net Tue Aug 24 02:24:28 2004 From: dzeytoun at cox.net (dzeytoun) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 02:24:28 -0000 Subject: Who stuns Sirius? (was Re: The Veil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111050 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cdayr" wrote: > > > I think it was Dumbledore. I think the big realization that DD > comes to at the end of OotP has huge implications for how he is > going to deal with Harry in the future. He will no longer be able to > protect him from the harsh reality of the war and of his role in this > epic struggle. In effect, he believes that by caring too deeply for > Harry, he has created incredibly risky situations. He needs to > stop putting Harry's feelings first and do what has to be done. He > also realizes that Sirius is a big liability to the security of the > Order. He takes too many risks. More importantly, LV now knows > that he has a huge weapon against Harry, the person he cares > about as "father and brother." DD realizes that he must separate > Harry from Sirius, both for the safety of the order and the success > of the fight. > > By killing Sirius, DD actually dredges up in Harry the intensity of > emotion that makes it possible for him to defend himself against > LV's possession. It is only when Harry starts thinking about > Sirius ("And I'll see Sirius again " (OotP, 36)) that > Voldemort > can no longer possess him and has to flee. Later DD says to > Harry, "On the contrary the fact that you can feel pain like this > is > your greatest strength." (OotP, 37) > > IMO, Dumbledore sees that by protecting Harry, he has lessened > his ability to feel the deep pain and love that will eventually be > LV's downfall. DD kills Sirius in a very painless and easy > manner, but a manner in which he activates Harry's "greatest > strength." > > I don't think DD is ESE- I just think that he realized Sirius had > to > be a sacrifice to raise Harry's love/heart/passion to a new, > higher > level. > > Harsh, eh? But what do you all think? > > CDR ? Who has lurked for months but only posted once before, > and still wants to talk about Hagrid, Riddle, and "the traveler" in > CoS if anyone wants to (106761)! Frankly, I think this has to be the silliest idea I've heard in a very long time. To wit: 1) Basing an opinion on the panicked, self-defensive babbling of a half-crazed known murderess is not very sound argument; 2) Dumbledore would basically be saying, "I love you and I'm so very sorry I've hurt you so I just hurt you more to make things better." Yeah, right; 3) Harry's love and pain are increased but so are his rage and guilt - hardly a very wise game plan unless Dumbledore is the stupidest general since Westmoreland; 4) If Dumbledore wanted to get rid of Sirius there are thousands of surer and safer ways to do it (e.g. what if someone had seen him fire the stunner?). The supposition that he formulated all of this elaborate plot in the instant he saw Sirius in front of the veil is REALLY stretching it - to the point of frank absurdity; 5) This is, as has been said time and again, a children's series, or at least a series read by millions of children. You DON'T do things like that in children's books; 6) The statement on JKR's part that "Dumbledore is goodness" rather comes apart if he is guilty of such a thing; and, last but not least, 7) The whole notion is too bizarre to be countenanced even as a starting premise. Dzeytoun From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 02:41:13 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 02:41:13 -0000 Subject: Who stuns Sirius? (was Re: The Veil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111051 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dzeytoun" wrote: snip. > 2) Dumbledore would basically be saying, "I love you and I'm so very > sorry I've hurt you so I just hurt you more to make things better." > Yeah, right; > > 3) Harry's love and pain are increased but so are his rage and guilt - > hardly a very wise game plan unless Dumbledore is the stupidest > general since Westmoreland; Alla: LOL! Yes, definitely. Can you imagine what happens if Harry by some accident learns that Dumbledore killed Sirius? I wonder, would he be ready and willing to fight for Dumbledore's cause after he learns that Dumbledore killed his Godfather? What would be Dumbledore's justification then? Oh, yes :"I killed him in easy and painless manner" to increase your ability to fight Voldie. I wonder how soon after such conversation Harry decides to join Voldie. :o) The more logical way would be REALLY starting training Harry to help him survive, if Dumbledore feels that he cannot change his destiny. I am almost convinced that Dumbledore manipulates the eventns because he knows what happened in the past or what will happen according to his version of the events. (I come to think more and more often that some kind of time travel was or will be involved, no matter how much I dislike it) But, I absolutely don't believe the notion that Dumbledore is a manipulator in a sense that Harry as Harry, not as weapon is unimportant for him. Yes, getting rid of Voldie is important, but I think that Dumbledore tries his best to help Harry survive the encounter. It is very difficult to balance one life against many, but I believe that Dumbledore tries, because if he does not, he is really no better than Voldemort, IMO. Dzeytoun: >> 6) The statement on JKR's part that "Dumbledore is goodness" rather > comes apart if he is guilty of such a thing; > Alla: Yep. From Pouncevil at Att.Net Tue Aug 24 03:07:26 2004 From: Pouncevil at Att.Net (Pouncevil at Att.Net) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 03:07:26 +0000 Subject: Is Percey A Spy Message-ID: <082420040307.10714.412AB0ED000B4A47000029DA21587667550B070AADD2BBD20201AD@att.net> No: HPFGUIDX 111052 Here's a Thought??? Lets all remember that the "Rat" Scabbers came from Percy. We also know that Peter P. the rat was a DE and had been passing them information for years. Did Peter pass on information while in the "care" of Percy. Could Percy have been a DE all along with the promise of fame & fortune by LV followers when he returned to power. Also I still can not help but wonder which DE's knew Peter was a rat. Surly LV knew and could have told other DE's. Why Didn't they go looking for him. Living with the Weasley's also gave Peter P. an in-site into the MOM goings on, as stated in GOF with Arthur describing the different members of the MOM and what jobs they had. What a wealth of information. "LOOSE LIPS SINK SHIPS" I wonder if Arthur will continue to comment on who's doing what and where in the MOM, or worse the OOTP. -- Ronald D. Reid [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Aug 24 03:15:04 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 03:15:04 -0000 Subject: Ginny & Cats (was Snape and the Edinburgh Festival) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111053 > > Bookworm: > I just did a search on the name Ginny in JKR's transcript and > nothing turned up. What were the circumstances of her asking the > question - while standing in line, book signing, ? > > Potioncat: Well, I cannot get the cut and paste to work to provide a link. Mugglenet.com has a report by a fan who asked a question while getting her book signed. I think the heading is "Two fans report from book festival." The fan says JKR said that the cat-like descriptions of Ginny are not significant. But having thought about it, we are such a canon thumping site, and we take such care to quote carefully, I really wish I hadn't brought it up in the first place. potioncat who needs to think before she types From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 03:31:38 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 03:31:38 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111054 > Marianne: > > I will be highly > disappointed if his DE career is revealed as something he > participated in on the sidelines. I don't want his role to have been > as witness, as simply having "seen things that..." I want to find > out that he jumped in whole-heartedly with both feet, took part in > various bouts of mayhem and murder and then came to have some sort of > epiphany that made him change course Neri: Why did DE!Snape change sides? This is one of the greatest mysteries in the books (Lexicon Steve, do you have it on your list?). I tried to round up the usual suspicions. I'm not really happy with any of them, but I added my personal scoring: LOLLIPOPS: He found that Voldy is going to kill Lily, and he was secretly in love with her, so he went to warn DD. (mushy, not JKR's style and not Snape's style: 4 out of 10). Life debt: He found that Voldy is going to kill James, and he wanted to pay his debt to James, so he went to warn DD (mushy, but consistent with canon: 7). Merci II: Snape owes big to either DD or Lily for something we don't know about yet (could be, but not very fair of JKR: 5). Big Bang: Following some dramatic event (possibly seeing or participating in killing someone) he had his epiphany and made the moral choice to change sides (could be either mushy or gruesome, but follows the Choice theme: 7). GEORGE / DIANA: He made a moral choice that took a long time brewing (mushy AND boring: 3). Revenge: Voldy killed/tortured someone in his family or someone he was in love with (not very mushy, but conventional. JKR can do better: 5). Eavesdropper Snape: He heard the prophecy in the Hog's Head and realized Harry will get rid of Voldy (unlikely; even DD is not so sure of that: 2). Dark Secret: Snape has some abilities that, to a degree, make him immune to Voldy (Ooclumency?). He realized that sooner or later Voldy will reveal this secret and kill him, so he went to DD and told him the secret. DD trusts Snape because if Snape betrays him he can always reveal the secret to Voldy, and then Voldy would kill Snape regardless of how much Snape proves loyal to him (not mushy and consistent with canon, but lacks the Choice theme: 6). HBP Snape: similar to "Dark Secret" but the secret is being the Half Blood Prince (not sure about that. Has mushy potential but could be nice if done right: 6) Scorning Snape: Snape just despises Voldy for his inaptitude (has its charm but inconsistent with canon: 5). Good Snape: He was never a real DE. He was always a spy for the side of good (super mushy: 1). Did I miss any theory? Which would you prefer? Neri From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 03:40:46 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 03:40:46 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111055 >> Neri: > > Why did DE!Snape change sides? This is one of the greatest mysteries > in the books (Lexicon Steve, do you have it on your list?). I tried > to round up the usual suspicions. I'm not really happy with any of > them, but I added my personal scoring: > snip. > Life debt: He found that Voldy is going to kill James, and he wanted > to pay his debt to James, so he went to warn DD (mushy, but > consistent with canon: 7). snip. > >> Big Bang: Following some dramatic event (possibly seeing or > participating in killing someone) he had his epiphany and made the > moral choice to change sides (could be either mushy or gruesome, but > follows the Choice theme: 7). > > Alla: Hey, Neri. I am actually equally torn between these two theories. I want Snape's redemption "done right" and even though I don't consider him to be a good guy yet, I prefer to think that he is capable of making moral choices.... sometimes. ;o) I think him trying to pay his life debt to James is very likely, but then if he left Voldie for that reason only it would mean that Snape still shares DE ideology in many many important matters. Does he miss his DE days? I think I like dramatic event the best. Something really horrific and unexpected (unexpected murder ???) made him see that Voldemort and Co are not the best company to hang out with? And of course the person killed should be somebody Snape cared about, otherwise it just would not work, IMO. I don't think that Snape always being a spy is very likely. I think Dumbledore's "returned to our side" pretty much refutes it, but of course you never know with JKR. From CariadMel at aol.com Mon Aug 23 17:00:29 2004 From: CariadMel at aol.com (Annette) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 17:00:29 -0000 Subject: The house points hour-glasses In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111056 > However, I'd probably go with topaz, as it's yellow color is the > classical color, and it's another birthstone... same as the other 3. > > Josh ****** I concur with you and Tammy on this one. Topaz seems the most likely. BTW, I was surprised that it took as long as Book 5 for me to realise the points were physically counted in hour-glasses. I don't know where I thought they used to be added up before, a magic ledger in DD's office I suppose! Nettie From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Mon Aug 23 21:09:24 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 17:09:24 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why now? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040823210924.9567.qmail@web52006.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111057 Sarah wrote: > I think she's getting ready to send book six off to the > editors, probably within the next couple of months. Luckdragon: JKR just answered questions at the Edinburgh book festival and stated she was only halfway through the book. From aoibhneach1 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 23 21:27:46 2004 From: aoibhneach1 at yahoo.com (Cindy) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 21:27:46 -0000 Subject: Harry/Voldemort fusion theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111058 > Gadfly McLellyn wrote: > > Reading MAN AND HIS SYMBOLS edited by Carl Gustav Jung, I got the > idea that symbolically Harry is consciousness and Voldemort is > unconsciousness. In essence they are one being badly splintered. > This would tie many things together from the Harry Potter books. I think this is an excellent essay reflecting exactly my thoughts! I tried to say the same thing in an earlier post, but because of my lack of skill in writing, it came out all jumbled and misunderstood. Yes, I believe that Harry and V are "shadows" of each other that need to be fused - that is why "neither can live while the other survives". One consciousness has to become part of the other (in a sense die "at the hand of the other"), because they are somehow split, and need to merge together. There is a part in one of the books, and I've been unable to find it, where DD sees two shadowy snakes emerge from his pensieve(?) (can't remember if that is what it was). He mentions something about them being separate but of the same essence. That is what stuck with me, and why I believe in the end, V will die and Harry will live. The two will come together in Harry. Why do I think Harry will live? Simply because I believe the evil will be vanquished; my opinion is the series will not end with this evil being roaming around. Cindy From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 04:45:54 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 04:45:54 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: <20040824000622.28008.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111059 Magda Grantwich wrote: > Snape will always have my undying gratitude for being the first > character in the series who had some three-dimensional depth to him. > He won my respect with his potions trick which Hermione described > more as a logic puzzle and more than the average wizard was capable > of. He still strikes me as the one wizard who cut make it in the > muggle world once he figured out the traffic signs and the currency. > > Moreover, he's a nice change from the well-intentioned but mostly > ineffective males that usually surround Harry. All of them caring > for him and deeply concerned but sometimes you just want somebody to > crack the whip and get the ducks all lined up in a row. One way that > JKR could make the next book shorter than OOTP would be for Snape to > pick up Harry at the Dursley's. There'd be none of the usual taking > 200 pages to get to Platform 9.75; Harry would be packed, primed, > strapped to a broomstick and Fed-Exed to Hogwarts by page 40, tops. > > Yup, the Snarky Git is a keeper, definitely. Hope he doesn't get > killed until halfway through Book 7. > > Magda Carol responds: What, killed while Hogwarts is in session, only halfway through the book? If he has to go, let it be at the very end of Book 7, saving Harry. (We know from a previous interview that he has something very important to do, one way or the other, and based on his actions for the Order near the end of OotP, I really don't think there's any doubt which side he's on.) Love the Fed-ex suggestion and agree completely that Snape is a keeper, by far the most interesting adult character, male or female. Carol, whose favorite Snape moment is when he courageously and defiantly shows Fudge his Dark Mark From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 24 05:03:23 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 05:03:23 -0000 Subject: Why now? (other books / series) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111060 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dcgmck" wrote: > dcgmck: > Dumbledore tells Harry in PS/SS that death is but the next great > adventure. Nearly Headless Nick tells Harry in OotP that he was > afraid of the next plane of existence. Harry, Luna, Neville, and > Ginny hear voices across the threshold beyond the Veil. There is > only conjecture because no one has returned from either Elvenhome or > from beyond the Veil to say, at least as far as we have thus far been > informed... imamommy(straying dangerously off-topic here) Actually, if you read the Silmaillion, you'll find out that Elves (of whom, I believe, Galadriel is the only survivor), used to live in the Undying Lands, but brought a curse upon themselves and are trying to get back home. Tolkein never says what his version of the highest God, Illuvatar, has in store for mortal men when they die, but the godlike beings that also live there have power to grant choice to some on occasion; that is how Elrond Halfelven became immortal while his brother went on to be a direct ancestor of Aragorn. My own religion teaches that the Veil exists as a barrier between this world and the spirit world; that we used to live there and the Veil obscures our memories of our former life, and that we will return to that place when we die. Sometimes we may "remember" things that happened there. We don't know that *noone* has gone through the Veil and back again, we just haven't been told that. I think that in order for death as a theme to be of real value, Harry will need to also learn about the meaning of life. He needs to know where he comes from, what his purpose is on the earth, and where he is going after he dies. Just your basic eternal questions. I have no idea how JKR will answer them:) imamommy From ctcasares at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 23 22:38:28 2004 From: ctcasares at sbcglobal.net (tylerswaxlion) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 22:38:28 -0000 Subject: November birthstone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111061 "JoAnna" wrote: > I have no idea if a "true" topaz is more yellow than orange, but I'd imagine > they look similar. Topaz is a yellow-to brown stone (tawny, actually ;^) ) It's my mom's birthstone, so there's a bunch around home. They can zap topaz with lasers and it turns blue. I like it better that way, but it annoys my mom, who insists true topaz has to be yellowy brown. Amethyst is purple, by the way. It's February's (and my) birthstone. Canary diamonds are also yellow, but they are rare (and more expensive than white diamonds). I'd go with topaz, cause I like the birthstone connection. TL From slithy_toves19 at yahoo.ca Tue Aug 24 00:35:58 2004 From: slithy_toves19 at yahoo.ca (slithy_toves19) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 00:35:58 -0000 Subject: Why now? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111062 Snow said: > It is most certainly up to JKR's "publishers" to actually release the golden > egg. Look at it from a publisher's point of view; in the time between > her books, book sales go up immensely. If the publishers are in control of > the sale of the book they would wait until sales start to slack off before > hitting the public again with what is an enormous and immediate profit for > them. > > Why would a woman whose utmost priority are her children, and then her book, > involve herself in a web site that contains enough information to fill a > book itself unless she is attempting graciously to compromise for the lack > of book 6's release because her publishers have not given permission for > releasing it. Slithy_toves19 replies: I've had some contact with the publishing world, and I have to say that I just don't see this happening. It's very true that agents and publishers will time the release of books. But for the most part, it is simply to stop flooding the market. Many popular authors release one book a year. More literary authors often will wait two years between releases. Most of this has to do with the writing/editing process than publishing timing. Timing will just dictate what week/month a book will be released ("summer reading" books come out in the spring release, a lot of big names and literary authors release in the big fall release, some come out right before Christmas, etc). If anything, I bet the three year wait made the publishers a bit nervous - people are fickle, and three years is a long time to wait. The wait between GoF and OotP was a long one, publishing wise. HP mania really peaked around the release of OotP, because of the movie release and surrounding hype. I'm sure the publishers would rather get this next book out sooner rather than later to take advantage of that before it slows down. Sharon From ctcasares at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 24 01:20:44 2004 From: ctcasares at sbcglobal.net (tylerswaxlion) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 01:20:44 -0000 Subject: Who stuns Sirius? (was Re: The Veil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111063 "cdayr" wrote: > 2) Bella tells Harry she didn't do it "'Come out, come out, little Harry!' > she called in her mock-baby voice, which echoed off the polished wooden > floors. `What did you come after me for, then? I thought you were here to > avenge my dear cousin!'" (OotP, 36) > > Bella implies that she did not kill Sirius- she doesn't understand > why Harry is chasing her when the real killer is still downstairs. > Why wouldn't she be gloating about her victory? See, I read this scene exactly opposite of you. Bella is gloating and taunting Harry *because* she killed Sirius. The mock-baby voice implies sarcasm and mocking to me. Harry is hiding instead of charging straight at Bella. She's taunting him to get him to come out. "I thought you were here to avenge my dear cousin"--I thought you were here to attack me for killing Sirius, but here you are hiding. I read her first sentance as: "What did you come after me for, then," **if not to attack me** It's rhetorical remark more than a sincere question. snip > I don't think DD is ESE- I just think that he realized Sirius had to > be a sacrifice to raise Harry's love/heart/passion to a new, higher > level. > > Harsh, eh? But what do you all think? Way too harsh for me. I feel the same way about the idea that DD knows that Sirius *isn't* dead, but lets Harry believe it. It's just too cruel. Maybe it's because my father died when I was 6, but killing a father- figure just to teach a lesson is ESE to me. YMMV TL From sweetface531 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 05:54:08 2004 From: sweetface531 at yahoo.com (Justine) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 05:54:08 -0000 Subject: Why such a point of characters' birthdays? In-Reply-To: <96773c880408231226360e1903@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111064 James: The birthdays of Harry, Ron, Hermione, and maybe Neville, Luna, and Ginny will probably have some effect on the storyline in regards to apparation licenses and coming of age (as mentioned elsewhere in the thread), but aside from that, I'd say just for fun. Justine: I had a scary thought. Let's assume that she's wishing them happy birthdays in the present. That is, "Happy 24th Birthday, Harry Potter!" I doubt we'll see the same for James, Lily, or ::cringes:: Sirius; a tribute to the dead (whether on the birthday or on the deathday) is more likely for those who have passed on. Perhaps she's showing us who the survivors are, those who live through the books and are still around now... So Neville, Harry, Ginny, and Percy live. Ron's came around before the site opened--though I honestly can't remember when the site opened--and so did the birthday of the twins. It's unsettling, though, that from the opening to Neville's birthday, there were none to mention. Justine, impatiently awaiting a birthday wish for Remus... From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 03:26:28 2004 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 03:26:28 -0000 Subject: Is Percy a Spy? combined In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111065 > Luckdragon: > While anything is possible: > In an interview JKR was asked "Is Percy acting of his own accord in > OOTP. JKR replied "I'm afraid so". > > Jo could have simply responded "yes" or "no", but "I'm afraid so" > makes one think it is not for a good reason. I honestly don't think that he is a spy, it aggravates me that a lot of people are trying to find a loop or twist to the plot in order to explain why Percy was such a jerk in OoTP. What is wrong with accepting that a character can be a turncoat? Yet, I must admit that JKR's answer above could very well be interpreted like this: she knows Percy is a spy (we don't yet), so yes, he is acting on his own accord. Jo would not be lying, she'd just be hiding some truths. > DuffyPoo: > Percy is not in the Order so he would have a hard time being a spy > for them. He can't even be spying 'on' the Order as he has no > contact whatever with his family, or anyone close to DD (as of the > end of OotP). As he was working directly for Fudge it's doubtful he > had much contact with either Tonks or Kingsley. JMO > > What direction his life is going to take in the next two books is > anyone's guess -- well except JKR. I agree with you, I actually don't like the "Percy is a spy" theory. The point of my post was originated because I'd read two fics in which this theory was almost taken as canon...(I had to quit reading them, for some twisted reason I can stomach Snape turning good -and I hate the guy- but I just can't read Percy portrayed as a martyr and spy for the Order, etc, etc, LOL). Anyway, the theory behind Percy being a spy is that only Dumbledore knows about this, which is a very convenient explanation, as it avoids all the plot holes I mentioned in my post, it could even explain the one of DD arriving late to Harry's trial (who told him about the change of schedule?). I just hope that this is not a way to excuse Percy's pathetic, lame and egotistical behaviour in GoF and OoTP. Sorry, now I'm finished with my rant... Marcela From spaced_out_space_cadet at hotmail.com Tue Aug 24 06:12:07 2004 From: spaced_out_space_cadet at hotmail.com (spacedoutspacecadet) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 06:12:07 -0000 Subject: The Veil In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111066 > > Space Cadet wrote: > > Another interesting thought, only Harry and Luna who are > > close to the veil can hear the voices behind it. Neville is not > > near them at the time. I thought that it was interesting that > > only those who had seen death could hear it. > Josh: > Well, there's _something_ wrong in your thought, 'cause Neville had > seen death remember? His granddad, hence him seeing the thestrals. > Neville and Ginny were entranced by the veil, so perhaps they either > didn't comment on the voices, or were too far away... or there's > something else connecting these various things. Josh, I didn't mean that Neville couldn't hear the voices behind the veil, I was trying to point out (not too articulately it would seem, lol) that Neville obviously wasn't close enough to hear them. I do have to wonder what was so entrancing about the veil in the first place, or to go further why were they entranced by death at all. Space Cadet From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Tue Aug 24 06:23:03 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 06:23:03 -0000 Subject: Who stuns Sirius -- ESE!Lupin? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111067 >>> Entropy wrote: > I've believed for quite some time that Sirius is not dead (JKR's > tears to the contrary notwithstanding). In fact, I believe that > DD was looking for a way to get rid of Sirius for a while, and > faking Sirius' death turned out to be a viable option. <<< Brenda now: As much as I would LOVE to believe this, I'm afraid I can't. To me, Jo's comment on how death is final pretty much puts a stamp to Sirius' death, that he is in fact dead. *hiccup* And we much respect the author's opinion, right? >>> CDR wrote: > Like you, I'm convinced Bellatrix did not kill Sirius. Unlike > you, I do think he is dead, and I think he may have been killed by a member of the Order. <<< Bren now: I know you're not the only one thinking that Bella wasn't the real culprit behind Sirius' death. I very much agree with the following arguments you presented. Dzeytoun put it as "the panicked, self-defensive babbling of a half-crazed known murderess" but I disagree. If Bella indeed killed Sirius then she would have been more proud, more calm in defending herself. >>> CDR continues: > I feel pretty sure it wasn't Harry. Although all you ESE!Lupin > theorists might wanna grab this one as further proof for your > arguments, why would Lupin have been spending all that time > with Sirius at GP, alone, tons of chances to do him in in some > logical way, and then suddenly act now. Nope, not Lupin. <<< Bren: I personally believe it has ESE!Lupin written all over it. I always found it curious how Lupin held Harry back from entering the veil himself. I mean where was Lupin all along? He must have been near Sirius when it happened. Dumbledore had arrived and most of DEs started crumbling. The description in OoP is, paraphrased: "It seems that Bellatrix and Sirius were the only pair unaware of this new arrival." -- the odd must have shifted towards the Order. So why wasn't Lupin helping Sirius with battling Bellatrix? It seems like the logical thing to do for a loving Maurader friend. Unless, of course, Lupin was occupied with... something else. Why did Sirius' eyes widen with shock as he died? Was it that surprising to him that his capable evil top-lieutenant-of-Voldemort causin took him down? No, I believe he had just found out the shocking truth at that moment. Yes, he could have eliminated Sirius before, but killing in the middle of battle is the safer option -- one can easily make it look like an accident. Speaking of which, how is the 10+ page update-report coming along, Pippin? You know we're all anxious to hear it ;) > I think it was Dumbledore. I think the big realization that DD > comes to at the end of OotP has huge implications for how he is > going to deal with Harry in the future. [snip] > He also realizes that Sirius is a big liability to the security of the Order. He takes too many risks. More importantly, LV now knows > that he has a huge weapon against Harry, the person he cares > about as "father and brother." DD realizes that he must separate > Harry from Sirius, both for the safety of the order and the success > of the fight. Bren: Err... I must agree with Alla and Dzeytoun with this one, Dumbledore will face far greater difficulty in getting Harry ready for the war if he had caused such a heart-wrecking loss to Harry. True, Dumbledore can be invisible at will so perhaps that's how he did it, but I highly doubt it. >>> Alla wrote: > What would be Dumbledore's justification then? Oh, yes: > "I killed him in easy and painless manner" to increase your ability to fight Voldie. > I wonder how soon after such conversation Harry decides to join Voldie. :o) <<< HAHAHAHAH. Brenda From WriterKim at comcast.net Tue Aug 24 06:15:17 2004 From: WriterKim at comcast.net (Kim) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 06:15:17 -0000 Subject: Percy's Letter (Was: Is Percy a spy?) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111068 Hello! I rarely post, but I really love this topic; I must begin by saying that I felt genuinely betrayed by Percy-- until I read OOTP twice and ran into a couple of theories regarding Percy here on the list. Now I am definitely siding with the "Percy is a top secret spy" camp, mostly because of the letter he writes to Ron. In my book, the American hardcover edition, the letter is found on pages 297 and 298 and all quotes below are found on those pages. A couple of months ago, I read a post here about this same issue (I'm sorry, I don't remember the name of the poster and can't seem to find the post!) that mentioned just how much Percy gives away in the letter. The poster posited that Percy was, in fact, working for the order, and the letter gives many very important clues. After reading the post, I went back to the letter and was surprised by how much information really is handed to the trio in that letter. First of all, the letter is received on the evening before Umbridge becomes "High Inquisitor" and things get very, very bad at Hogwarts. And, according to the Daily Prophet article that arrives the next morning, the move to make her High Inquisitor occurred during the night. Percy must have fired off his letter to Ron rather quickly, perhaps right after the MoM decision. He also knew that the Prophet would have the information for the morning's paper and that the students would know about the move right away. If Percy is on the side of the MoM, why write with such haste, if not to warn the trio? Why not just let them find out on their own? The opening two paragraphs of the letter are sheer Percy Weasley, written to throw anyone who might be reading the mail. And remember- - we are constantly reminded, from the beginning of OOTP, that the mail is not safe. Percy would know this, and gives a clue right in the opening lines of the letter when he states his connections (MOM, Umbridge). He seems to be saying, "Dear Ron, Big Brother is watching! Listen up." Paragraph three furthers this idea: "But I want to give you more than congratulations, Ron, I want to give you some advice, which is why I am sending this at night rather than by the usual morning post." Why send it under the radar at all? Nothing in here could damage Percy; it isn't as though he is saying anything the MoM wouldn't love to hear-- at least on the surface. He continues, "Hopefully you will be able to read this away from prying eyes and avoid awkward questions." Percy would know the trio spends the majority of their time together. I believe he is counting on it. So whose eyes are prying? I believe this is another reminder, as we have been told throughout the novel by various characters, that the mail is being monitored. Paragraph four begins with advice against hanging out against Potter, but this is Percy's real reason for writing: "I feel bound to tell you that Dumbledore may not be in charge at Hogwarts much longer and the people who count have a very different--and probably more accurate--view of Potter's behavior. I shall say no more here, but if you look at the Daily Prophet tomorrow you will get a good idea of the way the wind is blowing--and see if you can spot yours truly!" This seems like a very clear warning that the MoM is moving in and will take no prisoners. Paragraph five carries a direct warning to Harry: "Potter had a disciplinary hearing this summer in fornt of the whole Wizengamot and he did not come out of it looking too good. He got off on a mere technicality if you ask me and many of the people I've spoken to remain convinced of his guilt." If Percy were a spy for the Order, he would feel it important to let Harry know about how the MoM continues to perceive him. He seems here to be warning Harry specifically not to get into any more trouble, as despite the success of his hearing, without Dumbledore at the school and without supporters in the Ministry Harry could face serious problems. Paragraph six-- Percy openly defames Harry's character and gives a little "shout out" to the one person he is sure will be reading this letter: Dolores Umbridge. He calls her "a really delightful woman, who I know will be only too happy to advise you." Why call her delightful, unless she's reading the letter? Unless I am way off base, none of the students or teachers, and even some of the MoM members do not seem to care for her very much, and I am not sure that even Percy would call her delightful. Paragraph seven, more clues: "Dumbledore's regime at Hogwarts may soon be over." Another warning about Dumbledore! Then, after expressing his sorrow that Umbridge is "encountering very little cooperation from staff as she strives to make those necessary changes" at Hogwarts, Percy says again "although she should find this easier from next week--again, see the Prophet tomorrow!" and finishes with a comment about students finding it prudent to help Umbridge. What strikes me the most about this paragraph is Percy's repetition of the important information: Dumbledore's position at Hogwarts is threatened and drastic changes from the MoM are coming, so beware! Paragraph eight gives an interesting note as well: "if you are writing to Mother at any point, you might tell her that a certain Sturgis Podmore, who is a great friend of Dumbledore's, has recently been sent to Azkaban for trespass at the Ministry. Perhaps that will open their eyes to the kind of petty criminals with whom they are currently rubbing shoulders." Unable to communicate with his mother, Percy sends this along instead. Unless he were trying to communicate this information to the Order, why else would he believe his mother would want to know it? By doing this, he also demonstrates an awareness of the OOTP and some of its key members. Last paragraph: "Please think over what I have said most carefully, particularly the bit about Harry Potter." Clearly, Ron does not think carefully on the information he has received. Harry does, a bit, but is caught up in the more inflammatory comments made and loses sight of the more important information that Percy gives away before he becomes completely distracted by Sirius in the fire. This letter can be read all sorts of ways, of course, but in the end, I am just thinking the best for Percy. My guess is that Percy truly is "acting on his own," trying to do some good independent of both the Order and the MoM. After all, he has the best chance of getting information from the MoM if Fudge believes that Percy has cut ties with his family, Dumbledore, and Harry. I only hope that if he is working on his own, nothing unfortunate happens to Percy before he's had the chance to work things out with his family. BetterBeGryffindor (who knows, after all, that Percy IS a Gryffindor!) From musicofsilence at hotmail.com Tue Aug 24 06:36:34 2004 From: musicofsilence at hotmail.com (lifeavantgarde) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 06:36:34 -0000 Subject: Why such a point of characters' birthdays? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111069 >>>James: The birthdays of Harry, Ron, Hermione, and maybe Neville, Luna, and Ginny will probably have some effect on the storyline in regards to apparation licenses and coming of age (as mentioned elsewhere in the thread), but aside from that, I'd say just for fun.<<< >>Justine: I had a scary thought. Let's assume that she's wishing them happy birthdays in the present. That is, "Happy 24th Birthday, Harry Potter!" I doubt we'll see the same for James, Lily, or ::cringes:: Sirius; a tribute to the dead (whether on the birthday or on the deathday) is more likely for those who have passed on. Perhaps she's showing us who the survivors are, those who live through the books and are still around now... So Neville, Harry, Ginny, and Percy live. Ron's came around before the site opened--though I honestly can't remember when the site opened--and so did the birthday of the twins. It's unsettling, though, that from the opening to Neville's birthday, there were none to mention.<< Stefanie: Just for a reference point, the site opened on May 15th of this year. http://www.mugglenet.com/fusion3/fullnews.php?id=1183 It would seem that she's wishing birthdays in the present as she has confirmed the years of the books' events on the CoS DVD. Given that, those in Harry's year are turning 24 this year, etc. Now, the only birthdays we have definitely either from the site or the books are Neville, Harry, Hermione, Ron, Fred, George, Ginny, and Percy. We have an approximation of Angelina's birthday (sometime in the week after Hallowe'en [GoF 16]). So we have several possibilities: 1) If she *is* wishing happy birthdays to those alive now, either (a) there are no birthdays between 5/15 and 7/30 or (b) those with birthdays between this period have died 2) If she's going to wish a birthday whether that person is alive or not "now." (a) there are no birthdays between 5/15 and 7/30 or (b) there *are* birthdays then, but they are of characters that aren't in the "make it on the calendar" club Which leaves us a year of watching the calendar either way. Perhaps she's only wishing birthdays to people who've gone to school with Harry at one point? Only to Gryffindors? To whomever she invites into "the club" (just to give us all frayed nerves)? Stefanie Who is on pins and needles waiting for either a dead person to show up or for a live "birthday'd" person not to make it on From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Aug 24 06:47:28 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 06:47:28 -0000 Subject: Book 6 Title In-Reply-To: <20040823205417.41547.qmail@web12303.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111070 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Metylda wrote: Colin: > > According to "The Leaky Cauldron" the title for Book > > 6 is "Harry Potter > > and the Half-Blood Prince" not "Harry Potter and the > > Half Blood Prince" > > as per the use of half-blood in the books. > bamf: > My problem with that thinking, is that Jo posted it to > the website without the hyphens. So, until JKR posts > that it should be 'Half-Blood' instead of 'Half > Blood', I'll use it without the hyphen. Geoff: Interestingly, if you look on her site at the list of FAQs about the books, one of the questions has a hyphen in Half-Blood Prince. From lavaluvn at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 06:51:06 2004 From: lavaluvn at yahoo.com (lavaluvn) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 06:51:06 -0000 Subject: Gilderoy lockhart - JKR's ex??? In-Reply-To: <41272BB3.9080207@tds.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111071 > vmonte wrote: > > >Yes, you both are probably right. After all, Carly Simon wrote the > >song "You're so Vain" after ex-boyfriend Warren Beatty. > > > > Jem wrote: > It was Warren Beatty????!!!! > > Hmmm > > Somehow that's less satisfying than I thought it would be > > But to bring this back to Potter. I guess it's decided Lockhart isn't > Philip Pullman then. > Now Andromeda: Ohh, was PHilip Pullman a candidate? I know he's kind of bad- mouth JKR, but that's about all I've heard.... (And now that it's been "confirmed" that Jo WASN"T referred to ex-hubby.. anyone have any good ideas??) From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Tue Aug 24 06:55:39 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 06:55:39 -0000 Subject: Time-Turner Questions?! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111072 Hi everyone, I thought I made my peace with Time-Turning plot device, but more questions are splurging out, now that it's been repressed. It gets SO confusing, for many reasons: 1. If there are times or events pre-destined to be revisited or corrected, it defies the whole purpose of free-will and "I'm in charge of my life" motto. It strongly reminds me of that vase incident from Matrix, when Neo visits the Oracle. 2. Another thing is that I have even greater problem is -- so time- turner acts as a DNA replication device? Wizard cloning machinery? To be able to produce multiple copies of same human being, with every bit of intelligence and cognition intact? How is that possible?? *sudden image of Homer's hammock comes to mind* 3. I'm now wondering if Time-Turners can be used in court. Wouldn't it prove to be a much more effective and truthful testimony if it can be verified by going back in time and the whole event presented in front of more witness? Wizards have better means to verify the truth - - either by Legilimens or Pensieve or Time-turners. I wonder why we don't hear of these devices during wizarding trials. Help! Smarter brains needed, help!! With HPness, Brenda From tonks_op at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 06:30:12 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 06:30:12 -0000 Subject: Snape, Malfory and Azkaban Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111073 Many of the DE are in Azkaban or in hiding, and some got off when they were tried in court. Snape was a DE and we do not hear of him being in Azkaban or a court trial. Also we have never heard of L. Malfoy being in Azkaban or on trial. Why is that? Maybe they never killed anyone?? Tonks_op From tonks_op at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 06:32:57 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 06:32:57 -0000 Subject: Why now? -- HBP publication In-Reply-To: <20040823210924.9567.qmail@web52006.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111074 > Sarah wrote: > > > I think she's getting ready to send book six off to the > > editors, probably within the next couple of months. > Luckdragon: > JKR just answered questions at the Edinburgh book festival > and stated she was only halfway through the book. ----------------- I thought the book was coming out in June of 2005. Can't remember where I heard that. It takes about 6 months from the time it is finished. Tonks_op From oppen at mycns.net Tue Aug 24 08:00:08 2004 From: oppen at mycns.net (Eric Oppen) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 03:00:08 -0500 Subject: The Power Voldemort Knows Not Message-ID: <004701c489b0$602b0ce0$8a510043@technomad> No: HPFGUIDX 111075 I'm one of those who believe that "the power the Dark Lord knows not" is love. However, this does lead to some silly thoughts: I keep imagining Harry somehow or other getting through that door he couldn't open at the Ministry, falling in, being utterly saturated with Love...and then chasing a terrified Voldemort all over the place, calling out endearments in a phony French accent! "Ah, my passionate little Dark Lord, at last we are alone together! *smooch smooch smooch* I know that you 'ave been playing 'ard-to-get, but I 'ave caught you at long last!" (Meanwhile, Voldemort, having found out that his spells don't work on Harry the hard way, is frantically struggling to get away, while the DEs and Aurors, who stared in utter amazement at first, are now lying or sitting around, helpless with laughter) Harry Potter as Pepe le Pew, and Voldie as that poor cat Pepe was always chasing... Or, maybe, Harry gets saturated with Love...and suddenly he's a 1960s flower-child? "Like wow, Voldie, you are on this, like, really uptight scene. Why don't you give up this Dark Lord jazz and groove with me?" From b_boymn at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 07:58:16 2004 From: b_boymn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 07:58:16 -0000 Subject: Is Percy a Spy? + Comment on Fudge & Umbridge. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111076 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "scoutmom21113" wrote: > Brandy wrote: > ...now that the Ministry is on the Order's side. > > Bookworm: > Are you sure? The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend. > > There are a number of us who have questions about Fudge's true > allegiance. Is he just a weakling who is scared to death? Is he an > agent for Voldemort? Is he a closet DE? > > Too many opinions, not enought clues. > > Ravenclaw Bookworm b_boymn: Excellent point, bookworm. I can only give my personal opinion and speculation on Fudge and Umbridge. I don't think they /were/ Death Eaters or Voldemort supporters, but the word "were" in that statement is critically important. Fudge and Umbridge were people in power, and people who were growing very fond of the power and the status it brought them. So fond of it, that they let it cloud their judgement. The power and position become so important to their own self-definition that they were willing to do anything to hold on to it, and equally willing to do anything to anyone who threatened it. Fudge became blinded in a way that any rational man could have seen would ultimately lead to his total and complete destruction. Umbridge become so entrenched in her belief in her own power that she was willing to casually (as good as) kill Harry simply because he had become and annoyance. Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely. So, while they may not have been Voldemort supporters, they are now in total disgrace. At the very least, they will be shunned by the wizard world, and very likely they will be despised, ridiculed, and even hated by some. They are persona non grata; unwelcome people without status in the wizard world. OK, that hasn't quite happened yet, but it will happen very quickly in the next book. Their unconscionable lust for power has destroyed them. But those who have feed heartily at the hog trough of power are not satiated easily. Once you have had a rich luscious taste, you can't help but want more, and heaven help anyone who stands in your way. Sort of like cheesecake. Now that Fudge and Umbridge are, to some extent, outcasts from the wizard world, they are very vulnerable to anyone who might come along with a sympathetic ear and a plan to restore their lost glory. In otherword, they are ripe for the picking by Voldemort and his band of merry men. I don't think they /were/ Voldemort supporters, but the humilation, shame, and continued hunger for luscious power /now/ makes them likely candidates. Now on to Percy, I don't think Percy is or was a spy because I think his /blow-up/ with his family was real, and I sympathize with him because I think I can very clearly see his position. As far as I'm concerned Arthur hold equal if not greater blame for the incident than Percy, although Percy is certainly carries a significant share. However, I could conceive of the possibility that after the Quibbler interview with Harry came out, Percy might have been swayed from his position. And, considering this possibility, Dumbledore might have made a 'no hard feelings' peace offering. Essentially, contacting Percy and trying to talk some sense into him. While that would not have healed the riff between Percy and his father, it could/would have brought Percy back to Dumbledore, and in the process laid the groundwork for a more complete reconciliation. I don't think this beak between Percy and his family is directly related to Voldemort's return. I think Percy is seriously offended that his own father didn't believe that a Perfect, Head Boy, student with 12 outstanding OWLS, and a significant number of highly graded NEWTs could get a job on his own merit. That is the true heart of this misunderstanding. Percy has spent his life doing it /right/, being the 'Good Son' and following the rules, certain that his path of /right/ would lead him to recognition and success. When he has his first crowning achievement that proves his 'follow the rules' way was superior to Fred and George's 'outlaw' ways, the people whose recognition he values most complete discredit his achievement. As a result, Percy was mad, and I say, fairly so. Others have suggested that Percy completely cut himself off from his family, including Christmas presents, to prove absolutely and beyond any doubt that he could succeed on his own merit, and that he was indeed worthy of and capable in the position he was given. I firmly believe there will be a reconciliation, but when it happens BOTH SIDES will have some serious apologising to do. That's my story, and I'm sticking to it. Steve/b_boymn (who is not the Lexicon Steve but the other one) From b_boymn at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 08:16:36 2004 From: b_boymn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 08:16:36 -0000 Subject: Mrs Figg, cabbage and Polyjuice Potion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111077 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cindy" wrote: > I was wondering - this may have been discussed before, I don't know - > but why does Mrs. Figg's house smell of cabbage (SS p.22), and the > Polyjuice potion tastes like cabbage (CoS p.216)? Could Mrs Figg be > using polyjuice for some reason? Or maybe, I've missed something in > reading the books (not as familiar with them as most people here). > > Cindy b_boymn: That's a fair conclusion to jump to, and one that has been supported by many people. In fact, many thousands of post back there was a well supported theory that Mrs. Figg was actually a beautiful young maiden who was using Polyjuice as a disguise while she kept her secret watch over Harry. I have the same question now that I posed back then. The first and most significant is .... WHY? To what end, what purpose could it possibly serve, how could the story in anyway be improved or advanced by some one using Polyjuice as a disguise. Certainly, an batty old lady playing herself makes more sense that a beautiful young maiden wasting 11 years of her life pretending to be Harry's babysitter. And why disguise by Polyjuice, it only last an hour, that has to be horribly inconvinient. True Barty!Moody did it, but he was generally NUTS. Don't take my response to personally, you're ideas are always welcome, and will alway be treated fairly. Remember, this is a theory that had and may still have many strong supporters. Although, none of the have been able to answer to my satisfaction the basic quesiton of Why? If I'm proven wrong, I will be more than happy to eat my electrons. Steve/b_boymn (was bboy_mn and for a while asian_lovr2, but was never Lexicon Steve) From b_boymn at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 08:51:22 2004 From: b_boymn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 08:51:22 -0000 Subject: Snape, Malfory and Azkaban In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111078 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tonks_op" wrote: > Many of the DE are in Azkaban or in hiding, and some got off when > they were tried in court. Snape was a DE and we do not hear of him > being in Azkaban or a court trial. Also we have never heard of L. > Malfoy being in Azkaban or on trial. Why is that? Maybe they never > killed anyone?? > > Tonks_op B_Boymn: There was an implied Hearing regarding Snape at which Dumbledore intervined on Snape's behalf and assured everyone Snape was a good guy. Dumbledore's statement to this effect is from the Pensieve scene where Prof. Karkarov accused Snape (GOF). Slippery Lucius Malfoy, who in all likelihood had many powerful friends indebted to him, claimed he was innocent and that he had been bewitched (Imperius Curse) into doing all those horrible things he was accused of. Given his prominent status in the wizard world, and his ample distribution of gold to the right people, apparently the court decided he wasn't acting of his own free will, and slippery as ever, he got off. The REALLY big question is, can he pull that same stunt twice? Will they believe him this time? I'm really torn. On one hand I want him punished, but on the other, this is one very very slippery Slytherin. Just a thought. Steve/b_boymn From b_boymn at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 08:55:26 2004 From: b_boymn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 08:55:26 -0000 Subject: Book 6 Title In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111079 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Metylda wrote: > > Colin: > > > According to "The Leaky Cauldron" the title for Book > > > 6 is "Harry Potter > > > and the Half-Blood Prince" not "Harry Potter and the > > > Half Blood Prince" > > > as per the use of half-blood in the books. > bamf: > > My problem with that thinking, is that Jo posted it to > > the website without the hyphens. So, until JKR posts > > that it should be 'Half-Blood' instead of 'Half > > Blood', I'll use it without the hyphen. > Geoff: > Interestingly, if you look on her site at the list of FAQs about the > books, one of the questions has a hyphen in Half-Blood Prince. B_Boymn: Sorry for the very short post, but his was touched on before. I believe the term 'half blood' appears in some edition (UK) without the hyphen and in the US editions with it. I don't have both editions so I can't compare identical passages. Nor have I searched all books to see if the presents of the hyphen is related to context. If someone has both UK and US, could you check a couple of passages and compare? Thanks. Steve/b_boymn (was bboy_mn) From J.Z.Dench at uel.ac.uk Tue Aug 24 09:07:58 2004 From: J.Z.Dench at uel.ac.uk (Jospehine) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 09:07:58 -0000 Subject: The book 6 Excerpt... -- Crookshanks? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111080 "Megan" wrote: I was wondering when I was reading it at the site (and I've visited the site in German (Deutsch) and the sign was still there!) I thought of Crookshanks! Could this be another of the Scabbers/Pettigrew incidents? I know Crookshanks is part Kneazle - but could it be that someone is turning into a Kneazle/Cat? "Megan" Josephine now: Like the other reply to this post, I also was first reminded of Crookshanks when I read this description. I'm sure he has been likened to a lion before (*sorry- no canon with me to support this- can anyone help?*). I did, however rule it out pretty quickly. Mainly because it seemed a little too expected. Would JKR use the same plot again that she has already used for Sirius and Pettigrew? I don't think so. Which is a shame because we have had a lot of theories going around on that cat. It just seems a little lame for JKR to use that ole chestnut again. Knowing JKR's track record I would imagine this clue relates to a new character. One that has probably been mentioned in passing in previous books. Jo From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 24 10:17:33 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 06:17:33 -0400 Subject: Why such a point of characters' birthdays? Message-ID: <001701c489c3$92ce5400$20c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 111081 Justine: "I had a scary thought. Let's assume that she's wishing them happy birthdays in the present. That is, "Happy 24th Birthday, Harry Potter!" I doubt we'll see the same for James, Lily, or ::cringes:: Sirius; a tribute to the dead (whether on the birthday or on the deathday) is more likely for those who have passed on. Perhaps she's showing us who the survivors are, those who live through the books and are still around now..." DuffyPoo: I had this very thought when Harry's birthday appeared on July 31st. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't mark the birthday of deceased loved ones on my calendar, only those for whom I need to remember to buy/send a card or gift. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From greatraven at hotmail.com Tue Aug 24 10:36:42 2004 From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 10:36:42 -0000 Subject: Time-Turner Questions?! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111082 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Brenda M." wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I thought I made my peace with Time-Turning plot device, but more > questions are splurging out, now that it's been repressed. > > It gets SO confusing, for many reasons: > > 1. If there are times or events pre-destined to be revisited or > corrected, it defies the whole purpose of free-will and "I'm in > charge of my life" motto. It strongly reminds me of that vase > incident from Matrix, when Neo visits the Oracle. > > 2. Another thing is that I have even greater problem is -- so time- > turner acts as a DNA replication device? Wizard cloning machinery? To > be able to produce multiple copies of same human being, with every > bit of intelligence and cognition intact? How is that possible?? > *sudden image of Homer's hammock comes to mind* > > 3. I'm now wondering if Time-Turners can be used in court. Wouldn't > it prove to be a much more effective and truthful testimony if it can > be verified by going back in time and the whole event presented in > front of more witness? Wizards have better means to verify the truth - > - either by Legilimens or Pensieve or Time-turners. I wonder why we > don't hear of these devices during wizarding trials. > > > Help! Smarter brains needed, help!! > > > With HPness, > Brenda Sue: Interesting thoughts. Time travel is always a paradoxical thing in any speculative fiction novel. The best we can suggest is that what happens when someone time travels happens because it always did - e.g. McNair, who seems to be chopping off Buckbreak's head is, in fact, throwing a fit of pique, which Harry and Hermione can see from another viewpoint. As for the methods of proving things during trials, perhaps the first two aren't used due to privacy issues - anyway, what happens if you're powerful enough, say, in Occlumency, to resist or even fake your memory? Because it seems to me that this is what Snape has probably been doing to LV all these years. It wouldn't really prove anything any more than a lie detector in our system. And the time- turner might be too dangerous to mess around with. From silmariel at telefonica.net Mon Aug 23 11:56:37 2004 From: silmariel at telefonica.net (silmariel) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:56:37 +0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Percy's Letter (Was: Is Percy a spy?) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200408231356.37691.silmariel@telefonica.net> No: HPFGUIDX 111083 BetterBeGryffindor wrote: > A couple of months ago, I read a post here about this same issue > (I'm sorry, I don't remember the name of the poster and can't seem > to find the post!) that mentioned just how much Percy gives away in > the letter. This one is older that 2 months but it fits your description. Percy's letter http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80213 Anyway, something that I didn't include in that post is, if power of names exist in the potterverse, then Penelope Clearwater should have his lost Odiseo coming home at last. Her name remembers me Tess Trueheart of the Dick Tracy comics. Purely IMO, of course. Carolina From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 11:58:38 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 11:58:38 -0000 Subject: Ginny & Cats (was Snape and the Edinburgh Festival) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111084 Potioncat: Well, I cannot get the cut and paste to work to provide a link. Mugglenet.com has a report by a fan who asked a question while getting her book signed. I think the heading is "Two fans report from book festival." The fan says JKR said that the cat-like descriptions of Ginny are not significant. But having thought about it, we are such a canon thumping site, and we take such care to quote carefully, I really wish I hadn't brought it up in the first place. vmonte responds: I posted the link below. Edinburgh Book Festival Reports I was one of the lucky 500 people who saw J.K. Rowling at the Edinburgh Book Festival on Sunday. In fact, I was the one who asked if the barman at the Hog's Head was Dumbledore's brother, Aberforth. I also took the opportunity to ask J.K. a few questions when she signed my book. Firstly, I asked if there was a reason why Ginny Weasley is always associated with cats (she is described by Percy in COS as being a cat lover, is often described as being curled up like a cat and once made a noise 'like an angry cat') but J.K. answered 'No, there's not, although you are obviously a very careful reader'. This to me sounded slightly hesitant as though there is something more to Ginny than we realize yet. She might of answered me further if I had not immediately asked her what would happen to Kreacher and 12 Grimmauld Place now that Sirius has gone. Although she dodged this question well she did say that we will find that out very early on, right at the start of the next book. http://www.mugglenet.com/mediasp/2004/august/edinburghreports.shtml Vivian From garybec101 at comcast.net Tue Aug 24 12:19:10 2004 From: garybec101 at comcast.net (garybec) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:19:10 -0000 Subject: Book 6 Title In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111085 > > bamf: > > > My problem with that thinking, is that Jo posted it to > > > the website without the hyphens. So, until JKR posts > > > that it should be 'Half-Blood' instead of 'Half Blood' Geoff: Interestingly, if you look on her site at the list of FAQs about the books, one of the questions has a hyphen in Half-Blood Prince. > > B_Boymn: > > Sorry for the very short post, but his was touched on before. I > believe the term 'half blood' appears in some edition (UK) without the > hyphen and in the US editions with it. I don't have both editions so > I can't compare identical passages. Nor have I searched all books to > see if the presents of the hyphen is related to context. > > If someone has both UK and US, could you check a couple of passages > and compare? Thanks. > > Steve/b_boymn (was bboy_mn) Becki has both versions; (lucky girl!) Without going through many pages looking for the words Half-Blood or Half Blood, I went directly to the one I know to be there, at the end of OotP, during the speech telling Harry about the prophecy and that he (LV) chose the "half-blood", like himself. Both versions have the hyphen. Becki From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Aug 24 12:23:23 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:23:23 -0000 Subject: Is Percy a Spy? + Comment on Fudge & Umbridge. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111086 > b_boymn: > snip > > Percy has spent his life doing it /right/, being the 'Good Son' and > following the rules, certain that his path of /right/ would lead him > to recognition and success. When he has his first crowning achievement > that proves his 'follow the rules' way was superior to Fred and > George's 'outlaw' ways, the people whose recognition he values most > complete discredit his achievement. As a result, Percy was mad, and I say, fairly so. Potioncat: Yes, it's pretty ironic that the good son is now the bad guy and the troublemakers are now heroes. I know in much of the books, the Trio were trying to avoid Percy, but Percy was, afterall, just enforcing rules. > Bbboy-mn > snip > I firmly believe there will be a reconciliation, but when it happens > BOTH SIDES will have some serious apologising to do. Potioncat: I agree here too. Whether this was a sincere rift in the family, or whether Percy is playing a role, I think it will work out before the end of the book. But I do not think Percy is evil, nor that he would side with the Death Eaters. > > From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Aug 24 12:34:53 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:34:53 -0000 Subject: Why such a point of characters' birthdays? In-Reply-To: <001701c489c3$92ce5400$20c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111087 > DuffyPoo: > I had this very thought when Harry's birthday appeared on July 31st. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't mark the birthday of deceased loved ones on my calendar, only those for whom I need to remember to buy/send a card or gift. Potioncat: But we do not know if JKR is doing anything more than having fun. And we don't know if she is considering the RW present or book 6 present. And certainly, as she writes book 6, Harry is alive. I didn't see the entry for Percy, did it say "Happy Birthday Percy"? Very interesting given that he's not in favor at the moment. Can't wait to see what it says about Snape! Or for that matter, Tom Riddle. And, along that line, if you buy a Scouting calendar, it will note both Lord Baden-Powell's and Juliette Gordon Lowe's birthdays. Although both are long since gone. (founders of the Scouting movement) Potioncat From garybec101 at comcast.net Tue Aug 24 12:40:30 2004 From: garybec101 at comcast.net (garybec) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:40:30 -0000 Subject: Snape, Malfory and Azkaban In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111088 tonks_ wrote: Many of the DE are in Azkaban or in hiding, and some got off when they were tried in court. Snape was a DE and we do not hear of him being in Azkaban or a court trial. Also we have never heard of L. Malfoy being in Azkaban or on trial. Why is that? Maybe they never killed anyone?? Tonks_op B_Boymn: There was an implied Hearing regarding Snape at which Dumbledore intervined on Snape's behalf and assured everyone Snape was a good guy. Dumbledore's statement to this effect is from the Pensieve where Prof. Karkarov accused Snape (GOF). Slippery Lucius Malfoy, who in all likelihood had many powerful friends indebted to him, claimed he was innocent and that he had been bewitched (Imperius Curse) into doing all those horrible things he was accused of. Given his prominent status in the wizard world, and his ample distribution of gold to the right people, apparently the court decided he wasn't acting of his own free will, and slippery as ever, he got off. Steve/b_boymn Becki wonders then; During LV's speech in Gof in the graveyard scene, where LV is going around to his DE's, when he reaches LM, he says, "Lucius, my slippery friend, I am told that you have not renounced the old ways, though to the world you present a respectable face..." If he claimed "Imperious Curse", wouldn't that be considered renouncing? To me, I see anyone claiming the imperious curse as renouncing. Wouldn't they have to claim, that they really weren't following LV, that they don't believe in his ways, that they were being controlled? I do agree with Steve. I think there are passages that say that LM claimed Imperious Curse, perhaps even more than once, it is just that I think the graveyard scene contradicts that. And since we are on the subject of the Imperious Curse, I have always wondered, why is it that Harry is able to fight off the IC, but experts, (ie: Aurors, like Madeye and Crouch) can not? Is Harry really that powerful? I would think in "Auror Training 101", that fighting off the IC would be one of the first things they teach you. What could be worse than an auror being controlled by LV? Any thoughts? Becki From eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk Tue Aug 24 12:46:10 2004 From: eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk (iamvine) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:46:10 -0000 Subject: Who stuns Sirius? (was Re: The Veil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111089 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cdayr" wrote: > I'm convinced Bellatrix did not kill Sirius. Unlike you, I > do think he is dead, and I think he may have been killed by a > member of the Order. Here's why: Sorry, I don't believe you. I think Bellatrix DID shoot that Stunner at Sirius. Here's why: > 1) The moment of death > "Harry saw Sirius duck Bellatrix's jet of red light: He was > laughing at her. "Come on, you can do better than that!" he > yelled, his voice echoing around the cavernous room. > The second jet of light hit him squarely on the chest. > The laughter had not quite died from his face, but his eyes > widened in shock." (OotP, 35) > > We do not see Bella send this second jet of light, neither does > Harry or Sirius. It comes out of nowhere. She was no longer on > the attack, his defenses were lowered, and someone else > stunned him with that second jet. He is surprised and shocked- > perhaps he saw who did it? He is surprised and shocked because he has been Stunned. In good writing, you don't have to specify where everything comes from. You imply. It saves a lot of words and makes the whole thing nicer to read. That sentence about the second jet of light is implying that Bellatrix shot it. If JKR had wanted to imply otherwise, she would have made it more obvious, maybe like this: "Harry saw Sirius duck Bellatrix's jet of red light: He was laughing at her. 'Come on, you can do better than that!' he yelled, his voice echoing around the cavernous room. "Suddenly, Harry heard a shriek from behind him; he whirled around, but it was only Luna slipping on a banana peel that had appeared out of nowhere. Harry looked back at Sirius... "...just in time to see a second jet of light hit him in the chest just under his left armpit. "The laughter had not quite died from his face, but his eyes widened in shock. As he fell backwards through the veil, his wand hand twitched, sending a feeble jet of light towards Bellatrix, who was standing too far to his right for it to hit her. As the veil fluttered and hid Sirius's body, only one thought, pitifully irrelevant, coursed through Harry's mind: where had that banana peel come from?" Note: a) The Stunner hit Sirius's left side, but Bellatrix was standing on his right. b) Someone conjured a banana peel at a crucial moment to distract all the onlookers. NOW you can start suspecting that Luna shot that Stunner... > 2) Bella tells Harry she didn't do it > "'Come out, come out, little Harry!' she called in her > mock-baby > voice, which echoed off the polished wooden floors. `What did > you come after me for, then? I thought you were here to avenge > my dear cousin!'" (OotP, 36) > > Bella implies that she did not kill Sirius- she doesn't > understand > why Harry is chasing her when the real killer is still downstairs. No, she means, "If you want to avenge Sirius, why are you hiding?" > Why wouldn't she be gloating about her victory? Gloating in the middle of a battle situation is always a bad move. Ask any villain. Bellatrix is too sensible - she's saving it for later. > 3) Bella doesn't brag > Bella has the chance to tell LV that she killed Sirius, but she > doesn't: > "'Master, I am sorry, I knew not, I was fighting the Animagus > Black!' sobbed Bellatrix, flinging herself down at > Voldemort's feet > as he paced slowly nearer." > "Fighting", not "killing." Seeing as she is in serious peril, you > would think she would announce her latest success at defeating > one of LV's enemies to him, but she doesn't. Diplomacy. She knows that Voldemort only wanted the prophecy at this time; he didn't care who died. She's trying to defend herself from his wrath. She gauges that bragging at this point would only annoy him and possibly make him Crucio her. And actually, when the prophecy got smashed she really was fighting Sirius, she hadn't killed him yet. Killing him only took a moment. Eleanor From severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk Tue Aug 24 13:07:44 2004 From: severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk (severelysigune) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 13:07:44 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111090 Neri wrote: < Why did DE!Snape change sides? This is one of the greatest mysteries in the books (Lexicon Steve, do you have it on your list?). I tried to round up the usual suspicions. I'm not really happy with any of them, but I added my personal scoring: Did I miss any theory? Which would you prefer? > Sigune: Hmm... the Life Debt, I can see that. He's honour-bound... I offer up my own pet theory (sorry, couldn't resist...) - feel free to tear it to bits. I haven't got any proof, but I believe I am being consistent with canon. Here goes: Imagine young Sevvie, just down from Hogwarts. At school he has time and time again been beaten by two clever, quick and powerful fellow students. He's sick of it. He decides to go and learn from the best, and so one day to surpass his two tormentors and take his vengeance. If he wants the best, he has two possible teachers to choose from: Lord Voldemort and Albus Dumbledore. Young Sevvie isn't *nice*. He loves Dark Arts. Dumbledore is hardly an option: he's on the side of Potter and Black, and he has made his name as an opponent of Dark wizards. That leaves the rising star of the moment, the powerful Lord Voldemort. The idea of joining him and the Death Eaters has some appeal. There will be Dark Arts galore and with some luck, young Sevvie will get to fight Potter and Black, this time with a lot of hooded pals on his side. If he has to harm a few Muggles or fellow wizards in order to be a member of this exclusive Dark club and get the opportunity to strengthen himself, then so be it. He joins. He partakes in the Death Eater brand of 'fun'. BUT. After some time he begins to realise the Death Eaters are not really the allies he had thought they were. They are all out to save their own skins, to further their own causes; and the Dark Lord does not really want his followers to substantially win power. He wants servants merely, and bullies his Death Eaters into such a position. This is so not what our ambitious young man wanted. He feels cheated. But he is bound to the Dark Lord by now. And on his own he has not sufficient strength to win back his freedom and pride. So he turns to Albus Dumbledore, the only man who *does* have that strength and power. He offers to spy for him. And how wonderful it feels to undetectedly thwart the Evil Overlord who thinks he possesses him. Heh heh. And, look, he's better off with Dumbledore on the whole: no more Cruciatus Curses, no serfdom, a nice job in a safe place, a position of trust, and lots to learn. Hasn't he made a clever move. Somehow I think that for Snape to make such an important decision as that of changing sides, there must have been something done to him personally. Someone near to him got killed? They shouldn't have been so clumsy. He changed his mind after being forced to do something gruesome? Don't buy that. Someone as calculating as he was would not have joined the DE's without first informing himself as to what they were all about. And he's not a wimp, or he wouldn't have lived till, well, Book Six at least, and wouldn't have shown Fudge the Dark Mark, and wouldn't have agreed to to whatever it is he is currently doing for Dumbledore. Snape's greatest concern is himself; if he joined the DE's, left them, became a spy, eventually joined the Order - he did so for selfish reasons. That's why Dumbledore can trust him: he knows he is Snape's greatest asset, they need each other to reach their respective goals, which happen to converge in one important place - Voldemort's defeat. I guess what I've sketched here is a mean, nasty Snape who does the right thing for the wrong reason. He's a gift of a character :). Yours severely, Sigune From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 13:02:56 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 06:02:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Veil In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040824130256.83124.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111091 --- entropymail wrote: > I've believed for quite some time that Sirius is not dead (JKR's > tears to the contrary notwithstanding). In fact, I believe that DD > was looking for a way to get rid of Sirius for a while, and faking > Sirius'death turned out to be a viable option. In fact, you can > find lots of good discussion about it under a thread > entitled "Faking Sirius's Death?". > > :: Entropy :: There's no way I'm going to believe that JKR put Harry through the emotional wringer in Dumbledore's office and sitting beside the lake confronting his apparent destiny and then say in Book 6 or 7 "Just kidding! Sirius is back!". I would be very disappointed in her ability as a storyteller if she does. Magda _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush From eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk Tue Aug 24 13:27:30 2004 From: eleanor at dreamvine.org.uk (iamvine) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 13:27:30 -0000 Subject: Time-Turner Questions?! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111092 Brenda, OK, I'll bite. I was going to put this in private mail, but I think it makes sense to say it here instead. > I thought I made my peace with Time-Turning plot device, but more > questions are splurging out, now that it's been repressed. > > It gets SO confusing, for many reasons: > > 1. If there are times or events pre-destined to be revisited or > corrected, it defies the whole purpose of free-will and "I'm in > charge of my life" motto. It strongly reminds me of that vase > incident from Matrix, when Neo visits the Oracle. People have had this problem with God since way back. If He's all-knowing, then He knows what you're going to do in the future, so how can He behave as if you have free will, and punish you for your sins? Augustine's answer was that God is "outside time" and sees the whole of history all at once. "Past" and "future" exist only in our minds. There is time, it all happens, and God sees it. http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/3b.htm (scroll down to "Human Freedom") It could just as well apply to Time-Turners. If God sees all of time at once, He can also see all Time-Turner trips, and He can see that they fit in with what's happening in the rest of the universe. > 2. Another thing is that I have even greater problem is -- so time- > turner acts as a DNA replication device? Wizard cloning machinery? To > be able to produce multiple copies of same human being, with every > bit of intelligence and cognition intact? How is that possible?? To me this is not worth worrying about. It's just a standard effect of time travel, seen in a different way that makes it seem weird. Yes, call them clones if you like, but remember that Clone 1 will eventually twirl a Time-Turner and disappear, and that Clone 2 remembers doing everything that Clone 1 will do until then. So it's much more limited than Dolly the sheep. There's a theory in quantum physics, which I think is a kind of physicists' half-joke, which says that maybe there's only one electron in the universe. All electrons are exactly the same, right? Why is that? Why, because they're all the same electron, which is doing lots of time-travelling! When it's moving forwards, it's an electron, and when it's moving backwards, it's a positron (the electron's antiparticle). At the points in time when the electron turns around, we see antimatter reactions. Sometimes an electron and a positron appear to hit one another and both disappear, and sometimes a pair of particles appears out of nowhere. Who knows? Maybe it's true. Draw a zigzag line on paper, then draw a straight line that cuts through it at least twice. The zigzag line is the path of the One True Electron, or Hermione, moving around in time. The straight line represents Now. Everything on that line exists Now. Each point where the lines cross, that's a copy of the Electron, or Hermione, that exists in the present. Yet they're all points on the same zigzag. There is only one Hermione, she's just moving around in odd ways. This is easier to see with the electron IMO, because you can see it when it's moving backwards, as a positron. You never see a backwards Hermione. (Enoimreh?) So instead, imagine that you sewed the Hermione zigzag into the paper. You can see the zigs, but not the zags because they are on the back of the paper. What looks like lots of short-lived copies of Hermione is really only one. > 3. I'm now wondering if Time-Turners can be used in court. Wouldn't > it prove to be a much more effective and truthful testimony if it can > be verified by going back in time and the whole event presented in > front of more witness? Wizards have better means to verify the truth - > - either by Legilimens or Pensieve or Time-turners. I wonder why we > don't hear of these devices during wizarding trials. Partly because going back to witness something would be changing the past, unless the witnesses were there in the first place. If there was someone else around, maybe the crime would never take place. Partly because we have no evidence that you can use a Time-Turner to travel forwards. We have only seen it used to go backwards a short way, and then the user exists in two places at once until the time when they left comes round again. Trials don't tend to happen very soon after the events being examined. If you wanted to check out something a year ago, you might have to live an entire year in hiding before you got back to the present. Not worth the trouble. And partly because they could use the other methods, I suppose. Only they don't seem to. I'd wonder why not, but that's a topic for another post. Eleanor From meltowne at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 13:39:14 2004 From: meltowne at yahoo.com (meltowne) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 13:39:14 -0000 Subject: Time-Turner Questions?! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111093 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Brenda M." wrote: Brenda: 1. If there are times or events pre-destined to be revisited or corrected, it defies the whole purpose of free-will and "I'm in charge of my life" motto. It strongly reminds me of that vase incident from Matrix, when Neo visits the Oracle. Meltowne: But someone at some point has to make the decision to go back to make the "change." H&H went back to correct their perception of what happened. They don't really change what happened to Buckbeak (since it already happened), but they do choose to save Sirius, which has not yet happened. The other instance where I believe it was used, at the beginning of SS/PS, Harry has disappeared once his parents died; Hagrid was sent back to make sure he wasn't taken by the wrong people. Brenda: 2. Another thing is that I have even greater problem is -- so time- turner acts as a DNA replication device? Wizard cloning machinery? To be able to produce multiple copies of same human being, with every bit of intelligence and cognition intact? How is that possible?? *sudden image of Homer's hammock comes to mind* Meltowne: I don't see that happening. Yes, the same person is present in the same time more than once - and one has lived through the eposide once before, and has more information than the "original" person. Brenda: 3. I'm now wondering if Time-Turners can be used in court. Wouldn't it prove to be a much more effective and truthful testimony if it can be verified by going back in time and the whole event presented in front of more witness? Wizards have better means to verify the truth - - either by Legilimens or Pensieve or Time-turners. I wonder why we don't hear of these devices during wizarding trials. Meltowne: But who are you going to send back? The entire Wizengamot? Won't their presence change the course of history? I don't think that many people could go back to observe without neing noticed, and if they were observed it might change what happened. I suppose the court could choose to send one person back to observe, but again I would wonder even about that. There is still the risk of contaminating the timeline. From slgazit at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 24 13:39:16 2004 From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 13:39:16 -0000 Subject: Snape, Malfory and Azkaban In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111094 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "garybec" wrote: > And since we are on the subject of the Imperious Curse, I have > always wondered, why is it that Harry is able to fight off the IC, > but experts, (ie: Aurors, like Madeye and Crouch) can not? Is Harry > really that powerful? I would think in "Auror Training 101", that > fighting off the IC would be one of the first things they teach > you. What could be worse than an auror being controlled by LV? There are two reasons that I see: Harry is indeed a very powerfull wizard - in PoA he was able to create a Patronus that drove away 100 dementors (Lupin tells him he himself could never do that); he could withstand the Imperius charm, even when performed by one of the most powerfull wizard in WW (Voldemort) and best him in a struggle of wills as well (the duel in the graveyard). Harry's technique, concentration and focus leave a lot to be desired but not his abilities. Once he masters a spell he can do it very well, even if it takes a while to get the hang of it - the summoning and Patronus charms are a case in point. The second explanation is that both Crouch and Moody were attacked by two wizards - Wormtail and Crouch Jr. There are several examples in GoF where combining spells works while a single spell does not. When only one wizard was doing the spell, both Crouch Jr. and Sr. were able to occasionally throw off the spell, even if only temporarily. As for Moody, he was starved and weakened once he was captured, therefore could not resist Crouch Jr. during the year. Salit From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 13:55:09 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 13:55:09 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111095 Alla wrote: Hey, Neri. I am actually equally torn between these two theories. I want Snape's redemption "done right" and even though I don't consider him to be a good guy yet, I prefer to think that he is capable of making moral choices.... sometimes. ;o) I think him trying to pay his life debt to James is very likely, but then if he left Voldie for that reason only it would mean that Snape still shares DE ideology in many many important matters. Does he miss his DE days? Neri: Well, I think this is a bit more in character than the Big Bang scenario. I mean, if he had a shattering moral epiphany then why is he so nasty now? But I think you have the same problem I have with the Life Debt scenario: it lacks punch. We already know about this part. Alla wrote: I think I like dramatic event the best. Something really horrific and unexpected (unexpected murder ???) made him see that Voldemort and Co are not the best company to hang out with? And of course the person killed should be somebody Snape cared about, otherwise it just would not work, IMO. Neri: Well, if he cared for the person who was killed then it is actually the Revenge scenario, isn't it? If he didn't care about him personally then it is the moral revelation scenario. This is how I see it. The difference between plain revenge and true morality is that true morality is universal, not personal. Not that I have much against the Revenge scenario. It is certainly in character. It is just that it's so conventional. Half the action movies from Hollywood use it (and not necessarily the better half either). OTOH Shakespeare had some very good stuff based on the revenge motive. But Shakespeare was a true FEATHERBOA whereas JKR is not. I'm not sure she can do justice to the Revenge scenario. As you can see I'm still of five-and-a-half minds in this. Neri From j.balfour at leedsmet.ac.uk Tue Aug 24 14:22:20 2004 From: j.balfour at leedsmet.ac.uk (Boolean) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:22:20 -0000 Subject: Harry's Depression in OoP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111096 > HunterGreen: IMO He could go either way in the next > book, those feelings may or may not continue (they could be replaced > with basic grief or depression). I don't think Harry is going to have too much time to think about anything in the next 2 books. There will be more action and less feelings, I think, and he'll be too busy fighting a war to mooch around like a hormone-ravaged teenager. From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Aug 24 14:26:57 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:26:57 -0000 Subject: Who stuns Sirius? (was Re: The Veil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111097 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cdayr" wrote: > I feel pretty sure it wasn't Harry. Although all you ESE!Lupin > theorists might wanna grab this one as further proof for your > arguments, why would Lupin have been spending all that time > with Sirius at GP, alone, tons of chances to do him in in some > logical way, and then suddenly act now. Nope, not Lupin. > (Please, JKR, not Lupin) > You were obviously thinking "Lupin" in your first sentence above, but you wrote "Harry". I'm not nit-picking-- it is this sort of unconscious confusion that tipped me off to ESE!Lupin in the first place. There is an essential vagueness about Lupin, such that we're not really sure who he is. We don't really know what he's after. A teaching post at Hogwarts? He had it, and threw it away. Political power for his kind? Not on the Order's agenda, sorry. Dumbledore isn't promising anyone the rights and freedoms that have been denied for centuries. Voldemort is. But regardless of motive, it obviously wouldn't do to kill Sirius while they were alone at GP. Even if ESE!Lupin gave himself an alibi and tried to frame someone else, the only possible suspects would be those admitted to the House, which would raise once again the possibility of a spy among the Order. That's the last thing a real spy would want. Sirius couldn't be killed unless there was some way to attribute it to enemy action, and that was impossible as long as he remained safely at GP. I'll save the full analysis of Lupin's behavior in the battle for the ESE!Lupin essay, but unless there was someone invisible in the room, Lupin was the only one besides Bella in position to have nailed Sirius. I can't say at this point whether ESE!Lupin knew he would have to kill Sirius all along, or acted in panic when it became clear that Kreacher's treachery would be discovered. Some of both, maybe. Pippin going back to work on the ESE!Lupin essay now From mauranen at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 15:00:14 2004 From: mauranen at yahoo.com (jekatiska) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 15:00:14 -0000 Subject: Lily's Protection (Re: LV never loved anyone) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111098 > Romulus Lupin: > I've read this theory before, but I always had this little problem > with it. Why would Lily put an anti-Dursley spell on Harry? He was > supposed to go live with his godfather and Guardian, Sirius Black, > who, while probably an immature father would certainly have been a > doting one (he is a doting godfather, inasmuch as his situation and > the world he lives in consent him to be). Are you suggesting Lily > knew Sirius would end up in Azkaban and Harry would have to live > with the Dursleys? If so, how did she come by that knowledge? > > Romulus Lupin, who just can't refrain from posting these days Jekatiska's comment: I don't think she actually consciously put an "Anti-Dursley spell" on Harry. Rather she left an imprint of herself in her baby, as part of her sacrifice, that would guard Harry against all sorts of hardship. Which after all he is likely to endure throughout his life, not only in his foster home. Lily's sacrifice would provide a comforting voice in Harry's subconscious mind, and help him endure whatever life has in store for him. A kind of reminder that he's not alone. This imprint also seems to have had quite an impact on the development of Harry's character, as it would be unlikely for the Dursleys to raise Harry in a way that would make him anything close to a decent person. Jekatiska From entropymail at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 15:08:35 2004 From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 15:08:35 -0000 Subject: Who stuns Sirius? (was Re: The Veil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111099 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > it is this sort of > unconscious confusion that tipped me off to ESE!Lupin in the > first place. There is an essential vagueness about Lupin, such > that we're not really sure who he is. Assuming Lupin is the one who shot the stunner at Sirius is not the same as assuming he is ESE!Lupin! Here's my scenerio of what happened that night: Everyone now knows that Sirius is an unregistered animagus and his "big disguise is useless". Not only does being recognized put Sirius in great danger, it also endangers the rest of the Order members. And Sirius is clearly not happy holing up at Grimmauld Place. So, he must find a new hiding place. Perhaps the Order has chosen to use the veil as a way of getting Sirius (quite literally) out of sight. The plan was all in place, ready to go, but had to be nudged up a bit when the opportunity at the MOM presented itself. Bellatrix cast the first curse, which Sirius dodged. But then "the second jet of light hit him squarely in the chest." Perhaps it wasn't one of the Death Eaters, but an OOP member, simply giving Sirius a convenient nudge through the veil. I chose ESH!Lupin (Ever So Helpful!) as the one who shot the stunner, not intended to hurt Sirius, but intended to push him through the veil. After Sirius takes his long, dramatic arc through the veil (a bit of overacting, perhaps?), he finds Fred and George waiting for him. They've bewitched the veil in the same way they did their Headless Hats, rendering everyone behind it invisible (that's why Harry thought he heard Ron whispering behind the veil.) Then Lupin tells Harry that Sirius is gone (There's nothing you can do, Harry...It's too late, Harry..."). How does Lupin know what the veil is? How in the world would a werewolf (the most outside of outsiders) have any idea what is going on in the Department of Mysteries? He wouldn't, unless he was given knowledge of the veil beforehand, by Order members. But this is my favorite bit: Gilderoy Lockhart is convalescing in the "Janus Thickey" ward. Janus Thickey was a wizard who faked his own death by leaving a note on the bedside table for his wife, claiming that he had been killed by a Lethifold. A Lethifold, also known as a Living Shroud (sounds like a veil), is a "dangerous beast resembling a half-inch thick black cloak ...It attacks sleeping humans, smothers them, then digests them, all in their bed, leaving no trace at all...Thankfully, this frightening creature is rare, only found in the tropics ." JKR's tricky with her clues. She loves messing with us! Could it she be trying to tell us something? It can't possibly be a coincidence that, in the very same book in which we lose Sirius, we are reminded of a wizard who has faked his own death via a black shroud (veil!). And, didn't Sirius spend some time hanging out in the tropics after his escape? :: Entropy :: From musicofsilence at hotmail.com Tue Aug 24 15:19:22 2004 From: musicofsilence at hotmail.com (lifeavantgarde) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 15:19:22 -0000 Subject: Why such a point of characters' birthdays? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111100 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > > DuffyPoo: > > I had this very thought when Harry's birthday appeared on July > 31st. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't mark the birthday > of deceased loved ones on my calendar, only those for whom I need to > remember to buy/send a card or gift. > > > Potioncat: > But we do not know if JKR is doing anything more than having fun. > And we don't know if she is considering the RW present or book 6 > present. And certainly, as she writes book 6, Harry is alive. I > didn't see the entry for Percy, did it say "Happy Birthday Percy"? > Very interesting given that he's not in favor at the moment. Can't > wait to see what it says about Snape! Or for that matter, Tom > Riddle. > > And, along that line, if you buy a Scouting calendar, it will note > both Lord Baden-Powell's and Juliette Gordon Lowe's birthdays. > Although both are long since gone. (founders of the Scouting > movement) Stefanie: Very true. We have various presidents birthdays marked on US calendars, but, only those which have been instated as national holidays. (Guh. Which Harry Potter's most certainly would be in any case. ::whimper::) I'm still convinced that she considers the RW "the present" just judging from the timeline on the CoS DVD. She approved that timeline which states Harry's birthday as July 31, 1980. In this case, Harry's seventh year would've been in 1997...we've escaped certain doom and not known the better of it, weird enough :-D Like I signed my other post...we won't actually know what's going on until either a person we canonically know as dead is celebrated or someone who's birthday we know doesn't show up. As of now, we know: Fred - April 1 George - April 1 Neville - July 30 Harry - July 31 Ginny - August 11 Percy - August 21 Angelina - The week after Hallowe'en (GoF 16) JKR's desktop calendar does seem to be "wizarding" as per the wizard of the month...if any of the kids birthdays have been instated as holidays since 1997, I guess it would be on there. Stefanie Who is weirded out by RW/WW crossoverness of this whole bit Xo) From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Tue Aug 24 15:23:54 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 15:23:54 -0000 Subject: Who stuns Sirius? (was Re: The Veil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111101 >>> Entropy wrote: > Perhaps the Order has chosen to use the veil as a way of getting > Sirius (quite literally) out of sight. The plan was all in place, ready to go, but had to be nudged up a bit when the opportunity at the > MOM presented itself. > > Bellatrix cast the first curse, which Sirius dodged. But then "the second jet of light hit him squarely in the chest." Perhaps it wasn't > one of the Death Eaters, but an OOP member, simply giving Sirius a > convenient nudge through the veil. I chose ESH!Lupin (Ever So > Helpful!) as the one who shot the stunner, not intended to hurt > Sirius, but intended to push him through the veil. > > After Sirius takes his long, dramatic arc through the veil (a bit of > overacting, perhaps?), he finds Fred and George waiting for him. > They've bewitched the veil in the same way they did their Headless Hats, rendering everyone behind it invisible (that's why Harry thought he heard Ron whispering behind the veil.) Then Lupin tells Harry that > Sirius is gone (There's nothing you can do, Harry...It's too late, > Harry..."). How does Lupin know what the veil is? How in the world would a werewolf (the most outside of outsiders) have any idea what is > going on in the Department of Mysteries? He wouldn't, unless he was > given knowledge of the veil beforehand, by Order members. > But this is my favorite bit: Gilderoy Lockhart is convalescing in the > "Janus Thickey" ward. Janus Thickey was a wizard who faked his own > death by leaving a note on the bedside table for his wife, claiming that he had been killed by a Lethifold. A Lethifold, also known as a Living Shroud (sounds like a veil), is a "dangerous beast resembling a > half-inch thick black cloak ...It attacks sleeping humans, smothers > them, then digests them, all in their bed, leaving no trace at all...Thankfully, this frightening creature is rare, only found in the > tropics ." > > JKR's tricky with her clues. She loves messing with us! Could it she > be trying to tell us something? It can't possibly be a coincidence > that, in the very same book in which we lose Sirius, we are reminded > of a wizard who has faked his own death via a black shroud (veil!). > And, didn't Sirius spend some time hanging out in the tropics after > his escape? Brenda: Lol Love your scenario of the "Beyond the Veil" story. I just wanted to raise a tiny red flag ever so slightly, before we get our hopes up too high: 1. Jo said that she cried after writing this chapter. She told husband, "I did it" when crying in her kitchen. He told her before not to kill the character off, but she said "I have to". [From an interview I read a while ago, can't remember where it was from, sorry] 2. From JKR's website, on "Immeritus" fan site "I love this site, which I discovered towards the end of writing Order of the Phoenix, and which made me feel exceptionally guilty, as you can imagine. I am so proud of the fact that a character, whom I always liked very much, though he never appeared as much more than a brooding presence in the books, has gained a passionate fan-club." -- notice how she uses past tense in describing Sirius. To me he's a goner *cries* 3. Her comment on how death is sudden and FINAL. She would see her mother in the Mirror of Erised. She wanted to get it through readers that death happens so quickly, unexpectedly and it's final. Do I still qualify for SAD DENIAL club status?? Brenda, who could so kiss JKR if she made Sirius alive! From sweetface531 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 15:38:17 2004 From: sweetface531 at yahoo.com (Justine) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 15:38:17 -0000 Subject: Why such a point of characters' birthdays? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111102 Stef: Like I signed my other post...we won't actually know what's going on > until either a person we canonically know as dead is celebrated or > someone who's birthday we know doesn't show up. As of now, we know: > Fred - April 1 > George - April 1 > Neville - July 30 > Harry - July 31 > Ginny - August 11 > Percy - August 21 > Angelina - The week after Hallowe'en (GoF 16) Justine: Darnit. The first news article on the site was from March 15th, and the twins' birthday, noted as April 1st on the site, was missed. Say it ain't so, Jo! Justine From mnaperrone at aol.com Tue Aug 24 15:44:19 2004 From: mnaperrone at aol.com (mnaper2001) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 15:44:19 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111103 > Neri: > > Why did DE!Snape change sides? This is one of the greatest mysteries in the books (Lexicon Steve, do you have it on your list?). I tried to round up the usual suspicions. I'm not really happy with any of them, but I added my personal scoring: > > Revenge: Voldy killed/tortured someone in his family or someone he > was in love with (not very mushy, but conventional. JKR can do > better: 5). > > Good Snape: He was never a real DE. He was always a spy for the side > of good (super mushy: 1). > > > Did I miss any theory? Which would you prefer? > > Neri Ally: I have one that's sort of a combo of a couple of yours. Its the revenge/not really a bad guy theory. Snape gets lured into the DEs with promises of respect and acceptance. But, once he gets in, he realizes its not all its cracked up to be. He's no more important or respected by the DEs than he was by the Marauders, and what's more, he really doesn't believe in what they believe in either. He may not cozy up to muggles, but disliking them and wanting to eradicate them from the earth are two different things. He's little more than a slave to an idea and Ruler he doesn't believe in, and the Snape who craves respect and recognition is not about to warm up to that idea. Ultimately, he realizes that he was trick/hoodwinked/bamboozled into joining just because they wanted to use his magical talents, and it makes him angry. Around the same time, Regulus Black - maybe someone Snape has had some heart to hearts with? - tries to get out and gets killed, and Snape realizes that there is no traditional means of escape. The only way out is to defeat Voldie altogether. It's his only hope of freedom. So - I think he could care less about Harry as a person, and just really really hates Voldie and the fact that he was manipulated by him. Those glittering eyes when he went off at the end of GOF - he was afraid (the paleness), but there was also something purposeful there IMO. Ally From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 15:45:16 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 15:45:16 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111104 > Sigune wrote: > I offer up my own pet theory (sorry, couldn't resist...) - feel free > to tear it to bits. I haven't got any proof, but I believe I am being > consistent with canon. > Here goes: > > > I guess what I've sketched here is a mean, nasty Snape who does the > right thing for the wrong reason. He's a gift of a character :). Neri: Sigune, I liked your theory. I think it is plausible and good character analysis. However, I still feel the need for a higher "Wow!" factor. We are waiting through six, possibly seven long books to hear the big secret: why is Snape on the side of good (always assuming he really is, of course). I expect some reward for the time and money ;-) . I also want a satisfying dramatic climax. Your Snape seems to be quite content with his current situation in life (aside of not getting the DADA job I guess). There isn't much conflict. James Potter and now Black are done for. There's nothing much that he misses. Deceiving Voldy is apparently some dangerous sport that he enjoys. So how do you see the climax? Neri From cdayr at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 07:26:18 2004 From: cdayr at yahoo.com (cdayr) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 07:26:18 -0000 Subject: Who stuns Sirius -- ESE!Lupin? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111105 > Brenda: > Err... I must agree with Alla and Dzeytoun with this one, Dumbledore > will face far greater difficulty in getting Harry ready for the war > if he had caused such a heart-wrecking loss to Harry. CDR again: Ouch. However, the arguments you all have offered in return for my bizarro theory have been entirely convincing- I yield to the Dumbledore would never do that theory. I didn't want to believe it anyway, and only was obsessed with it today, so I will easily shelve it with my many other out-there thoughts. I still feel the actual situation in the Chamber is very ambiguous, with that second red jet of light seeming to come out of nowhere. Do others feel the same? I will step back and say I have no idea now who else it could have been or why, if it really just is straight-forward Bella, JKR doesn't make it completely obvious by calling it "her second jet" instead of "the second jet" or something. It just leaves the door open for the sort of mystery that will drive me crazy until it is put to rest in a future book. And I will never believe in ESE!Lupin... even if it turns out to be true! : ( Ack! CDR - who hopes you haven't all permanently judged me as a freak over this post! From mauranen at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 15:54:49 2004 From: mauranen at yahoo.com (jekatiska) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 15:54:49 -0000 Subject: Pre-Hogwarts education (Re: focus on Hermione) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111106 > HunterGreen wrote: > Now, Angelina is in her sixth year at this point. Unless she was held > back (which I doubt very much), that means the cutoff date is no > later than October 28th (since this happened right around Halloween, > and October 30th was the beginning of a new week in 1994, so if her > birthday was Saturday the 29th, she *could* call it 'last week'). I'm > guessing the cutoff date is either Sept 1st, or Oct 1st. If it is > October, then it means that Hermione barely missed it. Now, I know the cutoff date and characters' birthdays have been discussed a lot here, but I would like to add this: I suppose the Hogwarts cutoff date would have to be somehow synchronised with other schools' dates, as I suppose the kids would be in different schools before coming to Hogwarts. Which raises the question I really wanted to ask. (Pardon me if this has been discussed here eaarlier, but there are too many messages to comb through ;) What education do kids in wizarding families receive prior to coming to Hogwarts? Judging from Ron's ignorance of muggle things, I would presume they don't go to muggle schools. Even if he managed to get through several years of British muggle schooling without learning what an aqualung is by the age of 11, he could not possibly avoid knowing more about football than anyone can possibly need to. But then, if they go to a wizard primary school, wouldn't at least some of them know each other before coming to Hogwarts? At least Ron or Neville don't seem to know anyone when they first arrive. Malfoy, on the other hand, already has his cronies, but this oculd be due to their families being close, rather than going to the same primary school. And if they go to a wizarding primary school, wouldn't they learn something about magic there? So you could expect them to be better prepared than muggle-born kids when they start Hogwarts. But Hagrid said (and others showed) that this is not the case. Do they just learn things like English and maths in primary school? Incidentally, what bothers me about Hogwarts is the lack of subjects like maths (which must be used at least in potions and astronomy) or languages. The Beauxbatons and Durmstrang students all spoke English, so I presume they learn it at school. Did Bill write to his Brasilian pen-pal in English or Portuguese? Charlie and the other dragon-handlers spoke English, but wouldn't one expect there to be Romanians doing the same job? Are British witches and wizards as reluctant to learn foreign languages as British muggles? Asks Jekatiska, who lives surrounded by ignorant British undergraduates and would like to think wizards are better educated... From khinterberg at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 07:36:36 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 07:36:36 -0000 Subject: Snape's job at Hogwarts Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111107 In OotP, during the Potions class in which Umbridge supervises Snape, he says that he has held his job there for 14 years, which means he got the post the year baby Harry's life changed. What are ideas of why he got the job then? We also know he first applied for DADA, but didn't get that. So were both positions open that year? khinterberg, who wants to know more about Snape From humantupperware1 at yahoo.com.au Tue Aug 24 08:48:26 2004 From: humantupperware1 at yahoo.com.au (humantupperware1) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 08:48:26 -0000 Subject: Percy's Letter (Was: Is Percy a spy?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111108 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kim" wrote: > Hello! > > > First of all, the letter is received on the evening before Umbridge > becomes "High Inquisitor" and things get very, very bad at > Hogwarts. And, according to the Daily Prophet article that arrives > the next morning, the move to make her High Inquisitor occurred > during the night. Percy must have fired off his letter to Ron > rather quickly, perhaps right after the MoM decision. He also knew > that the Prophet would have the information for the morning's paper > and that the students would know about the move right away. If > Percy is on the side of the MoM, why write with such haste, if not > to warn the trio? Why not just let them find out on their own? > > The opening two paragraphs of the letter are sheer Percy Weasley, > written to throw anyone who might be reading the mail. And remember- > - we are constantly reminded, from the beginning of OOTP, that the > mail is not safe. Percy would know this, and gives a clue right in > the opening lines of the letter when he states his connections (MOM, > Umbridge). He seems to be saying, "Dear Ron, Big Brother is > watching! Listen up." > snip of some very good ideas..... HumanTupperware: Even though I think this post is full of some good ideas about Percy warning Ron about what is to come, I tend not to read into these things so much (which may well be my downfall here), Basically, I think Percy was just being a bit of a prat. We all know what Percy is like, and there have been some recent posts about his struggle to achieve his ambitions on his own terms, plus the corrupting nature of power, and to me, this is what comes in as far as Percy is concerned. I don't think Percy was a spy. I think he is just highly ambitious, (remember Ron's comments about Percy's ambition when Crouch was in power?) and he is willing to take on the views of the ministry without question. Percy toes the Party line, he fawned all over Crouch, and then when he gets higher up in the ministry he does everything he can to uphold the ideas of his superiors. Otherwise, how else can he expect to succedd at the Ministry? (something that Arthur hasn't managed to do, which I think is a BIG part of Percy's problem) I percieved his letter to Ron to be more of the same pompous stuff, trying to influence Ron and his views on Harry and Dumbledore because that is what the ministry says. I also think that maybe the letter was intended to give us, the readers, a taste for what is to come, rather than an explicit warning to Ron, though your post does make a lot of sense........... Having said all this though, I do have a sneaking suspicion that it might have been Percy that told dumbledore about Harry's hearing being earlier, but Dumbledore has ways and means of knowing things that none of us can guess........... hmmmm? HumanTupperware From mnaperrone at aol.com Tue Aug 24 16:00:04 2004 From: mnaperrone at aol.com (mnaper2001) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 16:00:04 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111109 > Sigune: > > Hmm... the Life Debt, I can see that. He's honour-bound... > > I offer up my own pet theory (sorry, couldn't resist...) - feel free > to tear it to bits. I haven't got any proof, but I believe I am being > consistent with canon. > Here goes: >> BUT. > After some time he begins to realise the Death Eaters are not really > the allies he had thought they were. They are all out to save their > own skins, to further their own causes; and the Dark Lord does not > really want his followers to substantially win power. He wants > servants merely, and bullies his Death Eaters into such a position. > This is so not what our ambitious young man wanted. He feels cheated. > But he is bound to the Dark Lord by now. And on his own he has not > sufficient strength to win back his freedom and pride. > So he turns to Albus Dumbledore, the only man who *does* have that > strength and power. He offers to spy for him. And how wonderful it > feels to undetectedly thwart the Evil Overlord who thinks he > possesses him. Heh heh. And, look, he's better off with Dumbledore on > the whole: no more Cruciatus Curses, no serfdom, a nice job in a safe > place, a position of trust, and lots to learn. Hasn't he made a > clever move. Ally: Sigune, I just put forth a very similar theory before I read yours. I also think Snape got in and found out it wasn't quite what he expected and definitely definitely resents being some minion to a cranky, crucio-happy dark lord. Sigune: > Somehow I think that for Snape to make such an important decision as > that of changing sides, there must have been something done to him > personally. He changed his mind after being forced to do something > gruesome? Don't buy that. Someone as calculating as he was would not > have joined the DE's without first informing himself as to what they > were all about. And he's not a wimp, or he wouldn't have lived till, > well, Book Six at least, and wouldn't have shown Fudge the Dark Mark, > and wouldn't have agreed to to whatever it is he is currently doing > for Dumbledore. Snape's greatest concern is himself; if he joined the > DE's, left them, became a spy, eventually joined the Order - he did > so for selfish reasons. That's why Dumbledore can trust him: he knows > he is Snape's greatest asset, they need each other to reach their > respective goals, which happen to converge in one important place - > Voldemort's defeat. Ally: The one thing I disagree with here is that he wouldn't have joined the DEs without informing himself of what they were all about. While I agree that he probably knew in a sense what they were about, I don't think he really *KNEW* what it meant to be a DE. I think he was manipulated into joining. Remember, he would have been very young, and I always come back to his speech to Harry during occlumency about how Voldemort preys on "fools who wear their hearts on their sleeves." I think Snape is talking about himself there and how he was lured into the fold. I'm not so sure there had to be some big, momentous event to make him turn. I think JKR might pick something subtle here, the way she chose to make Sirius' death so sudden and fairly understated. In some ways, I think that would be better. And it may well have something to do with information about Snape we don't even have yet. But I agree, Snape's reasons are mainly selfish, and that's why DD knows he can trust Snape. I think Snape can't wait to be freed from his servitude, and that's the main thing driving him. Ally. From spaced_out_space_cadet at hotmail.com Tue Aug 24 11:42:42 2004 From: spaced_out_space_cadet at hotmail.com (spacedoutspacecadet) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 11:42:42 -0000 Subject: Snape, Malfory and Azkaban In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111110 Steve/b_boymn > The REALLY big question is, can he pull that same stunt twice? Will > they believe him this time? I'm really torn. On one hand I want him > punished, but on the other, this is one very very slippery Slytherin. I'd like to think that he can't get away with it twice, even if he is a good friend of Fudge (amazing what a little gold can do). The fact that he was there fighting and was the leader of the first band of DE will go against him, but again there is that matter of gold... Then again even if he does get out, I think that this time his reputation will carry a tarnish that will be too hard to get rid of. It will be quite interesting to see where it all leads... From phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk Tue Aug 24 11:59:02 2004 From: phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk (Kate Harding) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 11:59:02 -0000 Subject: Ginny & Cats (was Snape and the Edinburgh Festival) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111111 potioncat: > The fan says JKR said that the cat-like descriptions of Ginny are > not significant. > > But having thought about it, we are such a canon thumping site, and > we take such care to quote carefully, I really wish I hadn't brought > it up in the first place. psyche: The question was, descriptions of Ginny are often related to cats, is there a reason for this? The answer was, no there's not, but you are onbviously a very careful reader. That doesn't sound to me like an evasive hint. It sounds to me like she's genuinely saying there's no significance, and complimenting the person on her careful reading! psyche From phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk Tue Aug 24 12:06:29 2004 From: phoenix at risen.demon.co.uk (Kate Harding) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:06:29 -0000 Subject: Squibs and potions (was Mrs Figg, cabbage and Polyjuice Potion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111112 Cindy: > > I was wondering - this may have been discussed before, I don't know - > > but why does Mrs. Figg's house smell of cabbage (SS p.22), and the > > Polyjuice potion tastes like cabbage (CoS p.216)? Could Mrs Figg be > > using polyjuice for some reason b_boymn: > That's a fair conclusion to jump to, and one that has been supported > by many people. > I have the same question now that I posed back then. The first and > most significant is .... WHY? psyche: That raises another question, I think (apologies if this has come up before). Can squibs create potions? Does the process of potion making work purely on the ingredients? Or is the wizards actual magic a component as well? Because if squibs can make potions, you'd think they'd all work really hard to learn it to compensate for their lack of other magic. Filch might be reading Potions 101 instead of Kwikspell (or whatever it was - text not to hand). psyche From cruthw at earthlink.net Tue Aug 24 16:07:33 2004 From: cruthw at earthlink.net (caspenzoe) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 16:07:33 -0000 Subject: Is Percey A Spy In-Reply-To: <082420040307.10714.412AB0ED000B4A47000029DA21587667550B070AADD2BBD20201AD@att.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111113 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Pouncevil at A... wrote: > Here's a Thought??? > > Lets all remember that the "Rat" Scabbers came from Percy. > > We also know that Peter P. the rat was a DE and had been passing them information for years. Did Peter pass on information while in the "care" of Percy. > > Could Percy have been a DE all along with the promise of fame & fortune by LV followers when he returned to power.... > Living with the Weasley's also gave Peter P. an in-site into the MOM goings on, as stated in GOF with Arthur describing the different members of the MOM and what jobs they had. What a wealth of information. "LOOSE LIPS SINK SHIPS" I wonder if Arthur will continue to comment on who's doing what and where in the MOM, or worse the OOTP. > -- > Ronald D. Reid Having re-read COS recently, I was struck by the number of times mysterious behavior on the part of Percy is mentioned - it's not just once or twice, but several times. In COS Percy seems to have some hold over Ginny, or at the very least to be monitoring her. In addition, he appears inexplicably in the dungeon. I know the canon explanation (offered by Percy) at the end of COS is that Ginny has caught him in an assignation with Penelope Clearwater, but, if so, why insist that she conceal it, and why behave deceptively, (again!) not once, but several times, given his later openess about the relationship? Why, for that matter, would Percy (a Gryffyndor, a Slytherin rival, residing in the upper floors of the castle) and Penelope (a Ravenclaw, also residing in the upper floors of the castle) meet in a dungeon, close to the Slytherins' quaters of all places? Why does PP become Percy's pet and why does Percy bequeath PP, in the form of Scabbers, to to Ron? Why does PP choose the Weasely family to reside with, and why is another Weasily, Ginny, targeted by LM in COS? If Percy is a spy, it's inconcieveable to me that he is spying for Dumbledore. Rather, if anything, his suspiscious behavior indicates an allegiance, conscious or not, to the other side. Added to which (sorry to any Percy fans) Percy is really a rather weak character (from a human, not a literary point of view): he cares too much what others think of him and for praise and power; he cares for the letter of the law (the rules) and not the spirit the law is intended to serve - very human, very common weakneses that, as proven by history time and again, can be twisted to serve very evil, one might even say ESE ends. Regardless whether Percy is intentionally serving VM (is a spy for VM) or not, his actions have never really served the good (i.e: DD) yet in canon have they? Quite the opposite: of late, they have certainly opposed it. Caspen From humantupperware1 at yahoo.com.au Tue Aug 24 13:41:31 2004 From: humantupperware1 at yahoo.com.au (humantupperware1) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 13:41:31 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past (was Re: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111114 > Neri wrote: > > < Why did DE!Snape change sides? This is one of the greatest > mysteries in the books (Lexicon Steve, do you have it on your list?). > I tried to round up the usual suspicions. I'm not really happy with > any of them, but I added my personal scoring: > > > > Did I miss any theory? Which would you prefer? > > > > Sigune: > > Hmm... the Life Debt, I can see that. He's honour-bound... > > I offer up my own pet theory (sorry, couldn't resist...) - feel free > to tear it to bits. I haven't got any proof, but I believe I am being > consistent with canon. > Here goes: snip > > > After some time he begins to realise the Death Eaters are not really > the allies he had thought they were. They are all out to save their > own skins, to further their own causes; and the Dark Lord does not > really want his followers to substantially win power. He wants > servants merely, and bullies his Death Eaters into such a position. > This is so not what our ambitious young man wanted. He feels cheated. > But he is bound to the Dark Lord by now. And on his own he has not > sufficient strength to win back his freedom and pride. > So he turns to Albus Dumbledore, the only man who *does* have that > strength and power. He offers to spy for him. And how wonderful it > feels to undetectedly thwart the Evil Overlord who thinks he > possesses him. Heh heh. And, look, he's better off with Dumbledore on > the whole: no more Cruciatus Curses, no serfdom, a nice job in a safe > place, a position of trust, and lots to learn. Hasn't he made a > clever move. HumanTupperware here: Your post got me thinking, not so much "why" Snape left the DE, but if he turned into a spy for Dumbldore's side, how has he convinced Voldy that he is still loyal? Apart from the Occlumency, which I'm sure comes in handy, Voldemort surely knows that Snape works at Hogwarts, so somehow, his teaching position must be justified to Voldy. I'm sure I surmised somewhere during the books that Snape had been spying for Dumbledore in the days before Voldy was vanquished, then afterwards had actually manged to leave the DE for a while, but then returned, (at the end of GOF?) to spy for Dumbledore again. Sure, he would have gotten the teaching position at Hogwarts after Voldy's vanquishment, but did he maintain to the remaining DE that he was at Hogwarts to spy on Dumbledore? If he then returned to Voldy after GOF, for him to justify keeping his teaching position, he must be telling Voldy some information, maybe pretending to spy on Dumbledore, but giving fake information? Do Snape and Dumbledore get together once a week to make up stories to tell Voldy? I know we all have to wait until the next book to get the full backstory, but I was always curious as to how Snape manages to keep Voldy off his back when he has a job right underneath Dumbledore's nose.......very handy for Voldy. I am also assuming in all this that Snape is not ESE, merely very very nasty to Harry. Any thoughts? (feel free to tear me to pieces if this has been gone over a million times before) HumanTupperware From ctcasares at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 24 14:48:07 2004 From: ctcasares at sbcglobal.net (tylerswaxlion) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:48:07 -0000 Subject: Is Percy a Spy? + Comment on Fudge & Umbridge. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111115 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: >But I do not think Percy is evil, nor that he > would side with the Death Eaters. I agree; I don't think Percy is evil, and I think he's got to be crushed to discover his mentor Fudge has been such a fool (supposing Fudge's not ESE, or, that Percy doesn't believe Fudge is ESE.) Here's my take: Most of the Weasley boys seem concerned with success/riches--even ickle Ronny imagines fame and glory in the Mirror of Erised. Percy thought he knew best. His father was sidelined with Muggles b/c he didn't know how to network! Percy would just do everything "right" and then he would be justly rewarded with riches and glory, everything his father lacked. So, Percy excelled in school, was hired by MoM, and got himself attached to the MoM himself!!! Hey, his cauldron report really WAS that good. I think Percy really thought his dad was just jealous of Percy's success, and tried to bring him down with his crazy notions of HE- Who-Must-Not-be-Named's return. Please. The Minister knows better! Poor Percy had to cut himself off from them. Percy must have thought his dad was trying to sabotage his success, either b/c he was so misguided or intentionally our of jealousy. Now it turns out dad *was* right and dad *has* been truly treated unfairly at work. Doing what's "right" doesn't mean you'll receive what's fair. Real life is messy. So it's crisis time for Percy. Will he accept the fact that his dad was right about LV; that sometimes those in power are corrupt, and that hard work doesn't always pay off in the real world? Or will he be willing to do anything to preserve a place of authority at MoM, with or without Fudge? (b/c how did he survive that Barty Crouch mishap anyway???) It's a just side story, but I've gone from finding Percy to be an annoying distraction, to wondering what he'll do next. TL From ctcasares at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 24 15:00:39 2004 From: ctcasares at sbcglobal.net (tylerswaxlion) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 15:00:39 -0000 Subject: Who stuns Sirius -- ESE!Lupin? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111116 Brenda: > Why did > Sirius' eyes widen with shock as he died? Was it that surprising to > him that his capable evil top-lieutenant-of-Voldemort causin took him > down? No, I believe he had just found out the shocking truth at that > moment. I think Sirius was shocked to be mortally wounded. He's a Gryffendor, they seem to be brave and rash to a fault. He thought he had the upper hand, even with his "capable evil top-lieutenant-of- Voldemort cousin". (It's just *Bella*, for Pete's sake!) He didn't know his life was about to be over; he had PLANS. Or perhaps falling through the Veil was a shocking experience. Or perhaps he was just "stunned" to be STUNNED. ;^) I don't think there was a secret DE behind the grassy knoll. Then again, I could be totally wrong. ;^) TL From severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk Tue Aug 24 16:36:40 2004 From: severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk (severelysigune) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 16:36:40 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111117 Neri wrote: < Sigune, I liked your theory. I think it is plausible and good character analysis. However, I still feel the need for a higher "Wow!" factor. We are waiting through six, possibly seven long books to hear the big secret: why is Snape on the side of good (always assuming he really is, of course). I expect some reward for the time and money ;-) . I also want a satisfying dramatic climax. Your Snape seems to be quite content with his current situation in life (aside of not getting the DADA job I guess). There isn't much conflict. James Potter and now Black are done for. There's nothing much that he misses. Deceiving Voldy is apparently some dangerous sport that he enjoys. So how do you see the climax? > Sigune: Ay, there's the rub. Once I've figured that out I'll write it into a fanfic :-). No, seriously, I don't really know. I certainly don't believe in a great selfless sacrifice. As I have said in earlier posts, I'd really feel cheated if that were to happen. It would take some VERY CONVINCING writing on JKR's part to make me swallow that. Even if Snape still feels the burden of his Life Debt to James Potter, I figure he will do anything he can to avoid paying it by yielding his own life. If Life Debts worked that way, they would be silly - why save someone if they will someday have to die for it? And anyway, I see Snape as the Great Survivor, even though that places me in what is apparently a minority position. As to his apparent contentment, I'm not so sure. He isn't rash; he's patient. He appears to me from canon as a man who knows his own limitations (logical, calculating); he will only bite off as much as he can chew. He can't fight Voldemort directly, so he helps the Order. But I do think he could take out *Malfoy* personally. I sort of like that scenario. - Anyway, what I set out to say was that he may have greater ambitions, but he won't hurry them. His greatest concern right now is to survive VW II. So, 'content with his current situation' - yes, insofar as he is forced to work within limits at this particular point in time. [And I do think he's going through some sort of minor crisis right now, with Sirius dead. Two Marauders down in whose deaths he wasn't involved - so much for his vengeance. I pity poor Remus :).] In fact - but I'm sure no-one will agree with me here - I would think it very much in character for Snape not to assist in the Astounding Dramatic Climax at all. He has missed out on all the finales so far, hasn't he? Clever of him. He is the man in the shadows. He can let the high-ups fight their big battle and then come to gather the strands that are left. How very Slytherin. Someone will have to take charge after the heroes have done their bit and end up dead or scarred. Someone competent and methodical and cautious, in the right place at the right time. There will be some appealing vacancies, I bet; it would be a pity if no-one were there to fill them up. *That* would be a triumph over all who have scorned him. Am I suggesting it will go like this? Not at all. There will probably be some Big Bang and I will end up all disappointed. And since I haven't got a Big Bang mind, I leave the theorising about those scenarios to other people. I will be very happy to read them. Yours severely, Sigune From BTParks51 at aol.com Tue Aug 24 16:06:25 2004 From: BTParks51 at aol.com (Brian Parks) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 16:06:25 -0000 Subject: Regulus Black Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111118 Hello All I've just a bizarre idea about Regulus. Don't know whether anyone else has come up with this one but here goes: It's well known that Regulus is in the constellation of Leo so Regulus' animagus was/is probably a lion or cat just as Sirius was so-named because of the dog-star connection. If we write Regulus Black as Rs. Black (in the same way that William is often abbreviated as Wm.) and then translate Black into the French "noir", we get Rs. Noir which is a perfect anagram for Norris! Perhaps a subplot about Mrs. Norris was removed from the original draft of COS. After all, why should Mrs. Norris be petrified - it seems to serve no logical purpose. Feel free to tear this to shreds because I'm not even convinced myself! Regards Brian From yswahl at stis.net Tue Aug 24 16:49:10 2004 From: yswahl at stis.net (samnanya) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 16:49:10 -0000 Subject: Who stuns Sirius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111119 Entropy ---------------------- Bellatrix cast the first curse, which Sirius dodged. But then "the second jet of light hit him squarely in the chest." Perhaps it wasn't one of the Death Eaters, but an OOP member, simply giving Sirius a convenient nudge through the veil. I chose ESH!Lupin (Ever So Helpful!) as the one who shot the stunner, not intended to hurt Sirius, but intended to push him through the veil. Samnanya ---------------------- I had posted on this matter extensively late last year. The arguments for Sirius being hit by Lupin's jet rather than Bellas are (briefly) as follows - 1. Simple use of pronouns. Why didn't JKR just say "Her" rather than "the" in "THE second jet of light hit him squarely in the chest" ? "HER jet of light" would have been clear and there would not have been any question as to who did the damage. 2. Lupin was on ground level below the dais, which is raised. Sirius was ducking. If he had not straightened up yet, and there is no indication that he had, Bellatrix could not hit him "squarely" in the chest since she was level with him ON the dais. However, Lupin, from BELOW the dais could. {this is a visualization exercise} 3. When Bella felt she was about to be punished by Voldemort for not procuring the prophecy orb for him, she says "Master I am sorry. I knew not. I was fighting the Animagus Black!" (oop 812) She doesn't mention KILLING him, just fighting him. Why would she be shy with her accomplishments when she is about to be punished by her master? 4. JKR spends many paragraphs describing who was where in the battle. Everyone else was preoccupied in the battle, incapacitated, or getting lassoed by Dumbledore. EXCEPT LUPIN, who as I said, was in perfect position to act anonymously. 5. Sirius' look of shock, fear and SUPRISE. That is a lot of adjectives. Most writers stop at two (or even less). Why did JKR use so many adjectives? Getting hit by a spell that might result in death would merit shock and fear. Getting hit by a spell by an assumed friend would indeed be a helluva suprise. Once again, this is not an argument that events HAD to happen this way. Just don't be suprised if they did. Some of you might feel that this is yet another example of JKRs lack of skill as a writer, or inattention to detail, addiction to adjectives as Stephen King had commented (methinks)or just a plain ol' mistake by her or her editor... You're entitled to your opinion. Samnanya From musicofsilence at hotmail.com Tue Aug 24 16:52:12 2004 From: musicofsilence at hotmail.com (lifeavantgarde) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 16:52:12 -0000 Subject: Why such a point of characters' birthdays? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111120 > Justine: > Darnit. The first news article on the site was from March 15th, and > the twins' birthday, noted as April 1st on the site, was missed. > Say it ain't so, Jo! > Stefanie: Is anyone else confused...because I sure am. Mugglenet's article on the release of the website is marked down as May 15th (http://www.mugglenet.com/fusion3/fullnews.php?id=1183), but Justine is right: the first news article on Jo's website is labelled as March 15th. Checking on the Mugglenet news archives, there are several articles on March 15th, but certainly none dealing with the release of a website! Is this just a slip on JKR's site? (between March and May...I know I've made the mistake before) Any other confirmations out there? Anywho...as I was foodshopping, I brainstormed on this: What do we know of wizarding tradition as far as "national holidays" or the like. It would seem that the defeat of Grindelwald or the birthday of some famous wizard from days of yore (::cou[Merlin's birthday] gh::)would be celebrated as a holiday. Perhaps they are, but Hogwarts doesn't have off for said days? Harry has grown up Muggle and wouldn't really know about these holidays unless he was told. In any case, we don't know of anyone, living or dead, who's birthday falls between 5/15 and 7/30...holiday or no, the jury's still out Stefanie From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 24 17:12:08 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 17:12:08 -0000 Subject: Gilderoy lockhart - JKR's ex??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111121 Cindy: > > The same thought occurred to me after reading what JKR said. The > > fact that she mentioned having to "endure him for two solid > > years" made me very suspicious that it *was* her ex that she was > > talking about. Interesting. Tim: > That thought must of hit alot of us. > > If I remember correctly there was a news item a couple of years ago > where her ex surfaced > briefly to claim that JKR got the idea for Harry from him. And (once > again if I remember > correctly I can't find that item rihgt now), JRK said something like > "...he probably tells his > friends that he conceived Harry Potter" . SSSusan: I'm not saying it's NOT him, but I don't know.... Is JKR's ex remarried? Because [oh, no, here she goes] I'm positive I read/heard JKR say that this Mr. X's *wife* told her she suspected GL was based on her husband. In other words, even his wife recognized him but that he himself is so puffed up that he never would. Did I make this up?? Siriusly Snapey Susan From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Aug 24 17:17:14 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 17:17:14 -0000 Subject: Who stuns Sirius? (was Re: The Veil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111122 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" wrote: > Everyone now knows that Sirius is an unregistered animagus and his "big disguise is useless". Not only does being recognized put Sirius in great danger, it also endangers the rest of the Order members. And Sirius is clearly not happy holing up at Grimmauld Place. So, he must find a new hiding place. < > Sirius was a member of the original order when nobody apart from James, Lupin and Peter knew he was an Animagus. From what we can tell he was no more reckless later in life than he was then. Yet Dumbledore considered him "brave, clever and energetic," and Hagrid remembers him as an eager warrior. The idea that Sirius had become useless to the Order because he was so reckless or because his disguise didn't work anymore doesn't convince me. Dumbledore knows that open war is coming back. He's been planning for it for fifteen years. He's going to need Sirius soon, and once the news is out about Voldemort's return and everyone believes Harry, Sirius can be cleared easily enough, as Hermione tells us. Meanwhile, Sirius is not going to be happy hiding anywhere as long as Harry's in danger--what use will moving his hiding place be? Unfortunately, just because the fake death plot device has been used before, and will undoubtedly be used again ("Draught of Living Death" anyone?) doesn't mean that Sirius's death was faked. In fact, the fake death will be more effective when it is used if we are all convinced that an important character can die. Pippin From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk Tue Aug 24 17:50:39 2004 From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 17:50:39 -0000 Subject: Gilderoy lockhart - JKR's ex??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111123 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lavaluvn" wrote: > > vmonte wrote: > > > > >Yes, you both are probably right. After all, Carly Simon wrote > the > > >song "You're so Vain" after ex-boyfriend Warren Beatty. > > > > > > > > Jem wrote: > > > It was Warren Beatty????!!!! > > > > Hmmm > > > > Somehow that's less satisfying than I thought it would be > > > > But to bring this back to Potter. I guess it's decided Lockhart > isn't > > Philip Pullman then. > > > > Now Andromeda: > > Ohh, was PHilip Pullman a candidate? I know he's kind of bad- > mouth JKR, but that's about all I've heard.... (And now that it's > been "confirmed" that Jo WASN"T referred to ex-hubby.. anyone have > any good ideas??) Alshain: The only quote I managed to find on short notice was a statement that Pullman had read CoS, found it "funny and inventive", but that Harry Potter wasn't really his cup of tea. And didn't want to comment, seeing as how he'd read only the one book. Knowing that British journalists like to jump on anything a best-selling author says that could be twisted to mean disrespect or jealousy of another best- selling author (I've seen it in interviews with Terry Pratchett, Helen Fielding, Neil Gaiman and possibly others I've forgotten) I'm going to need more to go on with. I've understood that the suggestion of Philip Pullman was originally in John Granger's Hidden Key To Harry Potter. As JK Rowling seems to admire Pullman as a writer enough to recommend his books (e.g. in the Royal Albert Hall interview), I can't help but think that the gentleman might have some issues with His Dark Materials. http://www.religionnewsblog.com/3518-_Deconstructing_Rowling.html http://www.ev90481.dial.pipex.com/harry_potter_granger.htm Now I'm going to spend the rest of my free evening not writing fanfic, but musing on other HP characters who could be portraits of British authors. Clearly, Albus Dumbledore is Terry Pratchett. :-) Alshain, who likes HP and HDM alike, and suggests we take any further discussion of Rowling, Pullman and Granger, or Skeeterish tendencies in British cultural journalism, to OT_Chatter. From poppytheelf at hotmail.com Tue Aug 24 17:53:42 2004 From: poppytheelf at hotmail.com (Phyllis) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 17:53:42 -0000 Subject: Lucius Renouncing Voldie and Harry Resisting Imperio (WAS: Snape, Malfoy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111124 Becki wrote: > During LV's speech in Gof in the graveyard scene, where LV is going > around to his DE's, when he reaches LM, he says, "Lucius, my > slippery friend, I am told that you have not renounced the old > ways, though to the world you present a respectable face..." > > If he claimed "Imperius Curse", wouldn't that be considered > renouncing? I interpreted "not renouncing the old ways" as meaning that Lucius still supports Voldemort's hatred of non-pure blood wizards and Muggles. The "I am told" part probably means that Wormtail has filled Voldemort in on Lucius' attempts to rid Hogwarts of half- bloods by planting Riddle's diary on Ginny and his engaging in Muggle torture at the Quidditch World Cup. Voldemort's reference to Lucius as "slippery" follows Voldemort's chastisement of all of the DEs as "claiming bewitchment," which to me signifies that Voldemort knows full well that Lucius and others claimed to be put under the Imperius Curse to avoid being sent to Azkaban. I don't think Voldemort sees this as renouncing him, because Voldemort has no ethics and probably regards deceit as a way of life. I think Voldemort excuses Lucius' claim of Imperio because Lucius attempted to continue Voldemort's work when Voldemort couldn't do it himself. Becki: > And since we are on the subject of the Imperius Curse, I have > always wondered, why is it that Harry is able to fight off the IC, > but experts, (ie: Aurors, like Madeye and Crouch) can not? Is > Harry really that powerful? I believe Harry really is that powerful. I also believe that resisting the Imperius Curse cannot be learned. I think it's one of those things that you're either born with the ability to resist it, or you're not. Or, in Harry's case, it could be yet another attribute that he received from Voldemort when he survived Voldemort's AK curse as a baby. We have yet to see whether Voldemort can resist the Imperius Curse, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if he could. It could be that Voldemort, who would presumably have been told by Wormtail that Harry can speak Parseltongue because Voldemort transferred this power to him, might have asked Crouch Jr. to test the Imperius Curse on Harry to see if he could resist it in the same way Voldemort can. However, I prefer to think that Harry is alone in his ability to resist the Imperius Curse because he is an extraordinarily powerful wizard whose abilities have yet to be fully demonstrated. ~Phyllis From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Aug 24 19:14:11 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 19:14:11 -0000 Subject: Ginny & Cats (was Snape and the Edinburgh Festival) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111125 > psyche wrote: > > That doesn't sound to me like an evasive hint. It sounds to me like > she's genuinely saying there's no significance, and complimenting the > person on her careful reading! > Potioncat: My concern is being able to determine the validity of the conversation. I mean, it's one person's word. Anyone could post something. I hate to be picky here...but being picky is what we do. So as long as we know: this is what a fan said JKR said. That's why I'm sorry I brought it up. It isn't a transcript of a public interview. From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 19:34:48 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 19:34:48 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111126 > Sigune: > > As to his apparent contentment, I'm not so sure. He isn't rash; he's > patient. He appears to me from canon as a man who knows his own > limitations (logical, calculating); he will only bite off as much as > he can chew. He can't fight Voldemort directly, so he helps the > Order. But I do think he could take out *Malfoy* personally. I sort > of like that scenario. - Anyway, what I set out to say was that he > may have greater ambitions, but he won't hurry them. His greatest > concern right now is to survive VW II. So, 'content with his current > situation' - yes, insofar as he is forced to work within limits at > this particular point in time. Neri: OK, I'm adding "Snape biding his time" to the list of Snape theories, with author rights to Severely Sigune. But I don't think I buy it, and not only because of the lack of dramatic potential. I think it also suffers from one of the usual problems with Snape fans: they'll just assume he's that awesome, brave and altruistic guy without even noticing they do it. They'll say he's selfish, egocentric and "not nice", while making him behave like a hero. In your theory, for example, you had Snape fed up with Voldy. Sure, I have no problem believing this, even if Snape is selfish and egocentric. But this does not explain why did he become DD's right hand man, and why is he volunteering to what is obviously one of the most dangerous jobs in the war. If he was just fed up with Voldy, his best chance was to disappear completely, change identity and find himself a DADA post (or even a Dark Arts teacher) in some school abroad, preferably a school with sinister traditions and gothic atmosphere that suits his tastes. Or, if he doesn't like teaching (and it doesn't look like he does), become an independent Dark Arts villain, free to follow his own interests in the level of good/evil that suits him. Instead he goes straight to DD, Voldy's big opponent, where he can't indulge in Dark Arts or even become the DADA teacher, and is forced to teach Potions to idiot teenagers, look after the hated Harry Potter, fight on the side of the hated Gryffindors and serve two masters, DD and Voldy, at the same time. I can't see Snape signing for this only because he enjoys the sports of deceiving Voldy and torturing students. So either he is really the brave and altruistic hero (and in this case why is he pretending to be so bad?) or he has some vendetta, some geis, some debt, or another twist of fate that requires being stuck in his current dangerous and far-from- ideal position. And such a twist of fate also has (how conveniently) much more dramatic potential. I believe Snape has a secret. There's a BIG reason why he changed sides, there's a BIG reason why DD trusts him, and our job as readers is to try guessing this secret. Neri From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Tue Aug 24 19:56:12 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 19:56:12 -0000 Subject: Who stuns Sirius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111127 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" wrote: > Samnanya > ---------------------- > I had posted on this matter extensively late last year. > The arguments for Sirius being hit by Lupin's jet rather > than Bellas are (briefly) as follows - > > 1. Simple use of pronouns. Why didn't JKR just say "Her" > rather than "the" in "THE second jet of light hit him > squarely in the chest" ? > "HER jet of light" would have been clear and there would > not have been any question as to who did the damage. More dramatic... like the light should have been seen previously... why was Sirius wasting his time mocking her? Then again, some people will question anything. As the original jet of light was described more as being 'from Bella' and not 'at Sirius', the definitive nature of the arctle 'the' refers to that antecedant--Bellatrix's > 2. Lupin was on ground level below the dais, which is > raised. Sirius was ducking. If he had not straightened up > yet, and there is no indication that he had, Bellatrix > could not hit him "squarely" in the chest since she was > level with him ON the dais. However, Lupin, from BELOW > the dais could. {this is a visualization exercise} A mocking laugh and statement is delivered straightened up... more so than normal and certainly poor dueling positioning, as it would imply the head thrown back somewhat. Also, a duck is momentarily, as opposed to dropping into a crouch, or something along that nature. Furthermore, Harry, on the step, was watching Sirius, below him on the dais. If Lupid was in such a position, he'd be within Harry's view... Harry would have seen it. > 3. When Bella felt she was about to be punished by > Voldemort for not procuring the prophecy orb for him, > she says "Master I am sorry. I knew not. I was fighting > the Animagus Black!" (oop 812) > She doesn't mention KILLING him, just fighting him. Why > would she be shy with her accomplishments when she is about > to be punished by her master? Killing was momentary... the fighting itself was drawn out, involved dodging curses and focus, and therefore is the point of her being distracted from the prophesy. > 4. JKR spends many paragraphs describing who was where > in the battle. Everyone else was preoccupied in the battle, > incapacitated, or getting lassoed by Dumbledore. > EXCEPT LUPIN, who as I said, was in perfect position to act > anonymously. Hadn't Lupin jumped between Malfoy and the two boys? Lack of book, but Lupin's whereabouts were noted more recently than Shacklebolt's, for example... and placed him near Harry. One would presume that Lupin was fighting Malfoy. > 5. Sirius' look of shock, fear and SUPRISE. That is a lot of > adjectives. Most writers stop at two (or even less). Why did > JKR use so many adjectives? Getting hit by a spell that might > result in death would merit shock and fear. Getting hit by a > spell by an assumed friend would indeed be a helluva suprise. Um, the word was 'shock' which I assume would be the case from being hit by an unfriendly spell... and this was just his eyes. Also, it was used as a noun, but I'm just being silly. During this timespan, these various descriptors were applied to Sirius: 'laughter had not quite died', 'eyes widened in shock', 'graceful arc', 'mingled fear and surprise', 'wasted, once-handsome face'. To JKR (and to kids) this was supposed to be a very dramatic moment... and in slow motion: "It seemed to take Sirius an age to fall..." This is an image that will be burned in Harry's brain, and thus all the descriptors. > Some of you might feel that this is yet another example of > JKRs lack of skill as a writer, or inattention to detail, > addiction to adjectives as Stephen King had commented > (methinks)or just a plain ol' mistake by her or her editor... > You're entitled to your opinion. Nah, just the hopeless ramblings of someone needing to find conspiracy in every corner of a round room. Aren't all you screwy ESE people forgetting that Remus is the token werewolves-are-people-too character, _and_ he's a half-blood. His lack of wealth is a testement to his principles (see the Weasleys) and would be his only motive, not being as intimidatable as Wormie. *rolls eyes* I shouldn't even bother... I'll end up with an ESE label next! Josh From patientx3 at aol.com Tue Aug 24 20:23:39 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 20:23:39 -0000 Subject: Why such a point of characters' birthdays? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111128 Justine: > Darnit. The first news article on the site was from March 15th, and > the twins' birthday, noted as April 1st on the site, was missed. > Say it ain't so, Jo! Stefanie: >>Is anyone else confused...because I sure am. Mugglenet's article on the release of the website is marked down as May 15th (http://www.mugglenet.com/fusion3/fullnews.php?id=1183), but Justine is right: the first news article on Jo's website is labelled as March 15th. Checking on the Mugglenet news archives, there are several articles on March 15th, but certainly none dealing with the release of a website! Is this just a slip on JKR's site? (between March and May...I know I've made the mistake before) Any other confirmations out there?<< HunterGreen: The Leaky Cauldron's archives don't have any articles on March 15th about the opening of her website either (they do, however, have several mentions of it on May 15th). Also, looking into our archives (from this list), the first mentions of the site are in May. It must be just a mistake on her site. Stefanie: >>What do we know of wizarding tradition as far as "national holidays" or the like. It would seem that the defeat of Grindelwald or the birthday of some famous wizard from days of yore (::cou [Merlin's birthday] gh::)would be celebrated as a holiday. Perhaps they are, but Hogwarts doesn't have off for said days? Harry has grown up Muggle and wouldn't really know about these holidays unless he was told.<< HunterGreen: I'd say that, from what we've seen, there aren't "Wizarding World" holidays. Its odd, though, that the only holidays they celebrate (Halloween, Christmas, there was a mention of Easter) are also Muggle holidays. I doubt Harry could have missed them; even if he didn't have a day off from class, teachers would probably mention it. On this subject, isn't it odd that Harry always happily celebrates Halloween even though its the anniversary of his parents' murder? Stefanie: >> In any case, we don't know of anyone, living or dead, who's birthday falls between 5/15 and 7/30...holiday or no, the jury's still out << HunterGreen: Perhaps there is, but the idea of putting the character's birthdays on the site only occurred to her recently. Its seems strange that there wouldn't be a single birthday in the entire month of June, nor in half of May. I'm of the mind that the birthdays are just birthdays, whether the characters are living or dead (as it doesn't say 'Happy *24th* Birthday Harry', but 'Happy Birthday Harry'). I can't rule out there being birthdays in those months until a year has passed since the first birthday listed. From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Aug 24 20:35:02 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 20:35:02 -0000 Subject: Why such a point of characters' birthdays? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111129 > HunterGreen: snip On this subject, isn't it odd that Harry always happily celebrates > Halloween even though its the anniversary of his parents' murder? > Potioncat: But that happens all the time. Someone close dies on a holiday. The rest of the world goes on celebrating the holiday and eventually, so do you. Besides, by the time he started celebrating Hallowe'en in Hogwarts style, his parents had been dead 10 (?) years. From chairos at gmail.com Tue Aug 24 16:10:19 2004 From: chairos at gmail.com (Jon Rosebaugh) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 11:10:19 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry/Voldemort fusion theory In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111130 Cindy: >There is a part in one of the > books, and I've been unable to find it, where DD sees two shadowy > snakes emerge from his pensieve(?) (can't remember if that is what it > was). He mentions something about them being separate but of the > same essence. That is what stuck with me, and why I believe in the > end, V will die and Harry will live. The two will come together in > Harry. Why do I think Harry will live? Simply because I believe the > evil will be vanquished; my opinion is the series will not end with > this evil being roaming around. That's from Order of the Phoenix, when Harry tells Dumbledore about his dream of attacking Mr. Weasley. Wasn't a pensive; Harry is shown wondering what it is and what it means. Myself, I'm inclined to the interpretation offered in "Looking for God in Harry Potter": Basically that the serpent is confirming Harry's story, but when dividing it shows that there is a difference between Voldemort's intentions and Harry's intentions in the matter. After all, we do know that V was, in one manner or another, influencing Harry's mind throughout the book. From barbara_mbowen at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 21:21:31 2004 From: barbara_mbowen at yahoo.com (barbara_mbowen) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 21:21:31 -0000 Subject: Snape and Regulus Black (was Snape & the Edinburgh Festival Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111131 My little take off on Snape's motivation question. What if Snape was the one sent to kill Regulus Black? I think this has been conjectured before. But what if he failed? And what if Voldemort was so furious, he put the crucio on Snape for it? That would be a humiliation Snape would not easily endure. Sirius says Regulus was, well, lacking in intellect (I believe he calls him a "stupid idiot" who "panicked" at what being a DE was about (OOP p. 112)). So here is the kid brother of a hated Marauder, who is something of a fool, and this "stupid idiot" manages to trick Snape somehow, and escape. Put this together with my favorite theory about Regulus Black, that he is, in fact, in hiding as the reclusive Stubby Boardman (who retired from his career as a rock'n'roll singer after being struck by a radish at a concert). His retirement from singing was just at the same time as he was allegedly killed: some 15 years before. Never mind Voldemort, he knows better than to come out of hiding while Snape is still out there. He's hiding from the DE's, he's hiding from the MoM and he's most of all hiding from Snape. I have great hopes for Regulus Black as a comic character. I see him as a charming lightweight, who is nonetheless pretty darn ingenious at getting out of tight places (a talent I believe younger brothers frequently possess). I really, really hope he shows up in Book Six. Marmelade's Mom From mauranen at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 22:11:13 2004 From: mauranen at yahoo.com (jekatiska) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 22:11:13 -0000 Subject: Why didn't Voldemort die? (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111132 > > Valky: > > The Magical Brethren statue blew up, yes, but my point was where in > > canon does the Avada Kedavra blow stuff up _when it actually kills > > someone_. Unless you're suggesting that Harry survived because > > LV..... ? missed ? ;P > > Josh: > Of course he didn't miss... Harry's scar shows us where it landed... > but who knows what the effect is of an AK _failing_. Irresistable > force against an immovable object... yeah. Jekatiska: He didn't miss, but the curse _failed_. (A term from canon.) Also we must bear in mind Voldemort's protective spell(s) that worked against the Avada Kedavra curse, undoubtedly producing a force capable of destroying a mere house... >Josh: > However, keep in mind that LV's wand _was_ retreived. I can explain > everything else, including the knowledge of LV's (partial) demise by > fading of Dark Marks, but Wormie got that wand somehow. Jekatiska: Yes, how DID that wand find its way back to Voldemort? Jekatiska From navarro198 at hotmail.com Tue Aug 24 22:30:16 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 22:30:16 -0000 Subject: Who stuns Sirius -- ESE!Lupin? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111133 Bren: I personally believe it has ESE!Lupin written all over it. I always found it curious how Lupin held Harry back from entering the veil himself. Bookworm: So if Sam fell of a cliff during a fight and Howard leaned over to try to stop him from falling, it is suspicious/evil for Larry to grab Howard before he fell over the cliff too? This argument has never made any sense to me. Bren: Why did Sirius' eyes widen with shock as he died? Bookworm: "Come on, you can do better than that! Give it your best shot....Oh, my god she did....." Shock, as in cocky, over-confident Sirius actually lost a fight against the cousin he hates. CDR: ...if it really just is straight-forward Bella, JKR doesn't make it completely obvious by calling it "her second jet" instead of "the second jet" or something. Bookworm: It's just the way she phrased it. For the same reason she didn't show us Harry sneaking into the office to get the Marauders' Map back ? she didn't think it was necessary. CDR: I still feel the actual situation in the Chamber is very ambiguous, with that second red jet of light seeming to come out of nowhere.Do others feel the same? Bookworm: I'll agree that there is room for JKR to show us that something suspicious really did happen there. I just haven't seen any convincing arguments for it yet. Ravenclaw Bookworm (who does not believe it was Lupin) From mauranen at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 23:00:20 2004 From: mauranen at yahoo.com (jekatiska) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 23:00:20 -0000 Subject: Lord Voldemort's Death In-Reply-To: <001001c48385$fad07130$09c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111134 > DuffyPoo wrote: > He can hold a wand and perform magic, because he still knows the spells (his memories were not erased), and has a body to hold the wand. It may explain the "gleam" in DD eye (GoF); he knows the body LV created for himself did not make him mortal again, did not return him to "full strength and power" but is only a shell for his ghost-like self to dwell in and use. > > > DD said to LV, "Indeed, your failure to understand that there are things much worse than death has always been your greatest weakness." (OotP) LV as a ghost, only an imprint of himself, a feeble imitation of life, powerless and wandless, unable to ingest a potion to ever make him anything more or less, trapped between here and there, laughable to some degree; would that be worse than death to LV? > > Thoughts? > > DuffyPoo > Jekatiska: >From canon I know of one thing that has been said to be worse than death. A Dementor's kiss that removes your soul. Could this be a clue? What if the downfall of Voldemort lies in a simple spell that will remove his soul, or... erase his memory? But Voldemort being so powerfully protected, the only one capable of doing that would be Harry, as their minds are connected. Whether this would destroy Harry as well is a different matter. Jekatiska From meidbh at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 23:30:41 2004 From: meidbh at yahoo.com (meidbh) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 23:30:41 -0000 Subject: Snape as baddie ( Don't get too fond of him!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111135 Meidbh wrote: "Then again, JKR did tell us not to get too fond of Snape (Book Day talk with Stephen Fry). Much as I hate the thought I think he may turn out to be a baddie after all..." and Vic responded: "...that what Rowling meant was that Snape's going to get himself killed, most likely in the seventh book. It would be exceedingly neat, in a tragically Greek sort of a way..." Meidbh (absent for a while so very impolitely didn't get a chance to respond to your first post till now): Yes. I think that would fit very neatly. It makes sense too with the "don't get too fond" warning. But I am still so cross with Snape for his inability to make the occlumency lessons work that I wouldn't put it past him to "accidentally" feed Harry to the DEs. I considered Snape's overwhelming self interest and blind dislike of Harry a sub category of "baddieness" (though of course not nearly as ESE or foolish as serving old red-eyes). Snape is far too smart not to know that he is on to a good thing at Hogwarts. Gloomy jaunts in graveyards with fear and dread vs long summer holidays, lashings of butterbeer AND his own dank dungeon. What a choice. Not to mention that our DD is more of a hearts and minds man than VM and far less likely to maim or dismember his associates. I know who I'd prefer to answer to! Whether motivated by self interest or honour, for the moment at least, it appears Snape is on DDs side. But I still believe he has it in him to really mess things up for Harry. So if you're right and JKR kills him off, the question is will she leave the girls weeping or will we be telling all and sundry that we're better off without him? Meidbh From jmmears at comcast.net Wed Aug 25 00:16:20 2004 From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 00:16:20 -0000 Subject: Percy and Arthur (Was Is Percy a Spy?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111136 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > Now on to Percy, I don't think Percy is or was a spy because I think > his /blow-up/ with his family was real, and I sympathize with him > because I think I can very clearly see his position. As far as I'm > concerned Arthur hold equal if not greater blame for the incident than > Percy, although Percy is certainly carries a significant share. I'm having a hard time with the notion of Arthur sharing "equal if not greater blame" for the rift with Percy. I have read your 'Good Son' posts and while I agree with much of your analysis of Percy's psyche, I strongly disagree with the notion that Arthur's attempt to open his eyes to what's really going on in the WW makes Arthur responsible for *any* of the ill-will resulting from the confrontation. In reviewing JKR's explaination for the rift between Percy and his family, it seems painfully obvious to all concerned that Percy's promotion is extremely fishy. Only weeks earlier, Percy is in a "load of trouble" with the ministry and the subject of a formal inquiry. Even if the inquiry didn't reach the conclusion that Percy was directly to blame for the Barty Crouch disaster, he could hardly have come out smelling like a rose. By the time Percy comes home crowing about his latest triumph, the stakes are very high indeed. Even with his hyper-focus upon his own career goals, he is smart enough and certainly old enough to have wondered about this sudden promotion to a job which would seem to be out of reach for an employee only one year out of school. It just doesn't make sense. I don't think Arthur had any choice in pointing this out to Percy as soon as possible. If he hadn't, he'd have been putting the Order at risk, as well as his family. Steve continued: > However, I could conceive of the possibility that after the Quibbler > interview with Harry came out, Percy might have been swayed from his > position. And, considering this possibility, Dumbledore might have > made a 'no hard feelings' peace offering. Essentially, contacting > Percy and trying to talk some sense into him. While that would not > have healed the riff between Percy and his father, it could/would have > brought Percy back to Dumbledore, and in the process laid the > groundwork for a more complete reconciliation. Well, the trouble is that Dumbledore's plate is quite full at this point in the story. He's the last one standing in the way of Umbridge and Fudge's total takeover of Hogwarts, and there's also the little problem of thwarting Voldemort's attempts to penetrate Harry's mind and steal the prophecy. I don't think that dealing with Percy's lack of loyalty and respect for him is all that high a priority. As far as Dumbledore's concerned, Percy is an adult and responsible for his own behavior. Steve wrote: > I don't think this beak between Percy and his family is directly > related to Voldemort's return. I think Percy is seriously offended > that his own father didn't believe that a Perfect, Head Boy, student > with 12 outstanding OWLS, and a significant number of highly graded > NEWTs could get a job on his own merit. That is the true heart of this > misunderstanding. But, he didn't get the job on his own merit, which should be patently obvious, even to him. I think that Percy's ambition and egotism have robbed him of any common sense or decency. I was genuinely shocked at his treatment of Molly when she attempted to reach out to him by visiting (apparently on her own) and then by sending him the jumper at Christmas. Percy was extremely cruel on both occasions and while I'm sure Arthur and Molly will be willing to forgive him, I don't think that I ever will. I've always cut Percy a lot of slack in spite of his pomposity and generally unpleasant behavior, because I thought that he was fundamentally decent and that he loved his family. Although I still don't believe he's an evil person or will become a DE, his OOP behavior has put him beyond the pale for me. When push comes to shove, protecting his fragile ego is more important to him than his family. My sympathies are entirely with his parents who in no way deserve this shabby treatment. Jo Serenadust, former Percy sympathizer From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 25 01:46:45 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 01:46:45 -0000 Subject: Snape and Regulus Black (was Snape & the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111137 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "barbara_mbowen" wrote: Put > this together with my favorite theory about Regulus Black, that he is, in fact, in > hiding as the reclusive Stubby Boardman (who retired from his career as a > rock'n'roll singer after being struck by a radish at a concert). His retirement > from singing was just at the same time as he was allegedly killed: some 15 > years before. Never mind Voldemort, he knows better than to come out of > hiding while Snape is still out there. He's hiding from the DE's, he's hiding > from the MoM and he's most of all hiding from Snape. > > Marmelade's Mom imamommy: Let's tie another idea to this: Regulus as the one "who has left me forever. He will be killed, of course." I think most of us agree that Snape is too obvious a conjecture to actually *be* this one, and this may provide a better theory to who this "one" is. imamommy From dontask2much at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 02:43:38 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 22:43:38 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why such a point of characters' birthdays? References: <001701c489c3$92ce5400$20c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: <026301c48a4d$543b8c00$6501a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 111138 From: "Cathy Drolet" > DuffyPoo: > I had this very thought when Harry's birthday appeared on July 31st. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't mark the birthday of deceased loved ones on my calendar, only those for whom I need to remember to buy/send a card or gift. > charme: I had that thought too, until another poster got me digging on Egyptian calendaring and astrology after seeing a post here about speculation the constellation of the lion (Regulus.) I chose Egyptian astrology as the best of the theories for this exercise, since there are lunar, calendaring, constellations, and even Sirius as a star are constant items of interest in the books and even in JKR's website. The appearance of Siruis actually starts the calendar year rouhgly on June 21st in ancient Egypt and there are 3 quarters of 4 months aptly named Inundation (from June 21 to Oct 21), Emergence (Oct 21 to Feb 21) and then Summer (Feb 21 to June 21.) Their calendar, in essence, ties with astronomy (no I didn't mistype that) as well. Here's some interesting notes, I didn't paste it all for length, about about each of the people in a list I saw earlier in this thread with their Egyptian sign (I added Ron & Hermoine:) George & Fred/April 1: Thoth It is with modesty that this bird-god Thoth provides ingenious ideas to the simple senses of humans and inspires their souls and energies with a passion to know and to build. Thoth's clear-sightedness drives away indolence, insidious cunning and impatient pride. Thoth's instruction induces people to invent and to risk breaking with tradition. Persons born under the sign of Thoth are enthusiastic and enterprising, but scorn mediocrity and meanness. They are courageous and like to take risks provided they are engaged in efforts that will ultimately allow them to surpass themselves. It is unthinkable for them to break their word or to cheat others. (Uhm, so that fits Gred and Forge, doesn't it?) Neville/July 30 and Harry/July 31 and Ginny/Aug 11: Sekhmet It is not possible to recognize compassion or doubt in the character of Sekhmet. It is driven by the most mathematical sence of justice.Those born under this sign are strongly telepathic, observant, authoritarian and rarely indulge themselves. Their moral sense is sometimes unfortunately censorious in spite of their secret desires. (Interestingly, explanation of this sign also points out the following: In Egypt, lions are often depicted two at a time back to back, each of them looking out over the opposite horizon. This twosome symbolizes presence through an eternal gaze which surveys and controls at the same time. This can apply, IMO, to both Harry and Neville as battling LV, and also Ginny as a potential "mate" and defender for Harry. Something to think about anyway.) Percy/Aug 21: Horus With Horus, the politics of justice take shape in the mythical world of the ancient Egyptians. Those born under the sign of Horus make their way in the world with a fierce will. Their intelligence and breadth of learning make them appear capable of understanding and uncovering everything. They must mater their rebellious spirit early, before their eagerness to dominate makes them opportunists Hermoine/Sept 19: Mut Thus, those born under the sign of Mut are secretive beings inclined to melancholy. Full of irony, frustrated in seduction because of their shyness, they nevertheless have formidable inner riches because they know how to go directly to the point in all their human relationships. Their wisdom is obvious, their hopes inspiring. What they search for most is the goodwill and protection of an authoritative father figure. (I'll also mention there's more about this sign, and makes me wonder if JKR's comments in some of the chat about Hermoine's vulnerabilities are somewhat well displayed here.) Ron/March 1: Osiris We find in the myth of Osiris the symbolic sequence of disintegration and regeneration in a higher form. Osiris character is dual and personality generous. Fiery but vulnerable, when faced with adversity, you waver more than others and you experience the dilemma of picking the right moment for action and decision. (Think OoP and Quiddich, perhaps) I think it's interesting the similiarities, and plan to do more digging. There's too many coincidences for it to just be bunk, IMO. charme From tonks_op at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 19:09:55 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 19:09:55 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past (was Re: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111139 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "humantupperware1" wrote: > > Neri wrote: > > > > < Why did DE!Snape change sides? This is one of the greatest > > mysteries in the books (Lexicon Steve, do you have it on your list?). ----------------------- Tonks replies: Here is an idea.. what if Snape was on Dumbledore's side all along? And LV thinks he is a spy for HIM. Snape is a double agent. Or if Snape was really a DE, maybe because he is very intelligent, LV and other treated him the same way that James and Sirus did when he was in school. Maybe LV didn't appreciate Snape's intelligence and that just got to Snape after awhile. Snape could only take so much "leadership" "do as I say" sort of thing from someone who was not his intellectual equal. Or maybe Snape is on neither side, but both sides think that he is on theirs. Tonks_op From tonks_op at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 18:53:54 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 18:53:54 -0000 Subject: Combing Spells (was Snape, Malfory and Azkaban) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111140 Thank you all for the information about Snape and Malfoy. I am interested in this idea that Salit brought up: Salit wrote: There are several examples in GoF where combining spells works while a single spell does not. When only one wizard was doing the spell, both Crouch Jr. and Sr. were able to occasionally throw off the spell, even if only temporarily. -------------------------------- Do you think that is how they will do LV in at the end? Maybe Harry and Snape do a combined spell of some sort? Tonks_op From neisha_saxena at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 19:36:59 2004 From: neisha_saxena at yahoo.com (Neisha Saxena) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:36:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Guarding the Department of Mysteries In-Reply-To: <1093365188.34655.54823.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20040824193659.37342.qmail@web50908.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111141 Hello. I don't have the book in front of me, and please forgive me and/or direct me to the proper thread if this has already been discussed at length. But, I'm really curious about the Order guarding the Department of Mysteries in OTP. When did it start? How did they know? And why wasn't anyone guarding it the night of Harry's rescue mission? The whole thing seems quite strange to me. I mean, Harry wouldn't have thought Sirius would be on guard duty, but why wouldn't he think someone else from the Order would be there, having seen Mr. Weasley attacked and known about Mundungus Fletcher. Or did he assume that person had been killed? And had they in fact been killed? Also, I apologize profusely if the answers are right there in the canon and I just missed them. Thanks all! Neisha, who literally yelled at Harry during her first reading for not thinking about either Snape or Sirius' gift __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From porcupine88 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 20:55:37 2004 From: porcupine88 at yahoo.com (brandy) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 20:55:37 -0000 Subject: Is Percy a Spy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111142 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "scoutmom21113" wrote: > Brandy wrote: > ...now that the Ministry is on the Order's side. > > Bookworm: > Are you sure? The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend. > > There are a number of us who have questions about Fudge's true > allegiance. Is he just a weakling who is scared to death? Is he an > agent for Voldemort? Is he a closet DE? > > Too many opinions, not enought clues. > > Ravenclaw Bookworm However, I'm not sure that Percy's allegiance is to Fudge himself rather than the Ministry as an institution. Now that the whole wizarding world knows V is back, if Fudge *doesn't* act against him he'll be out of power. I don't think he's a DE, I think he just wants to keep his position of power over all else. Yes, he might decide he could get more power as a DE, but that would almost certainly mean leaving the ministry entirely in the post-OoP political climate. Percy, however, seems more tied to the institution of the Ministry of Magic than to Fudge himself. Yes, he sees Fudge as a mentor and role model, but I think that he is capable of becoming disillusioned with Fudge and abandoning him if necessary to continue serving the Ministry. That's why I don't think he'd be an effective spy - because his connection is to the Ministry, not to Fudge or Umbridge themselves. And now the Ministry as a whole can't afford to deny V or to avoid acting against him; if particular members do, they are likely to be rejected by the Ministry itself and forced to seek power elsewhere. I think that if Percy were being used as a spy and thus were likely to follow Fudge or any other particular person if they left the Ministry, he would have been written differently - the Percy we've seen is loyal to the Ministry itself. -Brandy From susanadacunha at gmx.net Tue Aug 24 23:35:54 2004 From: susanadacunha at gmx.net (Susana da Cunha) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 00:35:54 +0100 Subject: Time-Turner Questions?! References: Message-ID: <002001c48a33$7b11b620$302f0dd4@taxi> No: HPFGUIDX 111143 Time travel has been a science fiction pet since forever. Being a science fiction fan, I will try to explain the two main hypotheses usually considered: 1 - Time travel can change events. This is the hypothesis used in "Back to the future" (movie starring Michael J Fox). According to this, if you go back in time and change events you can alter the future (were you came from). Your 'past self' will *not* know of the change, but your 'present self' will know. Because your 'past self' doesn't know, it will never go back in time to change something that has already been changed and therefore your 'present self' cannot take the 'past self's place. This is of course a paradox and is not what happens in PoA (though I've seen it brilliantly 'deparadoxed' by some SF authors). 2 - Time travel cannot change events. This hypothesis states that you can only do what has already been done - there are no "alternative futures"! This is what happens in PoA and can only be explained by examples so I will try to describe a few: a) You go back in time to kill your father before you wore conceived. - You will *not* succeed! We *know* you wore conceived, therefore you failed! Some will ask: but what if I *do* kill him? The answer is: if you *had* killed him then you wouldn't have been born to raise absurd questions. It's like asking what happens if a black horse is white. It's a trick question with no possible answer because the horse is black and not white. b) You go back in time to kill Hitler when he was ten. - Again you won't succeed because we know he lived longer than that. c) You go back in time to have a chat with yourself. - This is my favorite and it brakes down to two situations: c1) your 'past self' doesn't know your 'present self' is coming. - You will give yourself a fright, of course. Fortunately, you won't die of a hart attack for the reasons discussed in example a). Your 'present self' will then begin to convince your 'past self' that he is his 'future he'. Of course, 'present self' already knows the outcome of his efforts because he has lived it. This means 'past self' won't kill 'present self' or the last would avoid the situation (unless he's suicidal). Does 'present self' have to remember the exact words of their conversation? No. The words he decides to say *are* the exact words that wore spoken (in 'present self's past). So you have a (friendly or not) chat with yourself and 'present self' already knows the outcome. 'Past self' doesn't need to know when is time to go back in time, but he will go. Some will ask: but what if he decides *not* to go back? The answer is, of course: he *has* decided to go back. c2) your 'past self' knows your 'present self' is coming. - Imagine you are alone for the afternoon with a time-turner. You're bored and lonely and you decide: in three hours I'll come back in time to keep me company. For safety you give yourself a password so you know it's you. Once you decided this, you 'present self' appears and says the password. You have a nice afternoon in your own company and at the end of it the 'past self' decides to go back to the beginning of the afternoon. Some will ask: but what if... Ok, ok! Let 's pretend for a moment he decides not to go back. After all, it must be very boring to relive the afternoon, right? The question is not *what happens if* but *why will he decide to go back*. If he doesn't there will be two of him. Who is going to keep the wife and children and who is going to leave and start a new life? Would you really want to have that discussion with yourself? After all, you are the same person and want the same things; therefore you'll never reach an agreement. Not satisfied yet? I'll get back to this issue. d) You go back in time and run into your 'past self' by mistake. - You even chose a date that you knew you wouldn't run into yourself, but you wore wrong! Again, your 'present self' knows the out coming. Your 'past self' may kill your 'present self' (never the opposite) or maybe you have the password from example c) and your 'past self' helps you out in your task. e) You decide duplicate yourself to form an army. - First the *how* and then the *why*: e1) how? You need an army *now*. You go back in time one hour and again another hour and again... and again... and again... so you end up a day or two 'ago' and there are still only two of you! Pretend you wait an hour until you are at the situation described in example c2) and that 'past self' will not go back. For the sake of argument, let's pretend there won't be a timequake because of that. There are two of you and two time-turners but 'past self' cannot go back or he will be 'present self' an hour ago. So 'present self' goes back and, for an hour, there will be three 'selves'. The two younger 'selves' cannot go back or they will 'disappear' into the 'present self'. So it's up to 'present self' to keep on going. Because he has to sleep eventually he will need to go back for 8 hours when is time to do so. After 6 months of going back 16 hours a day there will be 2881 'selves'. Done? Not quite yet: he also has to eat. For three meals a day he will need 180 meals that have to be available at the hour he's multiplying in. Not impossible. Every thing's solved but the timequake. e2) why? Naturally, I mean *why it won't work*! You have 2881 'selves', all with the same objective. Who's in charge? After the war is won, who will get the prize? Wars are made to be fought by the little people that then go home with PTS. You can't have an army of generals! Some will say: duplicate Pettigrew. I think not even Pettigrew is that stupid! No one will duplicate himself to be killed in a war; and if they live there won't be enough reword for everyone. The point is: it won't happen because no one would *choose* it to happen. There is only one timeline and the events of that timeline *have* happen. They are coherent and there are no timequakes. If someone deliberately tries to cause a timequake it will backfire and the outcome will resolve the paradox. So were does that leave 'free will'? Well, you are still free to *choose*! If you imagine you stepped out of the timeline and wore looking at past, present and future as a whole, wouldn't you refer at all of as past? Do you see your past actions as something that was forced on you? Does that mean you don't act of your own accord? It's not that events are decided for us, is that we have already made our choices along the timeline. Finely, what about PoA? Hermione was worn of the 'rules'. If you want to mess with time you have to do it in a way that doesn't backfire: "you must not be seen", especially if you're doing something wrong that someone might try to prevent. You must not try to change events you have witnessed or your actions will backfire. They played by the rules and got away with it. But what bugs me is how little surprised Dumbledore was to find Buckbeak gone out side of Hagrid's. By the time he suggests the use of the time-turner to save him he already knows they've succeeded. But before? Did he go back in time and had a little chat with himself? Probably not. My guess is the paintings heard two sets of them leaving the castle and told him before he set off to Hagrid's (they couldn't have *seen* two sets because one was under the invisibility cloth). Or most likely saw the pair of them appear out of thin air when they went back in time. Knowing they're friends of Hagrid's, DD guessed what they wore about to do. Susana From tonks_op at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 23:57:19 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 23:57:19 -0000 Subject: Lupin Evil? (was Who stuns Sirius -- ESE!Lupin?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111144 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "scoutmom21113" wrote: > Bren: > > I personally believe it has ESE!Lupin written all over it. I always > found it curious how Lupin held Harry back from entering the veil > himself. > > Bookworm: > So if Sam fell of a cliff during a fight and Howard leaned over to > try to stop him from falling, it is suspicious/evil for Larry to > grab Howard before he fell over the cliff too? > > This argument has never made any sense to me. ------------------------------------ Tonks_op replies: Why do people think that Lupin is evil? No, No, No. He is a good guy. There is no evidence to suspect otherwise. I wouldn't want you guys on my jury!! I agree that Bella and only Bella killed Sirius. ;-) Tonks_op From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 02:57:29 2004 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 02:57:29 -0000 Subject: Is Percey A Spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111145 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "caspenzoe" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Pouncevil at A... wrote: > > Here's a Thought??? > > > > Lets all remember that the "Rat" Scabbers came from Percy. > > > > We also know that Peter P. the rat was a DE and had been passing > them information for years. Did Peter pass on information while in > the "care" of Percy. > > >> caspen wrote: > Regardless whether Percy is intentionally serving VM (is a spy for > VM) or not, his actions have never really served the good (i.e: DD) > yet in canon have they? Quite the opposite: of late, they have > certainly opposed it. > > Caspen Doddiemoe here: I think that Percy was under the imperious curse..Wormtail's one coniving bit of nastiness(well, probably more than a bit). It simply makes sense....Percy's strange behavior since cs is more than just having a girl friend IMHO, he also "mother hens"-or mollycoddles Ginny" (he never was quite so concerned about Ron's health and well being that I remember). Percy's quest to be the best and gain power (remember him reading about prefects who gained power).sounds a great deal like a set of values from Wormtail more than Mr. or Mrs. Weasley. For all we know Percy may well have known Wormtail was an animagus--but never know his "history".. Percy may not be a spy..but he may well be influenced by Wormtail who had a great deal of access to both a wand and Percy when percy was sleeping. Wormtail may have had him under the imperious curse from time to time or ALL the time. This may well be why Percy gave Ron his "rat"..We're talking about a person who will not even let his family use the owl they bought him here! My guess is that Percy is not a spy, but what Wormtail helped make over the years he lived with the Weasley family. Which may mean that he is more conflicted than we believe. Doddie From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com Wed Aug 25 03:22:49 2004 From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 03:22:49 -0000 Subject: FILK: Following the Dark Lord Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111146 Following the Dark Lord To the title tune from Frank Loesser's musical Guys and Dolls MIDI at: http://www.hamienet.com/cat1712.html Dedicated to Constance Vigilance THE SCENE: Lord Voldemort's retreat. RABASTAN LESTRANGE & ANTONIN DOLOHOV (a couple of Mugs who don't get to sing filks very often) get a rare star turn. RABASTAN LESTRANGE: What's happenin' with the Half-Blood? I'll tell you what's happenin' with the Half-Blood We do not as yet know whether or not the Prince is a good guy or a bad guy But if he proves to be a good guy then we're going to kick his alf good! That's what's happenin' with the Half-Blood! DOLOHOV: What's on with the writin'? I'll tell you what's on with the writin'. As of August 2004, Jo says she's half-way through The Half-Blood Prince And of all her books this one is gonna be the most excitin' That's what's on with the writin'! RABASTAN: What's happenin' in the next volume? I'll tell you what's happenin' in the next volume. JKR provides an array of villains Who will be even more ghastly than Gollum That's what's happenin' in the next volume! BOTH: The book's the second-to-last one And the Dark Lord's gonna do another fast one RABASTAN: Yes, sir! When a gal gives pain to drive Aurors insane, You can bet that she's following the Dark Lord. DOLOHOV: When you see a Black getting blast through a Veil By that gal outta jail who sure that Black was set up to fail RABASTAN: When a wretched fiend, who on meanness was weaned Puts to use all the Polyjuice that he poured BOTH: Call it bad, call it rotten, but it never should be forgotten, That the fiend's only following the Dark Lord. DOLOHOV: When you see some clown renting out his back crown You can bet that he's thinking of the Dark Lord RABASTAN: When a troll breaks loose and goes out of control It is clear that the troll is pleasing the soul of our Riddle Lord DOLOHOV: If a wicked curse that is ranked with the worst Sends a Wiz down to Azkaban's life-time ward BOTH: Call it cruel, call it savage But the odds are better than average That the Wiz is just following the Dark Lord. DOLOHOV: When you see an elf forced to beat on himself He is owned by one honoring the Dark Lord. RABASTAN: When that guy Wormtail took a treacherous path And so brought on the end of many a friend once he did the math DOLOHOV: When a Slyth'rin grad vows to be like his dad Doin' deeds like the Death Eaters he's adored BOTH: Call him sly, call him vicious, ah, but that's because he's ambitious For a chance to be following the Dark Lord, Dark Lord, Dark Lord, For a chance to be following the Dark Lord! - CMC (internal rhymes are fun!) HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 03:43:40 2004 From: sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com (sevenhundredandthirteen) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 03:43:40 -0000 Subject: Who stuns Sirius? & Fake Death (was Re: The Veil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111147 > Brenda: > 1. Jo said that she cried after writing this chapter. She told > husband, "I did it" when crying in her kitchen. He told her before > not to kill the character off, but she said "I have to". [From an > interview I read a while ago, can't remember where it was from, sorry] > > 2. From JKR's website, on "Immeritus" fan site > "I love this site, which I discovered towards the end of writing > Order of the Phoenix, and which made me feel exceptionally guilty, as > you can imagine. I am so proud of the fact that a character, whom I > always liked very much, though he never appeared as much more than a > brooding presence in the books, has gained a passionate fan-club." Laurasia: But if she wanted us all to believe that Sirius was dead, she wouldn't go on about how easy it was to write an apparent death scene, right? We already knew that she had issues writing Cedric's death scene. If, all of a sudden, an actual main character appears to die and there was no fuss made, we'd all wonder why. The fact that she has told people how upset she 'was' proves that we are meant to take note of how upsetting it is. In other words- the perfect bluff. I think that it's perfectly possible that she is just 'playing the part' of an aggrieved Sirius fan until he returns. Mind you, then there are real issues with why Dumbledore told Harry all the stuff about the prophecy. Dumbledore admits that keeping information from Harry was a really bad thing to do. Unless he doesn't know that Sirius is dead, he's setting himself up to get more of his possesions thrown at him. How can he parrot on about 'You should've known before this, I'm sorry' whilst being aware that Harry is once again suffering real pain because there is more information being with-held from him.? I don't think it gels with Dumbledore at all. The only option must be that Dumbledore doesn't know that Sirius has faked his own death. Still, it seems plausible that Sirius and Lupin cooked up the scheme together over at Grimmauld Place. I do love this Sirius-not-dead theory, however. It certainly isn't baseless. But it also makes Sirius a bit of a coward- he 'left' when Bellatrix Lestrange was still up and about in AK distance from his Godson. Surely Sirius doesn't consider his of fake!death a higher priority than Harry's life? BUT, as much as I like this theory, I think the most elaborate fan theories spring out of discontent with the actual text (Any Matix fans remember all those weird 15 000 word explanations which arose after the vastly inferior 2nd movie?). If we all currently felt that there weren't any holes in the text, I doubt that this kind of theory would have sprung up. I think that Sirius is a lot of fans' favourite, and it's no secret that most people have yet to warm to the "sudden & unexpected, no clear consequence or benefit for Harry yet" death scenario. As yet, it's difficult to see the reason why it's okay and necessary for Sirius to die. It's oh-so-mean for JKR to with-hold this reason for another book. We're all desperate to know! But it maybe foolish from a narrative point of view to leave such a huge subplot unresolved. Harry certainly doesn't reach any resolution with Sirius's death at the end of OotP. And I would *hate* to see him spending all of HBP being angry and depressed over Cedric's death because we've seen that already! If Sirius returns (via two-way mirror or whatever) it has to be at a point when Harry has fully gotten over his death. If not, it suggests that death isn't final or absolute. It says that you *can* be desperate and hang on and dwell on memories and not get on with your life. I doubt JKR is going to put this theme in her book (Motto of the Mirror of Erised: you cannot dwell on dreams and forget to live). Does this mean Harry will get over Sirius ASAP? I doubt it. He dreamt about Cedric for months. That only leaves Harry spending a normal amount of time grieving- months at least. Which means Sirius may not reappear until Book 7!! Eep! If we were discontent with Sirius dying for no good reason and only a few days had passed in the book, how are we all going to be if Sirius's death shows no signs of benfitting the story for a year of book time?! This is why I think it may be a foolish narrative device. Of course, we will all immediately forgive JKR the instant Sirius waltzes on from stage right. The only thing I am sure of is that Sirius went through that veil for a reason. We don't know what the reason is yet, but this fake!death scenario certainly creates a great reason for sending Sirius through. ~<(Laurasia)>~ From slgazit at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 25 03:46:57 2004 From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 03:46:57 -0000 Subject: Guarding the Department of Mysteries In-Reply-To: <20040824193659.37342.qmail@web50908.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111148 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Neisha Saxena wrote: > But, I'm really curious about the Order guarding the > Department of Mysteries in OTP. > > When did it start? How did they know? And why wasn't > anyone guarding it the night of Harry's rescue > mission? They were already doing it when Ron and Hermione came to GP so probably started soon after LV came back to power, presumably based on information that Snape provided. As for why no one was guarding the night of Harry's rescue mission, my guess is that they stopped guarding the door after Voldemort found out that only he or Harry could take the prophecy. There was no point posting anyone then - Voldemort would not have gone to take it himself (probably there were security devices tuned to him inside the ministry - note he never went further than the atrium), and if he had, what was the point stationing someone who could not possibly stop him anyway - it'd just get them killed for nothing. As for Harry - that was what the occlumemcy lessons were about. Salit From sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 04:30:16 2004 From: sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com (sevenhundredandthirteen) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 04:30:16 -0000 Subject: Website dates (was Re: Why such a point of characters' birthdays?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111149 > Justine: > > Darnit. The first news article on the site was from March 15th, > and > > the twins' birthday, noted as April 1st on the site, was missed. > Stefanie: > >>Is anyone else confused...because I sure am. Mugglenet's article on > the release of the website is marked down as May 15th > (http://www.mugglenet.com/fusion3/fullnews.php?id=1183), > but Justine is right: the first news article on Jo's website is > labelled as March 15th. Checking on the Mugglenet news archives, > there are several articles on March 15th, but certainly none dealing > with the release of a website! Is this just a slip on JKR's site? > (between March and May...I know I've made the mistake before) Any > other confirmations out there?<< > > HunterGreen: > The Leaky Cauldron's archives don't have any articles on March 15th > about the opening of her website either (they do, however, have > several mentions of it on May 15th). Also, looking into our archives > (from this list), the first mentions of the site are in May. It must > be just a mistake on her site. Laurasia: I don't think it is a mistake, I just think the space between the written date and publication date is the time spent making the website. I remember reading those dates when the site first opened. I thought that it meant that the content was written back in March, but wasn't unveiled on the site until May. As in, JKR didn't say 'Make me a pretty site, I'll fill in the content later.' But said 'Here is some content, make me a site which includes all of this.' That way the team (or person) who created the site knew that it was going to be text-based, knew what kind of things would have to be incorporated into the layout, knew enough to make the design work with the content. Of course, through trials and coding and working with Flash, it took two months for the site to be finished, but it would have been incorrect to change the dates on the content. ~<(Laurasia)>~ From Meliss9900 at aol.com Wed Aug 25 05:02:12 2004 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 01:02:12 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Quick to define Harry as "clinically depressed"? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111150 In a message dated 08/21/2004 19.16 Central Daylight Time, syroun at yahoo.com writes: > Past that diatribe, does anyone else think that TMR is the half- > blood prince? > > Syroun > Not I. JKR posted at her website that Tom Riddle IS Voldemort and Voldemort isn't the HBP. Clearly (IMO of course) JKR doesn't consider LV and TMR to be seperate people. I tend to think that the HBP is someone we haven't met yet. Melissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From slgazit at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 25 05:50:28 2004 From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 05:50:28 -0000 Subject: Quick to define Harry as "clinically depressed"? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111151 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Meliss9900 at a... wrote: > Not I. JKR posted at her website that Tom Riddle IS Voldemort and Voldemort > isn't the HBP. Clearly (IMO of course) JKR doesn't consider LV and TMR to be > seperate people. > > I tend to think that the HBP is someone we haven't met yet. This is what I think too, after all that was true with all her titles - the person or object referred to in the title (SS, CoS, ...) is a completely new entity each. The only exception is the PoA but while we have heard of both Black and of Azkaban in books 1 and 2, there was no indication they were linked. Salit From vmonte at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 06:01:37 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 06:01:37 -0000 Subject: Snape as baddie ( Don't get too fond of him!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111152 Meidbh wrote: Whether motivated by self interest or honour, for the moment at least, it appears Snape is on DDs side. But I still believe he has it in him to really mess things up for Harry. So if you're right and JKR kills him off, the question is will she leave the girls weeping or will we be telling all and sundry that we're better off without him? vmonte responds: Nice post! I wonder about Snape as well. I really liked Neri's recent post about Snape too. But I do have a serious problem with Snape. I remember JKR once stating that Children are never fooled by this kind of teacher/person. And I understand what she means. Adults have a way of rationalising behavior in a way that children do not. My supicion about Snape, unfortunately, is that the children will turn out to be right about him. There have been several adults that have also warned DD or Harry about Snape too. Fudge warned DD in PoA, and fake Moody's conversation with Snape (the egg scene in GoF) in front of Harry seemed to imply that fake Moody knew that Snape had ulterior motives (not related to Voldemort) for being around Hogwarts. It's funny because both of these characters are evil. One is evil because he is a DE (Crouch), and the other is evil because he is corrupt and ignorant (Fudge). It's like the old saying: "It takes one to know one." Snape holds a lot of grudges. He seems like the kind of person that cannot forgive (and perhaps seeks revenge). He also seems very sneaky to me. I think he behaves differently in front of DD and MM (and perhaps the other staff) than he does when he is around the children. I keep feeling that Harry's penseive scene with Snape has some clue we haven't noticed yet. I also bet that Snape told Harry not to tell anyone about what he saw because there is something there (aside from the humiliation of being hung upside down) that Snape doesn't want someone else to find out. And yes, I think he has a separate "secret" agenda. Vivian From sad1199 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 06:35:30 2004 From: sad1199 at yahoo.com (sad1199) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 06:35:30 -0000 Subject: Please help find Fudge/Imperious Curse thread Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111153 sad1199 here: I am pretty sure there is a thread about Fudge being under an Imperious Curse. Could anyone please direct me to it? I am reading PoA again and have some theories on Fudge's distinct personality changes from PoA to OotP but I wanted to read the thread first and I just could not find it. Thank you in advance. Have A Happy Love Filled Day sad1199 From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Aug 25 06:48:08 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 06:48:08 -0000 Subject: Mrs Figg, cabbage and Polyjuice Potion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111154 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cindy" wrote: > I was wondering - this may have been discussed before, I don't know - > but why does Mrs. Figg's house smell of cabbage (SS p.22), and the > Polyjuice potion tastes like cabbage (CoS p.216)? Could Mrs Figg be > using polyjuice for some reason? Or maybe, I've missed something in > reading the books (not as familiar with them as most people here). > > Cindy Geoff: Being very mundane, I wonder whether it is just indicating how Harry perceives the house. As soon as I read it, my mind took me back to a favourite book of mine, 100 light years away from HP or LOTR when the hero is leaving a rather rundown house where his young lady lodges. "The doorknob felt greasy under his hand and the narrow hall smelled unpleasantly of cats." The smell is not dissimilar. Perhaps we are meant to look on Mrs.F at this point as an elderly lady who perhaps isn't able to keep the house as sparklingly clean as she did once and is obsessed with her cats. It certainly creates a particular vision in my mind of her and her house. From steve at hp-lexicon.org Wed Aug 25 07:44:23 2004 From: steve at hp-lexicon.org (hp_lexicon) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 07:44:23 -0000 Subject: Wizarding holidays In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111155 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > > HunterGreen: > snip > On this subject, isn't it odd that Harry always happily celebrates > > Halloween even though its the anniversary of his parents' murder? > > It's possible, of course, that the reason Halloween is such a big deal in the Wizarding World is that it celebrates Voldemort's defeat some 15 years ago. Maybe it's really The Boy Who Lived Day. With regards to the whole holiday idea, there is a letter to the editor in one of the Daily Prophets that Jo wrote in 1999 for Bloomsbury where someone suggests a Merlin Remembrance Day around the first of August just because he wants a day off work. Quotage: Dear Sir: Is it not time that the wizaring community set aside a day to honour the greatest wizard of this or any age? I could do with an extra day's holiday around August. Yours in hope, Harold Skively. Steve The Lexicon up too late From b_boymn at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 07:54:21 2004 From: b_boymn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 07:54:21 -0000 Subject: Percy and Arthur (Was Is Percy a Spy?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111157 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "serenadust" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > > > Now on to Percy, I don't think Percy is or was a spy..., and I > > sympathize with him .... As far as I'm concerned Arthur hold equal > > if not greater blame for the incident than Percy, although Percy > > is certainly carries a significant share. > Jo Serenadust: > > I'm having a hard time with the notion of Arthur sharing "equal if > not greater blame" for the rift with Percy. I have read your 'Good > Son' posts and while I agree with much of your analysis of Percy's > psyche, I strongly disagree with the notion that Arthur's attempt > to open his eyes to what's really going on in the WW makes Arthur > responsible for *any* of the ill-will resulting from the > confrontation. > b_boymn: Well, I'm sure you saw it but I will point out once again that "Percy certainly carries a significant share" of the blame. Arthur's problem is that he was responded with all the tact and subtlety of Fred. If Arthur truly saw the danger of the situation the diplomatic, tactful, and best strategic method of dealing with it would have been to congradulate Percy's new job and celebrate with him. Then gradually work in the possibility of conflict of interest being so close to Fudge, and he could have gradually let that tactfully evolve into statements about not understanding how Fudge can be against Dumbledore and Harry when there is so much evidence to support their position. Certainly Percy's back would have gone up at that, but Arthur could have pointed out that Percy was right; given his job, he would be expected to show support for his boss. And then follow that understanding with bits and pieces of evidence to suport Harry and Dumbledore. Evidence like how could Harry who lives a very sheltered life know the things he knows. How could Harry know the Death Eater's names? Yes, yes, it's in the public records, but like I said, Harry lives a very sheltered life, how does he come across public records? How could Harry have any knowledge of the reverse-spell/brother wand effect? How could Harry know anything about the graveyard? How could he describe so accurately a place he couldn't possibly know anything about? How could they explain Harry's wounds? How could Harry discribe the Riddle mansion? Of course, even Arthur or, for that matter, Dumbledore may not be able to explain these either, but Arthur's objective would have been to sway Percy. I could go on but the point is, if Arthur has made an effort, he could have turn the situation to his strategic advantage instead of allienating Percy. If not allying with Percy, then at least neutralizing him as a potential threat. > > Steve continued: > > > However, I could conceive of the possibility that after the > > Quibbler interview with Harry came out, Percy might have been > > swayed from his position. And, considering this possibility, > > Dumbledore might have made a 'no hard feelings' peace offering. > Jo Serenadust: > > Well, the trouble is that Dumbledore's plate is quite full at this > point in the story. He's the last one standing in the way of > Umbridge and Fudge's total takeover of Hogwarts, ... I don't think > that dealing with Percy's lack of loyalty and respect for him is all > that high a priority. ... > b_boymn: A agree completely, but I was trying to create a more plausable explanation than some of the far fetched 'Percy is a Spy' theories that were being stated. Rather than some grand conspiracy or elaborate plan, I suspect at most Dumbledore, at the appropriate moment, might have taken an hour or two of his time to make peace with Percy. Given his belief in second chances, that makes a whole lot more sense than some elaborate complex 'Spy Theory'. > > Steve wrote: > > > I don't think this beak between Percy and his family is directly > > related to Voldemort's return. I think Percy is seriously offended > > that his own father didn't believe that (...Percy...) could get a > > job on his own merit. That is the true heart of this > > misunderstanding. > Jo Serenadust: > > But, he didn't get the job on his own merit, which should be > patently obvious, even to him. I think that Percy's ambition and > egotism have robbed him of any common sense or decency. b_boymn: Percy is academically, and in the area of deportment, one of the most outstanding student to come through Hogwarts. From my read, this idea of getting 12 OWLs appears to be an outstanding achievement of the highest order. Something achieved by very very few students. I think it is also fair to say that Percy did equally well in his NEWTs and afteral was both Prefect and Head Boy. He has outstanding qualifications. Yes, I will admit that rising to Fudge's personal assistance was a bit fast for someone right out of school, and I have absolutely no doubt that Fudge's motives were corrupt, but it is unfair to say that Percy doesn't 'merit' this job. And, let's not forget that he's not being made king of the universe, he's a glorfied secretary for Fudge; he takes notes, fetches tea, files paper, etc.... True, he does all this for the Minister himself rather than some mundane middle manager, but in the end, Percy is still nothing but a 'gopher'. Certainly with his outstanding record at school, he is more than qualified to take notes and fetch Fudge's tea. As to his unfortunate previous position with Barty Crouch Sr., let us not lose sight of the fact that Percy was the LEAST senior member of that apparently large and significant department. There were many other employees who know Crouch much better and work with him much longer than Percy did. They certainly had a greater responsibility to come forward and voice their concerns. So while Percy certainly was questioned, and I'm sure Percy certainly was sweating bullets, in the end, Percy did nothing wrong. He recieved his orders and passed them on, and that's pretty much what he was paid to do. > Jo Serenadust: > > Percy was extremely cruel on both occasions and while I'm sure > Arthur and Molly will be willing to forgive him, I don't think that > I ever will. > b_boymn: Once again, I can only refer back to someone else's theory that Percy completely cut himself off from his family to prove that he could excel on his own merit. That regardless of what Fudge's motivation might be, Percy was bound and determined to prove the he was up to the job. Once he made that commitment, that had to include Christmas presents. If you took the present, it could be seen as Dumbledore's supporters trying to get into his good graces to get informaion about Fudge. I will admit that it was a very painful incident for Molly, and I have to believe that to some degree, Percy knew it would cause distress, but he had chosen his course, and felt he must stay on it. I will say this about the Weasleys, down to the last one, they are SO damned stubborn and mule-headed; not to mention hot-headed. > Jo Serenadust: > I've always cut Percy a lot of slack in spite of his pomposity and > generally unpleasant behavior, because I thought that he was > fundamentally decent and that he loved his family. Although I still > don't believe he's an evil person or will become a DE, his OOP > behavior has put him beyond the pale for me. When push comes to > shove, protecting his fragile ego is more important to him than his > family. > > My sympathies are entirely with his parents who in no way deserve > this shabby treatment. > > > Jo Serenadust, former Percy sympathizer bboy_mn: Without a doubt, Percy made a grave mistake, and I'm sure now, after the fact, he is deeply repentant, but that said, I do not relent on my belief that Arthur played his hand very poorly. One last note on Percy, I take strong objection to Percy being portrayed as power hungry or ambitious in a negative way. Percy wants achievement and success, more accurately, he wants to achieve and to succeed, but he does not desire power for the sake of power. Nor will he go to any ends to achieve his goals. Percy is the boy who does it right, even when he is wrong (ironically), and will take no pride in achievement or success that is ill-gotten. Someone once said that anyone who has ever been a parent or a child knows that love and hate can exist simultaniously, and that the presents of hate or anger, does not mean the absents of love. Like all of you, I am angry at Percy for being such a blind pompous ass, but I still love him, and believe the best in the long run. That's my story and I'm stuck with it. Steve/b_boymn (was bboy_mn, was asian_lovr2, was never Lexicon Steve) From dzeytoun at cox.net Wed Aug 25 08:24:38 2004 From: dzeytoun at cox.net (dzeytoun) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 08:24:38 -0000 Subject: Wrapping up the Umbridge subplot Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111158 What do you think we shall hear about Umbridge in Book 6? I, for one, will be terribly disappointed if JKR lets the whole thing drop. She introduced several dramatic plot twists (particularly the use of the Dementors and the Blood Quill) that really beg to be wrapped up with at least a brief mention - perhaps in the context of Fudge's ouster. It is interesting that she specifically talks about the scars from Harry's detentions remaining, although faintly. It would be very amusing to see someone such as Molly Weasley or McGonagall react to the story behind those scars. Dzeytoun From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 25 08:28:25 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 04:28:25 -0400 Subject: Snape's DE past Message-ID: <002c01c48a7d$7e052cf0$b9c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 111159 Tonks said: "Here is an idea.. what if Snape was on Dumbledore's side all along? And LV thinks he is a spy for HIM. Snape is a double agent." DuffyPoo: That was my theory that I posted around the seventh of August. Sorry I don't know the message number (how do you all keep track of that?) but it was called "Theory on Snape - MASSIVE." LV only believed Snape is spying for him, Snape is really working for DD and has been all along. Tonks said "Or maybe Snape is on neither side, but both sides think that he is on theirs." DuffyPoo: Now, that's an interesting thought! Unfortunately, I don't have any more to add...I'll have to go ponder it for a while. ;-) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 25 08:27:41 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 04:27:41 -0400 Subject: Who stuns Sirius? Message-ID: <002801c48a7d$641bdff0$b9c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 111160 > Everyone now knows that Sirius is an unregistered animagus and his "big disguise is useless". Not only does being recognized put Sirius in great danger, it also endangers the rest of the Order members. And Sirius is clearly not happy holing up at Grimmauld Place. So, he must find a new hiding place. < > DuffyPoo: I'm sorry, I don't know who originally posted the above as I've been attempting to stay out of this thread so I've cut it from someone else's thread and I don't know who said it. Something that has bothered me since the early pages of OotP is why did Wormtail not tell LV/DEs about Sirius until 'now'? He knew Sirius and James were both Animagi during the first war, when he was spying for LV. Why did he not tell him then? All the DEs would have known and been on the lookout, could have informed the Dementors in Azkaban (those who were there...Bella and friends). It certainly wasn't out of loyalty that Wormy kept his yap shut. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 25 08:30:49 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 04:30:49 -0400 Subject: Why such a point of characters' birthdays? Message-ID: <003001c48a7d$d3ceb160$b9c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 111161 > HunterGreen: snip On this subject, isn't it odd that Harry always happily celebrates > Halloween even though its the anniversary of his parents' murder? > Potioncat: "But that happens all the time. Someone close dies on a holiday. The rest of the world goes on celebrating the holiday and eventually, so do you. Besides, by the time he started celebrating Hallowe'en in Hogwarts style, his parents had been dead 10 (?) years." DuffyPoo: Also, Harry's not really connected to their deaths or to them for that matter. It's a part of his life he doesn't remember. His only memories of them have been the flash of green light, that combined with the cold laugh, then what was brought back to him by the Dementors. Two of my grandparents died before I was born, one died when I was three. If any of them had died on a holiday, it wouldn't have made a particle of difference to me. As it is, my Mother died nine days before Christmas. Apart from the first year, Christmas goes on as usual. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tonks_op at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 23:30:35 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 23:30:35 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past (was Re: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111162 > > Neri wrote: > > > > < Why did DE!Snape change sides? This is one of the greatest > > mysteries in the books (Lexicon Steve, do you have it on your list?). > > I tried to round up the usual suspicions. I'm not really happy with > > any of them, but I added my personal scoring: > > > > > > > > Did I miss any theory? Which would you prefer? > ----------------------------------- Tonks replies: Here is an idea.. what if Snape was on Dumbledore's side all along? And LV thinks he is a spy for HIM. Or if Snape was really a DE, maybe because he is very intelligent, LV and other treated him the same way that James and Sirus did when he was in school. Maybe LV didn't appreciate Snape's intelligence and that just got to Snape after awhile. Snape could only take so much "leadership" "do as I say" sort of thing from someone who was not his intellectual equal. Or maybe Snape is not on either side.. he appears to both sides to be on theirs? Tonks_op From tonks_op at yahoo.com Tue Aug 24 23:35:12 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 23:35:12 -0000 Subject: Snape and Regulus Black (was Snape & the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111163 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "barbara_mbowen" wrote: > My little take off on Snape's motivation question. What if Snape was the one > sent to kill Regulus Black? I think this has been conjectured before. But what > if he failed? And what if Voldemort was so furious, he put the crucio on > Snape for it? That would be a humiliation Snape would not easily endure. > ----------------------------------------- Put this together with what someone else said about Regulus possibly being Mrs. Norris.. and you get: Snape sent to kill Regulus, but he could not kill and they both went to Hogwarts. What do you think of that one?? From romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 09:03:58 2004 From: romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com (romuluslupin1) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 09:03:58 -0000 Subject: Book titles: do they show Harry's challenge for the year? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111164 When the title for book 5 was announced, someone said that so far all titles had shown Harry's challenge of the year and wondered if the Order would show the same pattern. While on first reading the Order seems to be on Harry's side (and it's certainly a positive thing in itself), it could also be seen as having negative effects for Harry: 1) He wanted to join, but was rejected because underage 2) The OOTP kept secrets from Harry, and this had dire consequences for him. I was wondering in what possible way the HBP, whoever he turns out to be, could be bad news for our boy. Any help from the theorists among us? If (God forbid) the HBP is Snape (I've seen some posts speculating he might be a half blood) I could see that happening ;-) Remulus Lupin, off with another whacky theory From susanadacunha at gmx.net Wed Aug 25 03:46:41 2004 From: susanadacunha at gmx.net (Susana da Cunha) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 04:46:41 +0100 Subject: Portuguese version of the prophecy References: <1092863157.15639.50051.m21@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <002101c48a56$2838fb20$652f0dd4@taxi> No: HPFGUIDX 111165 I'm having insomnia and decided to pick up my Portuguese version of OotP. The book fell opened in the Prophecy chapter witch I hadn't read in Portuguese and I immediately looked for the prophecy. I must say the translators made a very careful and accurate job on the prophecy (better than the rest of the book, anyway) but I can't help wondering if they won't be in big trouble in book 7. The literal English translation of the Portuguese version of the prophecy goes like this: 'The one *who holds* the power to *defeat* the Dark Lord approaches . born *of* those who have thrice defied him, born *when* the seventh month *ends* . and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have *a* power the Dark Lord knows not . and *one* must die at the *hands* of the other for neither can live while the other survives . the one *who holds* the power to *defeat* the Dark Lord will be born *when* the seventh month *ends* .' The original for comparison is: 'The one *with* the power to *vanquish* the Dark Lord approaches. born *to* those who have thrice defied him, born *as* the seventh month *dies* . and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have * power the Dark Lord knows not . and *either* must die at the *hand* of the other for neither can live while the other survives . the one *with* the power to *vanquish* the Dark Lord will be born *as* the seventh month *dies* .' (my emphasis) The first thing that comes to mind is, of course, the going around suggestion that Voldemort will die at his own hand (Pettigrew's silver hand). But there are others... Becky suggested (msg #110140) and I agree that the missing 'a' before 'power' could be suggestive. Many may comment on the birthday (alternative calanders). And there's the interpretation of the prophecy I posted on msg #110624: For (because) neither (not any) can live (stay in the state of exercising life) while (whereas) the other (who's hand is mentioned) survives (doesn't die). - because neither will stay alive, but one will survive. The translators would be in big trouble with that one! There is no way the Portuguese version could mean *that*! ('the other survives' takes different forms for the meanings of 'the other is surviving' and 'the other will survive' - though correctly translated, they chose the first meaning will I propose the last) If the interpretation of the prophecy ends up to be a more. er. imaginative one, the translators will have no option but to rephrase the prophecy in the last book. There will be many outraged children (and adults) in Portugal (and Brazil, and Angola, and Mozambique...). Anyone cares to list all possible miss interpretations? Susana 5:00 am From romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 08:53:10 2004 From: romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com (romuluslupin1) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 08:53:10 -0000 Subject: Disapparation inside Hogwarts? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111166 Someone was wondering how DD could disapparate from his office, when we know apparation/disapparation isn't possible within Hogwarts. Could he simply have put on one of Fred and George's invisibility hats and then walked out (or stayed in, for that matter)? Romulus Lupin, blaming the absurdity of his theories on the August sun From romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 08:43:18 2004 From: romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com (romuluslupin1) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 08:43:18 -0000 Subject: November birthstone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111167 JoAnna wrote: (snip) > What about yellow diamonds? IIRC, there is such a thing. Or what > about onyx? I don't know if it can be considered a gemstone, but > since the Hufflepuff colors are yellow and *black*... it's a > possibility, anyway. Romulus Lupin replies: There definitely is such a thing as yellow diamonds. I watched Gigi last night, and during her jewelry lesson her great-aunt, when Gigi mistakes a yellow diamond for a topaz, says "A topaz, among my jewelry? Are you mad?". I always thought topaz are less expensive than the other gems, which would fit humble Hupplepuffs to a T (can someone verify this?). Romulus Lupin From katiebug1233 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 08:54:13 2004 From: katiebug1233 at yahoo.com (Kate) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 08:54:13 -0000 Subject: Snape and Regulus Black (was Snape & the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111168 I'm almost 100% sure that JKR has said in interview that Regulus is dead. And I also think that interview was post OOTP.... Theory that Regulus was really the one killed in the MoM instead of Sirius anyone? From krussell98 at comcast.net Wed Aug 25 00:36:25 2004 From: krussell98 at comcast.net (Kathi Russell) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 20:36:25 -0400 Subject: Book 6 Title -- Hyphen? References: Message-ID: <060b01c48a3b$90c66080$3f8f3f44@Dude> No: HPFGUIDX 111169 > Colin: > According to "The Leaky Cauldron" the title for Book 6 is > "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince" not "Harry Potter > and the Half Blood Prince" as per the use of half-blood in > the books. > bamf: > My problem with that thinking, is that Jo posted it to the > website without the hyphens. So, until JKR posts that it > should be 'Half-Blood' instead of 'Half Blood', I'll use it > without the hyphen. > Geoff: > Interestingly, if you look on her site at the list of FAQs > about the books, one of the questions has a hyphen in > Half-Blood Prince. Okay - I can't figure out what the big deal is about the hyphen, no-hyphen debate. Can someone please explain this to me? Thanks! K From romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 07:57:05 2004 From: romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com (romuluslupin1) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 07:57:05 -0000 Subject: Is Percy a Spy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111170 Brandy: > I personally doubt that Percy is a spy - mainly because if he were > a spy, he'd be useless now that the Ministry is on the Order's side. > Snape will be useful til the very end, assuming his cover isn't > blown. But what is Percy going to do now, if the people he's spying > on no longer need to be spied on? > > Plus, he showed many signs of loyalty to the Ministry over all else > in GoF, before the Order was even reconvened. Given his personality > and history, his role in OoP makes sense without having to think he's > a spy. Well, while I'm not sure Percy is a spy, I don't think he'd become useless just because the MOM is now on the order side (which I'm not entirely sure of, either). He could still spy on all (un)suspected DE and DE sympathizers, for example. I doubt all LV supporters have been outed (was McNair present in the MOM raid? I can't remember). He could voice some purebloodist theories or something; I bet LV supporters would try to recruit him and they'd be found out. And I think DD has doubts about the MOM. He'd do well to have a spy there to keep an eye on things. Percy would be in a wonderful position for this. Romulus Lupin, who's starting to defend theories he doesn't believe in. Very bad sign! From suzchiles at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 10:46:49 2004 From: suzchiles at yahoo.com (suzchiles at yahoo.com) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 03:46:49 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Disapparation inside Hogwarts? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c48a90$d575b000$0400a8c0@domain.actdsltmp> No: HPFGUIDX 111171 > Someone was wondering how DD could disapparate from his office, when > we know apparation/disapparation isn't possible within Hogwarts. > Could he simply have put on one of Fred and George's > invisibility hats > and then walked out (or stayed in, for that matter)? > > Romulus Lupin, blaming the absurdity of his theories on the August sun I'm convinced he caused himself to disappear, as he tells Harry in PS/SS that he doesn't need an invisibility cloak to become invisible. I don't think he needed help from Fred and George to do that, either. Suzanne From romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 08:32:25 2004 From: romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com (romuluslupin1) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 08:32:25 -0000 Subject: Why didn't the Longbottoms go into hiding?/Secret Keeper Switch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111172 "mhbobbin" wrote: (snip) > My original Post was in the context of the Longbottoms and whether > it was appropriate for Aurors to go into hiding. My point was that > times were so dangerous that even Sirius Black had planned to go > into hiding--even prior to becoming the Secret Keeper. Not because > he was a coward but out of prudence. Better to be in hiding and be > ready to fight another day. I was incorrect in my statement that > Sirius wanted to decline the SK job so he could go into hiding--I > was only focused on the concept that EVEN Sirius was planning to go > into hiding so why couldn't Aurors hide their baby? Romulus Lupin: Thanks for clarifying. I'm afraid I jumped into the fray without thinking. (snip) > I think the decision process that led up to the fateful decision > to make Pettigrew the Secret Keeper--including the roles of the > Potters, Sirius, Peter and Remus (who Black admits to suspecting > was the spy) was what is critical to this part of the story. There > are few moments where the entire story hinges on a decision and I > believe the decision to make Pettigrew the Secret Keeper --and > everything that led up to it and the immediate aftermath--is what > is most critical here. Romulus Lupin: I agree with you that the *decision* to switch SK is the crucial point. It's unfortunate Sirius chose to trust that rat, or his plan would have worked beautifully. Talk about wizards not having an ounce of sense... Romulus Lupin From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Aug 25 11:18:03 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 11:18:03 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: <002c01c48a7d$7e052cf0$b9c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111173 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > > Tonks said > "Or maybe Snape is on neither side, but both sides think that he is > on theirs." > > DuffyPoo: > Now, that's an interesting thought! Unfortunately, I don't have any more to add...I'll have to go ponder it for a while. ;-) > > It's a bit more complicated than that, I think - though the basic premise is one that I've been burbling on about for the past year. Snape is not interested in the fight of good vs evil. Snape has his own agenda and it's *personal* not ethical - and DD knows this, understands this and accepts it. The Snape, DD and Voldy triangle exemplifies that old adage "My enemies' enemy is my friend." The only reason that Snape is allied to DD and the Order is because it is the only way he can get revenge for an action by Voldy that hit Snape on a personal level - probably through his family. Just to stir things up I did suggest that this consisted of Florence and the crying child in his memory flash, even though the time-line mitigates against this, Florence being a couple of years older than Sevvy according to the most likely calculations. (But see post 69509 and God knows how many posts since.) No matter. That's just a whimsical embellishment that isn't critical to the main theory. Snape was a good little DE - then suddenly he wasn't. Not only that but he betrayed his friends. Because make no bones about it, they were his friends. These were the Slytherins he was running around with at school; these are his natural allies. Nobody in the Order likes him; nobody except DD really trusts him - so why is he in so deep in the anti-Voldy coalition? Because he is vehemently, passionately, obsessionally anti-Voldy. He wants him brought down by any means. DD knows this. He has total certainty that Snape, having changed sides once will not do so again. Snape is a driven man. DD also knows why - "Professor Snape has his reasons.." he says in OoP. So why isn't he (or JKR) telling us? Because it's much more bangy than a baddy seeing the light, embracing goodness and truth and renouncing his naughty past. What could bring about a change so fundamental? It would have to be something pretty damn dramatic, wouldn't you say? What do we know about the character of S. Snape, Professor of this parish? He's cold. He's intelligent. He's logical. He's proud. And that last one is the key. Hit Snape in his pride, as Sirius did with the Shrieking Shack Mark I or in his so-called worst memory - the Grey Underwear Affair - and he will bear a grudge forever. He will nuture it, cosset it, carry it to the grave and beyond. So when he agrees to work on the same side as those he apparently hates you have to assume that there is a motivation that is even more compelling. Every so often a thread kicks into life on the "Worst Memory" theme. IMO it's no such thing. Snape has much worse than that little vignette to disturb his restful repose - personally I'd rate the Grey Underwear no higher than forth or fifth if you're willing to make some reasonable assumptions. (See 80844 - The worst is yet to come.) Even with what has been revealed so far I refuse to believe that the 'Prank' doesn't rate as worse in Sevvy's mind than a minor schoolboy fracas by the Lake. I don't go much on the so-called 'Life Debt' obligation either. IIRC no such phrase occurs in canon - anywhere. It's an invention by the fans based on some of DD's flim-flam. Snape wasn't looking out for Harry because of James but because of something else - DD has persuaded him that Harry, through the Prophecy, is the best bet to bring down Voldy - something Snape cannot do on his own. Much as Snape may dislike Harry (and I'm not totally convinced about that, either), he recognises that Harry is probably the only way to grind Voldy in the dust. Snape wants revenge. He wants it so badly he can taste it. Now give me another possible reason for that lust for revenge. JKR has stated previously that the marital status of some of the Hogwarts teaching staff will be revealed later. This leads one to suspect that such information is plot-sensitive. Who can you think of where this is likely to be an important revelation? Only two - DD and Snape; and with DD it's starting to look irrelevant as the books and theorising progresses, though some suspect that his blood-lines may be significant. But Snape now, that has legs. Snape loses wife and child because of a Voldy atrocity. Snape, the Black Widower, full of poisonous hate. I like it. Kneasy From severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk Wed Aug 25 11:53:53 2004 From: severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk (severelysigune) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 11:53:53 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111174 Let's continue this, for the sake of the argument :). Neri wrote: < OK, I'm adding "Snape biding his time" to the list of Snape theories, with author rights to Severely Sigune. But I don't think I buy it, and not only because of the lack of dramatic potential. I think it also suffers from one of the usual problems with Snape fans: they'll just assume he's that awesome, brave and altruistic guy without even noticing they do it. They'll say he's selfish, egocentric and "not nice", while making him behave like a hero.> Sigune: Exactly *how* is my version of Snape awesome, brave and altruistic? 1) He's not nearly powerful enough to settle his account with Voldie on his own; b) he lurks by the sidelines, waiting for his chance; 3) he's working for himself, not anyone else. Not very heroic, or not to my mind. Neri: < In your theory, for example, you had Snape fed up with Voldy. Sure, I have no problem believing this, even if Snape is selfish and egocentric. But this does not explain why did he become DD's right hand man, and why is he volunteering to what is obviously one of the most dangerous jobs in the war. If he was just fed up with Voldy, his best chance was to disappear completely, change identity and find himself a DADA post (or even a Dark Arts teacher) in some school abroad, preferably a school with sinister traditions and gothic atmosphere that suits his tastes. Or, if he doesn't like teaching (and it doesn't look like he does), become an independent Dark Arts villain, free to follow his own interests in the level of good/evil that suits him.> Sigune: He became DD's right hand man - exactly. He improved his position no end. It's called career planning. He had no future with Voldy, but Dumbledore has offered him one. Disappear completely and change identity? Much to obscure for an ambitious young man. He doesn't want to fade away, he wants to make it. A school with sinister traditions? Why should he do that if he can have a post at the *best* wizarding school? Surely he doesn't care *that* much about the decor. And there is charm in being the /only/ Dark wizard in a place. Independent Dark Arts villain? He's not strong enough for that; he doesn't rank with either Voldie or DD, magically speaking - though he may yet improve, he's still young. No, my theory says he seeks out men like DD and Voldy because he wants to learn from them and eventually best his enemies. He's not ready yet to be entirely and safely independent. And I do think he likes teaching, strange though it may seem. Neri: < Instead he goes straight to DD, Voldy's big opponent, where he can't indulge in Dark Arts ...> Sigune: We don't know about that. What does he do in his dungeons in his spare time - with a library with a large Restricted Section at hand? We know DD lets him get away with a lot; why not some Dark experimenting, too? You could argue that a school like Hogwarts doesn't need such a collection of forbidden books in the first place, but they are there, aren't they? Neri: < ... or even become the DADA teacher, and is forced to teach Potions to idiot teenagers, look after the hated Harry Potter, fight on the side of the hated Gryffindors and serve two masters, DD and Voldy, at the same time.> Sigune: But that may have its advantages. In a sense, he always wins :). Neri: < I can't see Snape signing for this only because he enjoys the sports of deceiving Voldy and torturing students. So either he is really the brave and altruistic hero (and in this case why is he pretending to be so bad?) or he has some vendetta, some geis, some debt, or another twist of fate that requires being stuck in his current dangerous and far-from-ideal position. And such a twist of fate also has (how conveniently) much more dramatic potential.> Sigune: Altruistic he certainly isn't, and brave only in a Slytherin way. But I agree the stake must be something worthwhile for Snape risk so much in his work for DD. However - how about eventually winning control over the power nexus of the Wizarding World, Hogwarts? (See Carolyn's post 108963, which I find particularly enchanting). I'd say that's something worth fighting for. And I don't think he pretends to be bad. He is the polar opposite of Remus Lupin. Instead of trying to hide his bad character traits, like Lupin so anxiously does, he flaunts them. That is all. And he has a sense of drama, of course. Neri: < I believe Snape has a secret. There's a BIG reason why he changed sides, there's a BIG reason why DD trusts him, and our job as readers is to try guessing this secret.> Sigune: I'm doing my best, Neri, in my own modest way :). Yours severely, Sigune From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Aug 25 12:08:10 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 12:08:10 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111175 >>Kneasy wrote: > > Snape was a good little DE - then suddenly he wasn't. Not only that but he betrayed his friends. Because make no bones about it, they were his friends. These were the Slytherins he was running around with at school; these are his natural allies. Nobody in the Order likes him; nobody except DD really trusts him - so why is he in so deep in the anti-Voldy coalition? Potioncat; I think you make a good point. These were friends. And Malfoy doesn't know he isn't one anymore. One of the Sorting Hat's songs struck a chord when it said (memory here) in Slytherin you'll find your friends. As we've seen them, Slytherins don't seem the friendship sort. Networking group perhaps. But as far as the Order goes, Lupin certainly praises Snape a lot (OK, twice.) He comments on his potion-making skill and on his occlumency skill. Both times it appears to be to nudge Harry to trust Snape. (Although Lupin has no reason to trust him!) And while I have the opinion that McGonagall enjoys the rivalry with Snape at school, that could certainly be up for debate. But I agree here, he would have to have an incredibly strong reason to associate with the members of the Order. >>Kneasy: >snip > > I don't go much on the so-called 'Life Debt' obligation either. IIRC no such phrase occurs in canon - anywhere. It's an invention by the fans based on some of DD's flim-flam. snip > Much as Snape may dislike Harry (and I'm not totally convinced about that, either), he recognises that Harry is probably the only way to grind Voldy in the dust. Potioncat: The entire debt to James/hates you because of James seems too contrived to work. So while he may not like Harry, I'd say there is something else there. But, I'd like to hear more of your thoughts that he may not dislike Harry. Does that at all connect to the idea that he's tough on Harry as a teaching method? (Alright everyone, Snape is a teacher, but he's no educator.)For further information, see Baloo's style of teaching in Jungle Book...Kipling not Disney. >>Kneasy: > Snape wants revenge. > He wants it so badly he can taste it. > Now give me another possible reason for that lust for revenge. Potioncat: Neri, Sigune and others have come up with good lists of possible motives. But whatever it is, it has to be an intense reason. Someone argued against revenge because that doesn't indicate a moral reason. But we don't know if his leaving LV is a moral reason. (JKR has warned us about him.) >>Kneasy: > JKR has stated previously that the marital status of some of the Hogwarts teaching staff will be revealed later. This leads one to suspect that such information is plot-sensitive. Who can you think of where this is likely to be an important revelation? snip Potioncat: Several times JKR has expressed surprise at anyone loving Snape. But the more I think of it, she doesn't say anyone didn't. And she may be playing along. Certainly, Snape seems the most likely. And I know in your view, love didn't have to play a part anyway. Also, (memory again) LV says "one who I think has left me forever"...seems to indicate LV thinks that person had a reason to leave. I think it was this thread where some discussed Snape's role in the final scenes...well, it isn't "Professor Snape and the Dunderheads" we're reading. We couldn't possibly learn as much about him as we want to (friend or foe) He has something important to contribute, but as in the earlier books, he'll slip off the pages sometime before the end. (Hopefully to return to his dungeon.) Potioncat who may have set the record for longest "me too" post. From ryokas at hotmail.com Wed Aug 25 13:11:33 2004 From: ryokas at hotmail.com (kizor0) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 13:11:33 -0000 Subject: Foreign versions of the prophecy (was: Portugese...) In-Reply-To: <002101c48a56$2838fb20$652f0dd4@taxi> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111176 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Susana da Cunha" wrote: > Anyone cares to list all possible miss interpretations? No, but I'll pour some more fuel to the fire and add a Finnish translation. Let's see. English: 'The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches . born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies . and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have power the Dark Lord knows not . and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives . the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord will be born as the seventh month dies .' Portugese: 'The one *who holds* the power to *defeat* the Dark Lord approaches . born *of* those who have thrice defied him, born *when* the seventh month *ends* . and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have *a* power the Dark Lord knows not . and *one* must die at the *hands* of the other for neither can live while the other survives . the one *who holds* the power to *defeat* the Dark Lord will be born *when* the seventh month *ends* .' Lessee. What with being a considerably different language, this is kind of tricky. Finnish: 'The one *who has* the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches. born to those who have thrice defied him, born *when* the seventh month dies. And the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he *has* *powers* the the Dark Lord knows not. And *one-or-the-other* [cool word, no?] must die *by* the hand of the other for neither can live *if* the other one *is alive*. The one *who has* the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches. born to those who have thrice defied him, born *when* the seventh month dies.' This does raise some interesting points, and unless translators have been collaborating with JKR to confirm the accuracy of their versions there's going to be trouble for non-English-speaking readers. The Finnish translation's quality is considered top-notch, though. Then again, we should avoid from overanalyzing the foreign versions (this being HPFGU, I was almost able to type that with a straight face). As different languages are, er, different, finding an exact equivalent for everything in the prophecy isn't very feasible, and differences are far more likely to mean translation trouble than hints of what is to come. Had I translated the Finnish one literally, it'd have begun with "It, who has power" and gone downhill from there. But this isn't going to stop you from theorizing, so ifthat's what you like doing, go ahead. - Kizor From quigonginger at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 13:13:22 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 13:13:22 -0000 Subject: Snape and Regulus Black (was Snape & the Edinburgh Festival In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111177 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kate" wrote: > I'm almost 100% sure that JKR has said in interview that Regulus is > dead. And I also think that interview was post OOTP.... Theory > that Regulus was really the one killed in the MoM instead of Sirius > anyone? Ginger, at your service: Were you, perhaps, referring to the World Book Day Chat? Q: Will we be hearing anything from Sirius Black's brother, Regulus, in future books? JKR's A: Well, he's dead, so he's pretty quiet these days. Too bad it kills the "Stubby" theory- I liked that one. Ginger, whose backspace key sometimes sticks. From mauranen at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 13:26:05 2004 From: mauranen at yahoo.com (jekatiska) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 13:26:05 -0000 Subject: Secret Text Behind the Door - SPOILERS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111178 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "djrfdh" wrote: > I suspect the "yellow eyes" belong to Madame Hooch (aka Hedwig) I'm lost. Why would Madam Hooch be Also Known As Hedwig? Surely we would know by now if Hagrid had bought one of the Hogwarts teachers for Harry as a birthday present from Magical Menagerie? ;) As for yellow eyes, why would they belong to any character we already know? OK, maybe yellow isn't the most common eyecolour, but it's not _that_ rare. My grandfather had yellow eyes, and I was vividly reminded of him when I read the secret text. I was also reminded of Moody by the phrase "mane of hair". Incidentally, my grandfather also had a glass eye. However, it's quite obvious it isn't Moody, and I don't think it's any other old character either. Jekatiska From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 14:18:58 2004 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 14:18:58 -0000 Subject: Book 6 Title -- Hyphen? In-Reply-To: <060b01c48a3b$90c66080$3f8f3f44@Dude> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111179 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kathi Russell" wrote: > > Colin: > > According to "The Leaky Cauldron" the title for Book 6 is > > "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince" not "Harry Potter > > and the Half Blood Prince" as per the use of half-blood in > > the books. > > > bamf: > > My problem with that thinking, is that Jo posted it to the > > website without the hyphens. So, until JKR posts that it > > should be 'Half-Blood' instead of 'Half Blood', I'll use it > > without the hyphen. > > > Geoff: > > Interestingly, if you look on her site at the list of FAQs > > about the books, one of the questions has a hyphen in > > Half-Blood Prince. > > > Okay - > I can't figure out what the big deal is about the hyphen, no-hyphen > debate. Can someone please explain this to me? > > Thanks! > > K The difference is one of those stupid questions that drive editors bonkers--what is modifying what? A "half-blood prince" is either a prince who is half-blooded or a prince of the half-bloods. A "half blood prince" is a partial "blood prince" whatever the hell that is--a prince of vampires was one of the theories I tossed out myself when this first came up. It is a phrase that--with what we know to this point--makes no sense. But it might in light of new plotlines. Hyphens are tricky things. ;-) JKR's site now uses the hyphen, as does amazon.com and barnesandnoble.com--not that those sites are infallible, by any means. So until we discover otherwise, I assume it is "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince." Antosha From cubs9911 at aol.com Wed Aug 25 15:08:43 2004 From: cubs9911 at aol.com (cubs99111) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 15:08:43 -0000 Subject: Can you Apparate Within Hogwarts?(Was Disapparation inside Hogwarts?) In-Reply-To: <000001c48a90$d575b000$0400a8c0@domain.actdsltmp> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111180 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > Someone was wondering how DD could disapparate from his office, when > > we know apparation/disapparation isn't possible within Hogwarts. > > Could he simply have put on one of Fred and George's > > invisibility hats > > and then walked out (or stayed in, for that matter)? > > > > Romulus Lupin, blaming the absurdity of his theories on the August sun > > I'm convinced he caused himself to disappear, as he tells Harry in PS/SS > that he doesn't need an invisibility cloak to become invisible. I don't > think he needed help from Fred and George to do that, either. > > > Suzanne *****This is something that I have struggled with. Do we really know that you can't apparate withing Hogwarts? Have we been told that? I'm not sure. I know that Hermione has said that you can't apparate into or out of Hogwarts. But can someone do it withing the castle? We have seen that Fawkes and Dobby have been able to although that might be a different sort of magic. I was struggling with this because in my fanfiction story that I am writing, I had the kids practicing apparation in the Room of Requirements and I had a lot of people reminding me that you can't apparate in Hogwarts. I'm not sure. Does anyone know if we have been told specifically about apparation within Hogwarts?****** JR From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 15:16:10 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 08:16:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Hagrid, Riddle and the Traveler in CoS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040825151610.45135.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111181 > CDR Who has lurked for months but only posted once before, > and still wants to talk about Hagrid, Riddle, and "the traveler" in > CoS if anyone wants to (106761)! Message 106761: "In CoS, Aragog reveals his origins to Harry and Ron. "I was not born in the castle. I come from a distant land. A traveler gave me to Hagrid when I was an egg." (CoS15) Who is this traveler? Why such a specific word- "traveler"? Why give a killer beast to a 13-year-old? This "dangerous egg from a stranger" scenario also put me in mind of the hooded figure in SS/PS that conveniently gives Hagrid another egg, the dragon Norbert, and in doing so gains information about Fluffy guarding the Sorcerer's Stone. I began thinking- could Aragog have been given to Hagrid with a similar motive, all those years ago? It seems a suspicious coincidence to me that the two moments when LV/Riddle is searching for something at Hogwart's (first the Chamber of Secrets, later the Sorcerer's Stone) a mysterious stranger appears and gives Hagrid his heart's desire, a Class A Non-Tradeable egg to raise in secret. I assume, although it is never explicitly stated, that the mysterious "dragon dealer" in SS/PS is Quirrell/LV. What if LV knows that Hagrid might willingly talk to a nice hooded man with a dangerous egg because he knows he had done it 50 years before? Was it Riddle (in disguise) who gave Hagrid the Acromantula egg (not too likely, he's no traveler at that point)? Or, more likely, another wizard, someone Riddle meets or knows, someone who has access to illegal items? Did Hagrid inadvertently help Riddle open the Chamber of Secrets by letting a secret slip in his excitement about the egg (as he did with the SS)? What secrets could he have known at 13? So, I throw this out to you allwho is this traveler? Why would he give a very dangerous egg to a 13-year-old? Are the two "egg" plots linked? What might this tell us about Hagrid, or perhaps Riddle, that might play a role in HBP?" End of Message That's a good catch. It's quite possible that Riddle was the first traveller too and was setting up Hagrid to take the fall as the monster-keeper in case suspicion started falling on Riddle himself. He certainly seemed to know exactly where Hagrid was keeping his new "pet" and could thus "capture" him in the act. Riddle was a pretty calculating kid and this would fit. I doubt if it was because Hagrid "knew something", even inadvertantly. No, I don't think the Norbert egg is part of an overall egg plot. Too much of a coincidence. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From ryokas at hotmail.com Wed Aug 25 15:40:23 2004 From: ryokas at hotmail.com (kizor0) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 15:40:23 -0000 Subject: The graves of James and Lily Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111182 A thought occurs: Lily and James were killed in Voldemort's attack. So unless there was nothing left of them, their remains would have been done away with in some manner, in all likelihood buried. Correct? To date, the graves haven't turned up anywhere in the books. Visiting them would probably be an important event for Harry, and distances don't matter all that much in the WW, so is it possible that this will become a Future Plot Point(tm)? There's room for overanalyzation, too, especially since there's a graveyard scene in GoF. I'd ask why Harry's shield against evaile had no effect on Dementors, since the reason it damaged Quirrel was given to be more about Quirrel's nature than LV's presence, but that's a story for another day, please ignore my ramblings. From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Aug 25 15:43:42 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 15:43:42 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111183 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: . > > Snape was a good little DE - then suddenly he wasn't. Not only that but he betrayed his friends. Because make no bones about it, they were hisfriends. These were the Slytherins he was running around with at school; these are his natural allies. Nobody in the Order likes him; nobody except DD really trusts him - so why is he in so deep in the anti-Voldy coalition?< I have to take exception to the last line. Hagrid trusts Snape, and the rest of the staff fall into line behind Snape quite handily when it's time to call Lockhart's bluff in CoS. It's true that JKR said children aren't fooled by this kind of sadistic teacher, but I think she meant they aren't taken in by adult attempts to sugar coat the situation. Kids don't believe that Mean Teacher is only doing it because he really cares, and they're quite right. Now, those of you who can't stand to see 'Snape' and the v-word in the same sentence can click on past, but I think ex-vampire! Snape is a much more magical reason for Snape to leave the DE's. Rank unadulterated speculation: The way I figure, young Snape comes to Hogwarts ignorant of his true heritage (as is everyone else) -- he thinks he's the natural son of a purista father and a somewhat mysterious mother. Everyone thinks she poisoned her husband and ran away, but since he was a squib, nobody got too excited about it. The squib husband would be by definition related to a wizard family. So Snape could resemble his putative father, the hook-nosed man we saw shouting at his mother in the Pensieve, because they're cousins (or half-brothers, if you want to get really soapy.) Growing up as a servant lad in a wizarding household, Snape manages to conceal the evidence of magic and everyone thinks he's a squib himself, until the Hogwarts letter comes. He's been allowed to dust the magical library, you see (there's so much Dark magic in there that it gives House Elves the vapors) and that's how he acquired his very extensive knowledge of curses, much more than a properly brought up child from a dark wizard family would be allowed to learn at that age. It's supposed to stunt their growth, you see, which is why young Snape is so skinny and undersized. But Snape is actually something much more dangerous than a wizard/squib offspring--he's part vampire on his mother's side. This is bad news--what happens is sooner or later the human part dies and that's when you get something like the vampire of legend: a walking corpse with an insatiable appetite for human blood. Snape is understandably horrified when he discovers this. The fate which awaits him naturally leads Snape to be interested in the philosopher's stone, and that brings Snape to the attention of Voldemort, along with the recommendations of the older Slytherins who were Snape's friends at Hogwarts and have already joined the DE's. Of course, Voldemort discovers Snape's secret and has an interesting proposition for him -- a switching spell. Snape can trade his vampire nature to Voldemort, and become fully human. Snape wants to be human, and besides, he suspects the alternative to going along with Master's idea involves torches and pitchforks, so he agrees. But fullyhuman!Snape discovers he's also, somewhat inconveniently, gained a human conscience. Unlike his fellow DE's, he's never learned to ignore it. Suddenly his debt to James Potter ("debt"is the world Dumbledore uses), which never troubled Snape before, is looming large. Also, it doesn't seem as enjoyable as it once did to devise new and clever poisons to test on hapless Muggles and Muggleborns. Snape has no problem at all being outrageously cruel to those who have offended him in even the slightest way, in fact it satisfies his newborn sense of justice, but suddenly innocent people aren't such attractive targets. Snape knows he'll never be allowed to leave the DE's alive. He knows too many of master's secrets. His life is linked to Voldemort's by the switching spell, so there's no possibility of faking his death either. Voldemort will know he's still alive. There's only one way he'll be allowed to leave Voldemort's service --Voldemort has to be destroyed. Snape has no idea how to do that. Only Albus Dumbledore seems to think Voldemort can be beaten--but why would Dumbledore want someone like Snape on his side? Meantime, Snape finds himself more and more reluctant to follow the Dark Lord's orders. In fact he gets very good at disobeying them and putting the blame elsewhere. Now, we know that Lily Potter defied Voldemort three times and lived. What if, one of those times, it was because Snape helped her escape? Lily remembers her debt to the DE who helped her, and pays it back by arranging a meeting between Snape and Dumbledore. Snape becomes Dumbledore's spy. In this capacity, he becomes aware that someone close to the Potters is a traitor. Snape thinks it's Sirius. When he learns that James intends to choose Sirius as the secret-keeper, he breaks cover and warns James, but James refuses to listen to him. When James is betrayed, ostensibly by Sirius, Snape has the sour satisfaction of knowing that if only James had listened to him, the Potters would still be alive. And he will never forgive James for getting Lily killed. Never. Snape thinks he sees that same arrogance in Harry, and that's why Snape hates Harry so much. It's also why the idea that James picked someone else as secret keeper after all was anathema to Snape in PoA. He couldn't stand to think that James *did* listen to him after all, chose someone else, and that he and Lily died for it. Now this sets up an interesting dilemma for Harry and a bangy conclusion. In order for Voldemort to die, the switching spell must be reversed. In fact, if Snape isn't to become a living corpse, it has to be more than reversed, so that Snape becomes fully a vampire. But then, he won't have a human conscience any more. Can Harry, assuming he's ever come to trust Snape at all, still trust him when he's no longer human? Pippin From mauranen at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 15:54:27 2004 From: mauranen at yahoo.com (jekatiska) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 15:54:27 -0000 Subject: Voldemort: Between Life and Death? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111184 > Inkling now: > Yes, and I fully expect that the magic of being deeply human will > trump the so-called superhuman magic in the end. (Or I'll be really > mad at JKR!) One (hopefully) prophetic event: Harry was able to > throw off Voldy's possesion by recalling his love for Sirius. I think we can safely rely on that. Haven't we seen enough pointers in the previous books? None of the tasks Harry&co have accomplished, the obstacles in PS, finding out and fighting the Basilisk, rescuing Sirius, getting through the Triwizard Tournament, the Department of Mysteries, have been simply about magic. There's always the humanity element, without which Harry would not survive. In the end it's always his loyalty and his "guts or whatever" that saves him, not his skill at waving the wand. From mauranen at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 16:09:36 2004 From: mauranen at yahoo.com (jekatiska) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 16:09:36 -0000 Subject: Voldemort: Between Life and Death? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111185 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jekatiska" wrote: > > Inkling now: > > > Yes, and I fully expect that the magic of being deeply human will > > trump the so-called superhuman magic in the end. (Or I'll be really > > mad at JKR!) One (hopefully) prophetic event: Harry was able to > > throw off Voldy's possesion by recalling his love for Sirius. > > I think we can safely rely on that. Haven't we seen enough pointers in > the previous books? None of the tasks Harry&co have accomplished, the > obstacles in PS, finding out and fighting the Basilisk, rescuing > Sirius, getting through the Triwizard Tournament, the Department of > Mysteries, have been simply about magic. There's always the humanity > element, without which Harry would not survive. In the end it's always > his loyalty and his "guts or whatever" that saves him, not his skill > at waving the wand. (Sorry, I accidentally sent the message before finishing it...) I think this human element is (at least part of) "The Power the Dark Lord Knows Not". He has a soul and human feelings, he can feel love and loyalty and mercy etc. which Voldemort can't. Voldemort fears and despises such feelings, and sees them as weakness, so he doesn't recognise humanity as power. And I think that will be his downfall. Jekatiska From cruthw at earthlink.net Wed Aug 25 16:10:47 2004 From: cruthw at earthlink.net (caspenzoe) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 16:10:47 -0000 Subject: Is Percey A Spy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111186 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "doddiemoemoe" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "caspenzoe" > wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Pouncevil at A... wrote: > > > Here's a Thought??? > > > > > > Lets all remember that the "Rat" Scabbers came from Percy. > > > > > > We also know that Peter P. the rat was a DE and had been passing > > them information for years. Did Peter pass on information while in > > the "care" of Percy. > > > > >> > > caspen wrote: > > Regardless whether Percy is intentionally serving VM (is a spy for > > VM) or not, his actions have never really served the good (i.e: > DD) > > yet in canon have they? Quite the opposite: of late, they have > > certainly opposed it. > > > > Caspen > > Doddiemoe here: > > I think that Percy was under the imperious curse..Wormtail's one > coniving bit of nastiness(well, probably more than a bit). It > simply makes sense....Percy's strange behavior since cs is more than > just having a girl friend IMHO, he also "mother hens"-or > mollycoddles Ginny" (he never was quite so concerned about Ron's > health and well being that I remember). > > Percy's quest to be the best and gain power (remember him reading > about prefects who gained power).sounds a great deal like a set of > values from Wormtail more than Mr. or Mrs. Weasley. For all we know > Percy may well have known Wormtail was an animagus--but never know > his "history".. > > Percy may not be a spy..but he may well be influenced by Wormtail > who had a great deal of access to both a wand and Percy when percy > was sleeping. Wormtail may have had him under the imperious curse > from time to time or ALL the time. This may well be why Percy gave > Ron his "rat"..We're talking about a person who will not even let > his family use the owl they bought him here! > Doddie I have to agree that Percy's behavior since COS is very suspiscious - but it's been subtle. As I said, I didn't see it myself until I reread COS (and I've been following this up by re-reading the entire series in sequence). This is why I'm so puzzled by those who think Percy may be spying for the ministry - just doesn't make sense to me. I do have one question though regarding the possibility that Percy has been imperioused by Wormtail: isn't there record of an interview in which JKR responds to the question whether Percy is acting on his own with a point blank "I'm afraid so"? Perhaps you are right though, in that she is referring to his present actions and not to the distant past when Wormtail was his pet. In any case, Percy, by character, as exhibited since the very first book, seems to me to be a ripe target for recruitment into the kind of inane, day-to-day cruelty that constitutes most of the real evil most of us posting to this board are likely to encounter first-hand. This kind of common every-day badness ranging from indifference to petty, niggling abuse doesn't appear to be related to the more spectacular - big green flashes of light, mayhem & genocide - type of evil that we rarely see up close and are always truly shocked to hear about, but ultimately the really shocking evils are supported and made possible by the more mundane type. Caspen From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org Wed Aug 25 16:30:35 2004 From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS)) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 11:30:35 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape and Regulus Black (was Snape & the Edinburgh Festival Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111187 Theory that Regulus was really the one killed in the MoM instead of Sirius anyone? Gina : I have wondered if Severus is Regulus and maybe that is what is meant by Regulus being dead, but who knows? I think Harry would have known if it was not Sirius but I still do not think Sirius is dead. Gina [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 16:35:13 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 09:35:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Gilderoy lockhart - JKR's ex??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040825163513.75720.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111188 Whatever JKR's feelings about the man, the fact is that he is her daughter's father and thus she has to be careful about what she says in public. If indeed GL is based on her ex-, then I doubt that she would ever admit it so as not to embarass or hurt her daughter. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From terpnurse at qwest.net Wed Aug 25 16:39:10 2004 From: terpnurse at qwest.net (Steven Spencer) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 09:39:10 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The graves of James and Lily In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4A532144-F6B5-11D8-8B32-0003930C168E@qwest.net> No: HPFGUIDX 111189 kizor0 wrote: > To date, the graves haven't turned up anywhere in the books. Visiting > them would probably be an important event for Harry, and distances > don't matter all that much in the WW, so is it possible that this > will become a Future Plot Point(tm)? > > I remember during the filming of PoA, I had heard or read that Curan (sp?) wanted to put a graveyard into the movie on the school grounds and that JKR nixed that, citing a specific place on the grounds where there *is* a graveyard and that it will come into play in a later book. I've wondered since then if perhaps the elder Potter's graves are there. Terpnurse From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 17:07:42 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 17:07:42 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111190 > Potioncat: > The entire debt to James/hates you because of James seems too > contrived to work. So while he may not like Harry, I'd say there is > something else there. > > But, I'd like to hear more of your thoughts that he may not dislike > Harry. Does that at all connect to the idea that he's tough on Harry > as a teaching method? (Alright everyone, Snape is a teacher, but > he's no educator.)For further information, see Baloo's style of > teaching in Jungle Book...Kipling not Disney. Alla: LOL! You did not think I would be able not to reply to that , don't you? :o) I think "debt to James" works perfectly fine, because the word "debt" is mentioned in canon and it is perfectly in character for Snape as I see him, but as Neri commented, it lacks "Bang", IMO. Why is the idea that Snape felt indebted to James feels contrived to you? Could you ellaborate on this one, please? I mean, yes, Dumbledore omits things, but plain out lie? I don't think we caught him with that yet. :o) Sorry, the train "Snape is tough on Harry as teaching method" left for me, when Snape was so entrapped in his old wounds and was willing to let Harry be possessed by Lord-Thingy. He behaved worse than a teenager then, much worse, IMO. Hmmm, Balloo's teaching methods. To tell you the truth, I read the book in the russian translation and he seemed kind and gentle soul... eh..Bear to me. In the russian cartoon he was pretty much the same. So, I guess I have to read the original, because right now I am insulted for Baloo, when you compare him with Snape. :o) From mauranen at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 17:16:31 2004 From: mauranen at yahoo.com (jekatiska) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 17:16:31 -0000 Subject: Worse than death Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111191 I lost the thread I was reading when I thought up this theory. Sorry for any repetition. It has been said that a Dementor's kiss leaves you to exist without a soul, and that this is worse than death (POA). If Voldemort has protected himself from death, then a way to vanquish him would be to destroy his soul. I don't think it would be the actual _Dementor's kiss_ that would destroy Voldemort, as the Dementors suck out good feelings and there aren't any in Voldemort to suck. Besides they are on the same side. Instead I think there must be another way for Harry to remove or destroy Voldemort's soul. I think this probably lies within the Power He Know's Not. As Voldemort has never known love of any kind, this is quite a plausible candidate for the Power. How about this: as someone incapable of love, Voldemort can not have a whole and complete soul. This is what I believe. He only has a "half-life" and a "half-soul". This half-soul would be threatened by a force so powerful as love, and so Harry's power in vanquishing him lies in an act of love or mercy, that will destroy what soul he has. This could not be an act of love _against_ Voldemort, as otherwise Lily's sacrifice would have finished him off. I'm inclined to think it would be an act of mercy for Voldemort that would surround him with the Power and crush his loveless soul. Then he would have to exist without his soul - worse than dead. This would also account for why Dumbledore didn't kill him at the end of OotP, as he knew it would be pointless. He would have to destroy his soul. And because there is a connection between Harry and Voldemort, Harry is the only one who can do this. Also, now that Harry knows this, he can have mercy on Voldemort. I suspect he might save his life and thus destroy his soul by flooding it with the power of love and mercy. This would fit well into Harry's "saving people thing". It would also make Voldemort in Harry's debt, which could be the crushing force that destroys him - gratitude. Or at the very least, because Harry has saved him, he can't kill or hurt him without consequences. Hmm... My rambling thoughts seem to have formed two theories rather than one. Jekatiska From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Aug 25 17:21:50 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 17:21:50 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111192 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Potioncat: > The entire debt to James/hates you because of James seems too > contrived to work. So while he may not like Harry, I'd say there is > something else there. > > But, I'd like to hear more of your thoughts that he may not dislike > Harry. Does that at all connect to the idea that he's tough on Harry > as a teaching method? (Alright everyone, Snape is a teacher, but > he's no educator.)For further information, see Baloo's style of > teaching in Jungle Book...Kipling not Disney. > Kneasy: Yes, it seems contrived to me too. Part of it is DD being devious (again). He openly admits that he's dumping Harry on the Dursleys because he's afraid of what would happen if Harry were to grow up basking in the admiration of the WW. He's quite happy for Harry to suffer in Privet Drive so long as Harry isn't 'spoiled'. In fact it's so bad that Harry sees admission to Hogwarts and the WW as an escape from misery. And what happens when he does return? The customers in the Leaky Cauldron fall over themselves to shake his hand, tell him how much they admire him, etc. This to an 11 year old. Not unexpected but still not good. A corrective will be needed. Enter Snape. Harry must learn that the WW is more than just a refuge from the privations of Privet Drive. There are people who don't like him, who wish him harm. He has to learn to deal with this, he has to learn that the WW is not safe and although he's a hero to many life is not going to be a bed of roses from now on. But talking to him, explaining the situation, is unlikely to be enough. He needs an 'enemy' - someone to put him on his mettle but who will cause him no real harm. An equivalent to Vernon Dursley - which when you think about it is just what Snape is. A biased, unfair, rude bully. DD underlines this by referring to the old animus between James and Snape. This is something that Harry can understand, it makes sense - at least to an 11 year old who never knew his father. As a bonus Snape, while apparently trying to 'catch Potter out' is in a very good position to keep a watchful eye on him. All too frequently when Harry is out and about when he shouldn't be, when there are dodgy people about, so is Snape. He's DD's first line of defence for Harry. Of course it wouldn't do for Harry to get wind of this - there would be the possibility that Harry would stop taking it all seriously; might even start thinking of it as just a game of wits. That wouldn't do at all. There's an old saying that if you want to get the attention of a mule then the first thing you do is hit it over the head with a piece of 4x4. Metaphorically that's what happens in his very first Potions Lesson - Snape dumps on him for no apparent reason and very definitely has Harry's attention from then on. Nobody thinks that Snape is a half-wit, in fact jjust the opposite. He's intelligent and logical. Much too intelligent to confuse Harry with James (echoes of Sirius). Whatever antipathy there was between the two has absolutely nothing to do with Harry and Snape is smart enough to know this. On a couple of occasions Snape compares Harry to James but he doesn't confuse them. Why would he bother? James is dead; Snape won that contest on points. I don't claim that he likes Harry, more that he is exaggerating his dislike. Like all successful agents Snape is a consumate actor. He probably sits iin his dungeon duplex giggling to himself thinking up new ways to get under Harry's skin. Every book or so Sevvy *demands* that Harry be expelled. Who does he demand this of? DD. Knowing that DD will do nothing. It's all for show. Note that when DD isn't around (during the reign of Dear Dolly) the one thing Snape does not do is to demand that "Potter be expelled." Because now he probably would be. Umbridge would get rid of Harry in a flash but strangely, Snape does not voice any comlaints. There is even a suspicion that Dolly did not get real Veritaserum to slip into Harry's drink. Now why would Snape do that? It's the acting bit again - Dolly isn't in on it - she'd take it seriously. Not like "DD & Snape - The Best Double-act in the WW." > > Potioncat: > Neri, Sigune and others have come up with good lists of possible > motives. But whatever it is, it has to be an intense reason. > Someone argued against revenge because that doesn't indicate a moral > reason. But we don't know if his leaving LV is a moral reason. (JKR > has warned us about him.) > Kneasy: True - Neri filled the screen with possible motivations, but IMO most (all except one, in fact) are insufficient to explain why Snape does what he does and acts how he acts - it's revenge pure and simple. It's such a simple motive that can explain so much. Other theories get into relationships with James, Lily, switch to convoluted explanations of how this affects the way he treats Harry and so on..and on...and on. But start from the simple premise that Snape hates and fears Voldy to an intense degree and it gets much simpler. Harry is the means of Snapes retribution via DD's plan. But Harry has to be trained and given an edge - what better way than by an genuine dyed-in-the-wool exDE? All this is at DD's instruction. DD knows exactly what is going on between Harry and Snape, though he may misjudge the intensity of Harry's feelings. Hardly surprising - for someone who is thought to be Harry's mentor and guide he doesn't talk to him much, does he? Basically DD is in the business of forging Weapon!Harry. He has a war to win. Much more is at stake than bruised feelings on Harrys part; much more is at stake than just Harry. If it came to the crunch would DD sacrifice the whole of wizarding society to save Harry? No. Harry is the means to save that society, he is not the alternative to it. And if DD answered differently he is the wrong person to be leading the fight. Harry is expendable *so long as they win*. In fact, everyone is expendable so long as Voldy is defeated - even DD. > > Potioncat: > Also, (memory again) LV says "one who I think has left me > forever"...seems to indicate LV thinks that person had a reason to > leave. > > I think it was this thread where some discussed Snape's role in the > final scenes...well, it isn't "Professor Snape and the Dunderheads" > we're reading. We couldn't possibly learn as much about him as we > want to (friend or foe) He has something important to contribute, > but as in the earlier books, he'll slip off the pages sometime > before the end. (Hopefully to return to his dungeon.) Kneasy: Yep. Could be a bit of supporting evidence. As to the final scenes, well, I've postulated that Snape will get rubbed out before the end - probably saving Harry's skin after some foolish but hardly untypical act of stupidity. I just hope that he sees his revenge as inevitable by that time. I can't imagine him living on, becoming an old curmudgeon, grumping about Hogwarts. But as he lies breathing his last, as Harry leans over him his last words, spoken with a sneer, will be "Get on with it Potter. Do something right for once." From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 17:36:25 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 17:36:25 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111193 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > Nobody thinks that Snape is a half-wit, in fact jjust the opposite. He's > intelligent and logical. Much too intelligent to confuse Harry with > James (echoes of Sirius). Whatever antipathy there was between the > two has absolutely nothing to do with Harry and Snape is smart enough > to know this. Alla: Snape SHOULD BE smart enough to know this, but so far everything we saw points to the contrary. No, he does not confuse Harry and James , he just thinks that Harry exactly like James (You are just like your father, Potter) Kneasy: > Every book or so Sevvy *demands* that Harry be expelled. Who does > he demand this of? DD. Knowing that DD will do nothing. It's all > for show. Note that when DD isn't around (during the reign of Dear > Dolly) the one thing Snape does not do is to demand that "Potter be > expelled." Because now he probably would be. Umbridge would get > rid of Harry in a flash but strangely, Snape does not voice any > comlaints. Alla: This is a good point, actually, but I never took Snape's desire to see Harry expelled seriously. Why would he want to do it? If Snape is indeed the cruel sadist,as I see him, it is much more "fun" to torture the child while he is in Hogwarts then let him wonder off somewhere. Kneasy: If it came to the crunch > would DD sacrifice the whole of wizarding society to save Harry? > No. Harry is the means to save that society, he is not the alternative > to it. And if DD answered differently he is the wrong person to be > leading the fight. Harry is expendable *so long as they win*. In fact, > everyone is expendable so long as Voldy is defeated - even DD. Alla: Sorry, I think that if Dumbledore decided in advance that Harry is expendable or anybody is expendable as long as they win, he will be the wrong person to lead the fight. I don't believe in the noble politicians in RW anymore, but I hope that JKR shows us the politican who struggles to save every single life he is responsible for. I do want to see the politican who has some nobility left, even if he is the fictional one. From nrenka at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 17:42:11 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (Nora Renka) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 17:42:11 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111194 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > Nobody thinks that Snape is a half-wit, in fact just the opposite. > He's intelligent and logical. Much too intelligent to confuse Harry > with James (echoes of Sirius). Whatever antipathy there was between > the two has absolutely nothing to do with Harry and Snape is smart > enough to know this. On a couple of occasions Snape compares Harry > to James but he doesn't confuse them. Why would he bother? James is > dead; Snape won that contest on points. I don't claim that he likes > Harry, more that he is exaggerating his dislike. Like all > successful agents Snape is a consumate actor. He probably sits iin > his dungeon duplex giggling to himself thinking up new ways to get > under Harry's skin. I've got one problem with this general characterization--it's basically IceKing!Snape that we see tossed out here every once in a while. Snape is intelligent and logical. He's also been shown to be *intensely* emotional more than once. I postulated once that the entire MAGIC DISHWASHER 'Snape is acting in the Shrieking Shack in PoA' idea was based around the conjecture "Snape wouldn't ACTUALLY lose it like that....would he?" Post-OotP, really looks like he would, wouldn't he? Unless you think that his fury there is also just a cover for some unknown and obscure purpose, too. Intelligence and emotion, as we've argued before, don't behave in any clear-cut relationship with each other. Intelligent people frequently do things that they *know* aren't correct (or whatever) because they are emotionally driven to do so. Hey, neurobiologists out there on the depression thread, want to weigh in? But I do say this as someone who's still not convinced that he's actually back spying on his old buddies in any close-to-direct manner. In fact, I have no idea what he's doing--best suggestion ever made to me was that he's running the staff lottery. Make Snape into the consummate actor in all the situations where the more straightforward reading is that he's furiously angry/emotional and fuming, and you just...flatten the character out. He's not perfectly logical all the time. Sometimes he gets to the right conclusion, but in the wrong way. And sometimes he won't listen when he's about to be proven wrong. On the other hand, he very well can put things together that no one else seems to 'get'. Me, I wouldn't mind seeing some version of George or his sister Diana popping up, although either of those requires a little more...moral consistency, shall we say, than seems to be evinced right now. -Nora sits back in her cozy rocker and awaits the inevitable Great Snape Armageddon with a wine bottle From manawydan at ntlworld.com Wed Aug 25 17:45:41 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 18:45:41 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Gilderoy lockhart - unanswerable question References: <1093402087.25996.99716.m16@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <002401c48acb$57bb3fa0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 111195 SSSusan wrote: >I'm not saying it's NOT him, but I don't know.... Is JKR's ex >remarried? Because [oh, no, here she goes] I'm positive I read/heard >JKR say that this Mr. X's *wife* told her she suspected GL was based >on her husband. In other words, even his wife recognized him but >that he himself is so puffed up that he never would. I suspect that we shall never know for sure. It sounds like one of the questions that JKR is _far_ too diplomatic to give the most probable answer so there's no point asking because if you try, you'll get the diplomatic response rather than the real one. I'd put "Is Lockhart based on your ex?" in the same field with "Which of the characters are gay?" and "Is Harry a Christian?" Any other suggestions, anyone? Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org Wed Aug 25 18:24:24 2004 From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS)) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 13:24:24 -0500 Subject: harry is tom riddle Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111196 I did not see this posted, but I have been no mail for a while. I think that Harry Potter and Tom Riddle are the same person, but in different times. Look at all the hands on DD's watch. We know time travel is a key to this series and "neither can live while the other survives" really sounds like the two are one in the same which would make sense why the name was familiar to Harry in a friendly way. The only hold up is we supposedly know who Tom Riddle's father was. Any ideas? Feel free to shoot this one down because I would hate if this were true. Gina A. Miller [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Aug 25 18:25:39 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 18:25:39 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111197 snipping my original post > Alla: snip > I think "debt to James" works perfectly fine, because the word "debt" is mentioned in canon and it is perfectly in character for Snape as I see him, but as Neri commented, it lacks "Bang", IMO. > Why is the idea that Snape felt indebted to James feels contrived to you? Could you ellaborate on this one, please? Potioncat: Hi, haven't seen your name lately. It does lack "Bang" and it may be a part of the rescue motive, but I don't think it's all of it. Maybe a combination of a debt with protecting Harry as the means of LV's defeat. Alla: >snip > > Sorry, the train "Snape is tough on Harry as teaching method" left > for me, when Snape was so entrapped in his old wounds and was willing to let Harry be possessed by Lord-Thingy. He behaved worse than a teenager then, much worse, IMO. Potioncat: Knowing that we disagree somewhat on that one, I'll accept your point, but, look at the teaching before Occlumency. If he thought Harry needed to learn something and learn it fast, he could have been using the Tough-Teacher technique. I'm not saying it worked; I'm not saying it's a valid technique; I'm not saying he shouldn't have tried something else... > Alla: > Hmmm, Balloo's teaching methods. To tell you the truth, I read the > book in the russian translation and he seemed kind and gentle soul... > eh..Bear to me. In the russian cartoon he was pretty much the same. Potioncat: In the story I'm reading, Bagheera complains that Baloo shouldn't bruise Mowgli so badly. But Baloo insists the Man-cub has to learn all the information (not just wolf) to be safe in the jungle. And when Mowgli recites the lesson correctly, Baloo says, "That was worth a few bruises." Alla: > So, I guess I have to read the original, because right now I am > insulted for Baloo, when you compare him with Snape. :o) Potioncat: Understood...they aren't much alike except for the bruising... There is also a quote that it is unlucky to compliment a child to his face. Does anyone know if JKR read Kipling? Potioncat From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Wed Aug 25 19:39:06 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 19:39:06 -0000 Subject: Snape's Revenge on Voldemort (His DE past) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111198 >>> Kneasy wrote: > Part of it is DD being devious (again). He openly admits that he's > dumping Harry on the Dursleys because he's afraid of what would > happen if Harry were to grow up basking in the admiration of the WW. > He's quite happy for Harry to suffer in Privet Drive > so long as Harry isn't 'spoiled'. <<< Brenda now: I agree with pretty much everything else you said, except for "DD being devious". To me, leaving Harry with the Dursley to prevent fame- contamination was a very prudent guidance. He's looking at the long- term development of Harry as a whole. Become a person before anything else. Yes, the 10 years of loveless life is very cruel and fatal to a growing child indeed, but IMO Dumbledore believed Harry would be strong enough to fight it. Can you imagine a cocky little Boy-Who-Lived admired by the whole wizarding society ever since he was 1? He would be the most arrogant self-absorbed piece of shit! And you know what the results are for 'those' -- they'd be divorced 3 times before entering 30's. And there was that Lily's blood protection reason. IMHO Dumbledore did a (undesired) favor to Harry. >>> Kneasy: He needs an 'enemy' - someone to put him > on his mettle but who will cause him no real harm. An equivalent to > Vernon Dursley - which when you think about it is just what > Snape is. A biased, unfair, rude bully. > DD underlines this by referring to the old animus between James > and Snape. This is something that Harry can understand, it makes > sense - at least to an 11 year old who never knew his father. <<< Brenda: So following your logic, Snape is keeping up with the "I Hate James... Harry I mean" front to everyone except DD? Including Hogwarts' staffs (except for perhaps McGonagall and Filch?) and students? Because it was Quirrell who tells Harry first, and DD just admits it. Just curious ;) >>> Kneasy: As a bonus Snape, while apparently trying to > 'catch Potter out' is in a very good position to keep a watchful > eye on him. All too frequently when Harry is out and about > when he shouldn't be, when there are dodgy people about, > so is Snape. He's DD's first line of defence for Harry. Brenda: The reason I believe Snape 'dislikes' Harry but not necessarily 'hates', is that he shows far too much interest in Harry. If you truly hate someone, you'll become indifferent and apathetic, not keen. I think PoA movie showed it well, in the Great Hall on Halloween night, when Snape asked DD "What should we tell Potter?" He sounded like he cares!!!! [now running away from the Elves for movie discussion] >>> Kneasy: I don't claim that he likes Harry, > more that he is exaggerating his dislike. Like all successful agents > Snape is a consumate actor. He probably sits iin his dungeon duplex > giggling to himself thinking up new ways to get under Harry's skin. Brenda: LOL, Snape giggling? That's an image I've never been able to conjure up ;) Snape is a consumate actor with many motives: - to protect his cover as DE by pleasing Malfoy & co. - to bring the 'celebrity' Harry down to earth (in his eyes anyways) - to let Neville realize that he is important! > Every book or so Sevvy *demands* that Harry be expelled. Who does > he demand this of? DD. Knowing that DD will do nothing. It's all > for show. Note that when DD isn't around (during the reign of Dear > Dolly) the one thing Snape does not do is to demand that "Potter be > expelled." Because now he probably would be. [snip] > There is even a suspicion that Dolly did not get real Veritaserum to slip into Harry's drink. [snip] > Not like "DD & Snape - The Best Double-act in the WW." You're getting another round of laughter for Umbridge Dolly the Sheep. Hehehehe. I never thought about that, but it's very true. Although I viewed his demand for Harry's expulsion as a judgment on DD's favoritism towards Harry. ('He broke enough rules to be expelled! Punish him!') But Snape is in the same ship (= boat, not relationship) as DD, so he wouldn't collaborate with Umbridge by any means. Even if that means he could actually see Harry getting expelled. Lol. I personally think JKR was trying very hard to convince the readers that Snape is indeed among the good guys now, and will save Harry to great length. >>> Kneasy: ... the marital status of some of the Hogwarts teaching staff will be revealed later. This leads one to suspect that such information is plot-sensitive. [snip] > But Snape now, that has legs. > Snape loses wife and child because of a Voldy atrocity. > Snape, the Black Widower, full of poisonous hate. > I like it. Brenda: While this theory is good, I must ask you -- then why do you think Voldemort trusts Snape? I'm basing this on the assumption that Snape has returned to his DE regime and VM doesn't suspect him as traitor - yet. Otherwise Snape would have gotten a blast of more scrutinizing Legilimens and far greater torture. Or hire another potion maker to brew the strongest Veritaserum, ensuring Snape hadn't taken the anti- truth potion. Pick your favorite, but I honestly think if DEs had reasons to suspect Snape, his cover would have been discovered by now. SO, assuming Snape is still safe and sound, why would Voldemort trust Snape if he had killed his family? Isn't that kind of dumb? Unless you think Voldy didn't realize Snape was closely related to his victims. But would't you first run a background check before taking him under? Voldy had Ministry officials in his DE group, it would be certainly handy and useful to check. > Basically DD is in the business of forging Weapon!Harry. He has a > war to win. Much more is at stake than bruised feelings on Harrys > part; much more is at stake than just Harry. If it came to the crunch > would DD sacrifice the whole of wizarding society to save Harry? > No. Harry is the means to save that society, he is not the alternative to it. Absolutely. There are things worth dying for, and for prepared minds, death is nothing but a great next advanture. ;) >>> Kneasy before: And if DD answered differently he is the wrong person to be leading the fight. > Harry is expendable *so long as they win*. In fact, everyone is expendable so long as Voldy is defeated - even DD. >>> Then Alla: I think that if Dumbledore decided in advance that > Harry is expendable or anybody is expendable as long as they win, > he will be the wrong person to lead the fight. Brenda: Well if you think about it, war is a lose-lose situation. You become a victim either as part of Voldy's Expansion Project OR putting a stop to the project. If the whole society is crumbling because of it, and you have the power (or hold the key) in destroying the evil, why not use it. It will be the most logical and right move to make. This is why I have no problem with DD using Harry as the 'Weapon' -- the psychopath is after Harry anyway. He wants to kill Harry more than anything! So why not take the advantage of it? >>> As to the final scenes, well, I've postulated that Snape will get rubbed out before the end - probably saving Harry's skin after some foolish but hardly untypical act of stupidity. I just hope that he sees his revenge as inevitable by that time. I can't imagine him living on, becoming an old curmudgeon, grumping about Hogwarts. > > But as he lies breathing his last, as Harry leans over him his last words, spoken with a sneer, will be "Get on with it Potter. Do something right for once." <<< HAHAHAHHA. You 'forgot' to add this part: Then he travels to the next advanture to see James and Sirius. Sevvy tells him, "You saved my life, I saved your son's life. Now we're even." And the eternity of hexing each other begins all over again!!! Brenda From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Aug 25 19:42:20 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 19:42:20 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111199 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > Kneasy: > True - Neri filled the screen with possible motivations, but IMO most (all except one, in fact) are insufficient to explain why Snape does what he does and acts how he acts - it's revenge pure and simple. > > It's such a simple motive that can explain so much. Other theories get into relationships with James, Lily, switch to convoluted explanations of how this affects the way he treats Harry and so on..and on...and on. But start from the simple premise that Snape hates and fears Voldy to an intense degree and it gets much simpler. < But JKR likes convoluted backstories! Look at what she came up with for Sirius. All we have to know is that Sirius loves and feels protective of Harry to an intense degree, right? But that didn't satisfy JKR--she invented a whole history for SB, according to her website. Even what made it into the books is pretty complex --and has to be, to account for the depth of his feelings for a child he hardly knows. And this is for somebody who's only supposed to be a brooding presence. I don't doubt we'll get something equally convoluted for Snape, who not only has a larger role to play, but also came pre-packaged with a set of intensely deep feelings for someone he'd never met before. Pippin From plungy116 at aol.com Wed Aug 25 19:43:08 2004 From: plungy116 at aol.com (Sarah) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 19:43:08 -0000 Subject: harry is tom riddle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111200 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Miller, Gina (JIS)" wrote: > The only hold up is we supposedly know who Tom > Riddle's father was. Any ideas? Feel free to shoot this one down because I > would hate if this were true. > > Gina A. Miller Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Tom Riddle's father called Tom Riddle? "Bone of the father, unknowingly given, you will renew your son!", and Harry is sat on the grave marked Tom Riddle. Sarah From hydradream at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 13:44:02 2004 From: hydradream at yahoo.com (hydradream) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 13:44:02 -0000 Subject: Theory on book titles (was: Book titles: do they show Harry's challenge) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111201 romuluslupin1: When the title for book 5 was announced, someone said that so far all titles had shown Harry's challenge of the year and wondered if the Order would show the same pattern. While on first reading the Order seems to be on Harry's side (and it's certainly a positive thing in itself), it could also be seen as having negative effects for Harry... snip I was wondering in what possible way the HBP, whoever he turns out to be, could be bad news for our boy. Any help from the theorists among us? If (God forbid) the HBP is Snape (I've seen some posts speculating he might be a half blood) I could see that happening ;-) Now Hydra: Hello everyone This is my first post here and I would not call myself a theorist, but I do have some thoughts on the titles of the books and this seems like a good place to start my career as a poster :) Here goes. I was trying to look for a pattern in the titles and what I found out was this. As you said, every title refers to a challenge or (I think) more specifically to part of the challenge that Harry must face during his school year. And as part of the challenge, the *thing* can be either on his side or against him, playing a more or less active role in his favor or against him. In other words, there are those elements that do not threaten or worsen his situation but are just part of the challenge and those that play an active role in the danger that he faces. So there seem to be two categories of titles: the ones that reflect a "simple" non hostile part of the challenge and the outright hostile element. HP & the Philosopher's Stone: the Stone is part of the challenge, but is neither a threat nor an aggravating factor in the quest. HP & the Chamber of Secrets: the Chamber is a hostile place that is not only hard to find, but conceals great dangers. HP & the Prisonner of Azkaban: although initially a potential threat, Sirius is definitely on Harry's side and a great asset on his side after that. HP & the Goblet of Fire: the Goblet helps Crouch-Moody enter Harry in the Tournament and even though it was only an unwitting accomplice it contributed to Crouch-Moody's evil plan HP & the Order of the Phoenix: the Order is definitely on Harry's side and its members are working tirelessly to protect Harry and fight Voldemort. As a conclusion (I hope I haven't lost too many readers "en route"), it seems that in every other book, the title refers to something positive or non-threatening to Harry and every other one designates a negative thing. If I follow that logic, the HalfBlood Prince should be an instrument against Harry or worst something outrightly hostile to him. Well, I hope my small theory interested someone (anyone??!!) and I would love to hear your opinions on it :) Hydra Keep reading From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Wed Aug 25 15:08:20 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 15:08:20 -0000 Subject: What drives You Know Who? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111202 Hello everyone, I'm new. I was re-reading CoS the other day, and started making a list in my head on what drives You Know Who. Then it occurred to me that it's probably been discussed on the web, but though I have trawled and trawled I haven't found much. I only have three things on my list and will discuss each of them in turn in relation to quotes from the books and from JKR, and the observations and questions the lead me to: 1.Purity of blood: Source material: 'Slytherin wished to be more *selective* about the students admitted to Hogwarts. He believed that magical learning should be kept within all-magic families. He disliked taking students of Muggle parentage, believing them to be untrustworthy.' Professor Binns p114 CoS. '...I would be able to lead another in my footsteps, and finish Salazar Slytherin's noble work.' Tom Riddle, p230 CoS. 'You think I was going to use my filthy Muggle father's name for ever?' Tom Riddle, p231 CoS. 'You [Lucius Malfoy] are still ready to take the lead in a spot of Muggle-torture, I believe? ...your exploits at the Quidditch World Cup were fun, I daresay ...' YKW, p564 GoF. And that is just about all we know. Slytherin was trying to get muggle-borns out of Hogwarts, it never says that he held a wider grudge against them, though it appears that due to YKW's horrible father, he does. Though his attitude to Malfoy's Muggle-torture at the world cup suggests that finishing Salazar Slytherin's noble work is not, for the moment, his top priority. 2.Killing Harry There's so much on this in the books that I think quotes would be over-indulgent, so I shall restrict myself to comments. I'm not sure that there's anything hidden here. Obviously, YKW wants him dead because Harry's the one with the power to vanquish him, and the sooner he can kill Harry (before he grows up and becomes too powerful), the better. For the moment, this is his all- consuming passion. Under this heading also goes his determination to get hold of a full copy of the prophecy. 3. Immortality. Source material: 'Dunno if he had enough human left in him to die.' Hagrid, p 46 PS. 'Not being truly alive, he cannot be killed.' DD p 216 PS. 'They, who knew the steps I took, long ago, to guard myself against mortal death?' YKW, p 562 GoF. 'I, who have gone further than anybody along the path that leads to immortality. You know my goal - to conquer death. And now, I was tested, and it appeared that one or more of my experiments had worked ... for I had not been killed, though the curse should have done it.' YKW, p 566 GoF. 'But I was willing to embrace mortal life again, before chasing immortal.' YKW, p 569 GoF. 'You should be wondering what he did to make sure that he did not die' JKR Edinburgh Book Festival 15th August 2004. 'Voldemort' is French (vol de mort) and can be translated as 'flight of/from death' (though there may be other ways). 'Death Eater' is a strange name for a group obsessed only with killing Muggles/Muggle-borns/half-bloods. In fact, there are a great many more direct references to YKW's desire for immortality than there are to his desire to rid the wizarding world of half-bloods. His sixteen-year-old self was obsessed with getting rid of muggle-borns, until he found out about Harry and his story, at which point his fear of (or interest in) someone he couldn't kill, or someone who could 'defeat the greatest wizard of all time' (CoS, p231) became more important. And why name his followers 'Death Eaters'? What has he promised them? If he knows that one or more of his experiments worked, will he be performing them on his Death Eaters now he has his body back? Somehow I don't think so. I know it's long for a first-ever-post, but thanks for reading! Dungrollin. From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Wed Aug 25 19:59:26 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 19:59:26 -0000 Subject: Portuguese version of the prophecy In-Reply-To: <002101c48a56$2838fb20$652f0dd4@taxi> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111203 >>> Susana wrote: > The literal English translation of the Portuguese version of the prophecy goes like this: > > 'The one *who holds* the power to *defeat* the Dark Lord approaches. born *of* those who have thrice defied him, born *when* the seventh month *ends* . and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have *a* power the Dark Lord knows not . and *one* must die at the *hands* of the other for neither can live while the other survives . the one *who holds* the power to *defeat* the Dark Lord will be born *when* the seventh month *ends* .' > > The original for comparison is: > > 'The one *with* the power to *vanquish* the Dark Lord approaches. born *to* those who have thrice defied him, born *as* the seventh month *dies* . and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have * power the Dark Lord knows not . and *either* must die at the *hand* of the other for neither can live while the other survives . the one *with* the power to *vanquish* the Dark Lord will be born *as* the seventh month *dies* .' <<< Brenda now: I met the Portuguese translator and her daughter at the Convention Alley 2004! She was a very nice lady. She told me and my friends that she was extremely careful in translating Jo's writing, because particular choice of working often holds clues to future plots. Translators are also in contact with JKR to make sure they are not ruining anything, so naturally they are exposed to more spoilers than us! Comparing the Portuguese version of prophecy to the original, the only major difference I see is "a power" vs. "power", and "hand" vs. "hands". Everything else seems to be just the grammar thing. As for whether the difference is significant -- sorry, I don't remember her explaining why she made such changes. She just said she was especially cautious with the prophecy. So no need to get her in trouble with long line-up of angry mob - yet! Brenda From restlesspoetry at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 17:07:35 2004 From: restlesspoetry at yahoo.com (karyn) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 10:07:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape as baddie ( Don't get too fond of him!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040825170735.87369.qmail@web60510.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111204 vmonte said: "But I do have a serious problem with Snape. I remember JKR once stating that Children are never fooled by this kind of teacher/person. And I understand what she means. Adults have a way of rationalising behavior in a way that children do not. My supicion about Snape, unfortunately, is that the children will turn out to be right about him." Hi everyone. Tis my first post, so bear with me if this has been pointed out before. Personally I don't like Snape because he does what seems to benefit him the most. He's civil to adults, but a complete ass to his students, for example. And not for any reason in particular. Just because he can. He's not fair in any sense of the word, and I do agree that it seems pretty likely (I'm sorry if this sentence doesn't make sense, English isn't my first language), that the kids are gonna be (to some degree) right about him. Why would JKR otherwise keep repeating the whole Snape as a suspicious character? If it didn't was significant to the story, wouldn't this repeating theme have been cut out at least a few of the times? And also: vmonte said: "Snape holds a lot of grudges. He seems like the kind of person that cannot forgive (and perhaps seeks revenge). He also seems very sneaky to me. I think he behaves differently in front of DD and MM (and perhaps the other staff) than he does when he is around the children. I keep feeling that Harry's penseive scene with Snape has some clue we haven't noticed yet. I also bet that Snape told Harry not to tell anyone about what he saw because there is something there (aside from the humiliation of being hung upside down) that Snape doesn't want someone else to find out. And yes, I think he has a separate "secret" agenda." As for the pensive, there's the obvious. It feels like if he had a crush on Lily - kids that are treated that way by their peers often do get crushes on people that defend them, and yes, I'm speaking from experience. This would (maybe) explain his hate for both Harry and LV? James didn't only save his life, which I assume was hard to take for someone like Snape - he also ended up with the girl. And since Snape couldn't be nasty to James at the time, he now takes it out on Harry. And if he really liked Lily, wouldn't that be a reason to break out of the Death Eaters, since LV was the one who killed her? Eh. This theory sounds too lightweigth and mushy for JKR. I'm sure she has something far more brilliant in mind. But I do agree that there's more to that pensive scene than what meets the eye. --karyn --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From flyballcairn at bellsouth.net Wed Aug 25 18:41:03 2004 From: flyballcairn at bellsouth.net (Danielle Arnt) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 13:41:03 -0500 Subject: Peeves Message-ID: <006701c48ad3$12ea1600$5302a8c0@Shadowfax> No: HPFGUIDX 111205 I've been thinking about Peeves recently. I don't think or suggest that he is somehow important to the plot, but I find it interesting that he is "allowed" at Hogwarts. Remember, in GOF, Fleur states that Madame Maxime would never allow a poltergeist at Beau Batons. Also, appparently, in OOTP,Umbridge is getting permission from the ministry to have him removed. We know he was there when the Marauders where there and that Dumbledore was Headmaster then as well. So, I think it says something interesting about Dumbledore's character that he allows this mischief maker to remain at Hogwarts. We know Dumbledore has a "twinkle" in his eye and must quite often look the other way at rule breaking since he seems to be so aware of what is going on in the school, at least in regards to Harry and co. I think Dumbledore has quite a good sense of humor and, like Harry when he gives the Tri Wizard winnings to Fred and George, realizes the importance of laughter. In fact, DD really only seems to mind rule breaking when there is any real danger involved, for example, the muggles seeing the flying car in COS (Harry notes how angry DD looked). It would be interesting to know when Peeves arrived at Hogwarts. On another vein, in POA, Lupin is explaining about the Marauders and their monthly escapades and how he felt guilty in breaking DD trust. That DD never knew what was happening. I think DD knows pretty much everything that goes on at Hogwarts and was well aware of what the Marauders were doing. Which begs the question of whether he knew Sirius could transfigure into a dog. Hhhmmm... My thoughts for the day! Danie (who doesn't have a clever HP name to use on the list but who would definitely bring her cat Quiz to Hogwarts if she were a student there!) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From patientx3 at aol.com Wed Aug 25 20:21:40 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 20:21:40 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111206 Alla: >>I think "debt to James" works perfectly fine, because the word "debt" is mentioned in canon and it is perfectly in character for Snape as I see him, but as Neri commented, it lacks "Bang", IMO. Why is the idea that Snape felt indebted to James feels contrived to you? Could you ellaborate on this one, please? I mean, yes, Dumbledore omits things, but plain out lie? I don't think we caught him with that yet.<< HunterGreen: Well, you weren't asking me, but I'll jump in anyway... I don't think Dumbledore was *lying*, just assuming. I don't really understand why Snape would see it as a life-debt, because he thinks James was in on trying to kill him in the first place (would you really be debted to someone if they put you in danger in the first place?). While Dumbledore may believe that Snape is debted to James, don't think that Snape believes this. Besides, why would a debt transfer to someone's son? I don't know why Snape would believe that. Personally, I think he saved Harry at the quidditch game because he saw that the broom was being jinxed and no one was doing anything about it. I think it had more to do with him being a teacher in the school than Harry personally. (or, as Kneasy suggests, he's protecting Harry because he sees Harry as the conduit to getting rid of Voldemort). From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org Wed Aug 25 20:37:50 2004 From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS)) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 15:37:50 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Peeves Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111207 Danie I've been thinking about Peeves recently. Gina: I have given Peeves a lot of thought too and I agree that I think DD allows him to stay because he finds him funny, but how many times have we heard that Peeves only listens to the Bloody Baron? Why is that? Maybe someone knows and I just missed the discussion, but I find it really odd that he is the only one that can control Peeves. And BB and PP go really well with all the other letters DD MM SS HH GG SS RR. I know there has been lots of discussion on that but who is Peeves really? Gina [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From snow15145 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 20:56:10 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 20:56:10 -0000 Subject: Who stuns Sirius? & Fake Death (was Re: The Veil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111209 Laurasia: But if she wanted us all to believe that Sirius was dead, she wouldn't go on about how easy it was to write an apparent death scene, right? We already knew that she had issues writing Cedric's death scene. If, all of a sudden, an actual main character appears to die and there was no fuss made, we'd all wonder why. The fact that she has told people how upset she 'was' proves that we are meant to take note of how upsetting it is. In other words- the perfect bluff. I think that it's perfectly possible that she is just 'playing the part' of an aggrieved Sirius fan until he returns. Snow: JKR may have been grieving for Harry's sake on the part of Sirius' death. We have heard her state over and over again about how much Harry has to be put through and that she wouldn't want to be him. JKR could have been saddened by what Harry has to go through because of the death of Sirius and not the death of the character itself. Laurasia: Mind you, then there are real issues with why Dumbledore told Harry all the stuff about the prophecy. Dumbledore admits that keeping information from Harry was a really bad thing to do. Unless he doesn't know that Sirius is dead, he's setting himself up to get more of his possesions thrown at him. How can he parrot on about 'You should've known before this, I'm sorry' whilst being aware that Harry is once again suffering real pain because there is more information being with-held from him.? Snow: There is a lot of information being held from Harry, for what the keeper(s) of the information may feel, is for Harry's own good. The scene where Harry is talking to Lupin and Sirius in the fire in Umbridge's office, Lupin and Sirius look at one another knowing the truth about Snape but don't offer any other reason to Harry except they were young and foolish. Sounds a bit like a cop out statement to me and I think it sounded that way to Harry as well. They could have told him the real reason why they picked on Snape and I doubt it only had to do with grey undies. I'm pretty sure it is something the maurauders knew about Snape's embarrassing home life that caused them to mistreat him (Snape) like he was a low-life scum not worthy of the time of day. Laurasia: I don't think it gels with Dumbledore at all. The only option must be that Dumbledore doesn't know that Sirius has faked his own death. Still, it seems plausible that Sirius and Lupin cooked up the scheme together over at Grimmauld Place. Snow: I had offered a theory, which I felt very feasible some time back in post: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/93618, where Tonks and Sirius, unknown to anyone else, had made a switch. The idea still floats (for me) for the reasons I stated in this post. Not very many people liked the idea at that time mainly because of JKR's comment as to how painful it was in writing Sirius' death stating that it would be cruel to have had Harry grieve over a death that didn't actually happen. Laurasia: I do love this Sirius-not-dead theory, however. It certainly isn't baseless. But it also makes Sirius a bit of a coward- he 'left' when Bellatrix Lestrange was still up and about in AK distance from his Godson. Surely Sirius doesn't consider his of fake! death a higher priority than Harry's life? BUT, as much as I like this theory, I think the most elaborate fan theories spring out of discontent with the actual text (Any Matix fans remember all those weird 15 000 word explanations which arose after the vastly inferior 2nd movie?). If we all currently felt that there weren't any holes in the text, I doubt that this kind of theory would have sprung up. I think that Sirius is a lot of fans' favourite, and it's no secret that most people have yet to warm to the "sudden & unexpected, no clear consequence or benefit for Harry yet" death scenario. As yet, it's difficult to see the reason why it's okay and necessary for Sirius to die. Snow: This answer lies, imo, in that puzzling tormenting two-way mirror question on JKR's web site: Why did Harry have to forget the mirror he had been given by Sirius in 'Order of the Phoenix'? " The mirror might not have helped as much as you think, but on the other hand, will help more than you think. You'll have to read the final books to understand that!" Why wouldn't the mirror have helped Harry would have found Sirius to be alive and not proceeded to the Ministry Sirius would not have followed Harry and would not have gone through the veil Harry would not have been possessed by Voldemort and would not have found the power in which to stop Voldemort's possession and therefore could not continue to the next stage of his vanquishing Voldemort forever ability. How could the mirror help more now that Sirius is gone I guess that would depend on where Sirius has gone and what information he has that would help Harry or did Sirius even take his mirror with him to the Ministry? How could the mirror help if Sirius doesn't have his or if he is actually dead? Laurasia: It's oh-so-mean for JKR to with-hold this reason for another book. We're all desperate to know! But it maybe foolish from a narrative point of view to leave such a huge subplot unresolved. Harry certainly doesn't reach any resolution with Sirius's death at the end of OotP. And I would *hate* to see him spending all of HBP being angry and depressed over Cedric's death because we've seen that already! Snow: >From the way JKR talks, Harry wont have much time to be angry about anything more than what is happening to him now. It sounds as though Harry wont even have a chance to say hello or goodbye to the Dursleys so something very unusual is going to happen right at the beginning of summer holiday that wont give him much time to think about Sirius let alone grieve over him. Laurasia: If Sirius returns (via two-way mirror or whatever) it has to be at a point when Harry has fully gotten over his death. If not, it suggests that death isn't final or absolute. It says that you *can* be desperate and hang on and dwell on memories and not get on with your life. I doubt JKR is going to put this theme in her book (Motto of the Mirror of Erised: you cannot dwell on dreams and forget to live). Snow: It may not be the motto of the mirror but that mirror, imo, is bound to hold some key to the eventuality of the story. It reminds me so much of through the looking glass because of its backwards writing as if to say you are looking at it from the other side of the mirror. Laurasia: Does this mean Harry will get over Sirius ASAP? I doubt it. He dreamt about Cedric for months. That only leaves Harry spending a normal amount of time grieving- months at least. Which means Sirius may not reappear until Book 7!! Eep! If we were discontent with Sirius dying for no good reason and only a few days had passed in the book, how are we all going to be if Sirius's death shows no signs of benfitting the story for a year of book time?! This is why I think it may be a foolish narrative device. Of course, we will all immediately forgive JKR the instant Sirius waltzes on from stage right. Snow: I know I would! I try not to become so emotional about any of the characters that I can't see the possibility of them being someone I didn't think they could be, like ESE Lupin, but I do have a soft spot for Sirius. Laurasia: The only thing I am sure of is that Sirius went through that veil for a reason. We don't know what the reason is yet, but this fake!death scenario certainly creates a great reason for sending Sirius through. Snow: I know my Sirius/Tonks scenario is different than the scenario you are speaking of but the fake!death result would be the same. I like the idea that this fake!death was set up because at least some of the Order knew that Harry could be baited in such a way by Voldemort and that they would have had some type of plan to ensure the outcome. Lupin and Sirius were well aware that Harry had to take Occlumency lessons and why they were so important. They also knew that Snape had stopped giving the lessons and that Harry's mind was now wide open to intrusion. I would hope that Lupin and Sirius or possibly even Tonks would have thought of an alternate plan incase this happened. Snow---Fifteen month old Harry looks out over his crib sees Voldemort take aim but before he can say Avada Harry says "I'm rubber your glue whatever you say bounces off of me and sticks to you!" From bamf505 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 21:05:59 2004 From: bamf505 at yahoo.com (Metylda) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 14:05:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Disapparation inside Hogwarts? In-Reply-To: <000001c48a90$d575b000$0400a8c0@domain.actdsltmp> Message-ID: <20040825210559.19833.qmail@web12303.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111210 --- Romulus Lupin pondered: > > Someone was wondering how DD could disapparate > from his office, when > > we know apparation/disapparation isn't possible > within Hogwarts. Suzanne commented: > I'm convinced he caused himself to disappear, as he > tells Harry in PS/SS > that he doesn't need an invisibility cloak to become > invisible. I don't > think he needed help from Fred and George to do > that, either. I actually wonder if the 'No Apparation' rule holds for everyone, but Dumbledore. I wonder if the Headmaster of the school (whoever it maybe), is able to apparate and dissaparate form the grounds. Kind of a perk and as a well-known secret. After all, if the enemy has the school surrounded, it's be a nice trick to have the head master be able to dissapparate and get help... Sun? What's that? ;) bamf, blaming the assurdidties of her theories on the August cold and rain... ===== "Why, you speak treason!" -Maid Marian "Fluently!" -Robin Hood -The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) Cub fans are not normal. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Wed Aug 25 21:10:38 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 21:10:38 -0000 Subject: What Drives You Know Who? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111211 >>> Dungrollin wrote: > I was re-reading CoS the other day, and started making a list in my > head on what drives You Know Who. Brenda: Welcome! ;) I would say his motivation is even more simple - POWER. I think Quirrell's words in the Mirror chamber describes Voldemort's 'teaching' the best: "There is no right or wrong, only power and those who are too weak to seek it" (paraphrased) I think the rest of VM's actions follows the pattern of his attempt to: (1) be almighty powerful, so no one will think of desert him like his father once did (2) eliminate anything/anyone that stands in his path to power (3) enjoy the power as long as possible, hence quest for immortality > 1. Purity of blood: > And that is just about all we know. Slytherin was trying to get > muggle-borns out of Hogwarts, it never says that he held a wider > grudge against them, though it appears that due to YKW's horrible > father, he does. Though his attitude to Malfoy's Muggle-torture at > the world cup suggests that finishing Salazar Slytherin's noble work is not, for the moment, his top priority. <<< Brenda: While this is certainly true for Tom Riddle, I don't know about Voldemort. This is how I think Voldemort sees pure-blood mania: Tom Riddle comes to Hogwarts from Orphanage. Soon he realizes he has been selected as Heir of Slytherin, by Salazar Slytherin himself, "the greatest of Hogwarts four". He realizes he is much more magically powerful and brilliant than most wizards. For an orphan boy who has never been properly loved, this is quite an attraction. He realizes he could be very powerful, and gives himself the title of Lord Voldemort (already power-hungry!). He behaves well enough to earn himself the position of Head Boy. He opens the Chamber of Secrets after 5 years of searchng, and attacks Muggle-borns in school, until death of a student makes him realize it's too risky to open it again. He writes a diary and leaves his saga with someone else. Then he graduates from Hogwarts, disappears, goes through numerous dangerous transformations, associates with darkest of their kinds, and fashions himself as Lord Voldemort. He starts gathering followers in Wizarding World. His catch is the whole "Let's revive the Pure-Bloodism", which majority of wizarding community is in favor of. It's flying very well! He is becoming more and more popular, lots of wizards and witches are supporting him. It is a great propaganda, works very nice for him till he shows his true color. After gathering enough followers, he starts the massive massacre. Do you know what this strongly reminds me of? Hitler's regime around World War II. He used the pure German blood line as a means to unify the country, to strengthen it. People need to be strongly motivated to stand united, ready to fight. But there must be a mutual enemy -- whether it be another country or different idealogy-- for this propaganda to work efficiently. So what does Nazis use? The "contamination" of purity by 'Aryan' or 'Jewish' blood. Hitler probably hated the minority population himself -- without personal emotion I don't know how *anyone* can be so driven to commit such a horrible crime without feeling anything. But it worked very nicely for him as well, very effective method to lead the country. Vast majority of social problems can now be blamed upon this poticial fictitious enemy rather than themselves. This is how I see Voldemort use the Pure-bloodism in WW -- he believed in it himself, but his greater and true motivation was to amplify his power by fooling everyone. The following is from JKR's website, FAQ section: ----------------------------------------------------[F.A.Q Section] [Q] Why are some people in the wizarding world (e.g., Harry) called 'half-blood' even though both their parents were magical? [A] The expressions 'pure-blood', 'half-blood' and 'Muggle-born' have been coined by people to whom these distinctions matter, and express their originators' prejudices. As far as somebody like Lucius Malfoy is concerned, for instance, a Muggle-born is as 'bad' as a Muggle. Therefore Harry would be considered only 'half' wizard, because of his mother's grandparents. If you think this is far-fetched, look at some of the real charts the Nazis used to show what constituted 'Aryan' or 'Jewish' blood. I saw one in the Holocaust Museum in Washington when I had already devised the 'pure-blood', 'half-blood' and 'Muggle-born' definitions, and was chilled to see that the Nazis used precisely the same warped logic as the Death Eaters. A single Jewish grandparent 'polluted' the blood, according to their propaganda. ----------------------------------------------------[F.A.Q. ends] > 2. Killing Harry > There's so much on this in the books that I think quotes would be > over-indulgent, so I shall restrict myself to comments. > > I'm not sure that there's anything hidden here. Obviously, YKW > wants him dead because Harry's the one with the power to vanquish > him, and the sooner he can kill Harry (before he grows up and > becomes too powerful), the better. For the moment, this is his all- > consuming passion. Imagine your greatest life ambition is to gain as much power as possible. You are now 70+ years old, or around there. You have been powerful, extremely powerful for most of your life, till 10+ years ago you lost *everything* you've worked for in your entire life, by an infant boy, who is half-blood by the way. And he keeps managing to escape you, each and every bloody time. HELL yeah, wouldn't *you* want to kill the boy?? > 3. Immortality. > In fact, there are a great many more direct references to YKW's > desire for immortality than there are to his desire to rid the > wizarding world of half-bloods. His sixteen-year-old self was > obsessed with getting rid of muggle-borns, until he found out about > Harry and his story, at which point his fear of (or interest in) > someone he couldn't kill, or someone who could 'defeat the greatest > wizard of all time' (CoS, p231) became more important. > > And why name his followers 'Death Eaters'? What has he promised > them? If he knows that one or more of his experiments worked, will > he be performing them on his Death Eaters now he has his body back? > Somehow I don't think so. Bren: Now, what good is power if you can only enjoy it for only a short while? Wouldn't you want to feel that way for eternity?? :o) Brenda ps. Apologies for poor memory, but what/who is YKW?? ... OH! You-Know-Who? Lol you must be the first person to use acronym on the euphemism (as far as I can remember!) ;P From cristelmc at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 17:09:43 2004 From: cristelmc at yahoo.com (cristelmc) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 17:09:43 -0000 Subject: The graves of James and Lily In-Reply-To: <4A532144-F6B5-11D8-8B32-0003930C168E@qwest.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111212 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steven Spencer" wrote: > kizor0 wrote: > > To date, the graves haven't turned up anywhere in the books. Visiting > > them would probably be an important event for Harry, and distances > > don't matter all that much in the WW, so is it possible that this > > will become a Future Plot Point(tm)? > > > > > > I remember during the filming of PoA, I had heard or read that Curan > (sp?) wanted to put a graveyard into the movie on the school grounds > and that JKR nixed that, citing a specific place on the grounds where > there *is* a graveyard and that it will come into play in a later book. > I've wondered since then if perhaps the elder Potter's graves are > there. > > Terpnurse Just curious!? What about Lily's parents? Just another thought. I think Harry is about to learn alot about his family on both sides in the upcoming book.Most common muggles would be totally flipped out about a wizard in the family; that is, if it had never happened before. According to Aunt Petunia, Lily's folks were thrilled.Which makes me wonder if there were other magical occurances in their family we just don't know about yet. I think that Petunia's hate for Lily fizzles down to pure green Jealousy. She wanted Lily's gifts, but did not have them.Maybe someone else in the family they all looked up to had these gifts too. If so Petunia certainly would not mention it. Nobody in the WW would either, most likely, because Harry has been in their world for quite a while now and we know nothing about the Potter family.(Other than his dad.)What do you think? From cristelmc at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 18:46:19 2004 From: cristelmc at yahoo.com (cristelmc) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 18:46:19 -0000 Subject: harry is tom riddle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111213 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Miller, Gina (JIS)" wrote: > I did not see this posted, but I have been no mail for a while. I think that > Harry Potter and Tom Riddle are the same person, but in different times. > Look at all the hands on DD's watch. We know time travel is a key to this > series and "neither can live while the other survives" really sounds like > the two are one in the same which would make sense why the name was familiar > to Harry in a friendly way. The only hold up is we supposedly know who Tom > Riddle's father was. Any ideas? Feel free to shoot this one down because I > would hate if this were true. > > Gina A. Miller > > LOL!!! You are joking right!? Harry could not possibly be Tom Riddle. We know that Tom's dad was Tom Riddle as well.And, Lord Thingy killed his own father in the Riddle house. We have record of who he is from the history of JKR's writing.(Didn't I just sound like Hermy!!!)And why would Harry kill his parents. He has been heartsick over them all his life. Maybe I am misunderstanding what you mean. Harry is not evil. Tom is evil. They are not the same person. > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From chairos at gmail.com Wed Aug 25 19:21:26 2004 From: chairos at gmail.com (Jon Rosebaugh) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 14:21:26 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] harry is tom riddle In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111214 On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 13:24:24 -0500, Miller, Gina (JIS) wrote: > I did not see this posted, but I have been no mail for a while. I think that > Harry Potter and Tom Riddle are the same person, but in different times. > Look at all the hands on DD's watch. We know time travel is a key to this > series and "neither can live while the other survives" really sounds like > the two are one in the same which would make sense why the name was familiar > to Harry in a friendly way. The only hold up is we supposedly know who Tom > Riddle's father was. Any ideas? Feel free to shoot this one down because I > would hate if this were true. > > Gina A. Miller Time travel was a key in PoA, yes, but I don't really think you can say it's key to the series. Of course, if your theory is correct you then have to explain why Ollivander would sell two different wands to the same person, how Harry could attend Hogwarts twice without looking too old (since we know Tom went through all or mostly all of his classes), not to mention why he'd try to kill himself. I prefer to stick to more conventional theories. From jakm_99 at yahoo.co.uk Wed Aug 25 19:40:06 2004 From: jakm_99 at yahoo.co.uk (jakm_99) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 19:40:06 -0000 Subject: harry is tom riddle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111215 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Miller, Gina (JIS)" wrote: > I did not see this posted, but I have been no mail for a while. I think that > Harry Potter and Tom Riddle are the same person, but in different times. > Look at all the hands on DD's watch. We know time travel is a key to this > series and "neither can live while the other survives" really sounds like > the two are one in the same which would make sense why the name was familiar > to Harry in a friendly way. The only hold up is we supposedly know who Tom > Riddle's father was. Any ideas? Feel free to shoot this one down because I > would hate if this were true. > > Gina A. Miller Maybe not the same person in the literal sense, maybe they are different parts of the same person? They need to balance each other in some way? Maybe whatever LV needs to become truly immortal is hidden in Harry somehow and thats why LV couldn't kill him? Maybe they're related through Lily? > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org Wed Aug 25 21:27:33 2004 From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS)) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 16:27:33 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The graves of James and Lily Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111216 I think that Petunia's hate for Lily fizzles down to pure green Jealousy. She wanted Lily's gifts, but did not have them. Gina : I agree and I honestly think we are fixing to find out that dear old Aunt Petunia is a hag! That will be a really funny slap in the face when/if that is revealed!!! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From herosarerare at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 20:08:27 2004 From: herosarerare at yahoo.com (herosarerare) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 20:08:27 -0000 Subject: hagrid's brother Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111217 What happened to Hagrid's brother after he was shot full of arrows and then ran off into the forest? From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org Wed Aug 25 21:33:10 2004 From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS)) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 16:33:10 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] harry is tom riddle Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111218 Time travel was a key in PoA, yes, but I don't really think you can say it's key to the series. Iprefer to stick to more conventional theories. Gina : * AS DO I and I sincerely hope that it stays conventional and does not get so far out that it ends really badly just to keep us from guessing the end. But the prophecy was worded that way for a reason and Harry and Tom look alike, both speak Parseltongue, both have matching wand cores, and we never got a good reason why that name sounded familiar to Harry. I REALLY TRULY hope this is as far out as it sounds or I would really be disappointed, but come now - "Why didn't LV die" - why did Harry live? "Why wouldn't DD kill LV in the DoM" it is all a little strange to me. Gina - who wants a good theory on the relationship of LV and HP [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From restlesspoetry at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 21:32:50 2004 From: restlesspoetry at yahoo.com (karyn) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 14:32:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The graves of James and Lily In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040825213250.55169.qmail@web60510.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111219 cristelmc wrote: I think that Petunia's hate for Lily fizzles down to pure green Jealousy. She wanted Lily's gifts, but did not have them.Maybe someone else in the family they all looked up to had these gifts too. If so Petunia certainly would not mention it. Nobody in the WW would either, most likely, because Harry has been in their world for quite a while now and we know nothing about the Potter family.(Other than his dad.)What do you think? karyn: Yes, it's obvious that Petunia is jealous, but I must say that I was surprised that it was brought up that Petunia remembers so much about the Wizard World (Azkaban, dementors, what have you), to then just be dropped. I thought it would come back, because it seemed way too significant for the story - why would she remember this for all these years and reveal that she remembered for her wizard-hating husband for no reason at all? Then again, I might look at this in too much of a "writer-mode". I've been writing since I could (almost 20 years now!) and even if I'm far from published I'm known to pick apart books and question why certain things are emphasized just because I look at it in too much of a "if I wrote this"-mode. But still. I do think that Petunia is gonna come in somehow. I can't really figure out how, because of the way she's portrayed, but... Any ideas? --karyn --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ryokas at hotmail.com Wed Aug 25 21:39:31 2004 From: ryokas at hotmail.com (kizor0) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 21:39:31 -0000 Subject: website maybe ot In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111220 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Miller, Gina (JIS)" wrote: > Where do we post about the website? Is that OT because I did not see it > listed? I need to know the code to the safe after the dart board and how to > get the spider! > > Gina A. Miller I'd say OT, in this case... but since you ask, it's simpler to get it over with here. The safe's code, congrats on getting past the dartboard, is hidden elsewhere in the site - the clue is pretty obvious once you note it's there - and you'll need to wait there for Peeves for a subtle change that reveals the code. The spider is hiding in plain sight, scurrying on and off a screen, just keep your eyes open. - Kizor From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Aug 25 21:51:28 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 21:51:28 -0000 Subject: Snape's Revenge on Voldemort (His DE past) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111221 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Brenda M." wrote: > > Brenda now: > I agree with pretty much everything else you said, except for "DD > being devious". To me, leaving Harry with the Dursley to prevent fame- > contamination was a very prudent guidance. He's looking at the long- > term development of Harry as a whole. Become a person before anything > else. Yes, the 10 years of loveless life is very cruel and fatal to a > growing child indeed, but IMO Dumbledore believed Harry would be > strong enough to fight it. > Kneasy: Of course he was being devious (again)! Voldy had vanished in the debacle of Godric's Hollow. According to DD (and canon) nobody knew what had happened to him - yet within 24 hours DD was stuffing a cuckoo into the Dursley nest. Why? What did he know? A hell of a lot more than he's admitting IMO. Harry is his down card in a game of stud poker - something that could be useful if things haven't turned out for the best, but what were the chances that he'd be needed? The odds looked slim at the time, but DD covered all eventualities. If that isn't being devious I don't know what is. > > Brenda: > > So following your logic, Snape is keeping up with the "I Hate > James... Harry I mean" front to everyone except DD? Including > Hogwarts' staffs (except for perhaps McGonagall and Filch?) and > students? Because it was Quirrell who tells Harry first, and DD just > admits it. > > Just curious ;) Kneasy: But does he really? When other adults are around he seems to be much scathing of Neville than of Harry. Besides, how many of the Hogwarts staff are in the Order? Hagrid (who follows DD's lead as if he were on it like a lap-dog) and perhaps Minerva. She's been seen once in the vicinity of Grimauld Place but I'm by no means certain that she is deep in the councils of the war cabinet. It's odd - except for transients such as Lupin and Crouch!Moody, the staff hardly ever pass comment about other members of staff. We really have no idea how much they know about anything that's important to the plot. > > > Brenda: > > The reason I believe Snape 'dislikes' Harry but not > necessarily 'hates', is that he shows far too much interest in Harry. > If you truly hate someone, you'll become indifferent and apathetic, > not keen. I think PoA movie showed it well, in the Great Hall on > Halloween night, when Snape asked DD "What should we tell Potter?" He > sounded like he cares!!!! [now running away from the Elves for movie > discussion] > > Kneasy: Easy for me to ignore: i haven't seen the film and have no intention of doing so - it ain't canon and therefore means nothing so far as I'm concerned. > Brenda: > > LOL, Snape giggling? That's an image I've never been able to conjure > up ;) > Kneasy: Of course Snape giggles - in the privacy of his own dungeon, naturally. He's pulling the ovine pelt product over every one else's ocular orifices. He'd just love that. > > Brenda: > > While this theory is good, I must ask you -- then why do you think > Voldemort trusts Snape? I'm basing this on the assumption that Snape > has returned to his DE regime and VM doesn't suspect him as traitor - > yet. Otherwise Snape would have gotten a blast of more scrutinizing > Legilimens and far greater torture. Or hire another potion maker to > brew the strongest Veritaserum, ensuring Snape hadn't taken the anti- > truth potion. Pick your favorite, but I honestly think if DEs had > reasons to suspect Snape, his cover would have been discovered by now. > Kneasy: Another unwarranted assumption on the part of the fans. I don't think Voldy does trust Snape - in fact I doubt he's even seen him since Sevvy left the DE Glee Club and they parted brass rags. This 'spy' thing just doesn't hold water. Snape gave evidence against some DEs and this is public knowledge. Voldy seems a vindicative sort of cove to me. At first sight Snape would be greeted with the WW equivalent of the Blackpool illuminations - all of them coloured green. Sure, he's up to something, but spying? I don't think so - and the fact that he so readily confirmed Harry's guess about his activities just reinforces my opinion. No; Snape is "...the one who has left me forever." But Sevvy keeps in contact with his old school chums - Lucius and the like. Old habits die hard. Whether this has anything to do with his activities for the Order is problematical; we don't know - unless Malfoy is hedging his bets on who's likely to be the eventual winner - which is something I wouldn't put past him. > > > >>> Kneasy before: And if DD answered differently he is the wrong > person to be leading the fight. > > Harry is expendable *so long as they win*. In fact, everyone is > expendable so long as Voldy is defeated - even DD. > >>> Then Alla: I think that if Dumbledore decided in advance that > > Harry is expendable or anybody is expendable as long as they win, > > he will be the wrong person to lead the fight. > > Brenda: > > Well if you think about it, war is a lose-lose situation. You become > a victim either as part of Voldy's Expansion Project OR putting a > stop to the project. If the whole society is crumbling because of it, > and you have the power (or hold the key) in destroying the evil, why > not use it. It will be the most logical and right move to make. > > This is why I have no problem with DD using Harry as the 'Weapon' -- > the psychopath is after Harry anyway. He wants to kill Harry more > than anything! So why not take the advantage of it? Kneasy: True. There is no point in fighting Voldy if sacrifices will not be made, because then Voldy will win. He has the entire WW in a hostage situation - "Give me what I want or I start killing." DD is not sentimental - go back to the start of PS/SS and see how much regret and emotion he shows over the deaths of James and Lily - absolutely none. He may even have surmised that their deaths were inevitable or necessary before the event. Why else admit to placing spells that would save Harry? And believe me, Harry is going to be mighty pissed when the details of the little chat he and DD had at the end of OoP finally sinks in. Besides, we have already been introduced to the necessity of sacrifice in the chess game. Ron saw that sacrificing himself was necessary and did it - even though at the time he had no certainty that he would survive. > > Kneasy: > >>> As to the final scenes, well, I've postulated that Snape will get > rubbed out before the end - probably saving Harry's skin after some > foolish but hardly untypical act of stupidity. I just hope that he > sees his revenge as inevitable by that time. I can't imagine him > living on, becoming an old curmudgeon, grumping about Hogwarts. > > > > But as he lies breathing his last, as Harry leans over him his last > words, spoken with a sneer, will be "Get on with it Potter. Do > something right for once." <<< > > HAHAHAHHA. You 'forgot' to add this part: > > Then he travels to the next advanture to see James and Sirius. Sevvy > tells him, "You saved my life, I saved your son's life. Now we're > even." And the eternity of hexing each other begins all over again!!! > > > Kneasy: No - Snape is ahead on points 'cos James didn't die saving Sevvy whereas Sevvy did die saving Harry. James will owe him, much to Snape's intense satisfaction - "Polish my aura, Potter. And don't miss out on the bit at the back like you did last time." From barbara_mbowen at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 21:52:46 2004 From: barbara_mbowen at yahoo.com (barbara_mbowen) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 21:52:46 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111222 Well, having had my beloved Stubby/Regulus theory repudiated by JKR herself, I'll have to join in the conjecturing over Snape. I agree with Kneasy that it had to be something horrendous that Voldie did to Snape, but I don't like it being the dead wife and child scenario. That is the motivation behind every violent revenge fantasy movie ever released, and there's at least one released every summer. So, while it provides the visceral hate/fear that we sense Snape *must* feel towards Voldie, and it ensures DD's absolute trust in him, but it's too much a cliche. Herewith a few conjectures of my own. Snape's Mother. What about that weeping woman? Maybe Snape's Mom was weak and ineffectual, and he was ashamed of her, (a Muggle born witch, maybe?). He put a lot of distance between them once he was out on his own, became a DE,etc. But somehow, she got herself killed in a DE attack. I see hers as being "collateral" death; she wasn't the real target and no one even bothered to figure out who she was. But Snape figured it out after the fact. A visceral reaction of hate, and the need for revenge is thus supplied. And this solves the biggest problem with the wife and kid theory to me, which is that Voldie would have known he'd had Snape's family killed and known not to trust him. (This assumes that Snape is still trusted by Voldie) Scenario number two, and forgive me if this has been suggested before: what about Bellatrix? She was beautiful once, and one of Voldemort's closest followers. Maybe Snape had hopes and they were dashed when Voldemort told her to marry Lestrange instead. Maybe both of these things happened. Who knows? Maybe Snape had an affair with Regulus Black only he ran off with Stubby Boardman instead and then Voldie had him killed....no, forget that one. Marmelade Mom, still making scenarios with Stubby Boardman in them From ryokas at hotmail.com Wed Aug 25 21:55:11 2004 From: ryokas at hotmail.com (kizor0) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 21:55:11 -0000 Subject: hagrid's brother In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111223 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "herosarerare" wrote: > What happened to Hagrid's brother after he was shot full of arrows > and then ran off into the forest? Hagrid refers to him being much better behaved some days after the incident, so he must be doing relatively well in the circumstances. - Kizor From caesian at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 22:17:45 2004 From: caesian at yahoo.com (caesian) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 15:17:45 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <971751AE-F6E4-11D8-AEA6-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111224 Caesian - clapping hands together (open palmed) and skipping for joy: "Yeah! Kneasy's back, Kneasy's back..." (Kneasy hits Caesian in the head with a 4X4.) "Ouch! Effing barmy old codger,..." On Aug 25, 2004, at 4:18 AM, arrowsmithbt wrote: > Snape is not interested in the fight of good vs evil. > Snape has his own agenda and it's *personal* not ethical -? and DD > knows > this, understands this and accepts it. > The Snape, DD and Voldy triangle exemplifies that old adage "My > enemies' > enemy is my friend." The only reason that Snape is allied to DD and > the > Order is because it is the only way he can get revenge for an action > by > Voldy that hit Snape on a personal level > Snape was a good little DE - then suddenly he wasn't. Not only that > but > he betrayed his friends. Because make no bones about it, they were his > friends. These were the Slytherins he was running around with at > school; > these are his natural allies. Nobody in the Order likes him; nobody > except > DD really trusts him - so why is he in so deep in the anti-Voldy > coalition? > Because he is vehemently, passionately, obsessionally anti-Voldy. > He wants him brought down by any means. > > > > Every so often a thread kicks into life on the "Worst Memory" theme. > IMO it's no such thing. Snape has much worse than that little vignette > to disturb his restful repose - personally I'd rate the Grey Underwear > no higher than forth or fifth if you're willing to make some > reasonable > assumptions. (See 80844 - The worst is yet to come.)? Even with what > has been revealed so far I refuse to believe that the 'Prank' doesn't > rate as worse in Sevvy's mind than a minor schoolboy fracas by the > Lake. > Brenda: > > While this theory is good, I must ask you -- then why do you think > Voldemort trusts Snape? I'm basing this on the assumption that Snape > has returned to his DE regime and VM doesn't suspect him as traitor - > yet. Otherwise Snape would have gotten a blast of more scrutinizing > Legilimens and far greater torture. Or hire another potion maker to > brew the strongest Veritaserum, ensuring Snape hadn't taken the anti- > truth potion. Pick your favorite, but I honestly think if DEs had > reasons to suspect Snape, his cover would have been discovered by now. > Caesian: OK, I'm just going to come right out and say it. Snape was in love with Lily. I know, there is not a shred of hard evidence to support this idea and - well, it is disgustingly mushy. I banish this thought whenever it occurs. I HATE, really, to post an idea like this, an idea that is so poorly supported (or contradicted, alas) by Canon. And this idea in particular. It is just so - so - Speilberg. But, I've got to break down and rationalize an exception in this case. This theory pops up just too often. How many people thought of this theory after reading only PS? I did. So did my husband, my brother, my mother-in-law, ... And it pops up in discussion, FanFic (I know, scourgify!!!)... it just keeps popping up. Curse of the collective unconcious. And, sadly, it fits with the Canon. Snape is consumed by revenge because Voldemort killed the (only) woman he (ever) loved, Lily. (My own little perversion is that I believe Snape was present in Godric's Hollow, and that we will find out it is Snape's voice in Harry's head, asking Lily to stand aside.) He loathes Harry because Harry is so blatantly James and Lily's son - not because he hated James, but because he loved Lily. The memory by the lake is not bad because he was teased, cursed or humiliated by James and Sirius - really, that must have happened 1000 times in 7 years and after - but because he hatefully rebuffed Lily ('it is our choices...'). Voldemort still trusts him because Snape will never admit - he loved Lily. Dumbledore trusts him because, well, maybe that old softy is the one who knows - yuck, or maybe Snape tried to save the Potters by turning sides just before their death. Now, I personally can't imagine Snape giggling to himself without wretching. But this? Sorry, sick mind I guess. I just can't seem to stop myself. Caesian - [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Aug 25 22:37:56 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 22:37:56 -0000 Subject: Snape's Revenge on Voldemort (His DE past) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111225 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > > Kneasy: > Another unwarranted assumption on the part of the fans. > I don't think Voldy does trust Snape - in fact I doubt he's even seen him since Sevvy left the DE Glee Club and they parted brass rags.This 'spy' thing just doesn't hold water. > Snape gave evidence against some DEs and this is public knowledge. Voldy seems a vindicative sort of cove to me. At first sight Snape would be greeted with the WW equivalent of the Blackpool illuminations - all of them coloured green. Sure, he's up to something, but spying? I don't think so - and the fact that he so readily confirmed Harry's guess about his activities just reinforces my opinion. > > No; Snape is "...the one who has left me forever." << Why do people ignore the last part of Voldemort's statement. .."he will be killed, of course." Now, vampire theories aside, Snape ain't dead, ergo, Voldemort no longer believes he has left forever. If the said defector is Snape and Snape's defection is public knowledge (we only know that it's the knowledge of the unidentified number of people at Karkaroff's hearing. RL grand juries are sworn to secrecy -- heaven knows what form the wizarding equivalent takes. Having 'sneak' tatooed in pimples on your forehead probably isn't the half of it.) then the last thing Voldemort can do is afford to leave him alive. It sets a bad example for the others, whose loyalty Voldemort doubts with a capital D. It's not like Voldie has sworn off killing for the duration--he managed to eliminate Bode. It's not like Snape is being guarded day and night in Grimmauld Place. No, Snape is still alive because somehow he's convinced the Dark Lord that he truly returned. How? That's the mystery. Pippin From jferer at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 22:46:51 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 22:46:51 -0000 Subject: harry is tom riddle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111226 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Miller, Gina (JIS)" wrote: > Time travel was a key in PoA, yes, but I don't really think you can > say it's key to the series. Iprefer to stick to more conventional theories. > > Gina : > * AS DO I and I sincerely hope that it stays conventional and > does not get so far out that it ends really badly just to keep us from > guessing the end. But the prophecy was worded that way for a reason and > Harry and Tom Gina:"Gina : * AS DO I and I sincerely hope that it stays conventional and does not get so far out that it ends really badly just to keep us from guessing the end. But the prophecy was worded that way for a reason and Harry and Tom look alike, both speak Parseltongue, both have matching wand cores, and we never got a good reason why that name sounded familiar to Harry. I REALLY TRULY hope this is as far out as it sounds or I would really be disappointed, but come now - "Why didn't LV die" - why did Harry live? "Why wouldn't DD kill LV in the DoM" it is all a little strange to me." Did you know that JKR has explicitly denied (in the "Rumours" section of her website) that Voldemort (and therefore Tom Riddle) is not Harry's father, and has also said that James Potter definitely is Harry's father? I don't understand why it's strange to you that Harry lived - that's been explained. "Why didn't DD kill LV in the DoM" has also been explained from DD's own lips. And it makes sense: Dumbledore knows there is only one that can destroy LV - Harry. Jim Ferer, who believes that LV is not naturally "alive" anyway, his existence sustained only by magic. From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org Wed Aug 25 22:58:47 2004 From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS)) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 17:58:47 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: harry is tom riddle Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111227 "Why didn't DD kill LV in the DoM" has also been explained from DD's own lips. And it makes sense: Dumbledore knows there is only one that can destroy LV - Harry. Jim Ferer gina now: You must not have read the rest of the interview where JKR says that we should have asked why DD did not try to kill LV and that the answer he gave is NOT the real answer. :-) Gina - going back to the sight to search [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jasnyder at intrex.net Wed Aug 25 23:26:39 2004 From: jasnyder at intrex.net (Jen Snyder) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 19:26:39 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] harry is tom riddle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111228 Gina : * AS DO I and I sincerely hope that it stays conventional and does not get so far out that it ends really badly just to keep us from guessing the end. But the prophecy was worded that way for a reason and Harry and Tom look alike, both speak Parseltongue, both have matching wand cores, and we never got a good reason why that name sounded familiar to Harry. I REALLY TRULY hope this is as far out as it sounds or I would really be disappointed, but come now - "Why didn't LV die" - why did Harry live? "Why wouldn't DD kill LV in the DoM" it is all a little strange to me. The "Harry is Tom" theory may be a little far out, but I definitely think that there is some kind of connection between Tom/LV and Harry. It's not as simple as father-son or same-person-in-different-time, but it's more complex than just "You're connected because he tried to kill you and failed" (paraphrasing Dumbledore). And I agree that JKR's emphasis on asking why didn't Voldemore die and why didn't Dumbledore kill Voldemort in the MoM is a clue. I think Dumbledore didn't kill LV in the Ministry not because he couldn't, but because he knows what the relationship is, and he knows that to kill LV - at this point in the story - would be to kill Harry. Maybe something will happen to separate them enough so that LV can be killed, or - what I think is more likely - bring them together. I'm not as sure about the question of why didn't LV die...except to say that it's because Harry didn't. This will probably just fuel the Harry is Tom theory, but...does anyone know what would happen if a witch or wizard tried to Avada Kedavra him or herself? Jen [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 23:46:00 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 16:46:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Who stuns Sirius? & Fake Death (was Re: The Veil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040825234600.25230.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111229 > Of course, we will all immediately forgive JKR the instant Sirius > waltzes on from stage right. > > ~<(Laurasia)>~ I certainly won't forgive her. I think it would be terrible to bring Sirius back. In addition to completely throwing away Harry's grief at the end of OOTP and his feeling of being alone as he faces his apparent destiny, it would serve no purpose plot-wise. Harry always felt closest to Sirius when he was farthest away - and usually incommunicado. Whenever he was with his godfather, there were always other people around or they were prevented from talking together (like when Molly kept him de-doxying drapes when he could have been asking Sirius about his parents). Once once - in GoF when they talked in the fireplace about the dragon task in the Triwizard Tournament - did Harry and Sirius ever really do that male bonding thing. They had an owl-post relationship, and it's what Sirius represented to Harry that he will miss. Sirius represented both the past (a link to his parents) and the future (a home away from the Dursleys, having a surrogate parent/brother when he left school) to Harry. The loss of Sirius was a door slamming on that imaginary future and that not-explored past. For Sirius to come back in the future would be pointless. His role in the series was to hold out tantalizing hope for Harry - and then have it snatched away. And really, it's not like he was really a good influence on Harry when he was around. His immediate response of "I'll be right there!" whenever Harry communicated with him did nothing but add to Harry's stress level in both GOF and OOOTP. Like Harry needs MORE stress in his life. Sirius was incapable of setting aside his own feelings about Snape, abuot Kreacher, about the past to really be there for Harry the way Harry needed. It would have been Harry who was the older brother in that relationship, I think. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 01:00:55 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 01:00:55 -0000 Subject: Who stuns Sirius? & Fake Death (was Re: The Veil) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111231 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich > wrote: > >> I certainly won't forgive her. I think it would be terrible to > bring > > Sirius back. In addition to completely throwing away Harry's grief > > at the end of OOTP and his feeling of being alone as he faces his > > apparent destiny, it would serve no purpose plot-wise. > > > > > Alla: > > > Well, to each their own. I will be incredibly grateful to her if she > decides to do so. > > I think it is pretty much a given that Harry will have some kind of > communication with Sirius in some form. > That was the question asked at March 2004 chat: " SiriuslyLovinSirius: If we ever see Sirius again, what form will he be in? JK Rowling replies -> I couldn't possibly answer that for fear of incriminating myself." - March, 2004 > So, the only question TO ME left is whether Sirius will return in > his human form and of course it is not very likely, but possible to > me. > > If Sirius death or "faked death" happened for some huge plot driven > reason, which JKR does not want to reveal just yet, it is quite > possible that his return will serve the same plot driven reason. > > > > Magda: > > > > > And really, it's not like he was really a good influence on Harry > > when he was around. His immediate response of "I'll be right > there!" > > whenever Harry communicated with him did nothing but add to > Harry's > > stress level in both GOF and OOOTP. Like Harry needs MORE stress > in > > his life. Sirius was incapable of setting aside his own feelings > > about Snape, abuot Kreacher, about the past to really be there for > > Harry the way Harry needed. It would have been Harry who was the > > older brother in that relationship, I think. > > > Alla: > > Sirius certainly had problems, but he seemed the only adult in the > series who loved Harry for Harry. I think that he tried to be there > when he could. > > Sirius may have been Harry's door to the past, but given the right > circumstances , they may have had a future together, I think. > > Incapable of setting aside his feelings about the past? Sirius is > not the only one guilty of that. (Cough. Snape. Cough) From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 01:07:10 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 01:07:10 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: <971751AE-F6E4-11D8-AEA6-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111232 > Caesian: > > OK, I'm just going to come right out and say it. Snape was in love > with Lily. Neri: LOLLIPOPS indeed has a very inciting charm. I fully admit I also believed it myself for at least four books, and this was my own thought since I was completely detached from any of the fandom at the time. But the fact that we all think about it doesn't mean that JKR thought about it. I'm sure that as a scientist you appreciate this point: Our beliefs about what the world should be are frequently the worst obstacle to discovering what it is really is. I actually don't consider the mushy part as a proof against LOLLIPOPS because JKR is indeed mushy sometimes. But LOLLIPOPS is not JKR's style. Until now, JKR had never used romantic love as a main motive or a driving force in the plot. If you combine all the SHIPping in the books together it will probably fit nicely into a single chapter (out of about 100 chapters until now). This is one of the things that are most difficult for the fans to come to grip with, and one of the main reasons why HP was fan-fictioned so intensively, but it is a fact. And I doubt it will be Snape, of all people, who will break this pattern. Unlike most of the fans, JKR doesn't find Snape romantic. He certainly has some sinister charm, and he is very mysterious, but remember that he is not mysterious for JKR, and that she has already got over her bad-guy complex. I never completely discarded LOLLIPOPS as a Snape theory, and it still manages to catch my attention, but I personally don't consider it a leading contender. Neri From ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 01:16:06 2004 From: ajhuflpuf at yahoo.com (A.J.) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 01:16:06 -0000 Subject: harry is tom riddle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111233 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sarah" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Miller, Gina (JIS)" > wrote: > > The only hold up is we supposedly know who Tom > > Riddle's father was. Any ideas? Feel free to shoot this one down > because I > > would hate if this were true. > > > > Gina A. Miller > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Tom Riddle's father called Tom > Riddle? "Bone of the father, unknowingly given, you will renew your > son!", and Harry is sat on the grave marked Tom Riddle. Someone posted the ideas about a year ago, both that Harry and Voldemort were the same (like your theory), and that Harry was Voldemort's real father and Voldemort was mistaken and thought he was killing his real ancestors but wrong in the attempt, and that 'bone of the father, unkowingly given' etc. actually underscored this because V. was once again trying to kill his father and failing (i.e., the first time, he killed Tom Riddle Sr. instead; the second time, Harry escaped.) Just so you know that someone did take off on these ideas and even go further. You can search the database... A.J. From jferer at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 01:37:56 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 01:37:56 -0000 Subject: harry is tom riddle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111234 gina now: You must not have read the rest of the interview where JKR says that we should have asked why DD did not try to kill LV and that the answer he gave is NOT the real answer. :-) Gina - going back to the sight to search" But the answer, I believe, is in Dumbledore's words. "Killing you would not satisfy me..." It sounds like DD is saying "Death's too good fer ya, varmint," but I think it's because it would not end Voldemort. The words of Dumbledore's that tie into this idea come from PS/SS: "He [Voldemort] is still out there somewhere, perhaps looking for another body to share... not being truly alive, he cannot be killed." So I believe Dumbledore did explain it. And he knows something else: only Harry can destroy Voldemort. From caesian at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 02:12:55 2004 From: caesian at yahoo.com (caesian) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 19:12:55 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7120BC0A-F705-11D8-AEA6-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111235 > > Caesian: > > > > OK, I'm just going to come right out and say it.? Snape was in love > > with Lily.? > > Neri: > > But the fact that we all think about it doesn't mean that > JKR > thought about it. I'm sure that as a scientist you appreciate this > point: Our beliefs about what the world should be are frequently the > worst obstacle to discovering what it is really is.? > > I actually don't consider the mushy part as a proof against LOLLIPOPS > because JKR is indeed mushy sometimes. But LOLLIPOPS is not JKR's > style. Until now, JKR had never used romantic love as a main motive > or a driving force in the plot. Caesian: Two very good points! "Common sense" is the scourge of the earth ;-). And while I do agree that thinking of Snape as loving anyone is, well, if not mushy, then too greasy for contemplation... shudders... this would really not be a romantic plot device. It would be a plot device concerning terrible loss, guilt, rage and revenge. The one response to terrible loss not already portrayed in a series devoted to loss. Molly lost brothers. Harry and Neville lost their parents. Gran lost her son and daughter-in-law. I mean, even Sirius just didn't seem angry enough about 12 years in Azkaban. The loss that is missing from this line-up, lost love or life partner, has not appeared because Harry is not mature enough to comprehend this. And Snape is the angry one. Really, really angry. He's probably so angry that not a shred of what he originally lost remains in him - it's now about guilt and revenge. Anyway, by the time Harry finds out about Snape's putative mushy side (at 15? how star-crossed...YUCK!), our tolerant friend Dumbledore will probably have taken a magic-bullet for the cause - leaving no one to even help Harry consider the human aspects of that greasy (half-blood) git / would-be suitor and his sad plight. The books are told from Harry's POV, afterall. Harry's first response would be - 'YUCK'! Followed closely by: 'But my mom didn't like him back right?!!' And once assured of that - (she was decent, not crazy) - he can go right back to YUCK! (Stopping briefly at pity. And if Snape has not already given up the ghost at this point, he'll kill himself.) Severus seen snogging Lily? No, won't happen. But unrequited love - well, what other kind is there when he has teeth like that? (unless you are Ewan McGregor - as SSSomeone would say, hubba hubba) So, very much unrequited. Poor man. No wait - YUCK! Sorry, I hate myself for even bringing this up - because it really, really is just a matter of opinion. Caesian - banishing herself to very obscure canon points in penance [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 02:48:13 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 02:48:13 -0000 Subject: Snape's job at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111236 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "khinterberg" wrote: > In OotP, during the Potions class in which Umbridge supervises Snape, > he says that he has held his job there for 14 years, which means he > got the post the year baby Harry's life changed. What are ideas of > why he got the job then? We also know he first applied for DADA, but > didn't get that. So were both positions open that year? > > khinterberg, who wants to know more about Snape Carol responds: Unless two teachers were killed by DEs at about the same time, I think it's likely that only the DADA position was open and Snape applied for it (IMO before the beginning of term; I think he was already at Hogwarts when the Potters were killed. Note that he said "fourteen years," not "almost fourteen years" or "fourteen years this November"). But Dumbledore, we're told, wanted him to try Potions instead, presumably asking the Potions master to take DADA. (It may even be that Snape, young as he was at the time, was better qualified for the Potions post than the person who previously held it. Real "masters" of potion making appear to be rare in the WW.) That's just the most likely scenario from my perspective. Others have been devised, as you'll find if you have the time, energy, and patience to use Searchmort to find our old posts on the topic. Carol From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com Thu Aug 26 03:29:25 2004 From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 03:29:25 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?FILK:_I=92m_a_Tweet_Wittle_Bird?= Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111237 I'm a Tweet Wittle Bird To the tune that Tweety Bird frequently sang in his altercations with Sylvester (who was undoubtedly a Kneazle) http://www.angelfire.com/fl4/birdsandmore/tweety/wavs/singin.wav http://members.fortunecity.com/cooltweety/cagesong.wav Dedicated to Eric Oppen (who lately invoked Pepe Le Pew) THE SCENE: The Headmaster's Office. FAWKES, a phoenix whose song is magical and is reputed to increase the courage of the pure of heart and strike fear into the heart of the impure, sits upon a swing and sings to himself (hey, we're not saying that **everything** a phoenix sings is imbued with that magical quality) FAWKES: I'm a tweet wittle bird from a mythic stage Fawkes is my name but I don't got no age I don't have to worry `bout Voldy's tricks; His green AK rays turn me back to a chick. - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm Tune in for our next episode, when Fawkes exclaims: FAWKES: I tawt I taw a Voldy Lord! And then, tune in again for our episode after that, in which Fawkes cries FAWKES: I did, I did, I did taw a Voldy Lord! From sad1199 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 03:33:37 2004 From: sad1199 at yahoo.com (sad1199) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 03:33:37 -0000 Subject: How do you get permission to add fave book to table? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111238 Hello. sad1199 here. I was going through the database and saw a section of favorite non-Harry books. How do I get permission to add my favorite book/author to the table? Thank you, sad1199 at yahoo.com From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 03:42:37 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 03:42:37 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: <7120BC0A-F705-11D8-AEA6-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111239 Caesian wrote: The loss that is missing from this line-up, lost love or life partner, has not appeared because Harry is not mature enough to comprehend this. And Snape is the angry one. Really, really angry. He's probably so angry that not a shred of what he originally lost remains in him - it's now about guilt and revenge. Neri: I find it hard to raise arguments against you because you forcibly remind me how much I liked LOLLIPOPS myself at the time (especially as I thought I invented it, LOL). Caesian: Anyway, by the time Harry finds out about Snape's putative mushy side The books are told from Harry's POV, afterall. Harry's first response would be - 'YUCK'! Followed closely by: 'But my mom didn't like him back right?!!' And once assured of that - (she was decent, not crazy) - he can go right back to YUCK! (Stopping briefly at pity. And if Snape has not already given up the ghost at this point, he'll kill himself.) Neri: You make a very good point. Whatever Snape's secret is, it will be very important how Harry will take it when he finds out. And I can't imagine Snape ridiculed for THIS specific secret. Therefore I agree with your guess: If LOLLIPOPS will turn out true, Harry will find out about it AFTER Snape will redeem himself, probably by dying when saving Harry and/or trying to kill Voldy. And if JKR manages THIS without being too mushy I'll applaud her every time I reread Book 7. Caesian: Severus seen snogging Lily? No, won't happen. But unrequited love - well, what other kind is there when he has teeth like that? (unless you are Ewan McGregor - as SSSomeone would say, hubba hubba) Neri: Yes, I wonder why SSShe didn't jump into this discussion herself yet. But I'll remind you that, unlike RL, in the books the way someone looks usually reflects his personality. Severus wasn't a hunk, but if he really dreamed about kissing Lily, he would have had the proper teeth for it. Neri From uath50 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 22:08:28 2004 From: uath50 at yahoo.com (uath50) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 22:08:28 -0000 Subject: Umbridge and the Dementors ? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111240 Did anyone find it strange that Umbridge was not sent to prison for sending the dementors after Harry? I thought that maybe she should have at least lost her job at the MOM or sent to Azkaban. "uath50" From uath50 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 22:14:29 2004 From: uath50 at yahoo.com (uath50) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 22:14:29 -0000 Subject: The graves of James and Lily In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111241 > kizor0 wrote: > To date, the graves haven't turned up anywhere in the books. > Visiting them would probably be an important event for Harry, > and distances don't matter all that much in the WW, so is it > possible that this will become a Future Plot Point(tm)? The question you should be asking is, where are the bodies? I don't know about you but there's been no mention of any bodies. "uath50" From eeyore5497 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 23:25:32 2004 From: eeyore5497 at yahoo.com (Michelle Horcher) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 16:25:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Harry and Tom, related through Lily? (Re: Harry is Tom Riddle) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040825232532.79350.qmail@web12207.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111242 > "jakm_99" wrote: > Maybe whatever LV needs to become truly immortal is hidden in > Harry somehow and that's why LV couldn't kill him? Maybe they're > related through Lily? I have often had thoughts that perhaps LV is Harry's maternal grandfather! I never posted it before because I thought, no canon but... not only the similarities of powers, ie parseltounge, similar histories, etc. but they also LOOK alike!!! Coincidence?... Yes, it could just have to do with the curse scar etc. but I don't think Tom's looks could have been transferred through that curse. Again maybe just coincidence but I wonder... Michelle, who CAN'T wait for the next book...Hurry Jo, Please hurry!!! From carodave92 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 23:26:44 2004 From: carodave92 at yahoo.com (carodave92) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 23:26:44 -0000 Subject: Peeves In-Reply-To: <006701c48ad3$12ea1600$5302a8c0@Shadowfax> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111243 "Danielle Arnt" wrote: > > On another vein, in POA, Lupin is explaining about the Marauders > and their monthly escapades and how he felt guilty in breaking DD's > trust. That DD never knew what was happening. I think DD knows > pretty much everything that goes on at Hogwarts and was well aware > of what the Marauders were doing. Which begs the question of > whether he knew Sirius could transfigure into a dog. Hhhmmm... At the end of POA, when Harry is in the hospital wing recovering, Dumbledore tells Harry that the Marauders achieved alot, 'not the least of which was keeping their transitions into Animagi a secret from him'. Sorry to paraphrase, but I can't find the exact quote...but the meaning is that DD never knew about 4 unregistered Animagi running around the grounds. carodave From snow15145 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 04:15:57 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 04:15:57 -0000 Subject: harry is tom riddle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111244 Jim Ferer, who believes that LV is not naturally "alive" anyway, his existence sustained only by magic. Snow; You're right LV isn't alive and what is left of him would not be alive if it weren't for Harry! Of course this is only my opinion. Voldemort died that night at Godric's Hollow but left a piece of himself or should I say a piece of Tom Riddle in Harry which keeps him semi-alive this much I will support until I am proven wrong by JKR. JKR asked why didn't Voldemort die that night, the question should have been, did he live? But wouldn't that have given a bit too much away if she said why did he survive the AK? Can you actually perceive the almighty Voldemort as being alive, even after he regained a body? He doesn't appear to be much of a threat even to Dumbledore. This piece of---- is the almighty threat to the wizarding world... which has now degraded himself to the level of fighting fifteen year old children and wait lost! This is not a feared wizard, this isn't even a great feared wizard of day's gone bye, this is a wizard that was but isn't even a very good wanna be now Hello Voldemort died! He just doesn't know it yet! because he still feels that he is what he always was because of his connection with Harry along with his arrogance that he can never actually die. [{(Harry is what keeps Voldemort alive and therefore Harry is what can defeat him forever!)}] This doesn't necessarily mean that Harry must sacrifice himself in order to destroy the beast within, only that he needs to realize that this beast exists within himself and that he has the *power* to exorcise this unwanted inhabitation of his own soul! Snow-Fifteen month old Harry looks out over his crib seeing Voldemort take aim and saying, "you're dead" Harry looks up and says, "I know you are but what am I" From carodave92 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 23:42:37 2004 From: carodave92 at yahoo.com (carodave92) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 23:42:37 -0000 Subject: November birthstone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111245 > Romulus Lupin replies: > (snip) There definitely is such a thing as yellow diamonds. I always > thought topaz are less expensive than the other gems, which would fit > humble Hupplepuffs to a T (can someone verify this?). You are correct - topaz is not a precious stone (like emeralds, rubies and sapphires, the other stones used for house points) and so is less valuable. I completely agree that topaz is a perfect fit for humble Hufflepuffs. carodave From eeyore5497 at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 23:43:36 2004 From: eeyore5497 at yahoo.com (Michelle Horcher) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 16:43:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Snape's DE past (Snape loved Lily!) In-Reply-To: <971751AE-F6E4-11D8-AEA6-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040825234336.52082.qmail@web12210.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111246 > Caesian: > OK, I'm just going to come right out and say it. > Snape was in love with Lily. I know, there is > not a shred of hard evidence to support this > idea and - well, it is disgustingly mushy. I have always agreed with your theory! You said it perfectly. Inasmuch as you "wretch" at the mushy stuff, everything clicks into place! And let's face it, DD is an "old softy" and is very fond of Harry and if your theory is correct and Sevvy did try to save the Potters or perhaps was the one who informed DD about what was about to occur in Godric's Hollow that might be why DD trusts him! Michelle, who wishes she was a witch instead of a muggle so she could wave her wand and her laundry would disappear... From steve51445 at adelphia.net Thu Aug 26 01:20:27 2004 From: steve51445 at adelphia.net (Steve) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 21:20:27 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Can you Apparate Within Hogwarts?(Was Disapparation inside Hogwarts?) References: Message-ID: <02d801c48b0a$df2d2c70$6401a8c0@steveupstairs> No: HPFGUIDX 111247 JR wrote: *****This is something that I have struggled with. Do we really know that you can't apparate withing Hogwarts? Have we been told that? I'm not sure. I know that Hermione has said that you can't apparate into or out of Hogwarts. But can someone do it withing the castle? We have seen that Fawkes and Dobby have been able to although that might be a different sort of magic. I was struggling with this because in my fanfiction story that I am writing, I had the kids practicing apparation in the Room of Requirements and I had a lot of people reminding me that you can't apparate in Hogwarts. I'm not sure. Does anyone know if we have been told specifically about apparation within Hogwarts?****** JR Steve here: I don't think we've been told anyting about apparation except by Hermoine. Now if DD said it can't be done then that's different. We know that you need a licence to apparate, but where do you practice? If you can't apparate at Hogwarts, then it can't be taught there. Underage wizards can't preform magic outside of school, so students can't practice at home. Maybe those from wizarding families could, but from what we know of how hard it is to do, they probably would be caught by the MoM. The twins passed their tests sometime between April 1 and August 6 when Harry got to 12 Grimmauld Place. If they didn't learn anything about it at Hogwarts then that gives them from July 3 when they leave Hogwarts, to August 5 to learn all about apparation and take their tests. Mr. and Mrs. Weasley would have been a bit too busy with the OotP to help them learn. Maybe there is a classroom that allows apparation, or perhaps apparation is allowed within the castle but not in or out of it. I think we will find out for sure soon, as Ron will turn 17 during HBP. Steve [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ladypensieve at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 04:55:40 2004 From: ladypensieve at yahoo.com (Lady Pensieve) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 04:55:40 -0000 Subject: Can you Apparate Within Hogwarts?(Was Disapparation inside Hogwarts?) In-Reply-To: <02d801c48b0a$df2d2c70$6401a8c0@steveupstairs> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111248 I don't have the exact quote, but Hermione gets very frustrated about this point and usually says: Doesn't anyone read "Hogwarts, a History!" So I don't think it's just her opinion - although she says it so much you know it's got to be a foreshadowing of some kind. In OOP, we see that the Knight bus can come up to the gates, so how hard would it be to come up to the gates and walk in? Also, the time that Dobby did his disappearing act, Lucius was at Hogwarts...the house elf might have apparated 'within' Hogwarts, but not from the outside in, or vice versa. That might be possible, since Portkeys and floo powder seem to be available. Kathy --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > JR wrote: > > *****This is something that I have struggled with. Do we really know > that you can't apparate withing Hogwarts? Have we been told that? > I'm not sure. I know that Hermione has said that you can't apparate > into or out of Hogwarts. But can someone do it withing the castle? > We have seen that Fawkes and Dobby have been able to although that > might be a different sort of magic. I was struggling with this > because in my fanfiction story that I am writing, I had the kids > practicing apparation in the Room of Requirements and I had a lot of > people reminding me that you can't apparate in Hogwarts. I'm not > sure. Does anyone know if we have been told specifically about > apparation within Hogwarts?****** > > JR > > Steve here: > > I don't think we've been told anyting about apparation except by Hermoine. Now if DD said it can't be done then that's different. We know that you need a licence to apparate, but where do you practice? If you can't apparate at Hogwarts, then it can't be taught there. Underage wizards can't preform magic outside of school, so students can't practice at home. Maybe those from wizarding families could, but from what we know of how hard it is to do, they probably would be caught by the MoM. The twins passed their tests sometime between April 1 and August 6 when Harry got to 12 Grimmauld Place. If they didn't learn anything about it at Hogwarts then that gives them from July 3 when they leave Hogwarts, to August 5 to learn all about apparation and take their tests. Mr. and Mrs. Weasley would have been a bit too busy with the OotP to help them learn. Maybe there is a classroom that allows apparation, or perhaps apparation is allowed within the castle but not in or out of it. I think we will find out for sure soon, as Ron will turn 17 during HBP. > Steve > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 26 05:01:14 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 05:01:14 -0000 Subject: Harry getting to GP by floo / thestrals (was Re: Good Writing) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111249 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" wrote: > > HunterGreen: > -- > About the floo powder thing, though, during my first read I wondered > like Del why Harry didn't just go directly into Grimmauld Place after > he found out Sirius needed rescuing. It annoyed me quite a bit in > fact. However, I think now I agree with the idea that flooing into > the school is not allowed, but seeing how I wasn't the only person > who got the wrong idea, it would have been nice if that had been > included in the text somewhere. imamommy: A lot of people have been asking "why didn't Harry just Floo to GP?" Well, that would make sense if he were going solo. But he always intentioned to take R&H along for the ride: "How're we going to get there?" he asked them. There was a moment's silence. Then Ron said, "G-get there?" "Get to the Department of Mysteries, so we can rescue Sirius!" Harry said loudly. (OOP, Cpt. 32, Out of the Fire, p.731, Scholastic) later: Harry's eyes met Ron's. He knew that Ron was thinking exactly what he was: If he could have chosen any members of the D.A. in addition to himself, Ron, and Hermione to join him in the attempt to Rescue Sirius, he would not have picked Ginny, Neville, or Luna. (OOP, Cpt. 33, Fight and Flight, p.761, Scholastic) IMO, Harry didn't Floo because he intended to go get backup. He always figured on Ron and Hermione coming with him, and he had to go get them. If he hadn't been caught, maybe they would have figured out a distraction so *the three of them* could all Floo to GP. imamommy From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 26 05:19:57 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 05:19:57 -0000 Subject: Can you Apparate Within Hogwarts?(Was Disapparation inside Hogwarts?) In-Reply-To: <02d801c48b0a$df2d2c70$6401a8c0@steveupstairs> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111250 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > Steve here: > > I don't think we've been told anyting about apparation except by Hermoine. Now if DD said it can't be done then that's different. We know that you need a licence to apparate, but where do you practice? If you can't apparate at Hogwarts, then it can't be taught there. Underage wizards can't preform magic outside of school, so students can't practice at home. Maybe those from wizarding families could, but from what we know of how hard it is to do, they probably would be caught by the MoM. The twins passed their tests sometime between April 1 and August 6 when Harry got to 12 Grimmauld Place. If they didn't learn anything about it at Hogwarts then that gives them from July 3 when they leave Hogwarts, to August 5 to learn all about apparation and take their tests. Mr. and Mrs. Weasley would have been a bit too busy with the OotP to help them learn. Maybe there is a classroom that allows apparation, or perhaps apparation is allowed within the castle but not in or out of it. I think we will find out for sure soon, as Ron will turn 17 during HBP. > Steve imamommy: What about apparition class in Hogsmeade on weekends? It's possible we won't know about it until it affects Harry & Co. (like we didn't know about Hogsmeade visits, period, until PoA) Hermione is not the only person to say you cannot Apparate in Hogwarts. I don't have the quote, but Snape mentions it somewhere. If you trust him... imamommy > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 05:46:43 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 05:46:43 -0000 Subject: Is Percy A Spy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111251 Caspen wrote: > Having re-read COS recently, I was struck by the number of times > mysterious behavior on the part of Percy is mentioned - it's not > just once or twice, but several times. In COS Percy seems to have > some hold over Ginny, or at the very least to be monitoring her. In > addition, he appears inexplicably in the dungeon. > > I know the canon explanation (offered by Percy) at the end of COS is > that Ginny has caught him in an assignation with Penelope > Clearwater, but, if so, why insist that she conceal it, and why > behave deceptively, (again!) not once, but several times, given his > later openess about the relationship? Why, for that matter, would > Percy (a Gryffyndor, a Slytherin rival, residing in the upper floors > of the castle) and Penelope (a Ravenclaw, also residing in the upper > floors of the castle) meet in a dungeon, close to the Slytherins' > quaters of all places? > > Why does PP become Percy's pet and why does Percy bequeath PP, in > the form of Scabbers, to to Ron? Why does PP choose the Weasely > family to reside with, and why is another Weasily, Ginny, targeted > by LM in COS? Carol: Considering that Percy was only about six years old when he acquired Scabbers, I think PP most likely chose him because of his age and relative poverty. He was simply a little boy who wanted a pet and his parents accepted the pet because it cost nothing and required very little beyond a cage, a food and water dish, cheap food and litter for the cage. If he was *very* tame, as he probably was (being fat and lazy), he might not even have required *that* much maintenance. Percy simply turned him over to Ron, his youngest brother who was just entering Hogwarts, when he was given Hermes the owl for becoming a prefect. (You can't have two pets, and proud Percy not going to choose a scroungy old rat over a handsome new owl.) I don't see any need for an ulterior motive on Percy's part regarding Scabbers. Even though rats aren't on the approved pet list, Dumbledore and McGonagall probably looked the other way considering the family's poverty. A rat is a lot less expensive than a cat or an owl. As for Peter's motive in choosing to live with the Weasleys, I think he simply wanted a family to take him in, and he had a better chance with a poor family than a rich one. From what we know of Peter, he isn't so much evil (aside from being able to cast an avada kedavra under coercion) as weak and lazy and cowardly. He probably was perfectly happy as a rat--that's his animagus form and therefore his nature, after all--and enjoyed being taken care of without having to do anything in return. He had no desire to go back to the DEs, who thought he had betrayed them and would have sought revenge if they knew he was alive, and no reason to think that Voldemort was back until at least the end of SS. He apparently wasn't seriously worried by what he overheard from Harry or the Weasleys until the beginning of PoA. And it wasn't spying but survival that was on his mind. He feared revenge from Sirius Black--and with good reason. Whatever Percy may be up to now (and I think he's simply been led astray by ambition, the desire to be appreciated, and a too-rigid belief in authority and rules), he can't possibly have been corrupted by a rat who remained a rat for the entire time that Percy owned him. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 06:20:33 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 06:20:33 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past (was Re: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111252 HumanTupperware wrote: > > Your post got me thinking, not so much "why" Snape left the DE, but if he turned into a spy for Dumbldore's side, how has he convinced Voldy that he is still loyal? Apart from the Occlumency, which I'm sure comes in handy, Voldemort surely knows that Snape works at Hogwarts, so somehow, his teaching position must be justified to Voldy. > > I'm sure I surmised somewhere during the books that Snape had been spying for Dumbledore in the days before Voldy was vanquished, then afterwards had actually manged to leave the DE for a while, but then returned, (at the end of GOF?) to spy for Dumbledore again. Sure, he would have gotten the teaching position at Hogwarts after Voldy's vanquishment, but did he maintain to the remaining DE that he was at Hogwarts to spy on Dumbledore? If he then returned to Voldy after GOF, for him to justify keeping his teaching position, he must be telling Voldy some information, maybe pretending to spy on Dumbledore, but giving fake information? > Do Snape and Dumbledore get together once a week to make up stories to tell Voldy? Carol: Suppose that he took the position *before* Godric's Hollow, before the beginning of term, when a position was most likely to be open and advertised for. His real motive, of course, would be to get away from Voldemort and the DEs and to be close to Dumbledore, for whom he was already working as a spy, but he could have told Voldemort that he was applying to spy *on* Dumbledore. There would have been a mere two months in which he would have had to pass on some sort of fake information, certainly with the advice and approval of Dumbledore, and ten long years during which Voldemort was out of the picture (though I imagine that neither Snape nor Dumbledore believed that he was gone forever). Snape would not have been expected to return to Voldemort until the night at the graveyard in GoF. IMO, he must have persuaded Lucius Malfoy, who in turn half-persuaded Voldemort, that Snape had no choice but to remain at Hogwarts because you can't apparate from the grounds and he had to stay near Dumbledore at the tournament to avoid arousing suspicion. I say half-persuaded, because Voldemort knows that Snape tried to thwart Quirrell's efforts to kill Harry and steal the philosopher's stone and because he may have heard from Crouch!Moody that Snape was loyal to Dumbledore. Voldemort would want the connection between Lucius and Severus to continue as long as it provides him with useful information even if he still (rightly) believes Snape to be disloyal. If he has also made a connection between Snape and the appearance of the Order at the MoM, then Snape is almost certainly back on his hit list and is once again "the one who I believe has left me forever" and who will be killed *if* Voldemort has his way. Fortunately for us Snape fans, Voldemort is not a prophet and has a way of causing his own best-laid plans to "gang aglay." HumanTupperware wrote: > I am also assuming in all this that Snape is not ESE, merely very very nasty to Harry. Carol: I share that assumption. Carol From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Aug 26 06:43:08 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 06:43:08 -0000 Subject: Umbridge and the Dementors ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111253 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "uath50" wrote: > Did anyone find it strange that Umbridge was not sent to prison for > sending the dementors after Harry? > > I thought that maybe she should have at least lost her job at the > MOM or sent to Azkaban. > > "uath50" Geoff: Interesting question is: who knows that she sent them? This is one of those snippets of information which may come out of the woodwork to trouble the dear lady in the future.... From J.Z.Dench at uel.ac.uk Thu Aug 26 07:31:19 2004 From: J.Z.Dench at uel.ac.uk (Jospehine) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 07:31:19 -0000 Subject: Wrapping up the Umbridge subplot In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111254 "dzeytoun" wrote: What do you think we shall hear about Umbridge in Book 6? I, for one, will be terribly disappointed if JKR lets the whole thing drop. She introduced several dramatic plot twists (particularly the use of the Dementors and the Blood Quill) that really beg to be wrapped up with at least a brief mention - perhaps in the context of Fudge's ouster. It is interesting that she specifically talks about the scars from Harry's detentions remaining, although faintly. It would be very amusing to see someone such as Molly Weasley or McGonagall react to the story behind those scars. Dzeytoun Josephine now: I am inclined to say that we have heard the last of Dolores, except perhaps in passing (like Gilderoy L in St Mungos). JKR gave us sweet justice at the end of OOP just seeing Dolores suffer in the hospital wing and also with her departure from Hogwarts. This, for me, wrapped it up quite nicely. The only scary irony would be if she was indeed appointed as MOM. But I see that highly unlikely as Fudge is very intent on keeping his image intact, despite his latest blunders, and would be loathe to cast someone such as Umbridge in this role following her embarrassment as the acting head of Hogwarts. He may make an example of her... reminiscent of Crouch and Winky no? From porcupine88 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 04:01:49 2004 From: porcupine88 at yahoo.com (brandy) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 04:01:49 -0000 Subject: Hermione acting out-of-character Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111255 I searched the past few hundred posts and didn't see anything about this, sorry if it's been brought up already. I just want to know if I'm the only one who got really, really annoyed when Hermione came totally out of character and did something as stupid as saying to the centaurs tha she wanted them to get rid of Umbridge for her. I mean, such a HUGE deal had just been made, with her present, about the centaurs not being there to serve humans, etc etc. She had obviously been paying attention, since she knew enough to know that they'd go after Umbridge but not her and Harry. And yet, she uncharacteristically opens her mouth, says something stupid, and magically has to be rescued by Grawp. Anyone have an explanation for this? Or is it just a mistake - JKR paying too much attention to where she wants the plot to go (seeing Grawp again) to think about what the character would actually do? I actually didn't like the whole Grawp subplot at all - he'd better become really important in the next couple books, or he's not worth having in the series at all. -Brandy From porcupine88 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 04:19:39 2004 From: porcupine88 at yahoo.com (brandy) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 04:19:39 -0000 Subject: Snape's job at Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111256 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "khinterberg" wrote: > In OotP, during the Potions class in which Umbridge supervises Snape, > he says that he has held his job there for 14 years, which means he > got the post the year baby Harry's life changed. What are ideas of > why he got the job then? We also know he first applied for DADA, but > didn't get that. So were both positions open that year? > I noticed this too - it seems like he was quite young to become a Hogwarts prof. I think that part of his coming to Hogwarts may have had to do with his defection from V, a way for Dumbledore to ensure his safety - or to give him a cover so that V would think he was actually spying ON DD instead of FOR him. But regardless, he must have been truly amazing at Potions to get the position so young; if he weren't worthy of it, I'm sure DD could have found another job for him to get him to Hogwarts (apprentice Potions master or something, I don't know). I also wonder how many times he's gone after the DADA post, and been rejected. Was it just because he's better at potions? Or because he's been too close to the dark arts for comfort? Or maybe DD worries that if he's teaching DADA, V will realize what side he's really on. -Brandy From mz_annethrope at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 06:57:06 2004 From: mz_annethrope at yahoo.com (mz_annethrope) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 06:57:06 -0000 Subject: harry is tom riddle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111257 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "snow15145" wrote: > Jim Ferer, who believes that LV is not naturally "alive" anyway, his > existence sustained only by magic. > > Snow; > You're right LV isn't alive and what is left of him would not be > alive if it weren't for Harry! Of course this is only my opinion. > Voldemort died that night at Godric's Hollow but left a piece of > himself or should I say a piece of Tom Riddle in Harry which keeps > him semi-alive this much I will support until I am proven wrong by > JKR. > JKR asked why didn't Voldemort die that night, the question should > have been, did he live? > [{(Harry is what keeps Voldemort alive and therefore Harry is what > can defeat him forever!)}] > mz_annethrope: How can anything be semi-alive? Hmmm. A virus. At least that's a nice Muggle World analogy. Voldemort has been remarkably parasitic ever since his great defeat: inhabiting animals and Quirrel, swilling unicorn blood and snake venom, regenerating in bits and pieces of servant, father and enemy. You may have a point. mz_annethrope From jferer at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 09:01:41 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 09:01:41 -0000 Subject: Is Percy A Spy? Who for? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111258 Carol: "Whatever Percy may be up to now (and I think he's simply been led astray by ambition, the desire to be appreciated, and a too-rigid belief in authority and rules), he can't possibly have been corrupted by a rat who remained a rat for the entire time that Percy owned him." You're right. Scabbers wouldn't make a good salesman, would he? "Help us, and you could earn rich rewards, like I have! May have another scrap?" I always thought that Percy stood for a couple of things: 1) the get along to go along apparatchik who turns his sense of right and wrong over to an authority figure like Crouch Sr. or Fudge, and maybe 2) the unredeemed Hermione. By that I mean the kind of person that Hermione avoided becoming by discovering higher purpose, courage, and loyalty with her friends. But we could all be wrong. There's no evidence, but Percy could be a spy - for Dumbledore. A spy under such deep cover that he alienates his family and friends to maintain his legend as having given his complete loyalty over to Fudge. As I said, there's not a shred of real evidence, only two little things: it's just the kind of thing Dumbledore would think of, and that Percy is a Weasley, Arthur and Molly's son; I have a hard time thinking ill of any of them. It's the explanation I'd like to believe, but that's certainly not good enough. OTOH, we haven't seen anything that rules it out. Jim Ferer From tonks_op at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 02:53:04 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 02:53:04 -0000 Subject: Gilderoy lockhart - JKR's ex??? In-Reply-To: <20040825163513.75720.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111259 Magda wrote: > Whatever JKR's feelings about the man, the fact is that he is her > daughter's father and thus she has to be careful about what she > says in public. If indeed GL is based on her ex-, then I doubt > that she would ever admit it so as not to embarass or hurt her > daughter. -------------------------- tonks_op says: I am not sure that it is her ex-husband. Doesn't she say that she hasn't seen the man in years and would be suprised if he came up to her someday at a book signing or something. If it were her ex- husband wouldn't she have more contact with him since they do have a child and he probably has visitation? Tonks_op From ear at scn.org Thu Aug 26 05:02:22 2004 From: ear at scn.org (Emily Anne Rude) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 05:02:22 -0000 Subject: Severus Snape: The grudge and the very long LOLLIPOPS biography... In-Reply-To: <001b01c16616$1e477e00$ed90aecb@price> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111260 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tabouli" wrote: "JKR herself has hinted that there's more to it than that through Hagrid, we just don't know what the other factor or factors are." I'd be interested to know what people think those other factors might be. As riveting as romance is, even a mangled one like that proposed here, I hate to think that every big decision Snape has made was based on a crush. Yikes. > > "At this point, Harry hasn't done *anything* to Snape." He's the son of the man who (in Snape's mind) ruined Snape's life. It's as if the guy who stole everything from you, that you believe you should have had, had a son who turned out to be even more loved and esteemed than your original nemesis without even trying. Meanhile, you are still risking your life and happiness (for reasons unknown) for his well being, and he doesn't even know about it. No one gives *you* any credit for that, while your worst enemy's son gets to be everyone's savior just by being alive. How's that for starters. > "There even a tiny hint from JKR in a chat I once read (no, no idea which one, though no doubt someone will be able to say). I think she was was asking for questions from an audience and someone asked if Snape would fall in love. JKR laughed and asked what made him/her think of that, and said it was an interesting idea and s/he would find out why later. Or something like that which suggested there might in fact be something in it." Oh *no*... Pink Flamingo, anyone? > "Severus can't help noticing one of James' greatest fans is a young redhead called Lily Evans, who has often vied with him for top student in Charms. ...treats him with far more respect and reason than her fellow Gryffindors..." Yeah, except that Lily loathed James in OOTP, remember? Greatest fan, huh? I'd like to see from where you got that idea. "...but as Lily is always around, he dares not be anything but polite to him." Uhhh, really? "...his unconvincing attempts to be suave and fawning around her..." Yes, I'd say calling her a filty mudblood would be pretty darn unconvincing. > "Though his initial reaction is a terrible glee, as Severus Apparates to Godric's Hollow, three thoughts simultaneously occur to him. The first is that if he kills James, Lily will be single again, and he might, just might, be able to claim her at last. The second is that however much he hates James, he owes him his life. The third, and most frightening thought of all, is that even if he did manage to kill James and claim Lily, his joy would be very brief. Lily is Muggle-born, and his next task could well be to kill her himself." I could really see Snape gnashing his teeth at this paragraph, true or no. Oh dear... > "Suddenly, the rage which has blinded Severus for so many years begins to evaporate. Why had he killed those innocent people he had killed and tortured for Voldemort? Was it loyalty to Voldemort, hatred for them, or hatred for am unjust world which always seem to give most to those who deserved it least? As the last of the rage dissipates, it is replaced by a terrible feeling of shame and self-loathing. If Lily knew what he has done she would hate him as much as he hates her husband. The truth of it hits him like an iceberg, and he starts to shake all over at the thought of what he has become. He knows there is only one thing left that can redeem him. He Apparates to the Hogwarts gates, goes straight to Dumbledore and breaks down completely." Ah, pulling a Javert on us, is he? Nnnooo, I *don't* think so. The last time I heard about something like this happening was in Les Miserables, and the poor confused inspector ended up drowning himself rather than reconcile his past. No matter what anyone says about Snape's ability to hide his emotions, (which, I must say, sometimes isn't that evident) I think that if he had an epiphany of that degree we would be dealing with a whole different character. ...But maybe that's just me. From jferer at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 09:18:43 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 09:18:43 -0000 Subject: Hermione acting out-of-character In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111261 Brandy:"I just want to know if I'm the only one who got really, really annoyed when Hermione came totally out of character and did something as stupid as saying to the centaurs tha she wanted them to get rid of Umbridge for her." Why can't it just be Hermione's mistake? She's been brilliant the whole book long, thinking of the DA, Rita Skeeter's article, Marietta Edgecombe's decorations, and even a way to fool Umbridge. (Hermione's learning to think on her feet. She used to be much more deliberate.) She's under just a little stress when the centaurs show up. Hermione isn't perfect, although she seems like it sometimes. Babe Ruth's lifetime batting average was .342; that means his "mistake" average was .658. Let's give Her-my-oh-ninny a break here. JKR *does* want to advance the Grawp plot, even telling us Grawp will matter. (If Grawp is troll royalty, then his part-human half brother would be....) The troll subplot is important to Dumbledore, too, who told Fudge back in GoF that the wizard world should send emissaries to the Giants. Jim Ferer, who'd like to be a fly on the wall when Dumbledore and JKR sit down for a story conference. From porcupine88 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 03:50:13 2004 From: porcupine88 at yahoo.com (brandy) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 03:50:13 -0000 Subject: Percy's Letter (Was: Is Percy a spy?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111262 "Kim" wrote: > First of all, the letter is received on the evening before Umbridge > becomes "High Inquisitor" and things get very, very bad at > Hogwarts. And, according to the Daily Prophet article that arrives > the next morning, the move to make her High Inquisitor occurred > during the night. Percy must have fired off his letter to Ron > rather quickly, perhaps right after the MoM decision. He also knew > that the Prophet would have the information for the morning's paper > and that the students would know about the move right away. If > Percy is on the side of the MoM, why write with such haste, if not > to warn the trio? Why not just let them find out on their own? But on the other hand, why warn them the night before? What good could it possibly do them to know twelve hours in advance? > The opening two paragraphs of the letter are sheer Percy Weasley, > written to throw anyone who might be reading the mail. Or maybe because it's being written by Percy Weasley, so of course he sounds like himself. > Paragraph three furthers this idea: "But I want to give you more > than congratulations, Ron, I want to give you some advice, which is > why I am sending this at night rather than by the usual morning > post." Why send it under the radar at all? Nothing in here could > damage Percy; it isn't as though he is saying anything the MoM > wouldn't love to hear-- at least on the surface. He continues, > "Hopefully you will be able to read this away from prying eyes and > avoid awkward questions." Percy would know the trio spends the > majority of their time together. I believe he is counting on it. > So whose eyes are prying? I believe this is another reminder, as we > have been told throughout the novel by various characters, that the > mail is being monitored. Whether or not the trio are together at night, they're certainly together during meals, along with all the Gryffindors. If he's not a spy and just bad-mouthing Harry, he knows for sure that Harry is likely to be around Ron if the letter is delivered at breakfast. I think that this can be taken at face value. > Paragraph four begins with advice against hanging out against > Potter, but this is Percy's real reason for writing: "I feel bound > to tell you that Dumbledore may not be in charge at Hogwarts much > longer and the people who count have a very different--and probably > more accurate--view of Potter's behavior. I shall say no more here, > but if you look at the Daily Prophet tomorrow you will get a good > idea of the way the wind is blowing--and see if you can spot yours > truly!" This seems like a very clear warning that the MoM is moving > in and will take no prisoners. Again, why bother warning them a few hours in advance? > Paragraph five carries a direct warning to Harry: "Potter had a > disciplinary hearing this summer in front of the whole Wizengamot > and he did not come out of it looking too good. He got off on a > mere technicality if you ask me and many of the people I've spoken > to remain convinced of his guilt." If Percy were a spy for the > Order, he would feel it important to let Harry know about how the > MoM continues to perceive him. He seems here to be warning Harry > specifically not to get into any more trouble, as despite the > success of his hearing, without Dumbledore at the school and without > supporters in the Ministry Harry could face serious problems. Or warning Ron that Harry is dangerous and should be avoided. > Paragraph six-- Percy openly defames Harry's character and gives a > little "shout out" to the one person he is sure will be reading this > letter: Dolores Umbridge. He calls her "a really delightful woman, > who I know will be only too happy to advise you." Why call her > delightful, unless she's reading the letter? Eh, we already know Percy is a Ministry sycophant - whoever is in charge at the Ministry is his favorite person. > Paragraph eight gives an interesting note as well: "if you are > writing to Mother at any point, you might tell her that a certain > Sturgis Podmore, who is a great friend of Dumbledore's, has recently > been sent to Azkaban for trespass at the Ministry. Perhaps that > will open their eyes to the kind of petty criminals with whom they > are currently rubbing shoulders." Unable to communicate with his > mother, Percy sends this along instead. Unless he were trying to > communicate this information to the Order, why else would he believe > his mother would want to know it? By doing this, he also > demonstrates an awareness of the OOTP and some of its key members. If he were a spy, why on earth would he send this info through RON? Ron who a) doesn't know he's a spy and so is likely to disregard what he says and b) is not an actual member of the Order, and is left out of important meetings, etc. If they were going to send Percy off to spy, I would certainly hope that they would give him better means of communication than through someone who doesn't even know he's supposed to be relaying information. -Brandy From eeyore6771 at comcast.net Thu Aug 26 10:06:08 2004 From: eeyore6771 at comcast.net (Pat) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 10:06:08 -0000 Subject: Umbridge and the Dementors ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111263 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "uath50" wrote: > > Did anyone find it strange that Umbridge was not sent to prison > for > > sending the dementors after Harry? > > > > I thought that maybe she should have at least lost her job at the > > MOM or sent to Azkaban. > > > > "uath50" > > Geoff: > Interesting question is: who knows that she sent them? This is one of > those snippets of information which may come out of the woodwork to > trouble the dear lady in the future.... Pat: That's true. I think that at this point only the kids who were in her office have that bit of information. She says that what Cornelius doesn't know won't hurt him, when she is about to use the Cruciatus curse on Harry. Right after that she says that Fudge never knew that she sent the dementors. It does seem likely that Hermione, at least, would think to tell someone what they heard Umbridge say. Pat From eloiseherisson at aol.com Thu Aug 26 10:06:58 2004 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloise_herisson) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 10:06:58 -0000 Subject: Severus Snape: The grudge and the very long LOLLIPOPS biography... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111264 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tabouli" wrote: > "JKR herself has hinted that there's more to it than that through > Hagrid, we just don't know what the other factor or factors are." Wow! You had me rushing around in excitement there, wondering if Tabouli were back! Just to clarify, this has gone right back to the beginnings of the history of the "Snape loved Lily" theory on this board. This post was made back in November 2001, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/28782 and is linked in the Snape FAQ http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/faq/snape.html on our Fantastic Posts site http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/faq/ Emily: > I'd be interested to know what people think those other factors might > be. As riveting as romance is, even a mangled one like that proposed > here, I hate to think that every big decision Snape has made was based > on a crush. Yikes. Eloise: Yikes indeed. I never crewed aboard the good ship LOLLIPOPS, though I did fear that I was being drawn ever closer in her wake. To be fair, I think that the LOLLIPOPS folks would see it as more than a *crush*. People *do* do extreme things in the name of love, even unrequited love. Tabouli: > > "At this point, Harry hasn't done *anything* to Snape." > Emily: > He's the son of the man who (in Snape's mind) ruined Snape's life. > It's as if the guy who stole everything from you, that you believe you > should have had, had a son who turned out to be even more loved and > esteemed than your original nemesis without even trying. Meanhile, > you are still risking your life and happiness (for reasons unknown) > for his well being, and he doesn't even know about it. No one gives > *you* any credit for that, while your worst enemy's son gets to be > everyone's savior just by being alive. How's that for starters. Eloise: Oh, yes, absolutely. The only thing is that we then have to go back a stage further and ask *why* was James Snape's nemesis? The available evidence suggest that the animosity goes right back to day one, just like Harry's and Draco's. This suggests to me that it has nothing whatsoever to do with Lily as I can't imagine Snape developing feelings for a girl of the same age at the tender age of 11. My own suspicion is that there was already some kind of Potter/Snape history that went back at least one generation. However, to be fair, that doesn't meant that Snape *couldn't* have developed feelings for Lily later, either as icing to the cake, or indeed even more important to him than any preceding animosity. In fact, Lily could have become a desirable object precisely *because* she was James' (I hadn't thought of that one before). I have yet to be convinced, but to me that is the most likely scenario for Snape developing feelings for Lily. Tabouli: > > "There even a tiny hint from JKR in a chat I once read (no, no idea > which one, though no doubt someone will be able to say). I think she > was was asking for questions from an audience and someone asked if > Snape would fall in love. JKR laughed and asked what made him/her > think of that, and said it was an interesting idea and s/he would find > out why later. Or something like that which suggested there might in > fact be something in it." Emily: > Oh *no*... Pink Flamingo, anyone? LOL. Well, as noted in the Snape section of Hypothetic Alley (a compendium of various named/personified theories, again found in the Fantastic Posts site) http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/faq/hypotheticalley.html the Pink Flamingo is a rallying point for both Snape SHIPpers and anti-Snape SHIPpers. For those who don't know, >>The flamingo is a symbol of Snape SHIPping. It derives from the statement that giving Severus Snape a romantic plotline "would be like putting a single pink flamingo in the middle of a Gothic cathedral." << Tabouli: > > "Severus can't help noticing one of James' greatest fans is a young > redhead called Lily Evans, who has often vied with him for top student > in Charms. ...treats him with far more respect and reason than her > fellow Gryffindors..." > Emily: > Yeah, except that Lily loathed James in OOTP, remember? Greatest fan, > huh? I'd like to see from where you got that idea. Eloise: Well, in Tabouli's defence, as she hasn't been around here in ever such a long time (come back Tabouli, we old-timers miss you!), she did write this over two years before the publication of OoP. I think that revelation about James and Lily caught all of us unawares. And of course in the head-in-the-fire scene when Harry states to Sirius that Lily hated James, Sirius just dismisses it, "Nah, she didn't". Again, to be fair, we can't really divine what any of those three felt about each other from that little scene in the penseive when emotions were running high. In fact if we don't want to admit our attraction to someone, even to ourselves, it might well manifest as hostility. Tabouli/Emily: > "...but as Lily is always around, he dares not be anything but polite > to him." > > > Uhhh, really? > > "...his unconvincing attempts to be suave and fawning around her..." > > > Yes, I'd say calling her a filty mudblood would be pretty darn > unconvincing. Eloise: Again, this is with the benefit of reading OoP which Tabouli didn't have. > > Emily: > Ah, pulling a Javert on us, is he? Nnnooo, I *don't* think so. The > last time I heard about something like this happening was in Les > Miserables, and the poor confused inspector ended up drowning himself > rather than reconcile his past. No matter what anyone says about > Snape's ability to hide his emotions, (which, I must say, sometimes > isn't that evident) I think that if he had an epiphany of that degree > we would be dealing with a whole different character. ...But maybe > that's just me. Eloise: Yes, well, I don't like the sudden epiphany thing either. A desire to reconcile Snape's character *now* with his DE past and to find some continuity of character was what led Marina to develop George and I to develop Diana. Boring as some may find these theories , I find the idea of the fully committed DE suddenly seeing the light and converting a whole lot less interesting than the struggle of a complex and unhappy man to survive both physically and emotionally in the circumstances in which he finds himself. Nevertheless, although I don't see Snape going off and drowning himself, I *can* see him putting himself in a position where he knows his life will be forfeit, either to simply do what he knows what is his duty or because stranded in limbo, as essentially a dark magician in a world of 'light' magic he has no other resolution. ~Eloise From eeyore6771 at comcast.net Thu Aug 26 10:43:50 2004 From: eeyore6771 at comcast.net (Pat) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 10:43:50 -0000 Subject: Can you Apparate Within Hogwarts?(Was Disapparation inside Hogwarts?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111265 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, imamommy at s... wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > > Steve here: > > > > I don't think we've been told anyting about apparation except by > Hermoine. Now if DD said it can't be done then that's different. [snip] > > Steve > > imamommy: > > What about apparition class in Hogsmeade on weekends? It's possible > we won't know about it until it affects Harry & Co. (like we didn't > know about Hogsmeade visits, period, until PoA) > > Hermione is not the only person to say you cannot Apparate in > Hogwarts. I don't have the quote, but Snape mentions it somewhere. > If you trust him... > > imamommy Pat: You've brought up something that has always bothered me. Dobby comes and goes, which I always took for apparition and disapparition- -I hadn't thought about him walking into the grounds first. I just attributed his ability to do that to the strong magic that house elves have and about which we know very little. Snape reminds Fudge that you can't apparate when they are looking for Crouch, Sr, who has vanished after Harry and Krum found him near the forest, in GOF. But it has always seemed like Hermione reminds them all way too many times--like that must be one of those red herrings that JKR has intentionally placed in the books. If we hear it often enough, we will eventually just assume that it's not possible. One would think that if they really wanted to protect outsiders from entering Hogwarts secretly, they would not allow people to pop into a fire via floo powder either. Pat From ryokas at hotmail.com Thu Aug 26 10:44:50 2004 From: ryokas at hotmail.com (kizor0) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 10:44:50 -0000 Subject: The graves of James and Lily In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111266 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "uath50" wrote: > The question you should be asking is, where are the bodies? I > don't know about you but there's been no mention of any bodies. > > "uath50" Has there been any reason to mention them? In chapter one of CoS, it's confirmed that James and Lily are dead which would imply bodies, though being in the OotP and all there might well be some other means. After that chapter time skips forward by a decade, at which point the matter should already be long gone. - Kizor From eeyore6771 at comcast.net Thu Aug 26 10:52:36 2004 From: eeyore6771 at comcast.net (Pat) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 10:52:36 -0000 Subject: Disapparation inside Hogwarts? instead of using thestrals In-Reply-To: <20040825210559.19833.qmail@web12303.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111267 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Metylda wrote: > > --- Romulus Lupin pondered: > > > > Someone was wondering how DD could disapparate > > from his office, when > > > we know apparation/disapparation isn't possible > > within Hogwarts. > > > Suzanne commented: > > I'm convinced he caused himself to disappear, as he > > tells Harry in PS/SS > > that he doesn't need an invisibility cloak to become > > invisible. [snip] > > > I actually wonder if the 'No Apparation' rule holds > for everyone, but Dumbledore. [snip] > > bamf, blaming the assurdidties of her theories on the > August cold and rain... > Pat again: Sorry I didn't put this in my previous post, but I just read your comment about Dumbledore being exempt from the rule, and it reminded me that when Hagrid is telling them about thestrals, he says that they don't get much work, other than pulling the carriages--unless Dumbledore decides to use them instead of apparating to London. Of course, he doesn't say whether DD has to leave the grounds to apparate, but still, it was one of those things that stuck out like a sore thumb when I read it--at least the 2nd time anyway. Pat From dzeytoun at cox.net Thu Aug 26 10:55:54 2004 From: dzeytoun at cox.net (dzeytoun) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 10:55:54 -0000 Subject: Wrapping up the Umbridge subplot In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111268 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jospehine" wrote: JKR gave us sweet > justice at the end of OOP just seeing Dolores suffer in the hospital > wing and also with her departure from Hogwarts. This, for me, wrapped > it up quite nicely. You really think so? This seems to be a major bone of contention in the fandom. Lots of people (myself included) found Umbridge's "punishment" to be weak and not nearly proportionate to her crimes (i.e. she should be in Azkaban). Dzeytoun P.S. Now, if we learn in passing in the next book that she IS in Azkaban, or permanently mentally disabled (there is no indication in OOTP that she won't be just fine shortly), or otherwise engaged in long-term and severe suffering, THAT will wrap up the sub-plot nicely. From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Aug 26 11:27:39 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 11:27:39 -0000 Subject: Is Peter evil? was Re: Is Percy A Spy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111269 Carol wrote: From what we know of Peter, he isn't so much evil (aside from being able to cast an avada kedavra under coercion) as weak and lazy and cowardly. Potioncat: Excellent post about Percy. I agree. But this line jumped out and did flips. Remember a couple of thousand of posts ago, or maybe more, the big discussion was whether casting Unforgivables did something to the one who cast them. And along that line, what effect it had on Harry that he tried to cast one, and what it said about him that he couldn't. Well, obviously Peter knew how to cast an Avada Kedavra, because I doubt this was the first time. And, assuming you have to want to kill the person, Peter must be pretty darned evil. It didn't appear that he was under Imperio at the time. We know he spied for LV, in the past, I wonder what else he did? I'm not arguing that a good or just not-evil person couldn't be forced to kill someone, but that this type of killing requires certain skills. Potioncat From ryokas at hotmail.com Thu Aug 26 11:28:22 2004 From: ryokas at hotmail.com (kizor0) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 11:28:22 -0000 Subject: Wrapping up the Umbridge subplot In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111270 > P.S. Now, if we learn in passing in the next book that she IS in > Azkaban, or permanently mentally disabled (there is no indication in > OOTP that she won't be just fine shortly), or otherwise engaged in > long-term and severe suffering, THAT will wrap up the sub-plot nicely. Unfortunately, with the amount of ire she's roused there's going to be grumbling no matter what happens. Many will only consider it wrapped up nicely if she meets a grisly enough end, and feeding her to a box of Blast-Ended Skrewts may not be grisly enough. (Personally, I think that reversing that last suggestion would certainly satisfy all but a very few. Certainly there must be spells that would make such a feat possible.) - Kizor From mauranen at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 11:32:01 2004 From: mauranen at yahoo.com (jekatiska) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 11:32:01 -0000 Subject: Hermione acting out-of-character In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111271 > Brandy:"I just want to know if I'm the only one who got really, really > annoyed when Hermione came totally out of character and did something > as stupid as saying to the centaurs tha she wanted them to get rid of > Umbridge for her." Jim Ferer: > Why can't it just be Hermione's mistake? She's been brilliant the > whole book long, thinking of the DA, Rita Skeeter's article, Marietta > Edgecombe's decorations, and even a way to fool Umbridge. (Hermione's > learning to think on her feet. She used to be much more deliberate.) > She's under just a little stress when the centaurs show up. Jekatiska: It's not out of character, though. Remember what she said about Firenze being the new divination teacher: "I don't really like horses" and "he still has four legs". Hermione doesn't understand centaurs - or even house-elves for that matter. She's brilliant when it comes to human behaviour, spells, and book knowledge. But - maybe because of her muggle background - she doesn't understand other magical creatures. This is something they don't really teach at Hogwarts, nor is it something that can be learned from a book. The insight to the thinking of other creatures than humans can only come from experience and open-mindedness. I guess it could be a kind of analogy for understanding other cultures in the muggle world. Hermione's blunder is actually quite revealing. It shows her Spew-idealist character in quite a different light. She sees house-elves as something to be helped, but doesn't understand the way they think, and goes on helping them completely the wrong way. This is the kind of mistake Western countries sometimes make in helping developing countries. They mean well, but at the same time they discard the local culture as someting inferior to their own, and impose their own values. This is exactly what Hermione is doing with Spew, and this is also her attitude towards the centaurs. She fails to understand their way of thinking because it's in conflict with her own. So she hears what they say - both the house-elves and the centaurs - but doesn't understand what they really mean. I think this is a very clever way of showing that Hermione is after all, human and as such an immature one. That is not to say that she is immature in the negative sense of the word, simply that she is still a child. She is 15, and at 15 most of us have some ideas of the world, that are not quite fully developed. Some of us, like Hermione and myself at that age, are convinced that our ideas are right and everyone else is wrong, and go on shouting out about it. I feel very uncomfortable about this side of Hermione's personality, because it is so real and, for me, so close to home. And by the way, Jim, Grawp is a giant, not a troll. Jekatiska From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 26 11:46:28 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 07:46:28 -0400 Subject: Umbridge and the Dementors ? Message-ID: <001901c48b62$53824a40$93c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 111272 uath50 said: "Did anyone find it strange that Umbridge was not sent to prison for sending the dementors after Harry? I thought that maybe she should have at least lost her job at the MOM or sent to Azkaban.' DuffyPoo: I think probably any punishment that is to come is still in the future. She was in the hospital wing until nearly the end of the school term when she snuck out over a dinner hour. Besides, nobody knows that Umbridge sent the Dementors after HP except herself and a dozen or so teenagers. There were no adults present when she made the statement. The testimony of six kids to despise her will mean nothing in WW court, quite likely, even if one of them is The Boy Who Lived. The kids on the Inquisitorial Squad aren't likely to tell what they have heard. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 26 11:45:42 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 07:45:42 -0400 Subject: The graves of James and Lily Message-ID: <001301c48b62$37ccefd0$93c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 111273 "uath50" said: "The question you should be asking is, where are the bodies? I don't know about you but there's been no mention of any bodies." DuffyPoo: "I set out for your parent's house straight away. And when I saw their house, destroyed, and their bodies -- I realized what Peter must have done. What I'd done." PoA - The Servant of Lord Voldemort. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Aug 26 12:27:57 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 12:27:57 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: <971751AE-F6E4-11D8-AEA6-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111274 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, caesian wrote: > > OK, I'm just going to come right out and say it. Snape was in love > with Lily. I know, there is not a shred of hard evidence to support > this idea and - well, it is disgustingly mushy. I banish this thought > whenever it occurs. I HATE, really, to post an idea like this, an idea > that is so poorly supported (or contradicted, alas) by Canon. And this > idea in particular. It is just so - so - Speilberg. But, I've got to > break down and rationalize an exception in this case. This theory pops > up just too often. How many people thought of this theory after > reading only PS? I did. So did my husband, my brother, my > mother-in-law, ... And it pops up in discussion, FanFic (I know, > scourgify!!!)... it just keeps popping up. Curse of the collective > unconcious. > Urgh! Is there no limit to the disgusting perversions thrust at the naive, trusting, dewy-eyed fan? LOLLIPOPS indeed! These vile imaginings should be whispered furtively in a darkened room where the ears of the innocent will not be sullied by such iniquitous depravity. I did attempt to put the record straight last year with my AGGIE post (77800) wherein I pointed out that there was an equal likelihood that it was Lily who had the hots for Sevvy but was spurned as Snape dedicated his life to a fulfilling career torturing Muggles. In fact the evidence in canon, though indirect, tends to be more supportive of AGGIE than LOLLIPOPS. It's no secret that Kneasy is about as romantically inclined as a sack of spuds; such maunderings as those emanating from the SHIPping fraternity (sorority?) generally get flipped through faster than his computer processor can comfortably manage. But this demands rebuttal. Firstly, is there any evidence for this fantastical theory? Er..no. It all seems to be based on the 'fact' that Snape hates Harry and then scrabbling around to dredge up a reason for such animosity. But if Sevvy is putting on an act, exaggerating his dislike, then there's not even that. Secondly, is there evidence against? Well Sevvy is an aspirant DE, firm upholder of the principles of Slytherin philosophy - he hates Muggles and mudbloods and supports the pureblood ethic; something that excludes Lily from becoming the light of his life, despite the fact that it seems to be her that insists on pushing herself into his private quarrels. Never has Snape mentioned her name in canon; never has DD so much as intimated to Harry that there might be a few unwelcome skeletons rattling in the family closet - "Ah, Harry. I think it's time that I told you about Professor Snape and your mother. It's about time you started addressing him as Uncle Sevvy." Strewth. Can you imagine such a thing? And what would Harry's reaction be? Pity, compassion or disgust? Or will he wonder why the miserable old bugger didn't give him better marks in Potions? For a certainty the vision of Snape carving Lily's initials on his broomstick handle could scar him for life. Being a realist I accept the inevitability that the irredeemably romantic will ignore all appeals to reason, logic, common-sense or even evidence. All of those become irrelevant when that rosy-pink glow that accompanies incipient match-making fogs the brain. But the rest of you - stand firm. Ignore the blandishments, dismiss the cajolery, spurn the spurious and ask yourself one question.Can you really and truly see Snape composing poetry and penning touching little billets-doux in the watches of the night? Neither can I. Kneasy From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Aug 26 12:43:15 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 12:43:15 -0000 Subject: Percy's Letter (Was: Is Percy a spy?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111275 A very good post snipped out leading to: Brandy: > If he were a spy, why on earth would he send this info through RON? Ron who > a) doesn't know he's a spy and so is likely to disregard what he says and b) > is not an actual member of the Order, and is left out of important meetings, etc. If they were going to send Percy off to spy, I would certainly hope that they would give him better means of communication than through someone who doesn't even know he's supposed to be relaying information. > Potioncat: Although I'm not sure if Percy is under cover, or just misguided; I don't think the letter was his "official spy report." He may have been making an attempt to give the Trio a "heads up" and he may have included a desparate attempt to get information to the Order. If Hermione had sent Ron a note saying what a delightful woman Umbridge was, Ron would know she didn't mean it, and would understand to read carefully. It could be that Percy expected Ron to see through some of these comments as well. I'd like it to have been an attempt to communicate if only because when this sort of thing ususally happens in fiction, the characters immediately say, "Oh, look it's a code..see every other third word is important..." The other thing is, he may not be a spy for the Order, but just for Dumbledore...in the same sense that Snape wasn't a member of the Order in the first war, but worked for DD. Potioncat From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Thu Aug 26 10:13:20 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 10:13:20 -0000 Subject: Severus Snape: The grudge and the very long LOLLIPOPS biography... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111276 "Emily Anne Rude" wrote: I think that if he had an epiphany of that degree > we would be dealing with a whole different character. ...But maybe > that's just me. Dungrollin: No, it's not just you! This lies at the bottom of my inability to find LOLLIPOPS in any way believable. We have never seen Snape care about anyone, he appears to be exactly the same person now as he was in the pensieve. Not only is 'doing something drastic for the sake of love' (unrequited or otherwise) completely out of character, but as a character he doesn't *need* to have anyone he is close to being tortured and killed by You Know Who in order to turn him into an unpleasant, snide, sneering sarcastic nasty piece of work, because he already was. To my mind there are only two possibilites as to why Snape left the DEs, 1. He was afraid for his life, or 2. There was something he wanted more than what You Know Who was offering (which, BTW, is not as cut-and-dried as it seems) which made working against him and having to consort with muggle-lovers worthwhile. His treatment of Hermione (and he has no real reason to dislike her - she is a perfect student after all) makes me think that he despises non-pure-bloods as much as ever. I suspect that he did not *choose* to leave the DEs, he was forced to, which would account for a lot of his bitterness. > Tabouli: > > > "There even a tiny hint from JKR in a chat I once read (no, no > idea > > which one, though no doubt someone will be able to say). I think > she > > was was asking for questions from an audience and someone asked if > > Snape would fall in love. JKR laughed and asked what made him/her > > think of that, and said it was an interesting idea and s/he would > find > > out why later. Or something like that which suggested there might > in > > fact be something in it." Dungrollin: I can't remember where I read the transcript of this either, but I assumed that she was referring to the word 'redemptive' in this answer, though I can't seem to find the full quote. As I recall, someone asks if Snape is going to fall in love, and JKR says 'Who would want Snape to fall in love with them?' Then the interviewer asks a more lengthy question, saying something along the lines of 'there is a very redemptive aspect to Snape' (paraphrased), and that's when JKR says she's stunned that someone says that, and that they'll see why in books 6 & 7. So many of these interviews are condensed on the web, I have a feeling that things get quoted out of context. Does anyone know what I'm talking about, or did *I* get confused by one of these paraphrased transcripts? If we're in the business of picking up on little clues, we ought to be accurate... Dungrollin.x From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Aug 26 12:47:50 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 12:47:50 -0000 Subject: Umbridge and the Dementors ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111277 Pat wrote: delete It does seem likely that Hermione, at least, would think to tell someone what they heard Umbridge say. > Potioncat: Well, we have the same situation as we did when the Trio knew Black was innocent. Who will believe them? It's unlikely the Slytherins would support Hermione's story. From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Thu Aug 26 10:46:47 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 10:46:47 -0000 Subject: What Drives You Know Who? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111278 Brenda: > I would say his motivation is even more simple - POWER. Snip > (1) be almighty powerful, so no one will think of desert him like his > father once did > (2) eliminate anything/anyone that stands in his path to power > (3) enjoy the power as long as possible, hence quest for immortality snip Dungrollin: Absolutely ? didn't mention it because I thought it kind of went without saying. Brenda: > Tom Riddle comes to Hogwarts from Orphanage. Soon he realizes he has > been selected as Heir of Slytherin, by Salazar Slytherin > himself, "the greatest of Hogwarts four". He realizes he is much more > magically powerful and brilliant than most wizards. For an orphan boy > who has never been properly loved, this is quite an attraction. He > realizes he could be very powerful, and gives himself the title of > Lord Voldemort (already power-hungry!). Snip Dungrollin: Why does he choose the name Voldemort while he's still at school? If he has no thoughts of immortality, but is just being the heir of Slytherin and hating mudbloods, then it's a happy coincidence that the name goes so well with his later `goal ? to conquer death.' > He starts gathering followers in Wizarding World. His catch is the > whole "Let's revive the Pure-Bloodism", which majority of wizarding > community is in favor of. It's flying very well! He is becoming more > and more popular, lots of wizards and witches are supporting him. It > is a great propaganda, works very nice for him till he shows his true > color. After gathering enough followers, he starts the massive > massacre. Snip Sure, but if he's getting people onside by reviving Pure-Bloodism, why name the group `Death Eaters'? Why not something more in- keeping with the purity-of-blood-obsessed followers of the Heir of Slytherin? I suspect that the immortality-quest is a much greater part of the story than we have so far seen, and plus JKR's hint that we should be wondering what he did to make sure he didn't die adds up to Yet another speculative theory probably involving Snape. Dungrollin.x From vidarfe at start.no Thu Aug 26 11:18:00 2004 From: vidarfe at start.no (vidar_fe) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 11:18:00 -0000 Subject: The graves of James and Lily In-Reply-To: <4A532144-F6B5-11D8-8B32-0003930C168E@qwest.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111279 > kizor0 wrote: > > To date, the graves haven't turned up anywhere in the books. > > Visiting them would probably be an important event for Harry, > > and distances don't matter all that much in the WW, so is it > > possible that this will become a Future Plot Point(tm)? Terpnurse wrote: > I remember during the filming of PoA, I had heard or read that > Cuaron wanted to put a graveyard into the movie on the school > grounds and that JKR nixed that, citing a specific place on the > grounds where there *is* a graveyard and that it will come into > play in a later book. I've wondered since then if perhaps the > elder Potter's graves are there. vidar_fe writes: The problem with the "Lily & James are buried at Hogwarts"-theory is: Why hasn't Harry visited their grave yet? I mean, he's been there for five years, if his parents' grave is anywhere near the castle, I can't believe he hasn't found it yet. It is so unlikely. And besides, the house in Godric's Hollow burned to the ground, perhaps the bodies where destroyed? From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Aug 26 13:24:16 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 13:24:16 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111280 Kneasy wrote: > I did attempt to put the record straight last year with my AGGIE post > (77800) wherein I pointed out that there was an equal likelihood > that it was Lily who had the hots for Sevvy but was spurned as Snape > dedicated his life to a fulfilling career torturing Muggles. > In fact the evidence in canon, though indirect, tends to be more > supportive of AGGIE than LOLLIPOPS. Potioncat: Man your cannons...erm, canon. Here it is, JKR's endorsement of AGGIE: >From the Edinburgh Festival > "I hesitate to say that I love him. [Audience member: I do]. You do? > This is a very worrying thing." ... " Girls, stop going for the bad guy. Go for a nice man > in the first place. It took me 35 years to learn that, but I am > giving you that nugget free, right now, at the beginning of your > love lives." JKR wasn't talking to the fans, she was talking to Lily! Give up Sevvy, go out with Jimmy.... OK, maybe not. The biggest drawback to Severus loves Lily is that if he loved Lily, would he join the DEs in the first place? If he carried a torch for Lily how could he treat her son so badly? Now, if she rejected him in a cruel manner and he was out to get revenge on both James and Lily, then that wouldn't explain why he left LV. But I think there may be a Lily-Severus connection which I will hopefully put some thought into before I post. Potioncat From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 26 13:25:22 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 13:25:22 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111281 Caesian: > > Severus seen snogging Lily? No, won't happen. But unrequited > > love - well, what other kind is there when he has teeth like > > that? (unless you are Ewan McGregor - as SSSomeone would say, > > hubba hubba) Neri: > Yes, I wonder why SSShe didn't jump into this discussion herself > yet. But I'll remind you that, unlike RL, in the books the way > someone looks usually reflects his personality. Severus wasn't a > hunk, but if he really dreamed about kissing Lily, he would have > had the proper teeth for it. SSSusan: SSShe SSSomeone checking in! "Hubba hubba" is reserved for Alan Rickman, btw, not for Severus Snape--just want to make that clear. :-) Anyway, I've not been posting, as I was away from my computer this past weekend, had freshmen orientation at the college library where I work, and I've been working on a little something on [gasp!] Minerva McGonagall. [Darn kids & job--how am I ever to finish the thing??] I did read Neri's original post (111054 & followed the thread), with the various theories for why Snape is on the Side of Good, which in turn was a response to Marianne's well-stated position (111030) on why she doesn't want to discover that Snape participated only on the DE sidelines, but rather was a wholehearted participant who eventually had some kind of epiphany which caused his return to DD. I understand Marianne's desire for this--for Snape to have done something which really *requires* redemption. And I *don't* think Severus Snape was just "misunderstood." I think he was up to his eyeballs in the Dark Arts, as Sirius suggested, and that he joined up w/ Voldy because he believed in at least some part of Voldy's philosophy and/or methods. The idea of an epiphany is intriguing to me. Of course, it is what begged the question Neri attempted to answer: what could cause such an epiphany? And if not an epiphany, at least a change of heart/mind? When I first discovered HPfGU, late in the spring of 2003, one of the first posts I read in FP was LOLLIPOPS. I was *very* taken with it at first, and my confidence in it has waxed & waned over time. It does fit nicely with the possibility of *an* event which caused him to turn to DD and leave Voldy--if Snape found out about the GH attack before it happened, for instance. But I'm just not sure unrequited love would be ENOUGH for all of this, esp. his behavior all these many years later. An interesting, somewhat similar theory is Kneasy's "Black Widower" one--that perhaps Snape was actually married [to Florence?] and lost his wife/family when Voldy had them murdered. I think REVENGE *is* one of those motivations which would fit canon!Severus well. In sum, I guess I'm still open to several possibilities, though none is yet really GRABBING me. I like Neri's Big Bang-- "Following some dramatic event (possibly seeing or participating in killing someone) he had his epiphany and made the moral choice to change sides (could be either mushy or gruesome, but follows the Choice theme: 7)." (111054) --but mostly, I agree with Potioncat (111175), when she said that "Whatever it is, it has to be an intense reason." And that's intense to SEVERUS SNAPE, too, not necessarily to you or me. Our job is to try to figure out what would move him in such a way as to either bring on an epiphany or motivate his "revenge gene" to such an extent that he'd: 1) traipse off to DD; and 2) be able to convince DD that he *really* would never be going back. Kneasy has stated many times his belief that Snape's motivation is NOT a belief in good over evil, nor anything, really, besides his own personal agenda, likely a desire for personal revenge. I don't go quite that far. I think DD *wouldn't* trust Snape if that's all there were to it...and I don't think DD is unable to judge Snape's true motivations. I think DD knows pretty much the full story, whatever it is. SO WHAT IS IT?!? Siriusly Snapey Susan From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Aug 26 13:32:36 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 13:32:36 -0000 Subject: Theory on book titles (was: Book titles: do they show Harry's challenge) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111282 Hydra: > I was trying to look for a pattern in the titles and what I found out was this. As you said, every title refers to a challenge or (I think) more specifically to part of the challenge that Harry must face during his school year. > > And as part of the challenge, the *thing* can be either on his side or against him, playing a more or less active role in his favor or against him. In other words, there are those elements that do not threaten or worsen his situation but are just part of the challenge and those that play an active role in the danger that he faces. > > So there seem to be two categories of titles: the ones that reflect a "simple" non hostile part of the challenge and the outright hostile element. > > If I follow that logic, the HalfBlood Prince should be an instrument against Harry or worst something outrightly hostile to him. > Valky: Hi Hydra, I not long ago attempted to post a similar analysis to yours but I gave up on it. I attempted to use graphical sorts of descriptions such as Harry <---Attacker--- Chamber of Secrets and other such stuff. Yours is much simpler and thats infinitely better I think. My own managed to become far too technical when I thought about it. Interestingly we have come to the same conclusion that the HBP is one of the things that comes hostily toward Harry, but then again wouldn't it be just the perfect moment for JKR to change the pattern and keep us on our toes. Tying this in with a separate analysis of the book themes, one that was posted by dgmck a couple of weeks ago, (probably some half a million posts ago LOL), there is another pattern theory that relegates a Quidditch position/play to each book. It is prompted by the analysis of Snapes Potion Puzzle which you can find in the files section of this site. After all that research, phew. The pattern is, that book one had a Seeker theme; Book two a Chaser(Poison) theme; Book three another Chaser (with a hint of keeper); The Fourth was a Beater; and the Fifth was a Chaser(Look for poison references). That leaves a second Bludger and the actual Keeper Position. Most who posted agreed that the Keeper (Last Line of Defence) would dominate book seven, leaving book six the Beater theme the brother of which, notably, is book four the first one of the series with a body count. This backs up an image of bloody war and a hostile HBP in book six, for us. More on themes: Book four was, also, the opposite of the preceding book in its theme: Sirius started out the attacker and ended as the defender while Moody started the defender and ended out as the attacker. And both died peculiar deaths....... Following this logic the HBP will be the opposite of OotP in its title. This could mean that the HBP is Salazar Slytherin (whom LV follows since its not him), or that the HBP book will have an opposing implication on Harry, in that, rather than him seeing someone elses secrets against their wishes... {There are lots of Harry Spy themes in OOtP: Extendable Ears, Getting into the closed ward, seeing Voldemorts mind and Snapes memories lots and lots} .......perhaps the book six theme opposes this in someone seeing into Harry's secret mind. Or it could be both. What do you think? Welcome to posting Hydra! Valky From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 26 13:35:52 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 13:35:52 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past (was Re: Snape and the Edinburgh Festival ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111283 HumanTupperware wrote: > > Your post got me thinking, not so much "why" Snape left the DE, > > but if he turned into a spy for Dumbldore's side, how has he > > convinced Voldy that he is still loyal? Apart from the > > Occlumency, which I'm sure comes in handy, Voldemort surely knows > > that Snape works at Hogwarts, so somehow, his teaching position > > must be justified to Voldy. > > > > I'm sure I surmised somewhere during the books that Snape had been > > spying for Dumbledore in the days before Voldy was vanquished, > > then afterwards had actually manged to leave the DE for a while, > > but then returned, (at the end of GOF?) to spy for Dumbledore > > again. Sure, he would have gotten the teaching position at > > Hogwarts after Voldy's vanquishment, but did he maintain to the > > remaining DE that he was at Hogwarts to spy on Dumbledore? If he > > then returned to Voldy after GOF, for him to justify keeping his > > teaching position, he must be telling Voldy some information, > > maybe pretending to spy on Dumbledore, but giving fake > > information? > > Do Snape and Dumbledore get together once a week to make up > > stories to tell Voldy? Carol: > Suppose that he took the position *before* Godric's Hollow, before > the beginning of term, when a position was most likely to be open > and advertised for. His real motive, of course, would be to get > away from Voldemort and the DEs and to be close to Dumbledore, for > whom he was already working as a spy, but he could have told > Voldemort that he was applying to spy *on* Dumbledore. There would > have been a mere two months in which he would have had to pass on > some sort of fake information, certainly with the advice and > approval of Dumbledore, and ten long years during which Voldemort > was out of the picture (though I imagine that neither Snape nor > Dumbledore believed that he was gone forever). > > Snape would not have been expected to return to Voldemort until the > night at the graveyard in GoF. SSSusan: I may be missing something, Carol, but how could Snape & DD have *planned* this? No one could have known that Voldy was going to go down that night at GH. Again, I may be mis-reading this, but it seems you're suggesting Snape "only" had to worry about those two months between start of term & Halloween night. As for HumanTupperware's final question, above, I've often wondered that myself. *If* Snape is *actually* spying FOR the Order and *pretending* to spy for Voldy, what kinds of stuff would he feed Voldy? I suppose this complication--as well as the notion that Voldy assumes Snape switched loyalties--is part of what's behind those posters here who think Snape is NOT actually in contact w/ Voldy these days and either isn't spying on him at all, or is doing so only in a manner which is hidden [*cough*bat/vampire*cough*]. That would still beg the question of why Lucius hasn't severed ties w/ Severus, though, wouldn't it? Siriusly Snapey Susan, amazed at all the mysteries which surround Severus Snape. From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Thu Aug 26 13:43:16 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 13:43:16 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111284 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > Ignore the blandishments, dismiss the cajolery, spurn the spurious > and ask yourself one question.Can you really and truly see Snape > composing poetry and penning touching little billets-doux in the > watches of the night? > Neither can I. > > Kneasy Carolyn (giggling helplessly at this new tirade) Ok, you've contradicted yourself. How come you reckon that he's dedicated his life to revenging the death of his wife and child? If he ain't the type to send billets-doux to the lovely Lily (and I SO agree!), can you really see him wooing anyone else? Screwed up bunches of belladonna and brambles, accompanied by exclusive bottles of eau-de-toad? There's pent up passion there, oh yes, and he's panting for revenge for something..but for a woman? As I've said before, I'm struggling with this one. One pleasant possibility is that he had a crush on darling Bella at some point, and she rejected him. The only other woman that he might care about could be his mother, dying as a result of his father's (and maybe Snape's) involvement in the dark arts. It has a certain motif quality and could bring in issues of family pride. But both options are frankly pretty mushy. Nah, whatever romantic inclinations he ever had are history. Its got to be something grittier, preferably involving murder, blackmail, and arcane power-struggles amongst the WW elite. I think Severely Sigune's character analysis on Tuesday was spot on - our Sev is playing a long game, and working with DD for the time being suits him just fine. Granted, some major incident prompted this decision on tactics, something that made him plenty mad and was probably a betrayal of some sort, but of the heart? No, please, no. Carolyn Can't believe this is a SHIPPING discussion with Kneasy.. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 26 13:54:31 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 13:54:31 -0000 Subject: The graves of James and Lily In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111285 kizor0 wrote: > > > To date, the graves haven't turned up anywhere in the books. > > > Visiting them would probably be an important event for Harry, > > > and distances don't matter all that much in the WW, so is it > > > possible that this will become a Future Plot Point(tm)? Terpnurse wrote: > > I remember during the filming of PoA, I had heard or read that > > Cuaron wanted to put a graveyard into the movie on the school > > grounds and that JKR nixed that, citing a specific place on the > > grounds where there *is* a graveyard and that it will come into > > play in a later book. I've wondered since then if perhaps the > > elder Potter's graves are there. vidar_fe writes: > The problem with the "Lily & James are buried at Hogwarts"-theory > is: Why hasn't Harry visited their grave yet? I mean, he's been > there for five years, if his parents' grave is anywhere near the > castle, I can't believe he hasn't found it yet. It is so unlikely. > And besides, the house in Godric's Hollow burned to the ground, > perhaps the bodies where destroyed? SSSusan: LOL! Why wouldn't Harry have visited them? Because Harry never asks questions! [Damn him!] How much has Harry EVER really asked about Godric's Hollow? To our knowledge, he's not asked for specifics, he's never asked where his parents are buried, he's never expressed an interest in visiting their graves (if they exist) nor Godric's Hollow itself. Many of us go NUTS over this aspect of Harry's personality. As likely as not, it's as much JKR keeping things from us as Harry's "true personality," but still.... Seriously, with all H/R/H's wanderings, I do understand what you're saying about its being unlikely that they've not stumbled across this...but given that the Hogwarts graveyard has never been mentioned by anyone in 5 books, maybe it's tucked away somewhere on the edge of the grounds? As for the bodies of James & Lily, this was just posted in 111273 by DuffyPoo: "I set out for your parent's house straight away. And when I saw their house, destroyed, and their bodies -- I realized what Peter must have done. What I'd done." PoA - The Servant of Lord Voldemort. Siriusly Snapey Susan From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Aug 26 14:07:06 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 14:07:06 -0000 Subject: The graves of James and Lily In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111286 SSSusan wrote: > Seriously, with all H/R/H's wanderings, I do understand what you're saying about its being unlikely that they've not stumbled across this...but given that the Hogwarts graveyard has never been mentioned by anyone in 5 books, maybe it's tucked away somewhere on the edge of the grounds? > Potioncat: The other possibility is that Cuaron was sincere, but mistaken. JKR may have been talking about the graveyard in GoF. She may have thought it would be confusing to have two graveyards..particularly given how compressed the story becomes in the movies. I've seen the interview with Cuaron, but has anyone ever read a comment from JKR on this? Nitpicking Potioncat From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Aug 26 14:25:13 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 14:25:13 -0000 Subject: Umbridge and the Dementors ? In-Reply-To: <001901c48b62$53824a40$93c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111287 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > uath50 said: > "Did anyone find it strange that Umbridge was not sent to prison for sending the dementors after Harry? > > I thought that maybe she should have at least lost her job at the MOM or sent to Azkaban.' > > > DuffyPoo: The testimony of six kids to despise her will mean nothing in WW court, quite likely, even if one of them is The Boy Who Lived. The kids on the Inquisitorial Squad aren't likely to tell what they have heard. > Oh, but it would make excellent blackmail material. Lucius is in jail, but Draco might try a bit of extortion on his own account. Pippin From fotoger1 at hotmail.com Thu Aug 26 11:24:33 2004 From: fotoger1 at hotmail.com (Tory Santillie) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 06:24:33 -0500 Subject: Harry and Tom, related through Lily? (Re: Harry is Tom Riddle) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111288 > "jakm_99" wrote: > > Harry somehow and that's why LV couldn't kill him? Maybe they're > > related through Lily? Michelle wrote: >I have often had thoughts that perhaps LV is Harry's >maternal grandfather! I never posted it before >because I thought, no canon but... JKR has stated numerous times that LV is not a relative of Harry's. I don't think she would lie flat out about their not being related and then come in with some genetic connection. That would be a cheat. Tory From andreoe at yahoo.fr Thu Aug 26 11:51:06 2004 From: andreoe at yahoo.fr (andreoe) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 11:51:06 -0000 Subject: What drives You Know Who? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111289 Dungrollin: > 'Voldemort' is French (vol de mort) and can be translated as 'flight > of/from death' (though there may be other ways). Another way is 'Steal of Death.' "andreoe" From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 13:18:30 2004 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 13:18:30 -0000 Subject: Hermione acting out-of-character In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111290 Brandy wrote: I just want to know if I'm the only one who got really, really annoyed when Hermione came totally out of character and did something as stupid as saying to the centaurs that she wanted them to get rid of Umbridge for her. > Anyone have an explanation for this? Or is it just a mistake - JKR paying too much attention to where she wants the plot to go (seeing Grawp again) to think about what the character would actually do? ****** Actually, I think her blatant mistake is in character. PS: Since she is the 'brains' of the trio, I'd fault her with forgetting the Invisibility Cloak after they had delivered Norbert to Charlie's friends. They landed in detention and lost 150 points. CoS: Polyjuice mistake, anyone? After all she plotted and went through: restricted section permission, stealing of ingredients, brewing the potion for a whole month, sleeping draught in cupcakes and then goes and makes the simplest mistake of 'assuming' those hairs were Millicent's, LOL. PoA: No huge mistakes there, only that taking all the classes was a bit too much for her. GoF: Again, she 'assumed' that Rita's articles would not bother her (got herself lots of hate mail and the smallest Easter egg from Molly, plus the teasing of her schoolmates). I think that JKR has given us an almost perfect, rational girl whom makes mistakes when in distress or when she becomes too confident of herself, which IMO it's becoming of her. Hermione is too right too many times in the stories, she has to have faults for her to be a believable character -and not just in the hair department, LOL. Marcela From tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr Thu Aug 26 13:34:14 2004 From: tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr (totorivers) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 13:34:14 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111291 Potioncat: > The biggest drawback to Severus loves Lily is that if he loved > Lily, would he join the DEs in the first place? If he carried a > torch for Lily how could he treat her son so badly? > > Now, if she rejected him in a cruel manner and he was out to get > revenge on both James and Lily, then that wouldn't explain why he > left LV. The other drawback is that while Severus really hated James, it was almost the same for Sirius or Remus. James just took the brunt of the hate because he was the unofficial leader, and we see in canon that James just bothered Sevvie because Sirius was bored - there was no *competition* between them, it was all on Sevvie's part. I also wonder where you took the basis for calling Sevvie intelligent or anything like that. Sevvie is broken, he wanted to be the best but couldn't. He isn't some deep character, we can see through the books that when it comes to it, he is unable to make the right decision when it comes to Harry being right about something, nor about Sirius and so on. From cannon, James is known to not only bother Sevvie but loads of Slytherin: there is no rivalry in James part, except he is said to hate the dark arts. He is also *helped* along the way by Sirius, who hates Snape for being what he could have been... Siriusly Snapey Susan: > Kneasy has stated many times his belief that Snape's motivation is > NOT a belief in good over evil, nor anything, really, besides his > own personal agenda, likely a desire for personal revenge. I don't > go quite that far. I think DD *wouldn't* trust Snape if that's all > there were to it...and I don't think DD is unable to judge Snape's > true motivations. I think DD knows pretty much the full story, > whatever it is. > > SO WHAT IS IT?!? Ok, that's just an hunch, and one most of you won't like: Maybe Severus realised that in Voldemort's world, only Voldemort had any power, and that the others were just crucio recipients. Or maybe Snape realised he would just stay an underdog in the DE, and couldn't accept it. That goes well with his temperament: no epiphany, just the realisation that being a DE, even if he does something that makes him number two, won't make him more powerful or anything, for the simple reason Voldemort allows no one exept himself to have power. And as for DD trusting him as a spy....I don't think DD does. I don't even think DD cares for Severus as a spy, he just doesn't want Severus to kill people for fun, and using him that way can be a way to keep a leash on Snape. "totorivers" From tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr Thu Aug 26 13:22:41 2004 From: tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr (totorivers) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 13:22:41 -0000 Subject: Percy's Letter (Was: Is Percy a spy?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111292 Potioncat: > The other thing is, he may not be a spy for the Order, but just > for Dumbledore...in the same sense that Snape wasn't a member of > the Order in the first war, but worked for DD. Ahem, how do you know that about Dumbledore and Snape? And for Percy.....his treason has been long in coming. Through the years, we have seen Percy bootlicking different characters when they are in power, and then backstabbing them when they are not. Harry is a Gryffindor through when he comes to rashness and bravery, but he has way too much ambition, and he really would follow whoever is his boss.......and you just have to reread GoF to see him saying bad things about Bagman then praising him, same for Crouch and Dumbledore. Pitiful, really. "totorivers" From porcupine88 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 14:35:42 2004 From: porcupine88 at yahoo.com (brandy) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 14:35:42 -0000 Subject: Hermione acting out-of-character In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111293 Jekatiska: > It's not out of character, though. Remember what she said about > Firenze being the new divination teacher: "I don't really like horses" > and "he still has four legs". Hermione doesn't understand centaurs - > or even house-elves for that matter. She's brilliant when it comes to > human behaviour, spells, and book knowledge. But - maybe because of > her muggle background - she doesn't understand other magical > creatures. This is something they don't really teach at Hogwarts, nor > is it something that can be learned from a book. The insight to the > thinking of other creatures than humans can only come from experience > and open-mindedness. I guess it could be a kind of analogy for > understanding other cultures in the muggle world. That's a good point - I hadn't thought of it in relationship to her attitude on house elves. She does seem to have a general problem with understanding the minds of non-human sentient creatures. -Brandy From ameliagoldfeesh at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 14:48:03 2004 From: ameliagoldfeesh at yahoo.com (ameliagoldfeesh) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 14:48:03 -0000 Subject: Severus Snape: The grudge and the very long LOLLIPOPS biography... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111294 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dungrollin" wrote: > "Emily Anne Rude" wrote: > > > > Tabouli: (Way back on Nov. 5, 01) > > > > "There even a tiny hint from JKR in a chat I once read (no, no > > idea > > > which one, though no doubt someone will be able to say). I > think > > she > > > was was asking for questions from an audience and someone asked > if > > > Snape would fall in love. JKR laughed and asked what made > him/her > > > think of that, and said it was an interesting idea and s/he > would > > find > > > out why later. Or something like that which suggested there > might > > in > > > fact be something in it." > > Dungrollin: > So many of these interviews are condensed on the web, I have a > feeling that things get quoted out of context. Does anyone know > what I'm talking about, or did *I* get confused by one of these > paraphrased transcripts? > If we're in the business of picking up on little clues, we ought to > be accurate... > > Dungrollin.x A Goldfeesh: The quote is from JKR's Oct. 12, 1999 The Connection interview (a radio interview if I remember correctly). >From Quick Quill Quotes: One of our internet correspondents wondered if Snape is going to fall in love. (JKR laughs) Who on earth would want Snape in love with them? That's a very horrible idea. There's an important kind of redemptive pattern to Snape He, um, there's so much I wish I could say to you, and I can't because it would ruin. I promise you, whoever asked that question, can I just say to you that I'm slightly stunned that you've said that and you'll find out why I'm so stunned if you read Book 7. That's all I'm going to say. Hope that helps, A. Goldfeesh (to quote Greywolf- by the way Greywolf- welcome back!) (who felt like the time turner was in use seeing the names of Eloise, Tabouli, Amanda, and then that of Pidgeon37 and Cindy- by accidently hitting "next" on Tabouli's post.) From tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr Thu Aug 26 13:13:07 2004 From: tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr (totorivers) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 13:13:07 -0000 Subject: Hermione acting out-of-character In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111295 Jekatiska: > It's not out of character, though. Remember what she said about > Firenze being the new divination teacher: "I don't really like > horses" and "he still has four legs". Hermione doesn't understand > centaurs - or even house-elves for that matter. She's brilliant > when it comes to human behaviour, spells, and book knowledge. But > - maybe because of her muggle background - she doesn't understand > other magical creatures. > > Hermione's blunder is actually quite revealing. It shows her > Spew-idealist character in quite a different light. She sees > house-elves as something to be helped, but doesn't understand the > way they think, and goes on helping them completely the wrong way. > She fails to understand their way of thinking because it's in > conflict with her own. So she hears what they say - both the > house-elves and the centaurs - but doesn't understand what they > really mean. I think you may have something there, but you are also missing a few important details. First, Hermione identifies herself with the centaur and the house elf, so she naturally think their common points are more important than in reality. She identifies herself with them as a result of being muggle-born: like Ron doesn't try to feel for magical being, whether they are house elf or something else, Ron or other wizards, even "nice one", do not understand her, and ridicule her, which may be a drive for her so-called perfectionism and "bossiness". So Hermione may have convinced herself that she was naturally the centaur's allies, and that they would have understood her, while the centaur put all the wizard in the same bag. Second, Hermione is under severe stress. She just had her best friend being menaced with the cruicatus curse, and maybe more. I don't think she was really thinking at that point, and this stress may have come out as being short and unconsiderate. The same happens with spew in a way, she is *angry* at wizards when she does that, and it is almost as much against pure blood than for house elf...I think. Plus, she didn't have the time to really think things through, and her emotions in the matter were not helping. "totorivers" From silmariel at telefonica.net Wed Aug 25 14:57:59 2004 From: silmariel at telefonica.net (silmariel) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 16:57:59 +0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200408251657.59596.silmariel@telefonica.net> No: HPFGUIDX 111296 Kneasy: > Ignore the blandishments, dismiss the cajolery, spurn the spurious > and ask yourself one question.Can you really and truly see Snape > composing poetry and penning touching little billets-doux in the > watches of the night? > Neither can I. Carolyn: > (giggling helplessly at this new tirade) > Ok, you've contradicted yourself. How come you reckon that he's > dedicated his life to revenging the death of his wife and child? If > he ain't the type to send billets-doux to the lovely Lily (and I SO > agree!), can you really see him wooing anyone else? Mmm there are so many ways of loving and expressing love. I can't imagine Snape writing fluffy poetry, but this summer I found on my familie's summer house a diary recollecting poetry dated near 1900 by one of my male ancestors. The poems were about his recently lost child and they were not fllufy at all, and I can see Snape writing some of the sort. IMO kneasy has not contradicted himself. I also detest the idea of a babbling Snape in love, but that doesn't prevent marriage. A family can grow out of many things, respect and admiration, a sense of belonging and undestanding between the parts. It's is not out of the bounds that Snape found one person that made him feel at home. Not passion from storybooks, not loosing the mind for a woman, but a carefully constructed friendship developing into a bound that is worth a revenge? I can see that happening. > Granted, some major incident prompted this decision on > tactics, something that made him plenty mad and was probably a > betrayal of some sort, but of the heart? No, please, no. I'd prefer him touched at that level, I find ok an attitude of 'love has had such a personal cost that it will be an stupid error to repeat and I'm not stupid, so shipping is out of the question forever'. But I expect there's more in his past than his family affairs. He's an ex-DE. I suppose I over simplify here, but to me that means he's been an active terrorist and I can expect him having done with his on hands the work of one of them, and that has to count also. > Can't believe this is a SHIPPING discussion with Kneasy.. I can't either... but I couldn't resist. Carolina From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Aug 26 15:00:28 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 15:00:28 -0000 Subject: Percy's Letter (Was: Is Percy a spy?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111297 > Potioncat: > > The other thing is, he may not be a spy for the Order, but just > > for Dumbledore...in the same sense that Snape wasn't a member of > > the Order in the first war, but worked for DD. > Totorivers: > Ahem, how do you know that about Dumbledore and Snape? snipping a bunch of good points Potioncat: We know that DD vouched for Snape saying that Snape had provided service at risk to himself. We also know that certain members of the Order did not know that Snape had been a DE nor that Snape had served DD prior to LV's fall. I'm basing that on the GoF Pensieve scene. And several discussions between Black-Lupin-Harry. Though I'm not sure of which books. As to your points about Percy, I'll take a closer look at him. I'm in GoF now. Potioncat From porcupine88 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 14:38:12 2004 From: porcupine88 at yahoo.com (brandy) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 14:38:12 -0000 Subject: Percy's Letter (Was: Is Percy a spy?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111298 Potioncat: > If Hermione had sent Ron a note saying what a delightful woman > Umbridge was, Ron would know she didn't mean it, and would > understand to read carefully. It could be that Percy expected Ron > to see through some of these comments as well. That is one point - he seems pretty oblivious to others' opinions of him, so he may not realize at all that this is exactly the kind of thing Ron might expect to hear from him. -Brandy From porcupine88 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 14:50:13 2004 From: porcupine88 at yahoo.com (brandy) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 14:50:13 -0000 Subject: Can you Apparate Within Hogwarts?(Was Disapparation inside Hogwarts?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111299 Pat: > You've brought up something that has always bothered me. Dobby > comes and goes, which I always took for apparition and disapparition- > -I hadn't thought about him walking into the grounds first. I just > attributed his ability to do that to the strong magic that house > elves have and about which we know very little. I always assumed that this was something other than "apparition" - "apparition" seems to be a specific spell that wizards do, while I thought of what house elves do as possibly something natural that is just one of their inborn modes of transportation. It just happens to look like apparating, but they work in different ways. That's the only way I can explain how Dobby seems to be able to apparate all over the place. Also, as for whether or not you can REALLY apparate - I think that if you could, Dumbledore would have used it to escape from his office rather than having to rely on Fawkes to transport him. If anyone at all can apparate on the Hogwarts grounds, it would be Dumbledore. ...Right? > One would think that if they really wanted to protect outsiders from > entering Hogwarts secretly, they would not allow people to pop into > a fire via floo powder either. I forget if this discussion was here or on another board... But someone pointed out that when Harry was desperate to get to London, he could have flooed to Grimmauld Place, and checked for Sirius at the same time as placing him closer to the MoM. It's possible that the reason he didn't do this is b/c you can't use floo powder for transportation in and out of Hogwarts, only for communication, like a telephone line. Perhaps it doesn't allow more than your head to go through, or something. If you could floo in and out, it would have posed a major security problem in PoA at the very least. I'm just not sure why they don't make as big a deal out of not being able to floo as they do of not being able to apparate. -Brandy From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 26 15:22:56 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 15:22:56 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111300 totorivers [responding to Potioncat]: > I also wonder where you took the basis for calling Sevvie > intelligent or anything like that. Sevvie is broken, he wanted to > be the best but couldn't. He isn't some deep character, we can see > through the books that when it comes to it, he is unable to make > the right decision when it comes to Harry being right about > something, nor about Sirius and so on. From cannon, James is known > to not only bother Sevvie but loads of Slytherin: there is no > rivalry in James part, except he is said to hate the dark arts. He > is also *helped* along the way by Sirius, who hates Snape for being > what he could have been... SSSusan: I couldn't disagree with this more. Snape isn't a deep character? May I ask where you get that from canon? And Potioncat gets that Snape's intelligent from canon the same way many others have: he's a potions *master*; he can successfully brew the Wolfsbane Potion; he clearly knows the intricacies of his subject matter extremely well. I must have missed the bit where canon showed us James bothered "loads" of Slytherins. I recall hearing that Snape was part of a "gang of Slytherins" but I don't recall hearing that James pestered loads of Slytherins. Can you show me where I missed this? I also don't understand what you mean about Sirius hating Snape "for being what he could have been". Does the 'he' in that sentence refer to Sirius or to Snape? If Sirius, I really don't get it.... Siriusly Snapey Susan (earlier): > > Kneasy has stated many times his belief that Snape's motivation > > is NOT a belief in good over evil, nor anything, really, besides > > his own personal agenda, likely a desire for personal revenge. I > > don't go quite that far. I think DD *wouldn't* trust Snape if > > that's all there were to it...and I don't think DD is unable to > > judge Snape's true motivations. I think DD knows pretty much the > > full story, whatever it is. > > > > SO WHAT IS IT?!? totorivers replied: > Ok, that's just an hunch, and one most of you won't like: Maybe > Severus realised that in Voldemort's world, only Voldemort had any > power, and that the others were just crucio recipients. Or maybe > Snape realised he would just stay an underdog in the DE, and > couldn't accept it. That goes well with his temperament: no > epiphany, just the realisation that being a DE, even if he does > something that makes him number two, won't make him more powerful > or anything, for the simple reason Voldemort allows no one exept > himself to have power. > > And as for DD trusting him as a spy....I don't think DD does. I > don't even think DD cares for Severus as a spy, he just doesn't > want Severus to kill people for fun, and using him that way can be > a way to keep a leash on Snape. SSSusan: I don't have an objection per se with the possibility you've set out in the first paragraph here--that there was no epiphany but that Snape figured out he'd never gain power while w/ Voldy and didn't care for that fact--but I don't see how that translates into DD **accepting Snape back**. If it is all just about Snape going w/ the person with whom he thought he'd gain most power, then why work with DD? DD holds him in check; DD's not into gaining power for power's sake. Wouldn't this frustrate Snape, too, and tempt him to either go back to Voldy or set out on his own? More importantly, for me, is this: "I trust Severus Snape." DD says this more than once. Note it's not said as, "I trust Severus Snape *as a spy*" or "I trust Severus Snape, but not enough to let him be a spy," but simply "I trust Severus Snape." Would DD trust him so implicitly if he were just a power-hungry, switch-sides-willy-nilly kind of guy? I disagree wholeheartedly with your belief that DD doesn't care about Snape and just doesn't want him to kill people for fun. I don't think DD is stupid enough to believe that just having Snape as a member of the Hogwarts staff would be effective in stopping him--or anyone--if he was still inclined to engage in such activities. Why does DD give him that important task at the end of GoF? Why has Snape been given important Order business in OotP? Why did DD entrust Snape w/ Occlumency lessons? Because he trusts Severus Snape! And in my opinion, he would not trust him if he believed it was all about power for Snape. Nor would he ask him to complete such important tasks if he was merely trying to keep him on a short leash. [Occlumency turned into a failure, but not because DD didn't trust Snape, but because *in* his trust, he forgot about a weakness in Severus.] I would never buy that DD is too stupid to see through a "Snape front" such as this nor that he would allow Snape to stick around if he didn't truly believe he had changed. No, I think he is giving him a safe haven at Hogwarts *and* trusting him to keep his word [whatever it was!] and his loyalty to DD/against Voldy. Siriusly Snapey Susan From ryokas at hotmail.com Thu Aug 26 15:36:47 2004 From: ryokas at hotmail.com (kizor0) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 15:36:47 -0000 Subject: What drives You Know Who? [Non-sequitur] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111301 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "andreoe" wrote: > Dungrollin: > > 'Voldemort' is French (vol de mort) and can be translated as 'flight > > of/from death' (though there may be other ways). > > Another way is 'Steal of Death.' > > "andreoe" While we certainly can't rule out anything, what with dealing with JKR here and all, the 'flight' translation seems more fitting, plus it matches with the names-as-adjectives thing we've seen very much of. Perhaps we could get a native French speaker to elaborate on this. 'Steal' seems rather nonsensical to me. How would you go about it? [Cut to the Death Room in the Department of Mysteries] Voiceover: Favourite targets for the Death Eaters are Black Veils. [A group of Death Eaters runs onscreen from the right, grabs the corners of the stone arch, lifts it and runs away with it] - Kizor, who's sincerely sorry for the bad Python reference From theadimail at yahoo.co.in Thu Aug 26 15:45:59 2004 From: theadimail at yahoo.co.in (theadimail) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 15:45:59 -0000 Subject: HBP Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111302 Hi all, Any chance that the HBP guy and the new minister of magic are one and the same person?What say you. bye Adi From porcupine88 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 15:05:05 2004 From: porcupine88 at yahoo.com (brandy) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 15:05:05 -0000 Subject: Severus Snape: The grudge and the very long LOLLIPOPS biography... In-Reply-To: <001b01c16616$1e477e00$ed90aecb@price> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111303 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tabouli" wrote: > As captain of LOLLIPOPS I have to step in here. *snipping big long thing obviously written before OoP* Personally, I am a fan of thinking that Snape had a big thing for Lily, though I'm not sure how much it had to do with his going over to/coming back from the dark side. I do think that it is a big factor in his hatred of Harry, though. As someone else pointed out, Lily didn't like James much til seventh year. The other thing that bothers me is Snape's reaction to Lily chewing out James. He doesn't just say he doesn't need her help, he doesn't just snap at her, he flat-out calls her a mudblood. I know that Snape is no master of social graces, but I just can't fathom why he goes so far to offend her after she helps him. I know his pride has been wounded, but it seems like he should have just snapped at her and stalked off, then maybe after he thought better of it apologized in private. But instead he flips out and calls her the dirtiest name in the WW. How can we reconcile that with the idea of him having a crush on her? Or maybe the crush didn't start until after this event, when he realized that she was the only person being nice to him? -Brandy From oxladygxo at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 15:29:55 2004 From: oxladygxo at yahoo.com (Ranee) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 15:29:55 -0000 Subject: Umbridge and the Dementors ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111304 uath50: Did anyone find it strange that Umbridge was not sent to prison for sending the dementors after Harry? I thought that maybe she should have at least lost her job at the MOM or sent to Azkaban. Geoff: Interesting question is: who knows that she sent them? This is one of those snippets of information which may come out of the woodwork to trouble the dear lady in the future.... Pat wrote: delete It does seem likely that Hermione, at least, would think to tell someone what they heard Umbridge say. Potioncat: Well, we have the same situation as we did when the Trio knew Black was innocent. Who will believe them? It's unlikely the Slytherins would support Hermione's story. This is my first post so I hope I'm doing this right. :) It wasn't until this topic came up that I thought about Umbridge and her punishment. I would think that being taken by the Centaurs is more than enough punishment. In the hospital wing, she appears to be visibly and mentally disturbed. As for exposing Umbridge for sending the Dementors after Harry, I have to agree with Potioncat that no one will believe them besides maybe Dumbledore and the Order. The MOM will be bombarded with messages and problems dealing with Voldemort so at this point, I don't think Umbridge would be a priority. I don't think Hermione would even try to tell someone like Fudge or a Ministry member who's not an Order member because she knows they wouldn't believe a teenage student. Instead, she may use that information to her advantage. Just think of what she did with Rita. ~Ranee (also known as Lady G and oxLadyGxo on other websites and forums) From rhinobabies at hotmail.com Thu Aug 26 15:59:00 2004 From: rhinobabies at hotmail.com (coderaspberry77) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 15:59:00 -0000 Subject: What drives You Know Who? [Non-sequitur] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111305 > Perhaps we could get a native French speaker to elaborate on this. > 'Steal' seems rather nonsensical to me. How would you go about it? > > [Cut to the Death Room in the Department of Mysteries] > > Voiceover: Favourite targets for the Death Eaters are Black Veils. > > [A group of Death Eaters runs onscreen from the right, grabs the > corners of the stone arch, lifts it and runs away with it] > > - Kizor, who's sincerely sorry for the bad Python reference Heh - I'm not sorry for the reference at all. It amused me. As for the "stealing" part, I thought about this in passing awhile ago, as well, and while I'm certainly not a native French speaker, I live in a bilingual province, so I'm not TOTALLY unaware. Anyway, my thought was that it might be more of a stealing FROM death type of thing - not a literal translation - and that could very much apply. Voldemort, by seeking immortality, is basically "stealing from death" - that is to say, cheating it. To have him flee from death makes him less, I don't know, impressive or something. coderaspberry, who is waiting for someone who actually KNOWS French to come along and make his silly musings look pedestrian From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Thu Aug 26 16:08:27 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 16:08:27 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's Quest for Immortality (What Drives You Know Who) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111306 >>> Me before: I would say his motivation is even more simple: POWER > (1) be almighty powerful, so no one will think of desert him like > his father once did > (2) eliminate anything/anyone that stands in his path to power > (3) enjoy the power as long as possible, hence quest for immortality > >>> Dungrollin replied: Absolutely ? didn't mention it because I thought it kind of went without saying. <<< Bren now: Well, yes of course. But my point was that Voldemort's greatest ambition was POWER and everything else (purity of blood, Harry, immortality...) came from it. IMO those are merely different means to achieve power, not necessarily his motivations. >>> Dungrollin: > Why does he choose the name Voldemort while he's still at school? > > If he has no thoughts of immortality, but is just being the heir of > Slytherin and hating mudbloods, then it's a happy coincidence that > the name goes so well with his later `goal ? to conquer death.' Brenda: Well I have no idea how he chose his 'screen name', but it could have been as *simple* as this: Tom Marvolo Riddle: 'OK, so I want a new terrifying name. Will include "Lord" 'cause I wanna be almighty powerful.' LORD ... [t,m,m,a,v,o,o,r,i,d,l,e] After many tries to arrange the leftovers, he says: 'How about "I am Lord..." ??' I AM LORD ... [t,m,v,o,o,r,d,l,e] I won't be surprised if he searched for cool and frightening sounds in the library. Heck, if I wanted a new name for my future Evil Overlord regime I would! I have no clue whether he chose Voldemort for its meaning, or he just thought it sounded foreign and scary. Maybe he taught himself French from the library, maybe not. Who knows. Hermione is familiar with French but she also went to France for vacation. Tom Riddle didn't have that money... > Sure, but if he's getting people onside by reviving > Pure-Bloodism, > why name the group `Death Eaters'? Why not something more in- > keeping with the purity-of-blood-obsessed followers of the Heir of > Slytherin? > > I suspect that the immortality-quest is a much greater part of the > story than we have so far seen, and plus JKR's hint that we should > be wondering what he did to make sure he didn't die adds up to Hmm, that is a good point. There's also that "Morsmordre" for casting Dark Mark onto sky, which roughly means 'Death to bite/eat' according to Lexicon. Why "Death Eaters" indeed. Why not "Blood Purifiers" or "Mud Purgers"?? Voldemort is afraid of death, everyone knows that. Perhaps this is the unresolved trauma as a result of his mother's death? He wouldn't have been at the orphanage if she was alive (or so he/we assume). Also it could be that he viewed immortality as the symbol of greatest power. After all, who is more powerful than someone who can dodge bullets... I mean Avada Kedavra? You will never lose in a battle. Or here is an out-there thought that features coward!Voldy... Perhaps Voldy is afraid of what comes after death. The "next great adventure for those who are ready"... it could be something utterly frightening and destructive for Voldemort. Thus he desperately attempts to never arrive there. Just my two cents. Brenda From cruthw at earthlink.net Thu Aug 26 16:10:39 2004 From: cruthw at earthlink.net (caspenzoe) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 16:10:39 -0000 Subject: harry is tom riddle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111307 > I don't understand why it's strange to you that Harry lived - that's > been explained. "Why didn't DD kill LV in the DoM" has also been > explained from DD's own lips. And it makes sense: Dumbledore knows > there is only one that can destroy LV - Harry. > > Jim Ferer, who believes that LV is not naturally "alive" anyway, his > existence sustained only by magic. Sorry to nitpick, but one of us has missed something here (or JKR has - and I think that's least likely). In her recent Edinburgh appearance, JKR specifically stated that one of the questions fans have not asked her, but should have, is "Why didn't DD kill LV in the DoM." Why should fans have asked her this question if she's already truly answered it via DD? Apparently, she at least, is under the impression that any explanation was given by DD was incomplete or inadequate. Although I remember DD stating that VM had possessed Harry in the MOM in hopes that DD would sacrifice Harry in an attempt to kill him, I don't recall that he actually directly explained why he didn't attempt to kill VM either during his possession of Harry, or otherwise, to Harry, at all. I don't think Moldievort is fully alive either, however. In fact, I'm beginning to suspect that part of the point JKR is making in her books is that real evil is only as alive as we allow it to live in us. Caspen From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 16:45:53 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 09:45:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione acting out-of-character In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040826164553.18385.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111308 --- brandy wrote: > I mean, such a HUGE deal had just been made, with her present, > about the centaurs not being there to serve humans, etc etc. She > had obviously been paying attention, > since she knew enough to know that they'd go after Umbridge but not > her and Harry. > And yet, she uncharacteristically opens her mouth, says something > stupid, and magically has to be rescued by Grawp. > Anyone have an explanation for this? > > -Brandy I don't think it's out of character for Hermione; there are lots of instances in the books where she should have thought before opening her mouth. The only difference is that the encounter with the centaurs is more important than the other instances so we remember it more clearly. Just as examples in OOTP alone: wishing she could see thestrals and being horrified at Harry's cold response; hearing that Hargrid and Madame Olympe were in Dijon and getting ready to compare tourist accounts; trying to cheer Ron up when he says practice was lousy and he flares up and demands to know why she thought he was the one who made it lousy; and the other big one, asking Harry tactlessly whether he didn't have a "saving people thing" thus making him angry and assuring that he won't listen to her objections about saving Sirius from apparent torture. Magda ( who still thinks Hermione's great but winces sometimes) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Aug 26 16:48:39 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 16:48:39 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111309 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "carolynwhite2" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" > wrote: > > Ignore the blandishments, dismiss the cajolery, spurn the spurious > > and ask yourself one question.Can you really and truly see Snape > > composing poetry and penning touching little billets-doux in the > > watches of the night? > > Neither can I. > > > > Kneasy > > Carolyn > (giggling helplessly at this new tirade) > Ok, you've contradicted yourself. How come you reckon that he's > dedicated his life to revenging the death of his wife and child? If > he ain't the type to send billets-doux to the lovely Lily (and I SO > agree!), can you really see him wooing anyone else? Screwed up > bunches of belladonna and brambles, accompanied by exclusive bottles > of eau-de-toad? > Kneasy: Wooing? Snape wooing? Not likely. A touch of the old slap and tickle maybe; in fact that's why I paired him up with Florence - heavy breathing behind the greenhouses; adolescent ardour overcoming parental strictures; premature nuptials and well, these little accidents can happen even in the best regulated of families. Bertha was spying on them of course - no wonder she got hexed. There are times when the last thing you want is an unwelcome spectator. Not much romance in that sad affair. But still, Snape would consider his family to be his business and would not brook interference by outsiders. He may not be a perfect model of a family man but he'd be extremely territorial in his attitudes. And if Voldy or any DE acting on Voldy's orders zapped his wife and child he'd go ballistic. A Venetian vendetta with skull-duggery, betrayal and knives in the back would be a picnic by comparison. His pride would demand that accounts must be balanced. Think Titus Andronicus - death and destruction, blood and guts everywhere - now there's a revenge to savour. A bit over the top for Harry Potter but with luck we may finish the series with a similar reduction in the head count. Won't that be fun? From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Aug 26 17:48:29 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 17:48:29 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111310 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote:. > But the rest of you - stand firm. > Ignore the blandishments, dismiss the cajolery, spurn the spurious and ask yourself one question.Can you really and truly see Snape composing poetry and penning touching little billets-doux in the watches of the night? Neither can I.< I quote, "the beauty of the softly simmering cauldron with its shimmering fumes, the delicate power of liquids that creep through human veins, bewitching the minds, ensnaring the senses... and that perfect little haiku I can teach you how to bottle fame, brew glory, even stopper death Why, the man even casts a logic puzzle into verse. Or do you think somebody else writes his material? ? Now I agree that JKR is not a romantic writer. She writes as one who has found romance works better as the goal of personal transformation than the means. Ergo, I don't believe that Snape's love for Lily was the reason he joined the Death Eaters or the reason he left them. I do think that unresolved feelings about Lily are part of what makes it so difficult for him to let go of his hatred for Harry and James. Pippin From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 17:54:42 2004 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 17:54:42 -0000 Subject: The graves of James and Lily In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111311 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > SSSusan wrote: > > Seriously, with all H/R/H's wanderings, I do understand what > you're saying about its being unlikely that they've not stumbled > across this...but given that the Hogwarts graveyard has never been > mentioned by anyone in 5 books, maybe it's tucked away somewhere on > the edge of the grounds? > > > > Potioncat: > The other possibility is that Cuaron was sincere, but mistaken. JKR > may have been talking about the graveyard in GoF. She may have > thought it would be confusing to have two graveyards..particularly > given how compressed the story becomes in the movies. > > I've seen the interview with Cuaron, but has anyone ever read a > comment from JKR on this? > > Nitpicking Potioncat Antosha: It seems entirely possible that there *would* be a graveyard, either at Hogwarts or in Hogsmeade. So I say we take Mr. Cuaron at his word. Why wouldn't HRH have stumbled across it? Well, there might be spells protecting the graveyard--since wizards' remains would seem to be a potential source of great Dark Magic. Alternatively, the location could be somewhere protected--a courtyard with no doors or windows, say. There was some discussion of this a few months back, but (curse yahoo's search function!) I can't seem to find it. As for Harry not asking where they are--or much of anything else--remember that rule #1 of the house in which he lived from age one to age eleven was "Don't ask questions"! Antosha, who believes a visit to the graves of Lily and James will prove both a major plot point and a major psychological turning point for Harry in the up-coming books.... From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Thu Aug 26 18:02:20 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 18:02:20 -0000 Subject: PERCY: DD's Personal Spy or Ministry's Puppet? (Long) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111313 I have been (somewhat) trailing this thread with great interest and surprise. Mainly because it never occurred to me. I read Kim's interpretation of Percy's letter (Post 111068), Carolina's version (Post 80213) and Del's explanation (Post 69029) -- which were all very insightful and took me by great surprise. The thing that struck me during my first-time OoP reading was how ridiculously LONG Percy's letter was. Why bother? Ron never really listened to Percy, and now that he left the family there is even less chance. So why? I wanted to divide (what I think are) Pros and Cons of Percy being DD's personal spy, and why the letter was a means to send secret message. PERCY: [DD's Personal Spy] or [Ministry's Puppet]? ---------------------------------------------------------------- [Percy is the Spy] (1) How would a smart lad trust Fudge over Dumbledore? -- Yes, Percy seems to worship whoever is his boss at any given time. So when he was at Hogwarts, the Headmaster. As Crouch's assistant his loyalty was to Crouch. Then to Fudge. I perfectly understand his admiration of Crouch; Crouch was strict, competent, respected, charismatic and hard-working. But why Fudge? Percy should know that Dumbledore was once supported by many in WW to become the MoM. Fudge asked DD for guidance in his early days of MoM. DD is widely known as the greatest wizard, Percy says so himself to Harry. Percy should know that DD is far more powerful and competent than Fudge. So why would the smart, ambitious youngster like Percy would want to lose respect from the greatest wizard of his times? (2) The letter is ridiculously long: -- Perhaps Percy wanted to show off his writing to Ron, perhaps he was confident that once he explained himself and ranted fully, Ron would change his mind. Who knows. Then in Post 69029, Del said something that clarified this (to me at least): >> Del: I read a magazine about coding secret messages the other day. > And yesterday, while I was re-reading Percy's letter to Ron, > it struck me hard: this letter feels fake. It feels to me like > Percy is desperately trying to say something to Ron. <<< If it was indeed coded message to the trio, Percy would know how. Which leads me to next convincing point-- (3) The letter was sent to Ron at night, not during breakfast: -- IIRC Percy's letter arrived on the same night as Sirius' common room visit via Fireplace? So it would indicate that Harry's owl was already being intercepted. Why would a Ministry official, who has nothing to hide up in his sleeves, send a Umbridge-favor letter at night, secretly, to the dormitary? If Umbridge saw the letter she would be highly delighted, Percy might even get a raise! So why all the praise and unnecessary repetition/emphasis on "Ministry is good and holy, DD is nuts?" UNLESS he did this *in case of* emergency. He wanted to overgloat the Ministry to get himself out of tight holes. He also knows once Ron reads it, so will Harry and Hermione. Hermione and Percy always got along very well, which implies he regards her as his intellectual equal. I believe this letter was meant for Ron to read, but for Hermione to understand. "Congrats on Being the Prefect" excuse is just... corny, hehe. Too bad we don't see Hermione's reaction to the letter, just that she was "looking at Ron with an odd expression on her face". I always found this curious, why so calm? She certainly burst in outrage on numerous occasions before when their classmates attacked Harry! (4) Over-displayed Attack on Harry: -- Percy must be a true dung if he really thought he could persuade Ron by attacking Harry. They are best friends! Ron must've talked all about their exciting adventures at Hogwarts to the whole family during summer (for 4 years now!). Percy should know better, about the obstacles Harry & co went through, and generally just how deeply involved they were in various secrets and conspiracies of WW. Harry is after all, the Boy-Who-Lived, the only one to survive AK (besides VM) and defied him on several incidents. Harry is clearly much more powerful than Fudge or Umbridge, Percy should know at least that bit. Unless he was tipping Harry off with what the Ministry and Daily Prophet think of Harry, that it only got worse. (5) How does Percy know about Podmore? -- Yes, how the heck DOES he know? The Order is a *secret* organization, how did Percy know that Podmore, DD, and his parents were associated together? Alright, that should pretty much sum it up. Now to the downside... ---------------------------------------------------------------- [Percy is the Silly Ministry Puppet] (1) Percy loves the Ministry: -- Haha, where should I start? Well, he looked vividly jealous when Fudge talked to Harry very casually in PoA. He loves everything about the Ministry, he thinks the Ministry can do nothing wrong, as observed in many occasions throughout GoF and OoP... (2) Percy is very Arrogant: -- Both Carolina and Del have mentioned this point: >>> Carolina in Post 80213: > ..."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. <<< While I can see how this can be interpreted this way, I can't buy it. Percy is supreme in his arrogance: he can't get enough of himself! Proud, very proud. Throughout the whole series he almost seems unaware and oblivious to Ron's dislike for Percy's 'highway promotion' (sorry, can't think of better words!) I think he truly believes that everyone must strive to follow his footsteps. He also knows Fred and George don't like it and they made fun of him constantly. Why the sudden change of attitude? This is very stereotypical of Percy: "Yes, finally my little brother taking my route! I am the 'next big thing' and so good for you." Unless one would like to argue this was all in act and disguise. That's a bit too much stretch for me. (3) What good is warning in only few hours in advance? -- Brandy raised this very good point in Post 111262: >>> But on the other hand, why warn them the night before? What good could it possibly do them to know twelve hours in advance? <<< (4) Why don't Molly and Arthur know? -- What could be so important that even his own parents must be kept in dark? While their hearts have been broken and deeply scarred? So that they could keep Percy's cover? I don't know, I think that's too much to ask, especially when their 2 sons are in the Order as well. It is a heavily demanding, life-threatening position to be in, and to let them deal with emotional damage and betrayal from their own flesh and blood... that is very cruel and inefficient. Wouldn't it rather slow them down with the responsibilities as the Order member? If my son was working very deep undercover, it would greatly motivate me to perform my duties much better, to keep him safe at all cost. (5) What about Dumbledore escaping in front of Fudge and Percy? -- I was waiting for *someone* to explain this, but so far nothing, so I'm raising this point. At the mini-trial of DD in his office after DA was discovered, Percy seemed besides himself. He was quite hyper being the secretary of the hearing, and utterly disappointed and upset when DD escapes. > Potioncat: > > The other thing is, he may not be a spy for the Order, but just > > for Dumbledore...in the same sense that Snape wasn't a member of > > the Order in the first war, but worked for DD. So are you saying that Percy might have helped DD with his escape?? (6) So *everyone* in Potterverse is either Spy or Death Eater? -- I like the idea of Percy, the immature and stubborn youngster, being totally misguided by propaganda. Fooled by the Ministry and used as the political manipulation victim, right under his nose. It is more realistic that way: that some people are genuinely misled and fooled, others fight in war or cause the war. Just because we *want* certain characters to behave the way we want (be good or evil but really just in disguise) it doesn't mean they are, or should be. I personally don't want everyone to be either spies, or the Order members, or the Death Eaters, or the former DEs. That's too boring, no? ---------------------------------------------------------------- Whew, that's as far as I can think of. I just wanted your feedbacks, criticism, explanation, you name it. With HPness, Brenda From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Aug 26 19:19:30 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 19:19:30 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past (for the record) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111314 > totorivers [responding to Potioncat]: > > I also wonder where you took the basis for calling Sevvie > > intelligent or anything like that. snip > SSSusan: > I couldn't disagree with this more. Snape isn't a deep character? > May I ask where you get that from canon? And Potioncat gets that > Snape's intelligent from canon the same way many others have: he's a > potions *master*; he can successfully brew the Wolfsbane Potion; he > clearly knows the intricacies of his subject matter extremely well. > > Potioncat :-) Uh, for the record, although Totorivers was responding to my post, I'm not the one who said Severus Snape was intelligent. I do of course, agree that he is intelligent. I went up-thread several posts to see if I could find the correct individual, but couldn't. However, except for one recent humorous reference, I would not unless under Imperio call Professor Snape, "Sevvie". Potioncat :-) From aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 19:20:16 2004 From: aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com (aboutthe1910s) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 19:20:16 -0000 Subject: Severus Snape: The grudge and the very long LOLLIPOPS biography... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111315 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "brandy" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tabouli" wrote: snip But instead he flips out and > calls her the dirtiest name in the WW. How can we reconcile that with the idea of him > having a crush on her? Or maybe the crush didn't start until after this event, when he > realized that she was the only person being nice to him? > > -Brandy I've often wondered if his reaction to Lily isn't what made that memory Snape's *worst* (assuming that the chapter is objectively titled by Jo, instead of according to Harry's assumtion, which it may or may not have been, though it seems unlikely to have been Harry's assumption because Harry doesn't ever really make that assumption in the chapter) rather than what James did to him. I sincerely believe that he must have known he had no chance with her anyway, but I've considered the possibility that he blames himself for saying what he said to her that day for ruining the chance that he has, in hindsight, created for himself. aboutthe1910s From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Thu Aug 26 19:39:17 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 19:39:17 -0000 Subject: The graves of James and Lily In-Reply-To: <4A532144-F6B5-11D8-8B32-0003930C168E@qwest.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111316 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steven Spencer" wrote: > I remember during the filming of PoA, I had heard or read that > Curan (sp?) wanted to put a graveyard into the movie on the school > grounds > and that JKR nixed that, citing a specific place on the grounds where > there *is* a graveyard and that it will come into play in a later book. > I've wondered since then if perhaps the elder Potter's graves are > there. A link that includes that comment is http://www.hpana.com/news.18145.html BTW, the quote specifically states that JKR said that this graveyard was to play an important part in book 6. Also, that it is near a different wing of the castle from the Hermione-Malfoy slap/punch scene. Josh From beelissa at nycap.rr.com Thu Aug 26 20:57:41 2004 From: beelissa at nycap.rr.com (Melissa Worcester) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 16:57:41 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The graves of James and Lily References: Message-ID: <007701c48baf$53b9a6f0$6466a8c0@CPQ21816182602> No: HPFGUIDX 111317 Josh Warren wrote: >A link that includes that comment is >http://www.hpana.com/news.18145.html >BTW, the quote specifically states that JKR said that this graveyard >was to play an important part in book 6. Also, that it is near a >different wing of the castle from the Hermione-Malfoy slap/punch >scene. Thanks for the link. I have a theory, but it involves having to assume Cuaron got the details a bit wrong. My idea is that there is a graveyard in the wizarding world, but that it's not exactly at Hogwarts. Other than Hogsmeade, and Diagon Alley, there aren't other locations shown in PoA, so maybe Cuaron just understood that the graveyard wasn't on the spot of the grounds where he wanted to put it, but later, in the interview, didn't remember exactly where she said it would be so he added details of his own? It does seem hard to believe that Harry's parents could be buried right on the grounds of Hogwarts and have been there all this time and he's never seen it. I sure hope she explains that, if she does intend for the graveyard to be at Hogwarts. BTW, I also have an explanation for why Harry doesn't ask questions. It's in, I think, the 2nd chapter of PS/SS -- the chapter where we first meet Harry as an almost 11 year old. Something to the effect that "Don't ask questions" is the first rule for a peaceful life with the Dursleys. Petunia is even shown reacting negatively to Harry asking about the pot of clothes she's dying on the stove, a question that doesn't have to do with magic/Harry's past/parents, any taboo topic that I can think of. My idea is that Petunia continually drummed that into Harry, as he was growing up. And now that we have a hint that Petunia might have some latent magical ability, I wouldn't be surprised if she unwittingly used some form of magic to back up her insistence that he not ask questions, and that it's carried over into his personality. Melissa From MadameSSnape at aol.com Thu Aug 26 22:29:06 2004 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 18:29:06 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Umbridge and the Dementors ? Message-ID: <76.401dac55.2e5fbe32@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111318 In a message dated 8/26/2004 12:23:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time, oxladygxo at yahoo.com writes: It wasn't until this topic came up that I thought about Umbridge and her punishment. I would think that being taken by the Centaurs is more than enough punishment. In the hospital wing, she appears to be visibly and mentally disturbed. ================== Sherrie here: Hmmm...in Greek mythology - whence springs the noble centaur - there is no such thing as a female centaur. Centaurs reproduced by kidnapping human women... Given Umbridge's feelings about half-breeds, couldn't think of a worse punishment for her (at least, from HER point of view). Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 22:39:58 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 22:39:58 -0000 Subject: The graves of James and Lily In-Reply-To: <007701c48baf$53b9a6f0$6466a8c0@CPQ21816182602> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111319 Melissa wrote: > It does seem hard to believe that Harry's parents could be buried right on > the grounds of Hogwarts and have been there all this time and he's never > seen it. I sure hope she explains that, if she does intend for the graveyard > to be at Hogwarts. Now Cory: I don't think it seems so hard to believe that they could be buried at Hogwarts and Harry might not have found them. If there's a graveyard at Hogwarts, I assume that a lot of wizards are buried there, not just Harry's parents. Think about it -- if there's a big cemetary on the school grounds, why *would* Harry spend a lot of time hanging out there, unless he *knew* that his parents were buried there (which he obviously does not)? If the cemetary is on school grounds, Harry could have walked past it a hundred times and would probably never have given it a second thought. It's not like he's going to go walking through the cemetary examining headstones on the off chance that he knows someone. Until someone tells him that his parents are buried there, he'll have no reason to go there. --Cory From aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 22:40:15 2004 From: aboutthe1910s at yahoo.com (aboutthe1910s) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 22:40:15 -0000 Subject: The graves of James and Lily In-Reply-To: <007701c48baf$53b9a6f0$6466a8c0@CPQ21816182602> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111320 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Melissa Worcester" wrote: > Josh Warren wrote: > > >A link that includes that comment is > >http://www.hpana.com/news.18145.html > > >BTW, the quote specifically states that JKR said that this graveyard > >was to play an important part in book 6. Also, that it is near a > >different wing of the castle from the Hermione-Malfoy slap/punch > >scene. > > Thanks for the link. I have a theory, but it involves having to assume > Cuaron got the details a bit wrong. My idea is that there is a graveyard in > the wizarding world, but that it's not exactly at Hogwarts. > Melissa The thing is, and I've seen it pointed out before, there *is* a small graveyard on the Hogwarts grounds in the... er, forbidden media--I wouldn't bring this up, as I know we aren't supossed to talk about the forbidden media, expect that the fact that Cuaron has specifically mentioned he talking with Jo about a graveyard--which makes me believe that what was shown, even though it was in the background and very subtle, just might be accurate. Anyway, the graveyard is on a little island in the lake off to the side of Harry and Lupin when they are walking through the woods together. And I'm sorry to post on the forbidden media; I won't do it again; I just thought it was really worth bringing up at least. I'm going to go hide now. aboutthe1910s From mauranen at yahoo.com Wed Aug 25 12:48:03 2004 From: mauranen at yahoo.com (mauranen) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 12:48:03 -0000 Subject: Secret Text Behind the Door - SPOILERS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111321 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dudemom_2000" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lavaluvn" > wrote: > > > From: Brenda M. > > > > Spoiler space for speculation... > > > > J > > > > K > > > > R > > > > I > > > > S > > > > T > > > > E > > > > H > > > > A > > > > W > > > > E > > > > S > > > > O > > > > M > > > > E > > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > - > > > SECRET TEXT: > > > (He) looked rather like an old lion. There were streaks of grey > in > > > his mane of tawny hair and his bushy eyebrows; he had keen > > yellowish > > > eyes behind a pair of wire-rimmed spectacles and a certain > rangy, > > > loping grace even though he walked with a slight limp. > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > Andromeda: > > I would have to say it doesn't sound like Lupin at all. Jekatiska: No, definitely not Lupin. Why would it be Lupin? We already know what he looks like, and this sounds like the description of a new character we haven't met before. I somehow got a feeling that this was happening in some quite eerie place, possibly not in Hogwarts, but it could just have been my mood at the time I first read it. Could it be Gryffindor('s heir) in DD's Pensieve? Another preserved memory? Or a real person? > Dudemom_2000: > While McClaggan is a possibility, I am convinced we are seeing the > first real description of Alberforth, Dumbledore's brother....(about > time too!)And I bet he is a Gryffindor! We've already met Aberforth in the Hog's Head, why would she describe him again? Besides, Aberforth smells of goats, and this character is clearly lionish. Which points towards Gryffindor. Jekatiska From eeyore6771 at comcast.net Thu Aug 26 22:55:56 2004 From: eeyore6771 at comcast.net (Pat) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 22:55:56 -0000 Subject: Umbridge and the Centaurs In-Reply-To: <76.401dac55.2e5fbe32@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111322 > Sherrie here: > > Hmmm...in Greek mythology - whence springs the noble centaur - there is no > such thing as a female centaur. Centaurs reproduced by kidnapping human > women... Given Umbridge's feelings about half-breeds, couldn't think of a worse > punishment for her (at least, from HER point of view). > > Sherrie> Pat, laughing at the thought: While it would serve her right, I just can't imagine that JKR would quite go down that path with the story. Maybe implying it is enough- -we may never get a full explanation about what happened to Umbridge. Pat From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Aug 25 19:29:16 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 19:29:16 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111323 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > Alla: > > So, I guess I have to read the original, because right now I am insulted for Baloo, when you compare him with Snape. :o) > > Potioncat: > Understood...they aren't much alike except for the bruising... < Hmm... perhaps you haven't finished that story, Potioncat? ...Kipling spoilers ahead ** ** ** ** ** I think Snape is more like Bagheera. Silky voice, a former captive, bound by a debt, cruel, sarcastic, but a very good person, er, panther, to have on your side in a fight. And not above aiming a few swats at a cub most especially when his pride has been wounded. Pippin From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Aug 26 23:11:56 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 23:11:56 -0000 Subject: Is Peter evil? was Re: Is Percy A Spy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111324 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > Remember a couple of thousand of posts ago, or maybe more, the big > discussion was whether casting Unforgivables did something to the > one who cast them. And along that line, what effect it had on Harry > that he tried to cast one, and what it said about him that he > couldn't. > > Well, obviously Peter knew how to cast an Avada Kedavra, because I > doubt this was the first time. And, assuming you have to want to > kill the person, Peter must be pretty darned evil. It didn't appear > that he was under Imperio at the time. We know he spied for LV, in > the past, I wonder what else he did? > > I'm not arguing that a good or just not-evil person couldn't be > forced to kill someone, but that this type of killing requires > certain skills. Jen: Yeah, except I don't want to think of Lupin & Sirius as evil because they were willing and able to kill Peter in POA! If we use the logic that anyone who is willing to kill another is evil, then in a time of war that would pretty much include everyone. I'm sure Snape is intimately familiar with the AK curse, but I don't think of him as evil either. I guess you could say the Cedric/Peter situation isn't a good analogy because Cedric was completely innocent and no threat to anyone when he was killed. Peter the betrayer was a different case. Even though unarmed (like Cedric), at the time Sirius/Lupin threatened him Peter was a *future* risk if left alive. Still, it bothered me just a little with how comfortable Sirius & Lupin were, casually rolling up their sleeves to off Peter. I know it's naive to think in a time of war people don't take matters into their own hands on occasion. But the war was over!! That was a personal war. It's hard to sort out which characters are truly evil except for Voldemort, and only because JKR has told us he is irredeemably evil! Even about Wormtail she said, "there's always hope, of course." Jen Reese From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 23:40:15 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 23:40:15 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111325 Kneasy rhetorically asked: Can you really and truly see Snape composing poetry and penning touching little billets-doux in the watches of the night? Carolyn helplessly giggled: Ok, you've contradicted yourself. How come you reckon that he's dedicated his life to revenging the death of his wife and child? If he ain't the type to send billets-doux to the lovely Lily (and I SO agree!), can you really see him wooing anyone else? Screwed up bunches of belladonna and brambles, accompanied by exclusive bottles of eau-de-toad? Granted, some major incident prompted this decision on tactics, something that made him plenty mad and was probably a betrayal of some sort, but of the heart? No, please, no. Pippin quoted: "the beauty of the softly simmering cauldron with its shimmering fumes, the delicate power of liquids that creep through human veins, bewitching the minds, ensnaring the senses... and that perfect little haiku I can teach you how to bottle fame, brew glory, even stopper death Why, the man even casts a logic puzzle into verse. Neri now: I don't presume to know if it was a betrayal of the heart, but Like Pippin, I feel the need to quote: OotP, Ch. 24: "Then you will find yourself easy prey for the Dark Lord!" said Snape savagely. "Fools who wear their hearts proudly on their sleeves, who cannot control their emotions, who wallow in sad memories and allow themselves to be provoked so easily ? weak people, in other words ? they stand no chance against his powers!" Sounds quite emotional, isn't it? So who was the fool who wore his heart proudly on his sleeve and paid dearly for it? Was it somebody Snape knew? That he cared about? Or was it young Severus himself? I somehow suspect Severus at 19 wasn't that calculated and cold blooded as Snape at 36, and even the last one is not completely in control of his emotions. Neri From ellyn337 at earthlink.net Fri Aug 27 00:17:09 2004 From: ellyn337 at earthlink.net (mclellyn) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 00:17:09 -0000 Subject: Harry/Voldemort fusion theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111326 > > Gadfly McLellyn wrote: > > > > Reading MAN AND HIS SYMBOLS edited by Carl Gustav Jung, I got the > > idea that symbolically Harry is consciousness and Voldemort is > > unconsciousness. In essence they are one being badly splintered. This would tie many things together from the Harry Potter books. tons of snipping Cindy wrote: more snipping > Yes, I believe that Harry and V are "shadows" of each other that need to be fused - that is why "neither can live while the other > survives". One consciousness has to become part of the other (in a > sense die "at the hand of the other"), because they are somehow > split, and need to merge together. There is a part in one of the > books, and I've been unable to find it, where DD sees two shadowy > snakes emerge from his pensieve(?) (can't remember if that is what it was). He mentions something about them being separate but of the > same essence. That is what stuck with me, and why I believe in the > end, V will die and Harry will live. The two will come together in > Harry. Why do I think Harry will live? Simply because I believe the evil will be vanquished; my opinion is the series will not end with this evil being roaming around. Gadfly writes: I don't think we quite agree. I don't think evil will die. I think Voldemort will lose his body and be assimilated by Harry, but he will not die. I'm beginning to think the reason JKR says the last word in the last book is "scar" is because this cycle will start over again. Also remember on the chocolate frog card (SS p102) it says Dumbledore "defeat"s the dark wizard Grindelwald -- he does not kill him. So in other words, Dumbledore was not the one assimilated into Grindelwald. >From MAN AND HIS SYMBOLS about the forces of opposites: "(Greek thinkers) postulated the existence of a sort of life- giving "tension" (tonos), which supports and moves all things." p306 . "We can also see that the arrangement of archetypal symbols follows a pattern of wholeness in the individual, and that an appropriate understanding of the symbols can have a healing effect. And we can see that the archetypes can act as creative or destructive forces in our mind; creative when they inspire new ideas, destructive when these same ideas stiffen into conscious prejudices that inhibit further discoveries." pg 304. Tension. Creative or destructive forces. They will always be part of the human condition. That may be the uniqueness of the Harry Potter books -- to teach this complex idea to children. Gadfly McLellyn From macfotuk at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 00:22:47 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 00:22:47 -0000 Subject: PERCY: DD's Personal Spy or Ministry's Puppet? (Long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111327 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Brenda M." wrote: (Msg 111313) > (6) So *everyone* in Potterverse is either Spy or Death Eater? > -- I like the idea of Percy, the immature and stubborn youngster, > being totally misguided by propaganda. Fooled by the Ministry and > used as the political manipulation victim, right under his nose. It > is more realistic that way: that some people are genuinely misled and > fooled, others fight in war or cause the war. Just because we *want* > certain characters to behave the way we want (be good or evil but > really just in disguise) it doesn't mean they are, or should be. I > personally don't want everyone to be either spies, or the Order > members, or the Death Eaters, or the former DEs. That's too boring, > no? > I've always felt there something odd/fishy about Percy's development on OotP (begun in GoF) and, as many have pointed out, that he was Pettigrew as Scabbers' 'owner' (for an unknown/unspecified number of years). Just too creepy to be a Weasley. But then he always has been. Maybe you're right Brenda M in your point above that JKR is simply (intelligently as usual) mirroring the English Civil War (perhaps read any other incl. US) in which 'brother was set against brother' and families were sundered by irreconcilable allegiances to parliament/roundheads or king/cavaliers. I prefer to think Percy is DD's doule agent and have even, given the DD=Ron theory thought that maybe DD=Percy is as viable a theory if he is making amends (as DD sent back in time) for disastrously stupid and wrong-headed behaviour when he was Percy. hmmmmmmmmmm we tie ourselves in knots. Hopefuly JKR will answer the FAQ on her website some time soon. From macfotuk at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 00:30:18 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 00:30:18 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111328 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > > Pippin quoted: > > "the beauty of the softly simmering cauldron with its > shimmering fumes, the delicate power of liquids that creep > through human veins, bewitching the minds, ensnaring the > senses... > > and that perfect little haiku > > I can teach you how > to bottle fame, brew glory, > even stopper death > > Why, the man even casts a logic puzzle into verse. > WOW! Had never spotted that - haiku that is - very clever. Always thought though that Snape talking about stoppering death was an allusion both to death eating and, it now strikes me, perhaps to a part he may have played in LV evading death. Perhaps DD keeps Snape onside (WHY does he?!!) despite him being such a 'nasty piece of work' because he (Snape) knows what LV did to 'protect himself'. I'm intrigued by the theories that this same speech (the first time Snape talks to Harry) contains lots of clues for Harry about how he can defend himself from those with potions-based murderous intent. From macfotuk at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 00:53:10 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 00:53:10 -0000 Subject: The graves of James and Lily In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111329 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kizor0" wrote: > A thought occurs: Lily and James were killed in Voldemort's attack. So > unless there was nothing left of them, their remains would have been > done away with in some manner, in all likelihood buried. Correct? > > To date, the graves haven't turned up anywhere in the books. Visiting > them would probably be an important event for Harry, and distances > don't matter all that much in the WW, so is it possible that this > will become a Future Plot Point(tm)? > > It has confused me that Petunia says in the 1st book that her sister 'got herself blown up' and that much else suggests total destruction (with the obvious exception of HP himself) at Godric's Hollow. In GoF we learn that AK curse leaves no marks whatsoever (on the Riddles or on Cedric) so of course one might expect James and Lily's bodies to have been rescued and honoured by burial or whatever wizards do (why not funeral pyres or sending them through that acursed veil even?). Clearly, however, the rebounding of the curse aimed at Harry had associated destruction - the same happens incidentally when LV lobs it at DD (who deflects it) in OotP (even though Crouch Jr as Moody in GoF says its unblockable). Would Lily and James' bodies have survived the smoking rubble? methinks that on the basis of the theory that Harry 'died', but didn't, during this curse, but instead was fused with LV, sealed and marked by the scar (which after all looks like a permanent crack opening into a formerly perfect vessel), everything around might well have been obliterated. I'm not sure if PoA film director Cuaron got it wrong, but somehow I doubt it. It isn't canon because JKR hasn't said it, but that doesn't mean it's wrong. I have a pet theory that JKR ensures that the films (spit rant sorry for metioning them here) contain any clue that is important for future plot development and so telling him that a graveyard becomes significant in book 6 might well be something she felt compelled to reveal (though I'm sure hoped he wouldn't blab in public!). From macfotuk at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 01:04:22 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 01:04:22 -0000 Subject: Ron's dirt-smudged nose Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111330 Someone MUST have posted on this because you are mostly very clever and mostly very observant but it isn't something I've seen anything on: Please tell me if I'm being thick and/or have missed something (a joke for example), but exactly why is Ron's nose smudged when Harry first meets him on the Hogwart's express (SS/PS)? Mrs Weasley makes a point of noticing it and so does Hermione (also meeting Ron for the very first time) and it was in the film (sorry spit I hate them - well, no I don't actually, but yes they're not 'canon'). I think in this same chapter (and again in the film) there was the sunshine, mellow spell failing to work on Scabbers (i.e. turn him yellow) which becomes understandable only later in PoA when we find out that Scabbers=Pettigrew - it is as likely that the spell was countered as Ron having got it wrong or that it was a lousy spell on Fred and George's part - the explanation offered by Ron in the book. Any comments or theories about Ron's dirt-smudged nose would be appreciated here. Is it just, perhaps, that JKR is saying 'typical boy doesn't even know his nose is dirty because he doesn't care about his appearance'? Or something else? From aoibhneach1 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 01:16:41 2004 From: aoibhneach1 at yahoo.com (Cindy) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 01:16:41 -0000 Subject: Harry/Voldemort fusion theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111331 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mclellyn" wrote: > Gadfly writes: > > I don't think we quite agree. I don't think evil will die. I think > Voldemort will lose his body and be assimilated by Harry, but he will > not die. I'm beginning to think the reason JKR says the last > word in the last book is "scar" is because this cycle will start over > again. ********************************************************** I agree that V will be assimilated by Harry and that they will be fused. However, Voldemort will no longer be "living" in the sense that he is living now. I believe it is *Harry* who will be the victor, not *Voldemort*. Harry will "vanquish" the evil being. That is what I was attempting to convey. I don't know anything about the last word of the series being "scar". Is this something JKR said would be a certainty? I haven't read that interview. ********************************************************** Gadfly: > Also remember on the chocolate frog card (SS p102) it says > Dumbledore "defeat"s the dark wizard Grindelwald -- he does not kill > him. So in other words, Dumbledore was not the one assimilated into > Grindelwald. *********************************************************** Again the word "vanquish" comes to mind. DD was the victor in this conflict - in the way I believe Harry will be in the end. I am not saying there will be no evil. I believe there will no longer be the evil *Voldemort* - he will not live. I just have the strong feeling that it will be Harry. Cindy *********************************************************** From aoibhneach1 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 01:34:54 2004 From: aoibhneach1 at yahoo.com (Cindy) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 01:34:54 -0000 Subject: Secret Text Behind the Door - SPOILERS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111332 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jekatiska" wrote: > As for yellow eyes, why would they belong to any character we already > know? OK, maybe yellow isn't the most common eyecolour, but it's not > _that_ rare. My grandfather had yellow eyes, and I was vividly > reminded of him when I read the secret text. I was also reminded of > Moody by the phrase "mane of hair". Incidentally, my grandfather also > had a glass eye. However, it's quite obvious it isn't Moody, and I > don't think it's any other old character either. > > Jekatiska ***************************************************** Yes, one of my friends has golden eyes - truly golden and very pretty actually. I think it just may be a very, very light brown that takes on a yellowish appearance. I think this is a new character. I do not believe it is Lupin - has it been established that he has a limp or wears glasses? I don't remember. However, I strongly suspect that it may be the new DADA teacher. Cindy From aoibhneach1 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 01:40:44 2004 From: aoibhneach1 at yahoo.com (Cindy) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 01:40:44 -0000 Subject: Severus Snape: The grudge and the very long LOLLIPOPS biography... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111333 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "brandy" wrote: > The other thing that bothers me is Snape's reaction to Lily chewing out James. He doesn't just > say he doesn't need her help, he doesn't just snap at her, he flat- out calls her a > mudblood. I know that Snape is no master of social graces, but I just can't fathom > why he goes so far to offend her after she helps him. I know his pride has been > wounded, but it seems like he should have just snapped at her and stalked off, then > maybe after he thought better of it apologized in private. But instead he flips out and > calls her the dirtiest name in the WW. How can we reconcile that with the idea of him > having a crush on her? Or maybe the crush didn't start until after this event, when he > realized that she was the only person being nice to him? > > -Brandy ************************************************************ I don't know...but, it very well could be a matter of Snape's pride, as you say. He may have thought that Lily pitied him, and that made him angry. It sounds like an angry, emotional outburst due to humiliation in front of someone he may have secretly liked rather than a deliberate attempt to malign her. Just a thought. Cindy From macfotuk at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 01:44:36 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 01:44:36 -0000 Subject: HarryMort (was many other things) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111334 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "caspenzoe" wrote: > > Sorry to nitpick, but one of us has missed something here (or JKR > has - and I think that's least likely). In her recent Edinburgh > appearance, JKR specifically stated that one of the questions fans > have not asked her, but should have, is "Why didn't DD kill LV in > the DoM." > > Why should fans have asked her this question if she's already truly > answered it via DD? Apparently, she at least, is under the > impression that any explanation was given by DD was incomplete or > inadequate. Although I remember DD stating that VM had possessed > Harry in the MOM in hopes that DD would sacrifice Harry in an > attempt to kill him, I don't recall that he actually directly > explained why he didn't attempt to kill VM either during his > possession of Harry, or otherwise, to Harry, at all. Another lightbulb (bing!) moment stimulated by your post caspenzoe: I had always thought that LV possessing Harry at the end of OotP and then saying to DD 'kill me' was a kind of 'ner ner nee ner ner, can't get me' (cos I'm in your favourite person who you'll also kill) type thing. However, LV doesn't have a history of playing with DD or under-estimating him. It may be that LV is trying to tempt DD into some lapse either as a chess-like bluff (make this move and you'll beat me - only in fact I know you won't cos you haven't seen something that *I* have) or as temptation (Vader and Luke type moment a la Star Wars) to expressing his 'dark side' and therefore failing. However, it may be instead that LV recognises that he can ONLY be killed when he and Harry are reunited as a single entity and that DD knows this, but that as the strongest wizard he would surely survive and be freed of the suppressive link he presently has with HP so that DD's 'death blow' will kill Harry but not himself (LV). All this fits with the 'neither can live while the other survives' aspect of the prophecy. Further, it begs the question of what happened to baby Harry when he and Voldemeort were fused. Part of LV was sundered and became the spirit-like weakling that made its comeback by dark magic as LV in GoF (to an associated twinkle of triumph in DD's eye). HP now is the Voldie/Harry fusion. Where is baby HP? The truely good (Lily/James fusion) bit? Is it (like LV was) still floating disembodied to be reconstituted at a later date? Or is it still there in Harry fighting to be free and independent of LV's bit? hmmmmmmmm. As usual comments and criticism welcome. From macfotuk at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 01:48:05 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 01:48:05 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's Quest for Immortality (What Drives You Know Who) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111335 Oh come on everybody. JKR is the queen of names. Names have significance. Vol - steal/thief de = of Mort = death Cheater of death It's about death, .....well immortality (absence/cheating of death) --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Brenda M." wrote: > >>> Me before: I would say his motivation is even more simple: POWER > > (1) be almighty powerful, so no one will think of desert him like > > his father once did > > (2) eliminate anything/anyone that stands in his path to power > > (3) enjoy the power as long as possible, hence quest for immortality > > > >>> Dungrollin replied: Absolutely ? didn't mention it because I > thought it kind of went without saying. <<< > > > Bren now: > > Well, yes of course. But my point was that Voldemort's greatest > ambition was POWER and everything else (purity of blood, Harry, > immortality...) came from it. IMO those are merely different means to > achieve power, not necessarily his motivations. > > > >>> Dungrollin: > > Why does he choose the name Voldemort while he's still at school? > > > > If he has no thoughts of immortality, but is just being the heir of > > Slytherin and hating mudbloods, then it's a happy coincidence that > > the name goes so well with his later `goal ? to conquer death.' > > > Brenda: > > Well I have no idea how he chose his 'screen name', but it could have > been as *simple* as this: > > Tom Marvolo Riddle: 'OK, so I want a new terrifying name. Will > include "Lord" 'cause I wanna be almighty powerful.' > > LORD ... [t,m,m,a,v,o,o,r,i,d,l,e] > > After many tries to arrange the leftovers, he says: 'How about "I am > Lord..." ??' > > I AM LORD ... [t,m,v,o,o,r,d,l,e] > > I won't be surprised if he searched for cool and frightening sounds > in the library. Heck, if I wanted a new name for my future Evil > Overlord regime I would! > > I have no clue whether he chose Voldemort for its meaning, or he just > thought it sounded foreign and scary. Maybe he taught himself French > from the library, maybe not. Who knows. Hermione is familiar with > French but she also went to France for vacation. Tom Riddle didn't > have that money... > > > > Sure, but if he's getting people onside by reviving > > Pure-Bloodism, > > why name the group `Death Eaters'? Why not something more in- > > keeping with the purity-of-blood-obsessed followers of the Heir of > > Slytherin? > > > > I suspect that the immortality-quest is a much greater part of the > > story than we have so far seen, and plus JKR's hint that we should > > be wondering what he did to make sure he didn't die adds up to > > > Hmm, that is a good point. There's also that "Morsmordre" for casting > Dark Mark onto sky, which roughly means 'Death to bite/eat' according > to Lexicon. Why "Death Eaters" indeed. Why not "Blood Purifiers" > or "Mud Purgers"?? > > Voldemort is afraid of death, everyone knows that. Perhaps this is > the unresolved trauma as a result of his mother's death? He wouldn't > have been at the orphanage if she was alive (or so he/we assume). > Also it could be that he viewed immortality as the symbol of greatest > power. After all, who is more powerful than someone who can dodge > bullets... I mean Avada Kedavra? You will never lose in a battle. > > Or here is an out-there thought that features coward!Voldy... Perhaps > Voldy is afraid of what comes after death. The "next great adventure > for those who are ready"... it could be something utterly frightening > and destructive for Voldemort. Thus he desperately attempts to never > arrive there. > > Just my two cents. > > > Brenda From macfotuk at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 01:50:51 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 01:50:51 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's Quest for Immortality (What Drives You Know Who) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111336 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, macfotuk at y... wrote: > Oh come on everybody. JKR is the queen of names. Names have > significance. > > Vol - steal/thief > > de = of > > Mort = death > > Cheater of death > > It's about death, .....well immortality (absence/cheating of death) > PS Tom Marvolo Riddle is the contrivance NOT Voldemort. Voldemort JKR had from the very start (IMO). From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 01:53:31 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 01:53:31 -0000 Subject: Severus Snape: The grudge and the very long LOLLIPOPS biography... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111337 Cindy: > I don't know...but, it very well could be a matter of Snape's pride, > as you say. He may have thought that Lily pitied him, and that made > him angry. It sounds like an angry, emotional outburst due to > humiliation in front of someone he may have secretly liked rather > than a deliberate attempt to malign her. Just a thought. > Alla: Yes, no matter how much I dislike it I am willing to concede that it is possible, but, still Snape could pick ANY insult to throw at the girl if he was humiliated to be saved by her. Anything... He chose the ugliest insult in WW, which to me speaks volumes about him. From macfotuk at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 01:54:15 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 01:54:15 -0000 Subject: What drives You Know Who? [Non-sequitur] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111338 I should read the back threads - sorry coderaspberry77 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "coderaspberry77" wrote: > > Perhaps we could get a native French speaker to elaborate on this. > > 'Steal' seems rather nonsensical to me. How would you go about it? > > > > [Cut to the Death Room in the Department of Mysteries] > > > > Voiceover: Favourite targets for the Death Eaters are Black Veils. > > > > [A group of Death Eaters runs onscreen from the right, grabs the > > corners of the stone arch, lifts it and runs away with it] > > > > - Kizor, who's sincerely sorry for the bad Python reference > > Heh - I'm not sorry for the reference at all. It amused me. > > As for the "stealing" part, I thought about this in passing awhile > ago, as well, and while I'm certainly not a native French speaker, I > live in a bilingual province, so I'm not TOTALLY unaware. Anyway, > my thought was that it might be more of a stealing FROM death type > of thing - not a literal translation - and that could very much > apply. Voldemort, by seeking immortality, is basically "stealing > from death" - that is to say, cheating it. To have him flee from > death makes him less, I don't know, impressive or something. > > coderaspberry, who is waiting for someone who actually KNOWS French > to come along and make his silly musings look pedestrian From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Thu Aug 26 15:57:12 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 15:57:12 -0000 Subject: What drives You Know Who? [Non-sequitur] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111339 > > Dungrollin: > > > 'Voldemort' is French (vol de mort) and can be translated as 'flight > > > of/from death' (though there may be other ways). > > > > Another way is 'Steal of Death.' > > > > "andreoe" > > While we certainly can't rule out anything, what with dealing with JKR > here and all, the 'flight' translation seems more fitting, plus it > matches with the names-as-adjectives thing we've seen very much of. > Perhaps we could get a native French speaker to elaborate on this. > 'Steal' seems rather nonsensical to me. How would you go about it? > Dungrollin: I'm with 'andreoe' on this, though I'd translate that version as 'theft of death', though that's rather literal, because in French that's how you say 'Death's theft'. (I'm not a native French speaker, but I can speak it more-or-less.) I originally thought that 'flight from' was better (ie. it fit in with my secret theories), though with Riddle's (and later You Know Who's) extreme arrogance in the chamber at the end of CoS, 'flight', implying fleeing, doesn't entirely fit, and now I'm not sure... Unless he has a secret terror of death. Dungrollin.x From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 16:49:15 2004 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 16:49:15 -0000 Subject: Is Peter evil? was Re: Is Percy A Spy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111340 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > Carol wrote: > From what we know of Peter, he isn't so much evil (aside from being > able to cast an avada kedavra under coercion) as weak and lazy and > cowardly. > > Potioncat wrote: <> It didn't appear that he(Wormtail) was under Imperio at the time. We know he spied for LV, in the past, I wonder what else he did? > > I'm not arguing that a good or just not-evil person couldn't be > forced to kill someone, but that this type of killing requires > certain skills. > > Potioncat Doddiemoe here: In POA (US pg. 370) Sirus answers Hermione why Wormtail never attacked Harry over the years: "Because you(Wormtail) never did anything for anyone unless you could see what was in it for you."..."You'd want to be quigte sure he was the biggest bully in the playground before you went back to him, wouldn't you?" Regardless of good or evil---we do garner that selfishness and a hunger for power are part of Wormtail's personality... I see more similarities between Wormtail and Percy at this point. This got me wandering down the wondering path of questioning whether Wormtail had any influence over Percy over the years. I think the imperious curse can have all sorts of levels and sublties--what if wormtail primed Percy by suggesting a certain sort of values system? Even if Wormtail felt he was simply "sharpening" a tool for future use. Is this why, Percy whose attention to detail is so great he writes a 12 page report on cauldron bottom thickness, yet sees nothing strange in Crouch Sr.'s behavior in GOF? Is this why Percy is seeking the biggest bully out in *his* playground (Fudge) rather than supporting the most powerful wizard(DD) who really cannot give him anything he values at this time--good job, more money, prestige in the WW? And then in OOP (US 502) Fred and Gorge respectively state "Percy sent back his Christmas Jumper..."Without a note,". It just strikes me as supremely cheesy to send back part but not all of the gift package. (I assume he kept the mince pies) Also why didn't Percy just set the jumper aside and not wear it? Just seems unnecessarily cruel to send it back right on Christmas day no less when he knows he's just sending it back to his mother since his father is still in St. Mungos. I think there may be something more than blind ambition to Percy's behaviors is all. Doddie From tonks_op at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 20:15:48 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 20:15:48 -0000 Subject: The graves of James and Lily In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111341 Maybe wizards are not buried. We do not hear of a funeral for Sirius do we? Harry doesn't go to the gravesite does he? Maybe the graveyard in GOF is a muggle graveyard. Maybe wizards do things differently... any thoughts??? Tonks_op From BVincent at goldengate.org Thu Aug 26 20:33:41 2004 From: BVincent at goldengate.org (BVincent at goldengate.org) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 20:33:41 -0000 Subject: What drives You Know Who? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111342 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "andreoe" wrote: > Dungrollin: > > 'Voldemort' is French (vol de mort) and can be translated as 'flight > > of/from death' (though there may be other ways). > > Another way is 'Steal of Death.' > > "andreoe" May I correct that to "Theft of Death?" From porcupine88 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 21:04:53 2004 From: porcupine88 at yahoo.com (brandy) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 21:04:53 -0000 Subject: PERCY: DD's Personal Spy or Ministry's Puppet? (Long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111343 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Brenda M." > (1) How would a smart lad trust Fudge over Dumbledore? > -- Yes, Percy seems to worship whoever is his boss at any given time. > So when he was at Hogwarts, the Headmaster. As Crouch's assistant his > loyalty was to Crouch. Then to Fudge. I perfectly understand his > admiration of Crouch; Crouch was strict, competent, respected, > charismatic and hard-working. But why Fudge? Percy should know that > Dumbledore was once supported by many in WW to become the MoM. Fudge > asked DD for guidance in his early days of MoM. DD is widely known as > the greatest wizard, Percy says so himself to Harry. Percy should > know that DD is far more powerful and competent than Fudge. So why > would the smart, ambitious youngster like Percy would want to lose > respect from the greatest wizard of his times? I said this before, but I think it was in a different Percy thread (not even sure anymore). I think that Percy's loyalty is not to DD, or Fudge, or Crouch, but to the Ministry itself as an institution. He sees DD not necessarily as a threat to Fudge himself, but as a threat to "the way things work" at the Ministry. If he were to stage a coup, the entire basis of how the Ministry works would be thrown into confusion. I think Percy would just as easily have followed Dumbledore if he had been elected MoM, but he wasn't, so he follows Fudge. Same for his admiration of Umbridge - she is carrying the party line, therefore she is good (in Percy's view). Of course, now that the party line has changed, it will be interesting to see what Percy does... I think that he will continue to support whatever the Ministry does. Will he support Fudge's actions of the past year? Well, I think that depends on whether Fudge is in power or not. If he remains MoM, I think Percy will say that without solid evidence, he was doing the best he could. If he is ousted, I'm not sure that Percy will turn on him completely but he will surely be vocal in his support for whoever the new Minister might be. -Brandy From fotoger1 at hotmail.com Thu Aug 26 21:11:47 2004 From: fotoger1 at hotmail.com (Tory Santillie) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 16:11:47 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Can you Apparate Within Hogwarts?(Was Disapparation inside Hogwarts?) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111344 >Pat: > > You've brought up something that has always bothered me. Dobby > > comes and goes, which I always took for apparition and disapparition- > > -I hadn't thought about him walking into the grounds first. I just > > attributed his ability to do that to the strong magic that house > > elves have and about which we know very little. Brandy responds: >I always assumed that this was something other than "apparition" - >"apparition" seems to be a specific spell that wizards do, while I thought >of what house elves do as possibly something natural that is just one of >their inborn modes of transportation. It just happens to look like >apparating, but they work in different ways. That's the only way I can >explain how Dobby seems to be able to apparate all over the place. > Dobby's and house elves' apparition/disapparition is entirely different. When we first meet Dobby in CoS, Harry received the owl from the MoM for underage magic not for apparition but for a hover charm. Wouldn't the MoM been able to detect Dobby's disapparition as well, if it is indeed like that of wizards? tory From macfotuk at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 02:17:40 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 02:17:40 -0000 Subject: Severus Snape: The grudge and the very long LOLLIPOPS biography... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111345 Dear Brandy I am assuming you are a girl (woman). Sorry if this isn't coorect. JKR has a good feel for boy/girl interactions. That Hermione 'gets it' about Cho and Harry has no idea whatsoever is a prime example, but there are many other examples in Ron's behaviour in dealing with H herself and also in totally steamrolering Padma's sister's feelings at the Yule Ball. There's nothing worse in the average teenage boy's (and yes let's admit it sexist) universe than to have to be rescued from embarassment at the hands of the 'cool guys' by a girl(ey). I genuinely feel that JKR wrote it right that whether Snape liked, loved or loathed Lily he could still not, as a teenage boy (and a sheltered rather unworldly and immature one at that!) resent (it having to be) her defending him and, despite himself, allow his prejudices (pure bloods better than half or otherwise bloods) to override his 'feelings', especially when SO embarassed (knickers waving literally in the air). I beleive his calling her a mudbllod was the obnly way he could think of to say ' butt out I don't need your help here'. Sad to say his pride may have over-ruled his love. Of course this was one of those 'life-changing' moments (we all wish we could reverse) - the 'I wish I'd done something different then' times - the reason IMO why JKR named the chapter 'Snape's worst memory', not because he had been so embarrassed so much as that by his actions he had unwittingly thrown Lily into the arms of his nemesis James Potter. Clearly he didn't want Harry to see this (though conspiracy theories might suggest NOt clearly, namely that he set it up because he knew Harry couldn't help himself but look and he wanted Harry to see this memory and be wrong-footed by his interpretation or JKR wanted her readers wrong-footed in a similar way). . --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "brandy" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tabouli" wrote: > > As captain of LOLLIPOPS I have to step in here. > *snipping big long thing obviously written before OoP* > > Personally, I am a fan of thinking that Snape had a big thing for Lily, though I'm not > sure how much it had to do with his going over to/coming back from the dark side. I > do think that it is a big factor in his hatred of Harry, though. > > As someone else pointed out, Lily didn't like James much til seventh year. The other > thing that bothers me is Snape's reaction to Lily chewing out James. He doesn't just > say he doesn't need her help, he doesn't just snap at her, he flat- out calls her a > mudblood. I know that Snape is no master of social graces, but I just can't fathom > why he goes so far to offend her after she helps him. I know his pride has been > wounded, but it seems like he should have just snapped at her and stalked off, then > maybe after he thought better of it apologized in private. But instead he flips out and > calls her the dirtiest name in the WW. How can we reconcile that with the idea of him > having a crush on her? Or maybe the crush didn't start until after this event, when he > realized that she was the only person being nice to him? > > -Brandy From cdayr at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 21:22:20 2004 From: cdayr at yahoo.com (cdayr) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 21:22:20 -0000 Subject: Time-Turner Questions?! In-Reply-To: <002001c48a33$7b11b620$302f0dd4@taxi> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111346 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Susana da Cunha" wrote: > Time travel has been a science fiction pet since forever. Being a science > fiction fan, I will try to explain the two main hypotheses usually > considered: > (snip) > > 2 - Time travel cannot change events. This hypothesis states that you can > only do what has already been done - there are no "alternative futures"! > This is what happens in PoA CDR: Thanks for this detailed post- my mind is reeling but I think you really cleared up some of the specifics of HP-brand time travel. I have a few additions to your thoughts: I really appreciate JKR's type of TT because it is very limited and therefore cannot be used to solve every problem. For example, no one can TT back and save Lily and James because they have already died- this cannot be changed. If Sirius had been dementorized before they made it to him in POA, they could not have gone back and changed that either. An additional limitation seems to be in the length of time you can travel back. There is- as yet- no evidence that you can move forward in time once you have gone back. So once you've gone back, you are stuck there until you relive the passing time up to the present when you originally left. This could create some serious problems and really limits what you can do. For example, say Harry wants to go back and chat with his past self of two years ago. (Or a jury is sent back to see the scene of a crime, or whatever) First, he would have to turn the time turner 17, 520 times for all those hours. (Ok, maybe there are turners that go back further with each turn, but we haven't seen those yet) Then he would chat with himself. But then what? He now has to relive those two years up to the moment that he left originally, while remailing completely hidden so no one realizes there are two of him walking around. Then, when he finally gets back to his present time, he would suddenly appear to have aged two years overnight. So, it seems to me TT can only be used effectively if someone realizes something is about to happen (that hasn't happened yet) that they have to change, and can go back a short amount of time (usually hours, a day or two at the most) and make the change. Which is exactly what happened in POA. Of course, if it turns out there is a way to flash yourself back to the present after you have travelled to the past all of this is meaningless- but no evidence so far of that. CDR - who loves TT as a plot device when it is done well From porcupine88 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 21:21:38 2004 From: porcupine88 at yahoo.com (brandy) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 21:21:38 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111347 >I also wonder where you took the basis for calling Sevvie >intelligent or anything like that. Sevvie is broken, he wanted to be >the best but couldn't. He isn't some deep character, we can see >through the books that when it comes to it, he is unable to make the >right decision when it comes to Harry being right about something, >nor about Sirius and so on. I think we can safely assume that Snape is fairly intelligent. He was given a professorship at Hogwarts at quite a young age - something like 22? In PS/SS, he is the one who designs the logic puzzle to guard the stone - not only does that take some intelligence to design a logic puzzle, but also a bit of savvy to know that it's something many wizards would struggle with. I agree that his emotions can get in the way of his making the right decisions - but how does that make him less deep of a character? If anything, I think that it adds depth. If he were a cold, emotionless, one-dimensional baddie (which is how we see him through much of PS/SS), he wouldn't have a problem continuing the necessary occlumency lessons after Harry has invaded his privacy. He might make it more hellish for Harry, but he wouldn't be unable to continue. -Brandy From ujs31415 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 21:23:08 2004 From: ujs31415 at yahoo.com (ujs31415) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 21:23:08 -0000 Subject: Umbridge and the Dementors ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111348 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > DuffyPoo: > The testimony of six kids to despise her will mean nothing in > WW court, quite likely, even if one of them is The Boy Who Lived. > The kids on the Inquisitorial Squad aren't likely to tell what they > have heard. > > Veritaserum should fix that! From tonks_op at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 23:44:30 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 23:44:30 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Snape=92s_DE_Past_&_HBP?= Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111349 Here is an idea that I don't know if anyone has come up with before. I think that it ties many of the loose ends about Snape together. Lets say that Snape's father was a vampire. (I am not sure if this makes Snape one or not, but he might have some tendencies in that direction.) His mother was a pure blood witch, maybe even related to the Black family. Since some vampires were royalty, it is possible that Snape's father was also. Snape would be accepted into both Slytherin and the DE because he is not half Muggle and the vampire part is somehow acceptable to them. Half bloods were allowed to join the DE under certain circumstances; maybe this is one of the circumstances. Now consider this: 1. Snape is potions Master so that he can make the potions that he needs to keep from having his father's side come out. Perhaps he is well skilled in occumencey for the same reason. 2. DD does not want Snape to be the DADA teacher for some reason connected with his bloodline, for safety reasons. 3. There are things about Vampires and their relation to the WW that we have not been told yet. 4. Snape has never married because of his blood line. Both because most witches would not want to marry a man with that background and because he considers the Vampire part as a curse and does not want to transfer that to any children that he might have. Maybe his gruff exterior is there to keep any would be mate away. (Of course, that doesn't seem to be working!!! Since he seems to has so female many fans!) 5. If he were the HBP, this would partly explain his condescending attitude toward many others. The other reason he would treat others in a gruff manor is because he is very intelligent and prone to be somewhat arrogant because of it. (and I also think that it is his teaching style as well.) Tonks_op From WriterKim at comcast.net Fri Aug 27 00:01:31 2004 From: WriterKim at comcast.net (better2begryffindor) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 00:01:31 -0000 Subject: Percy's Letter (Was: Is Percy a spy?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111350 totorivers: but he has > way too much ambition, and he really would follow whoever is his > boss.......and you just have to reread GoF to see him saying bad > things about Bagman then praising him, same for Crouch and > Dumbledore. Pitiful, really. True-- Although I wonder sometimes what kinds of things Snape had/has to do to gain/keep Voldemort's confidence. I imagine that pretending to be a Death Eater has got to be a lot more unpleasant than saying what the Ministry wants to hear! There's no denying that JKR has set Percy up as ambitious and overly fond of power. I also rather like the term "prat" in reference to him. But I have a really hard time with the idea that Percy would turn against his family and friends solely for the sake of ambition. What I really love, however, is that we don't know. That's what makes Percy so interesting-- he's not a cardboard cutout of good/evil. BetterBeGryffindor From WriterKim at comcast.net Fri Aug 27 01:06:39 2004 From: WriterKim at comcast.net (better2begryffindor) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 01:06:39 -0000 Subject: PERCY: DD's Personal Spy or Ministry's Puppet? (Long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111351 wrote: > Percy is supreme in his arrogance: he can't get enough of himself! > Proud, very proud. Throughout the whole series he almost seems > unaware and oblivious to Ron's dislike for Percy's 'highway > promotion' (sorry, can't think of better words!) I think he truly > believes that everyone must strive to follow his footsteps. He also > knows Fred and George don't like it and they made fun of him > constantly. Why the sudden change of attitude? This is very > stereotypical of Percy: "Yes, finally my little brother taking my > route! I am the 'next big thing' and so good for you." > > Unless one would like to argue this was all in act and disguise. > That's a bit too much stretch for me. True, but I don't think that Percy's arrogance need necessarily be discounted when determining the intent of his letter or of his actions, nor do I believe it should completely condemn him. His arrogance is a part of who he is. After all, it is a continual source of surprise to Harry et. al. that Snape, with his charming personality, is part of the Order. But JKR has made clear throughout the series that choices, and not personality, are what count. (5) What about Dumbledore escaping in front of Fudge and Percy? > -- I was waiting for *someone* to explain this, but so far nothing, > so I'm raising this point. At the mini-trial of DD in his office > after DA was discovered, Percy seemed besides himself. He was quite > hyper being the secretary of the hearing, and utterly disappointed > and upset when DD escapes. Great point! I didn't think of that. But after re-reading this passage, I thought his actions seem almost overdone. Either he IS beside himself and overexcited, or he is over-acting. (I point to his "hearty laugh" at Fudge's sarcastic mention of Harry's hearing-- it just seems a little too much). He is sent out of the room just prior to DD's escape so we don't get that reaction from him, but what little we do see of him is just a shade more overblown than usual. But I also believe that no matter his motivations, as a brown-noser just two years out of school, he would be thrilled to be part of such an "important meeting." This is Percy, after all, and ambition is his weakness. > (6) So *everyone* in Potterverse is either Spy or Death Eater? > -- I like the idea of Percy, the immature and stubborn youngster, > being totally misguided by propaganda. Fooled by the Ministry and > used as the political manipulation victim, right under his nose. It > is more realistic that way: that some people are genuinely misled and > fooled, others fight in war or cause the war. Just because we *want* > certain characters to behave the way we want (be good or evil but > really just in disguise) it doesn't mean they are, or should be. I > personally don't want everyone to be either spies, or the Order > members, or the Death Eaters, or the former DEs. That's too boring, > no? While I'm not sure I agree with the idea that Percy is either being used or is a victim (though I will agree with immature and stubborn), I believe you are on to something here. I think it would be VERY boring if everyone had to be all good or all evil. JKR has confirmed that he is acting on his own. We know that he comes from a poor background and is consumed by the desire to succeed in the MoM. What I don't believe is that this ambition necessarily marks him as an evil person who will go against DD and the cause of good to follow Voldemort. I think that his letter is so interesting because whether he is spying for the Order or not (and I think that there is evidence to suggest both), it shows that he still cares for his family and for THEIR cause enough to send along a warning. And when the time comes that he has to choose a side (for I think that the series definitely moves toward that idea at the end of OOTP), he will not allow ambition, pride or his general Percy-ness to stand in the way of doing what is right. I love this discussion! Percy, no matter which way you read him, is one of the most interesting characters in the series! Kim From macfotuk at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 02:25:56 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 02:25:56 -0000 Subject: What drives You Know Who? [Non-sequitur] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111352 > Unless he has a secret terror of death. > Dungrollin.x IMO his terror of death is anything but secret. It is what he (LV) is all about. From spinelli372003 at yahoo.com Thu Aug 26 23:35:34 2004 From: spinelli372003 at yahoo.com (spinelli372003) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 23:35:34 -0000 Subject: Secret Text Behind the Door - SPOILERS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111353 Jekatiska wrote: <> Where exactly in canon is it that we have "met" Aberforth? I have read all the books multiple times but do not remember a passage where it is stated that the barkeep is Aberforth. sherry From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 27 02:38:16 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 02:38:16 -0000 Subject: Is Peter evil? was Re: Is Percy A Spy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111354 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" > wrote: > > Remember a couple of thousand of posts ago, or maybe more, the big > > discussion was whether casting Unforgivables did something to the > > one who cast them. Snip > > Jen: Yeah, except I don't want to think of Lupin & Sirius as evil > because they were willing and able to kill Peter in POA! If we use > the logic that anyone who is willing to kill another is evil, then > in a time of war that would pretty much include everyone. I'm sure > Snape is intimately familiar with the AK curse, but I don't think of > him as evil either. > > I guess you could say the Cedric/Peter situation isn't a good > analogy because Cedric was completely innocent and no threat to > anyone when he was killed. Peter the betrayer was a different case. > Even though unarmed (like Cedric), at the time Sirius/Lupin > threatened him Peter was a *future* risk if left alive. Still, it > bothered me just a little with how comfortable Sirius & Lupin were, > casually rolling up their sleeves to off Peter. I know it's naive to > think in a time of war people don't take matters into their own > hands on occasion. But the war was over!! That was a personal war. >> Jen Reese imamommy: I never actually saw the movie, but there was a film with Ashley Judd called "Double Jeopardy," where the woman's husband faked his own death, framed his wife, took their son and ran off with her best friend. While in prison the woman learns about the concept of double jeopardy: She can't be punished for the same crime twice. So when she is able to be paroled, she goes looking for the (insert favourite expletive here) so she *can* kill him, since she's already lost everything anyway and she's had nothing but time to focus on what this man had done to her. THis bears a lot of resemblance to Sirius: Wormtail got his friends killed, then frames him up for the murder and fakes his own death. Sirius goes to prison, and loses any chance of a relationship with Harry. I'm not going to say he was right, but I do get where he was coming from. Lupin, spineless Lupin. Why not suggest an alternative? imamommy From juli17 at aol.com Fri Aug 27 02:42:00 2004 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 22:42:00 EDT Subject: The graves of James and Lily Message-ID: <1ef.29045603.2e5ff978@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111355 > If the cemetary is on school grounds, Harry could have walked past it > a hundred times and would probably never have given it a second > thought. It's not like he's going to go walking through the cemetary > examining headstones on the off chance that he knows someone. Until > someone tells him that his parents are buried there, he'll have no > reason to go there. > > --Cory > Still, if your parents died when you were young, wouldn't where they were buried be something you'd long to know? Understandably, if Harry asked the Dursleys and they refused to tell him, he wouldn't have kept pursuing the issue. But once he entered the WW, it's hard to believe he wouldn't have asked where they were buried (or if their bodies survived the conflagration at Godric's Hollow). But, as far as we know, Harry's never even thought about it in the past five years. Perhaps Harry will discover his parents' graves, but JKR will have to explain his previous complete lack of interest (maybe someone put Harry under a "disinterest" charm so he wouldn't, er, dig up something better left buried ;-) Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From beelissa at nycap.rr.com Fri Aug 27 02:44:50 2004 From: beelissa at nycap.rr.com (Melissa Worcester) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 22:44:50 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The graves of James and Lily References: Message-ID: <008d01c48bdf$d3479c30$6466a8c0@CPQ21816182602> No: HPFGUIDX 111356 Cory wrote: >If the cemetary is on school grounds, Harry could have walked past it >a hundred times and would probably never have given it a second >thought. It's not like he's going to go walking through the cemetary >examining headstones on the off chance that he knows someone. Until >someone tells him that his parents are buried there, he'll have no >reason to go there. I guess it seems to me that if he saw a cemetery it would at least make him stop and think, "I don't know where my parents were buried. . ." But then there's the "Don't ask questions" thing. aboutthe1910s wrote: >The thing is, and I've seen it pointed out before, there *is* a small >graveyard on the Hogwarts grounds in the... er, forbidden media Can you email me off-list and explain what this forbidden media is? I am clueless. Sorry, I couldn't figure out how to email you. My address is beelissa at nycap.rr.com. Melissa From macfotuk at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 02:52:19 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 02:52:19 -0000 Subject: Can you Apparate Within Hogwarts?(Was Disapparation inside Hogwarts?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111357 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tory Santillie" wrote: Apparition, yes, hmmmmmmmmmmm............. when does Harry get to learn it? Was his jumping onto the school roof to evade Dudley (SS/PS) a type of apparition? If so, why couldn't he have just apparated away from that graveyard, or the MoM when the DE's showed up? Or there (To the MoM) instead of needing thestrals? Percy and the twins have learned to apparate during the time-frame of the books (and btw it seems to be wandless magic), so when do Hogwarts students get taught this? Why is Harry, so advanced in other respects magically, so delayed in this one. Also, talking of basic skills, when (apart from the single lesson in PS/SS are they taught to fly a broomstick? What does Madame Hooch teach and why do we never see the trio having lessons with her? Surely 'sports/PE/games whatever' is a core subject at all muggle schools and in WW would include mastery of a broomstick/flying. It's just something JKR has left out. Presumably bacause it doesn't move the plot anywhere. A similar subject would be art - just how DO you paint a picture that captures the essence of the sitter to the point where subjects can flit from one painting to another and so on? I suspect that the answers to all these questions is that it doesn't serve the plot for Harry to do or be able to do many of these things just yet or perhaps at all. Just like his not ever having really asked questions about his parents (what did they do? where was the money from? aren't there ANY relatives still alve? Who were their best friends and what can they tell him about them? etc etc). It's all very well to postulate that Petunia and Vernon beat the urge out of him to ask questions but in fact he asks Hagrid a gazillion questions that serve the plot when they first meet and then almost nothing thereafter. If we know too much too early, such as why Sirius had to die, then it ruins the impact later on. Poor JKR she can't satisfy us and we, in turn can't have it all ways AND, as she says, we don't *really* want to know the answers anyway, especially if we actually get close to revealing really important stuff for the plots of books 6 and 7 and, in the effort, spoil our own enjoyment in reading what I am sure will be equally excelent books to read as the others. Aaaaaaaaaarggghhhhhhh. From beelissa at nycap.rr.com Fri Aug 27 02:55:37 2004 From: beelissa at nycap.rr.com (Melissa Worcester) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 22:55:37 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Ron's dirt-smudged nose References: Message-ID: <009301c48be1$54b2c140$6466a8c0@CPQ21816182602> No: HPFGUIDX 111358 macfotuk wrote: >I think in this same chapter (and again in the film) there was the >sunshine, mellow spell failing to work on Scabbers (i.e. turn him >yellow) which becomes understandable only later in PoA when we find >out that Scabbers=Pettigrew - it is as likely that the spell was >countered as Ron having got it wrong or that it was a lousy spell on >Fred and George's part - the explanation offered by Ron in the book. >Any comments or theories about Ron's dirt-smudged nose would be >appreciated here. Is it just, perhaps, that JKR is saying 'typical >boy doesn't even know his nose is dirty because he doesn't care >about his appearance'? Or something else? This is an interesting point. First, though, I think that the spell was a bad one. It doesn't sound at all like any of the other spells we here them learning and using. Secondly, Fred and George told Ron something about wrestling a troll and other misinformation, so I kind of think stuff they tell Ron isn't always to be trusted. I think it's most likely that the dirt smudge is to point out the stark difference between Ron and Hermione. Ron had already been told about the dirt but doesn't seem to care, and Hermione notices it right away. Maybe to lead us to believe these two could never get together, but a red herring, obviously :-) And notice that Harry doesn't seem to have been bothered by the dirt smudge, though he's been talking with Ron since the train ride began. Melissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From juli17 at aol.com Fri Aug 27 02:59:15 2004 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 22:59:15 EDT Subject: Snape Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111359 > I think Snape is more like Bagheera. Silky voice, a former > captive, bound by a debt, cruel, sarcastic, but a very good person, > er, panther, to have on your side in a fight. And not above aiming > a few swats at a cub most especially when his pride has been > wounded. > > Pippin > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From juli17 at aol.com Fri Aug 27 03:08:41 2004 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 23:08:41 EDT Subject: Snape's DE past Message-ID: <103.4e18595b.2e5fffb9@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111360 (Sorry if that last post went through with no reply!) > I think Snape is more like Bagheera. Silky voice, a former > captive, bound by a debt, cruel, sarcastic, but a very good person, > er, panther, to have on your side in a fight. And not above aiming > a few swats at a cub most especially when his pride has been > wounded. > > Pippin > I think Bagheera actually liked Mowgli though ;-) I do think that part of Snape's job is to keep Harry's ego in check. I'm not sure Snape *knows* it, but I think that is why Dumbledore allows their contentious relationship to follow its course rather than putting a stop to it. And if Snape is aware of this, or has figured it out from Dumbledore's lack of action, there's no doubt he very much enjoys this part. He doesn't like Harry, or certainly not those personality traits of Harry's that remind him of James-- which is pretty much all of them!--and I'm sure he gets a perverse pleasure in bringing the brat down a peg or two whenever he can. It's always nice when you love your job, isn't it ;-) Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From macfotuk at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 03:10:50 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 03:10:50 -0000 Subject: Forbideen media (was The graves of James and Lily) In-Reply-To: <008d01c48bdf$d3479c30$6466a8c0@CPQ21816182602> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111361 I read 'forbidden media' to mean the HP films. Since the films are produced by Warner Brothers and they might be accused of doing anything for a buck, indo based solely on the films is frowned upon here (my imprerssion - also I think it explicitly states somewhere - read the FAQs and guidelines - that film-based info is not to be discussed - only information that can reliably be tracked to JKR herself - i.e books, her website or her interviews). --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Melissa Worcester" wrote: > > Cory wrote: > >If the cemetary is on school grounds, Harry could have walked past it > >a hundred times and would probably never have given it a second > >thought. It's not like he's going to go walking through the cemetary > >examining headstones on the off chance that he knows someone. Until > >someone tells him that his parents are buried there, he'll have no > >reason to go there. > > I guess it seems to me that if he saw a cemetery it would at least make him > stop and think, "I don't know where my parents were buried. . ." But then > there's the "Don't ask questions" thing. > > aboutthe1910s wrote: > > >The thing is, and I've seen it pointed out before, there *is* a small > >graveyard on the Hogwarts grounds in the... er, forbidden media > > Can you email me off-list and explain what this forbidden media is? I am > clueless. Sorry, I couldn't figure out how to email you. > > My address is beelissa at n... > > Melissa From tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr Thu Aug 26 16:08:46 2004 From: tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr (totorivers) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 16:08:46 -0000 Subject: Snape as DE (was Re: Percy's Letter (Was: Is Percy a spy?)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111362 > Potioncat: > We know that DD vouched for Snape saying that Snape had provided > service at risk to himself. We also know that certain members of > the Order did not know that Snape had been a DE nor that Snape had > served DD prior to LV's fall. > > I'm basing that on the GoF Pensieve scene. And several discussions > between Black-Lupin-Harry. Though I'm not sure of which books. I see. I'd like to know which scenes you are talking about, though, when you said others didn't know about Snape. Plus, it could also mean that Snape came and promised Dumbledore just before the end. We know the ministry had no ideas, but when did the ministry was secure? Plus, we don't know if every member knew every one. "totorivers" From tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr Thu Aug 26 16:02:50 2004 From: tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr (totorivers) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 16:02:50 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111363 Ok, this is easy..... Dumbledore gave power to Snape. He most likely helped him gain book about potions, plus Snape *is* an authority figure at Hogwarts. Snape knows that when he is with Dumbledore he isn't hated or made fun of. Snape has *power* during the years Voldemort isn't there. Before, Snape wanted power as a DE, but realised it was impossible. Plus, a non fanatical DE is soon dead, so he had to lie. And if *helping* Dumbledore gives him power, then why not. It explains why Dumbledore let Snape act like he does. In the same way, Dumbledore does trust Snape, as Snape has what he wants, and knows that betraying Dumbledore would be a very bad idea. Dumbledore is right to trust Snape. But where do you take the idea that Snape helped with his spying? Through the books, Snape has been a liability for Dumbledore, and Dumbledore doesn't care, as it gives Snape a chance for redemption -a chance Snape didn't take yet. As for Sirius, he sees in Snape the perfect Black, the boy who goes into the dark arts because he wants power, and he is too weak to grab power in the normal way. Same thing with potion, does being a potion master mean anything? Snape just made an effort that few others did, but he has never shown true depth of character.. As I said, Snape is a broken man that Dumbledore pities. He is the perfect exemple for an uredeemable character. "totorivers" From juli17 at aol.com Fri Aug 27 03:25:40 2004 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 23:25:40 EDT Subject: Snape's DE past Message-ID: <12d.498a7585.2e6003b4@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111364 > Neri now: > > I don't presume to know if it was a betrayal of the heart, but Like > Pippin, I feel the need to quote: > > OotP, Ch. 24: > "Then you will find yourself easy prey for the Dark Lord!" said Snape > savagely. "Fools who wear their hearts proudly on their sleeves, who > cannot control their emotions, who wallow in sad memories and allow > themselves to be provoked so easily ? weak people, in other words ? > they stand no chance against his powers!" > > Sounds quite emotional, isn't it? So who was the fool who wore his > heart proudly on his sleeve and paid dearly for it? Was it somebody > Snape knew? That he cared about? Or was it young Severus himself? I > somehow suspect Severus at 19 wasn't that calculated and cold blooded > as Snape at 36, and even the last one is not completely in control of > his emotions. > > Neri > Given Snape's "savage" delivery, I'd say he's talking from personal experience. Snape may have learned it early in life (considering the other memory of the hook-nosed man yelling at the cowering woman), or he may have been foolish enough (in his mind) to wear his heart on his sleeve once again only to have it shredded to pieces. But I don't really believe the object of his affections was Lily. For one thing, Snape leaves Voldemort's service *before* James and Lily are killed, so Lily's death couldn't be the impetus for leaving. Florence might be a possibility. I like the idea someone suggested (sorry, I'm not sure who did!) that Snape's wife might have tried to leave the DE's and was killed. If Snape was married, it makes sense to me that he would have married someone with similar interests, like the Dark Arts. Also, if Voldemort did kill Snape's DE wife because she was going to betray the cause, it would make sense that Snape could switch sides without Voldy's knowledge. Voldemort would expect Snape to hold his loyalty to the Dark Lord more dearly than any loyalty to his wife. If Snape and his wife had a child, even Voldemort would know that killing a defenseless, innocent child is something that might drive Snape away, so I can't see a child being involved. But a pregnancy might work, because then only Snape would know the extent of what he'd lost. Unsubstantiated theories aside, I'm sure that whatever caused Snape to switch sides, it was something BIG. Dumbledore tells Harry that he believes Snape's story, which tells me that Snape's story was something unexpected, something not everyone would believe. And since Dumbledore does believe it, it must also be something dramatic enough to make Snape switch sides, and to put his life on the line to bring about Voldemort's downfall. Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz Fri Aug 27 03:39:59 2004 From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:39:59 +1200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The graves of James and Lily In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.2.20040827152956.029c2eb0@pop3.xtra.co.nz> No: HPFGUIDX 111365 At 12:53 27/08/2004, you wrote: macfotuk wrote It has confused me that Petunia says in the 1st book that her sister 'got herself blown up' and that much else suggests total destruction (with the obvious exception of HP himself) at Godric's Hollow. In GoF we learn that AK curse leaves no marks whatsoever (on the Riddles or on Cedric) so of course one might expect James and Lily's bodies to have been rescued and honoured by burial or whatever wizards do (why not funeral pyres or sending them through that acursed veil even?). Clearly, however, the rebounding of the curse aimed at Harry had associated destruction - the same happens incidentally when LV lobs it at DD (who deflects it) in OotP (even though Crouch Jr as Moody in GoF says its unblockable). Would Lily and James' bodies have survived the smoking rubble? methinks that on the basis of the theory that Harry 'died', but didn't, during this curse, but instead was fused with LV, sealed and marked by the scar (which after all looks like a permanent crack opening into a formerly perfect vessel), everything around might well have been obliterated. I'm not sure if PoA film director Cuaron got it wrong, but somehow I doubt it. It isn't canon because JKR hasn't said it, but that doesn't mean it's wrong. I have a pet theory that JKR ensures that the films (spit rant sorry for metioning them here) contain any clue that is important for future plot development and so telling him that a graveyard becomes significant in book 6 might well be something she felt compelled to reveal (though I'm sure hoped he wouldn't blab in public!). Tanya here. I have found this thread quite interesting. But I only have one comment to make on the status of the destruction. In POA, page 268, in the shack, Sirius speaks of finding the house destroyed and their bodies. According to Hagrid, earlier in the book, Sirius arrives shortly after Hagrid gets Harry out of the house. True, their bodies might of been damaged in the explosion, but they were still discernible. Tanya From macfotuk at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 03:52:43 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 03:52:43 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: <103.4e18595b.2e5fffb9@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111366 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, juli17 at a... wrote: > I do think that part of Snape's job is to keep Harry's ego in check. > I'm not sure Snape *knows* it, but I think that is why Dumbledore > allows their contentious relationship to follow its course rather > than putting a stop to it. Do you mean you think that's his 'job' as a literary vehicle (i.e JKR's motivation in writing the character) or that he has been assigned the job by DD within the context of the books' plot? It certainly has puzzled me why in what otherwise seems a very fair world the other, very wise teachers (esp. McGonagle and DD) tolerate and approve so many of Snape's arbitrary removals of points from Gryffindor when victimising Harry, Ron, The twins, Hermione and Neville which he clearly gains enjoyment from doing. I often ask myself what system there is at Hogwarts of approving points being added to or removed from house totals, but think this is a wrong thing to do. Like so much else in JKR's universe I think it is concepts that matter and not details: the idea that the points are added and removed and what we, as readers, feel about this being fair or unfair, rather than some explicable system which actually tallies the points and changes them fairly. Of course, we the readers cheer each time these unfair decisions *are' overturned or countered and we enjoy booing loudly when they aren't or are especially unfair. Personally I feel this just sketches Snape as a really really nasty and vindictive teacher in the mould of teachers that many of us have probably encountered at school somewhjere in our lives. He's a bad guy - the teacher every student hates (unless they're horrid/slimy themselves)and yet noble enough to follow rules when commanded to. That Umbridge was allowed to do all that she did was just the same thing writ even larger, except that she never did anything noble ever - not intended to make sense in a real world respect where we hope fairness mostly prevails so much as to illustrate abuses of power and the powerlessness of the abusees to do anything about it, i.e. a literary vehicle to convey evil and unfairness. I believe Snape to be a complete and utter bastard (scuse my French) and JKR seems to agree (hence her surprise at his fascination for, and hero worship by, so many fans) and yet in other respects a very very noble individual who will do what is right when encouraged, forced or required to to do so. Even Vernon Dursley fits this description since in his own mind he is living up to a standard - magic is bad and errant. Therefore Snapes's nature is bad yet he can do good things and he knows the difference because he is intelligent but fallible. LV is simply bad and, while evidently fallible believes himself otherwise. Clear, end of story. It is interesting that completely opposite to Snape, Harry, Ron and Hermione and DD, McGonagal, Hagrid, Sirius and Molly (Magda) are good, but now and then do bad things despite themselves (like 99% of the rest of us).A mirror of real life and the strength of JKRs well-observed writing. From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 04:03:29 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 04:03:29 -0000 Subject: The graves of James and Lily In-Reply-To: <1ef.29045603.2e5ff978@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111367 Juli wrote: > Still, if your parents died when you were young, wouldn't where they > were buried be something you'd long to know? Understandably, if > Harry asked the Dursleys and they refused to tell him, he wouldn't > have kept pursuing the issue. But once he entered the WW, it's hard > to believe he wouldn't have asked where they were buried (or if their > bodies survived the conflagration at Godric's Hollow). But, as far as > we know, Harry's never even thought about it in the past five years. > Now Cory: Yes, if my parents had died, I would want to know where they were buried, but that's a separate issue. The post I was responding to said that it was "unbelievable" that the graves could be on the school grounds, because "surely" Harry would have found them by now (I'm paraphrasing, but I think I've got the essence). My point is that, given that he has not asked and nobody has told him, it doesn't seem so unbelievable to me that he would not have found them on his own. Yes, if I were Harry, I would have probably asked a lot more questions about my parents by now than he has (including, possibly, where they are buried), but Harry is apparently a lot less curious about certain things than a lot of us are. --Cory From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 04:09:53 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 04:09:53 -0000 Subject: The graves of James and Lily In-Reply-To: <008d01c48bdf$d3479c30$6466a8c0@CPQ21816182602> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111368 Melissa wrote: > I guess it seems to me that if he saw a cemetery it would at least make him > stop and think, "I don't know where my parents were buried. . ." But then > there's the "Don't ask questions" thing. > Now Cory: That's a fair point. Of course, the other side of the coin is that, presumably, he's been seeing cemetaries in the Muggle world all his life, and either hasn't wondered where his parents were buried or was punished by the Dursleys for asking. Maybe by now he's reached a point where it does not trigger a response. *shrug* --Cory From tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr Thu Aug 26 16:05:52 2004 From: tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr (totorivers) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 16:05:52 -0000 Subject: Severus Snape: The grudge and the very long LOLLIPOPS biography... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111369 We knew Snape hated James and Sirius and Remus. It is obvious that he saw himself as their rival. Having a girl, a muggle born, helping him was demeaning in his mind. Plus, Slytherin do call muggleborn mudblood, especially those one who are talented-and Lily was head girl remember? "totorivers" From tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr Thu Aug 26 16:10:24 2004 From: tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr (totorivers) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 16:10:24 -0000 Subject: Percy's Letter (Was: Is Percy a spy?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111370 > Potioncat: > > If Hermione had sent Ron a note saying what a delightful woman > > Umbridge was, Ron would know she didn't mean it, and would > > understand to read carefully. It could be that Percy expected > > Ron to see through some of these comments as well. Brandy: > That is one point - he seems pretty oblivious to others' opinions > of him, so he may not realize at all that this is exactly the kind > of thing Ron might expect to hear from him. Reread the scenes where Percy talks. In PS he praises Dumbledore, but when he is in GoF it is rather different. In GoF he dislikes Bagman but still bootlicks him, and then later after praising Crouch he says he is getting old and hints at taking his role...Percy isn't innocent. "totorivers" From tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr Thu Aug 26 19:29:31 2004 From: tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr (totorivers) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 19:29:31 -0000 Subject: "Sevvie" (was Re: Snape's DE past (for the record)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111371 Potioncat: > However, except for one recent humorous reference, I would not > unless under Imperio call Professor Snape, "Sevvie". > :-) Lol Sorry....:) And sorry too if I seem harsh, but Snapethesuperspy sometimes gets on my nerve, especially as he is shown in canon to be rather mediocre, and to not think things through. And please give me quote of Snape being particularly witty or something, because it is an assumption everyone makes, and there *are* scenes where Snape seems particularly dumb. "totorivers" From syroun at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 02:42:53 2004 From: syroun at yahoo.com (syroun) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 02:42:53 -0000 Subject: Hagrid as HBP? (was Re: Quick to define Harry as "clinically depressed"?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111372 > Syroun: > > Past that diatribe, does anyone else think that TMR is the half- > > blood prince? > Melissa: > Not I. JKR posted at her website that Tom Riddle IS Voldemort and > Voldemort isn't the HBP. Clearly (IMO of course) JKR doesn't > consider LV and TMR to be separate people. I am new at this, but I read another post...sorry no #/name that I remembered, but the person supported a theory that Hagrid could be giant royalty and is certainly a half-blood. I thought it was an interesting idea and ties in well with what went on in CoS. What do you think? Syroun From libtax10375 at earthlink.net Fri Aug 27 02:51:31 2004 From: libtax10375 at earthlink.net (Leeann McCullough) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 22:51:31 -0400 Subject: new book 6 info References: <1093538787.32971.73906.m24@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <001701c48be0$c3574c70$9ec9ef04@CPQ16151965929> No: HPFGUIDX 111373 I came across this sort of by accident and found it quite interesting. It has info they claim to be fact that I have never seen before. I hope you find it interesting. I tried to insert the link here, but I was threatened with a life sentence in Azkaban, so you will have to type it in the address bar yourself. http://www.pensieve.net/book6.htm Leeann-who isn't quite sure what she would see if face-to-face with a dementor From steve51445 at adelphia.net Fri Aug 27 03:29:54 2004 From: steve51445 at adelphia.net (Steve) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 23:29:54 -0400 Subject: CoS: after the deathday party Message-ID: <066301c48be6$1e9b7520$6401a8c0@steveupstairs> No: HPFGUIDX 111374 I've been re-reading CoS and came across something that has bugged me for a while. After the trio leaves NHN's party in the dungeon and Harry hears the basilisk's voice, they end up on the 2nd floor. Here they find the writing on the wall. At the same time as NHN party, the Halloween feast is going on, and the rest of the school is in the great hall. When the trio finds the writing (and Mrs. Norris) they hear 'hundreds of feet climbing the stairs' CoS US ed. PB pg139. At that point Draco makes his comment to the muggleborns. We know that Gryffindor and Ravenclaw have their dorms in the towers, Hufflepuff's are through a door off the entrance hall, and Slytherin's are in the dungeons. What was Malfoy doing 2 floors from the entrance to his common room at that time of night? The trio were probably at NHN party for about an hour or so. 8 isn't exactly late for the students to be around the castle, but why's Malfoy wandering? "Steve" From aoibhneach1 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 05:16:57 2004 From: aoibhneach1 at yahoo.com (Cindy) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 05:16:57 -0000 Subject: Hagrid as HBP? (was Re: Quick to define Harry as "clinically depressed"?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111375 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "syroun" wrote: > > > Syroun: > > > Past that diatribe, does anyone else think that TMR is the half- > > > blood prince? > > > Melissa: > > Not I. JKR posted at her website that Tom Riddle IS Voldemort and > > Voldemort isn't the HBP. Clearly (IMO of course) JKR doesn't > > consider LV and TMR to be separate people. > > > I am new at this, but I read another post...sorry no #/name that I > remembered, but the person supported a theory that Hagrid could be > giant royalty and is certainly a half-blood. I thought it was an > interesting idea and ties in well with what went on in CoS. What do > you think? > > Syroun ******************************************************* I believe JKR said that the story line from CoS that would have dealt with the Half-blood prince was completely removed. The only thing remaining in CoS that would relate to book 6 is that Harry "discovers somthing" that is somehow significant in book 6. I could be wrong, but that is what I remember reading. Also, I think the HBP is someone that has not been introduced yet. Each of the past titles of her books referred to something introduced in that particular book (with maybe an exception with Sirius Black who was briefly mentioned in book 1). Cindy From erikal at magma.ca Fri Aug 27 06:11:12 2004 From: erikal at magma.ca (Erika L.) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 02:11:12 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: What drives You Know Who? [Non-sequitur] Message-ID: <06fe01c48bfc$a83547a0$6ca31a40@hppav> No: HPFGUIDX 111376 macfotuk wrote: >Oh come on everybody. JKR is the queen of names. >Names have significance. >Vol - steal/thief >de = of >Mort = death >Cheater of death >It's about death, .....well immortality >absence/cheating of death) ------------- All right, here's my two cents on the issue... "Vol" in French is a noun meaning "theft" or "flight" ("voler" is the verb and means "to fly" or "to steal" and a "thief" is a "voleur"). The preposition "de" is translated into English as "from" or "of" depending on the context. This leaves us with the following possibilities: "theft from death," "theft of death" "flight of death," or "flight from death". I think any of these translations can describe one aspect of another of Voldemort's character. "Theft from death": This one was pretty well covered already: coderaspberry wrote: >Anyway, my thought was that it might be more of a stealing FROM >death type of thing - not a literal translation - and that could very >much apply. Voldemort, by seeking immortality, is basically "stealing >from death" - that is to say, cheating it. To have him flee from >death makes him less, I don't know, impressive or something. "Theft of death" For this version one could suggest another less literal interpretation whereby the "of" becomes possessive and we see it as "death's theft" pointing to death personified as a kind of thief, suggesting the harm Voldemort does in causing death and destruction. Certainly Harry has had his parents (and by extension his childhood) stolen from him when Voldemort murdered them. The families of all of Voldemort's victims can be said to be victims of this sort of theft. It's not my favourite translation of the name, but I think it's plausible. "Flight of death" If we consider "flight" in this context as meaning to "to fly" I would see this translation likening Voldemort to a bird of prey, death given wings or the like. "Flight from death": Dungrollin wrote: >I originally thought that 'flight from' was better (ie. it fit in >with my secret theories), though with Riddle's (and later You Know >Who's) extreme arrogance in the chamber at the end of CoS, 'flight', >implying fleeing, doesn't entirely fit, and now I'm not sure... >Unless he has a secret terror of death. You see, I think "flight from death," that is to say, the desire to flee death, is indeed the most appropriate translation of his name. I'll grant you that the fly/flee pun of "flight" exists only in English, but Rowling knows French-- she taught it-- so I think she's clever enough to make a bilingual pun. And I do actually think Voldemort is afraid of death. He wants to live so much that he's willing to enduring the most pitiable state of survival rather than face death. Just look at how he describes his existence after his AK backfires on Harry: >>"I had not been killed, though the curse should have done it. Nevertheless, I was as powerless as the weakest creature alive and without the means to help myself... for I had no body [...] I remember only forcing myself, sleeplessly, endlessly, second by second, to exist..." GoF 566-7 UK <<< During that decade Voldemort isn't even alive in any sort of meaningful way. I mean look at his description of his "life": "forcing myself sleeplessly, endlessly, second by second, to exist." Think of that... Second by second *forcing* himself to exist... That to me suggests a nightmarish version of existence and he stays that way for some ten years. He is so afraid of death that he doesn't care about the quality life-- as long as he's not dead that's good enough for him. Contrast that with Harry at the end of OoP. When Voldemort possesses him, for a second there, Harry actually wishes for death as a means of ending the pain and of seeing Sirius again. I don't think Voldemort could ever get to the point where'd he's wish for death, where he'd choose death over any form of survival. So yes, I think fleeing from death is what drives Voldedmort and I think that we can see it reflected in his name as well. Best, Erika (Wolfraven) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jujupoet29 at hotmail.com Fri Aug 27 07:21:00 2004 From: jujupoet29 at hotmail.com (sienna291973) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 07:21:00 -0000 Subject: Secret Text Behind the Door - SPOILERS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111377 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "spinelli372003" wrote: > Jekatiska wrote: > > < him again? Besides, Aberforth smells of goats, and this character is > clearly lionish. Which points towards Gryffindor.>> > Sherry said: > Where exactly in canon is it that we have "met" Aberforth? I have > read all the books multiple times but do not remember a passage where > it is stated that the barkeep is Aberforth. This is totally left of field but I had to delurk and chuck it out there. Some time ago, I posted a long three-part essay outlining what I believed to be the hidden pattern behind the HP books. In the essay, I hypothesised that they were set up as a hexagram, with the first three mirrored by the second three and the seventh book to tie them all together. In this theory, PoA would mirror HPB (along with PS/ GoF and CoS/OotP) and I theorised that clues to what would happen in HPB could be determined by what happened in PoA. The fact that the title refers to a person (exactly the same as PoA and the only one other than PoA to do so) seems to go some way towards supporting this theory. I read the spoiler behind the door and one thing hit me immediately ? this person, whoever he is (whether he be the HPB or not), reminded me forcibly of Crookshanks ? the yellow eyes, the limp (much like Crookshanks' bandy legs), the tawny coloured hair, even the lion like features. It seemed to somehow be appropriate as PoA was the book where we first met Crookshanks. I know Crookshanks is part-kneazle and that the likelihood is slim, but is it possible (even just a little bit) that Crookshanks is somehow an animagus and that this man is he? At the very least, there seems to be a strong connection there between them. I wouldn't be surprised if he had something to do with that cheeky cat. Sienna Who thinks her theories are beginning to get too far-fetched even for her From caesian at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 09:34:35 2004 From: caesian at yahoo.com (caesian) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 02:34:35 -0700 Subject: What did Riddle want from Ginny? Message-ID: <4EB7FA32-F80C-11D8-94D9-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111378 Well, I feel like Hannah Abbott: I lost my head completely and somehow managed to multiply a ferret into a flock of flamingos (OotP, O.W.L.S.) over on the Snape thread. I might have driven Kneasy to swear off romance entirely - and he used to have a thing for Madam Rosmerta! Oh well. Sorry. (wait a minute - do you think she's on to us with that ferret-flamingo reference? Draco would be the ferret, and then... nevermind.) So, in penance, I went digging around for some really, really obscure Canon. For example, anyone else notice that poor wizard Barruffio, the one who pedals Brain Elixer (OotP, O.W.L.S.), said 's' instead of 'f' and found himself on the floor with a buffalo on his chest (PS, Hallowe'en). But what got my interest was this question and answer on JKR's official Website in the FAQ section: Question: In 'Chamber of Secrets', what would have happened if Ginny had died and Tom Riddle had escaped the diary? Answer: I can't answer that fully until all seven books are finished, but it would have strengthened the present-day Voldemort considerably. My first thought was, is that really a frequently asked question? I mean, who are these genius kids? And who cares? He didn't escape and the diary is destroyed. Interesting that it was included. It was posted before the whole HBP announcement, or any mention of a long-lost link between CoS and HBP. (Sneaky.) Second, could this be the plot that was entirely removed from CoS? I.e., is the explanation of what happened between Ginny and Riddle, and what he stood to gain, removed from CoS to be included later? I would assume it pertains to the nature of the present-day Voldemort. What was he getting from Ginny? According to the text: "So Ginny poured out her soul to me, and her soul happened to be exactly what I wanted." hmmm. Very changelling hypothesis. (http://www.redhen-publications.com/Changeling.html) Also: "All the while he spoke, Riddle's eyes never left Harry's face. There was an almost hungry look in them." yikes, watch your soul. Caesian From earendil_fr at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 09:49:30 2004 From: earendil_fr at yahoo.com (earendil_fr) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:49:30 -0000 Subject: What drives You Know Who? [Non-sequitur] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111379 Coderaspberry wrote: > Anyway, > my thought was that it might be more of a stealing FROM death type > of thing - not a literal translation - and that could very much > apply. Voldemort, by seeking immortality, is basically "stealing > from death" - that is to say, cheating it. To have him flee from > death makes him less, I don't know, impressive or something. > > coderaspberry, who is waiting for someone who actually KNOWS French > to come along and make his silly musings look pedestrian Earendil. Native French speaker here. As I said in my post number 110053: 'Vol' means 'flight' as in flying, but not as in fleeing. But another meaning is, indeed, 'theft'. So if we stick strictly to the French possible translation, 'fleeing' is definitely ruled out. I suppose 'stealing *of* death' and 'stealing *from* death' could be translated the same, though honestly, the first meaning that comes to mind when reading 'Voldemort' is 'stealing *of* death', since interpreting it as 'stealing *from* death' would sound really, really weird ('to cheat death' could be translated as 'voler la mort', 'voler' being the verb associated to 'vol', but then 'vol' is a noun and couldn't be used in such a grammatical configuration, and even if it could, there would be no 'de' between it and 'mort')(I'm not sure I really made sense, here, did I?) Hope it helps, Earendil. From eeyore6771 at comcast.net Fri Aug 27 10:10:32 2004 From: eeyore6771 at comcast.net (Pat) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 10:10:32 -0000 Subject: What did Riddle want from Ginny? In-Reply-To: <4EB7FA32-F80C-11D8-94D9-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111380 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, caesian wrote: [snipping] > Question: In 'Chamber of Secrets', what would have happened if Ginny > had died and Tom Riddle had escaped the diary? > Answer: I can't answer that fully until all seven books are finished, > but it would have strengthened the present-day Voldemort considerably. > > My first thought was, is that really a frequently asked question? I > mean, who are these genius kids? And who cares? He didn't escape and > the diary is destroyed. Interesting that it was included. It was > posted before the whole HBP announcement, or any mention of a long- lost > link between CoS and HBP. (Sneaky.) > > Second, could this be the plot that was entirely removed from CoS? > I.e., is the explanation of what happened between Ginny and Riddle, and > what he stood to gain, removed from CoS to be included later? I would > assume it pertains to the nature of the present-day Voldemort. What > was he getting from Ginny? > > According to the text: > "So Ginny poured out her soul to me, and her soul happened to be > exactly what I wanted." > > hmmm. Very changelling hypothesis. > (http://www.redhen-publications.com/Changeling.html) > > Also: > "All the while he spoke, Riddle's eyes never left Harry's face. There > was an almost hungry look in them." > > yikes, watch your soul. > > Caesian Pat here: Bingo! I think you may be close to hitting the jackpot--you know, where JKR said we should be asking what Voldemort did to keep from dying when the AK curse rebounded. Hagrid has said it several times too--LV is not human enough to die. What makes us human? We, like Ginny, have a soul--that something inside us that makes us unique and different than the flora in the back yard. So, somehow, Voldemort has removed his own soul, but to live, he will need to regain it or someone else's. Creepy thought, really. What does Harry have that Voldemort has none of--a soul, full of love and compassion. What's in the room that was sealed shut at the Dept. of Mysteries? Same thing. Having an immortal soul is what has protected Harry all along--having a connection with his mother and with his friends and his godfather. Voldemort answers only to himself--he's concerned only with himself. He only cares for the DE's because they are a means to his desired end--gaining immortality. Which just led me down a different path altogether. There's more than one kind of immortality. Voldemort sees only the kind that means his physical body will live forever. But some people achieve a kind of immortality through their actions, rather than through an exceedingly long life. (Think of Anne Frank, who died so young, but is still remembered all these years later because of her diary that has touched so many people's hearts.) And that comes back to Ginny, who poured out her soul to "Tom" in the diary, and that was exactly what he needed to resume a human form again. Taking over someone else's soul may never work for him though, since he doesn't seem to have any understanding of what it means to truly have a soul. He's chasing a dream that he can never accomplish. Even when he had partially taken over Ginny, he did not understand Harry's connection with Dumbledore or why Fawkes came to him. Nor did he really seem to understand why Harry cared what happened to Ginny. He's not able to put himself in anyone's position, because he is so self-absorbed that he can only think of himself. That's not the way human beings live, isolated and devoid of emotions. Pat, who hopes this makes sense in the morning after I've had some sleep From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Aug 27 11:40:06 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 11:40:06 -0000 Subject: Snape as DE (was Re: Percy's Letter (Was: Is Percy a spy?)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111381 snipping my post. Totorivers wrote: > I see. I'd like to know which scenes you are talking about, though, > when you said others didn't know about Snape. Plus, it could also > mean that Snape came and promised Dumbledore just before the end. > We know the ministry had no ideas, but when did the ministry was > secure? Plus, we don't know if every member knew every one. > Potioncat: DD told the Hearing that Snape had "rejoined ourside before LV's fall" (GoF) We do not know if that is days or months. But it was long enough for Snape to gather more information "at great personal risk." Therefore, he did come back afterwards, like other suspected DEs, and he didn't just leave the DEs but helped "our side, at great risk." In the Shrieking Shack, (PoA) Black is surprised to learn that Snape is at Hogwarts. While it isnt surprising the two would lose touch after school, it does mean that Black didn't know that Snape was helping DD against LV. I'm taking that to mean, that no one else did either. So while Snape now comes openly to Order meetings, it seems to be that he did not do so before. The whole point of this was, I think, that Percy could be working for DD without the rest of the Order knowing. I'm not completely sure. So I'm keeping an open mind. Mothering soul that I am, I want him back home! Potioncat From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 12:11:09 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 12:11:09 -0000 Subject: Is Snape intelligent? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111382 Totorivers: > And sorry too if I seem harsh, but Snapethesuperspy sometimes gets > on my nerve, especially as he is shown in canon to be rather mediocre, > and to not think things through. And please give me quote of Snape > being particularly witty or something, because it is an assumption > everyone makes, and there *are* scenes where Snape seems > particularly dumb. Alla: OK. I.Do. Not. Defend. Snape. often. :o)Not at all, but today is one of those days. I am with Nora Renka on this one. For the life of me, I don't see where many Snape fans find IceKing!Snape in canon. Snape, as Shrieking Shack and Occlumency failure shows can be very, very emotional, IMO, BUT he is very intelligent too. Hmmm. Quotes? How about Snape being the one who figured out that Quirrell is up to something? Of course, the fact that he probably did not go to Dumbledore does not speak in his favor. :o) How about Snape being up to the task to prepare Wolfsbane for Remus? From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Aug 27 12:20:02 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 12:20:02 -0000 Subject: "Sevvie" (was Re: Snape's DE past (for the record)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111383 Totorivers wrote: snip And please give me quote of Snape > being particularly witty or something, because it is an assumption > everyone makes, and there *are* scenes where Snape seems > particularly dumb. > Potioncat: Fair enough! I'll show you witty if you'll show me dumb. I have to apologise for not providing actual quotes. Everything will be paraphrased. SS/PS: Logic puzzle. Opening speech in Potions class. CoS: After Ginny is taken to the Chamber, Snape greets Lockhart as the savior and tricks him into "Going after the monster." which all the teachers go along with, knowing Lockhart will hide and get out of their way. PoA: Wolfsbane Potion, which, if we believe Lupin, takes great skill. Assigning the werewolf paper to reveal Lupin's secret. He flips out in the Shrieking Shack...no, not a good example. He flips out in the hospital wing...oops, not so good either. Well, he's no James Bond. GoF: Keeping Harry distracted while DD comes down, while appearing to be interfering with Harry's efforts. (Harry is looking for DD, and Snape says DD is too busy to see him.) Making whatever preparations to go do whatever DD was sending him to do. (Which I think happened after the scene just mentioned.) OoP: He gives Umbridge fake veritaserum, knowing she doesn't have a clue how to use it or whether it is real. And when she asks for more asks, "You didn't use it all, did you? Three drops were enough." He gets Crabbe/Goyle(can't recall which) to loosen his hold on Neville without seeming to really be concerned about Neville. Snape is doing something for the Order. He isn't a trained spy. He's a person in a position to find information. The main reason I follow Snape so closely is that the first book was "spoiled" for me when someone gave it away that Snape wasn't the bad guy. At that point on, I read Snape differently. I never did suspect Quirrell! Potioncat From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 27 12:28:24 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 12:28:24 -0000 Subject: Is Snape intelligent? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111384 Totorivers: > > And sorry too if I seem harsh, but Snapethesuperspy sometimes > > gets on my nerve, especially as he is shown in canon to be > > rather mediocre, and to not think things through. And please > > give me quote of Snape being particularly witty or something, > > because it is an assumption everyone makes, and there *are* > > scenes where Snape seems particularly dumb. Alla: > OK. I.Do. Not. Defend. Snape. often. :o)Not at all, but today is > one of those days. > > I am with Nora Renka on this one. For the life of me, I don't see > where many Snape fans find IceKing!Snape in canon. > > Snape, as Shrieking Shack and Occlumency failure shows can be > very, very emotional, IMO, BUT he is very intelligent too. > > Hmmm. Quotes? How about Snape being the one who figured out that > Quirrell is up to something? Of course, the fact that he probably > did not go to Dumbledore does not speak in his favor. :o) SSSusan: Ah, but there are those who believe he DID go to DD! I didn't at first, but someone [Pippin, perhaps?] pointed out that after the foiled make-Harry-fall-from-his-broom incident, Quirrell apparently didn't try any more funny business until the end of the year's attempt for the stone (when DD as gone, btw). So perhaps Snape DID report in! **And note** that this nitpick takes *nothing* away from your point about Snape's intelligence here. Alla: > How about Snape being up to the task to prepare Wolfsbane for > Remus? SSSusan: Yes, something I mentioned earlier, too. And I would add the above saving Harry incident as evidence of Snape's intelligence as well. It was he, after all, who was smart enough to figure out what was happening AND knew how to handle it. I don't think a character's getting on your nerves equates with his being "dumb," Totorivers. You're asking for canon evidence of his intelligence, and several people have provided examples. I mentioned his being a potions *MASTER*, his ability to brew the wolfsbane potion, and the fact that he clearly knows his stuff in class [think of the times when he can tell in an instant, simply by looking at a cauldron, precisely what step of the process has been missed or which ingredient's measurement has not been accurately figured]. I would like to set the same task to you. If you really think Snape is so dumb or "mediocre," show us canon for it, please. Siriusly Snapey Susan From estelblau2002 at yahoo.es Fri Aug 27 10:16:31 2004 From: estelblau2002 at yahoo.es (estel) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 10:16:31 -0000 Subject: What drives You Know Who? [Non-sequitur] In-Reply-To: <06fe01c48bfc$a83547a0$6ca31a40@hppav> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111385 > macfotuk wrote: > > Oh come on everybody. JKR is the queen of names. Names have > > significance. > > > Vol - steal/thief > > > de = of > > > Mort = death > > > Cheater of death > > > It's about death, .....well immortality > > absence/cheating of death) Erika (Wolfraven) wrote: > All right, here's my two cents on the issue... > > "Vol" in French is a noun meaning "theft" or "flight" ("voler" > is the verb and means "to fly" or "to steal" and a "thief" is > a "voleur"). The preposition "de" is translated into English > as "from" or "of" depending on the context. This leaves us with > the following possibilities: "theft from death," "theft of > death" "flight of death," or "flight from death". > > I think any of these translations can describe one aspect of > another of Voldemort's character. I would like to add that in Catalan (Spanish language/dialect) Vol has two meanings: Vol - he wants (from de verb voler = to want) Vol - flight (noun) de - "of" is a preoposition in Spanish and Catalan. mort - is the Catalan word for "death" Then my translations are "he wants of death" and "flight of death". The first one doesn't fit very well... anyway I thought it could be interesting. Ester From griffin782002 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 12:28:22 2004 From: griffin782002 at yahoo.com (sp. sot.) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 05:28:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040827122822.88474.qmail@web90001.mail.scd.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111386 pippin_999 wrote: Hmm... perhaps you haven't finished that story, Potioncat? ...Kipling spoilers ahead ** ** ** ** ** I think Snape is more like Bagheera. Silky voice, a former captive, bound by a debt, cruel, sarcastic, but a very good person, er, panther, to have on your side in a fight. And not above aiming a few swats at a cub most especially when his pride has been wounded. Griffin782002 now: I wonder if it is right to compare Snape with Jack Sparrow. Well, both belong to a group that most people don't like, Snape in Slytherin, Sparrow is a pirate. I think in both cases most are appalled by this fact. But in the end some come to realize that although Sparrow belongs to a not so popular group of people, he has something good inside him. But in the Snape's case whether there is any goodness inside him or if he really deserves D.D.'s hasn't been realised yet. Shall I run for cover? :-P Griffin782002, who wonders if after the joke about H.P. behaving like Pepe le Pew and Fawkes singing as if he was Tweety, if she should compare the situation between H.P. and L.V. with that between the Coyote and the Roadrunner. Run for cover now? From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 11:12:37 2004 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 11:12:37 -0000 Subject: Umbridge and the Dementors ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111387 "uath50" wrote: > Did anyone find it strange that Umbridge was not sent to prison for > sending the dementors after Harry? > > I thought that maybe she should have at least lost her job at the > MOM or sent to Azkaban. > My take on this is that it will not be an ordeal until the dementors have officially left Azkaban. As much as I hate to admit..I think that some, or at least a few of the dementors want to stay at azkaban because there is well enough happiness there for them. (much like Arthur Weasley working in the missuse of muggle artifacts. Or Winky working for the Crouch home, or Kreacher working for the black home. HOWEVER..I think that the MOM has been FORCING ALL dementors to work their prison system and that's not right...I would not be surprised if there was one or two dementors left in Azkaban to tell the story of the "Umbrige order".. If not, then we can always rely on DD making ready use of the 30 mins he gave fudge.(He is, after all quite an accomplished enough legumiens.) And also, the next day afterwards he did retrieve Umbridge from the forbidden forrest. We have no idea how many reports happened in-between times, nor, do we know what fudge believes. No one knows anything about Fudge..including those electing him hence he may be MOM at the beginning of six or seven but may not be MOM at the end of six or seven. (is my guess) I only hope no one on a foolish scheme attempts to elect Ludlo Bagman or Mr. Perkins(you know the one with lumbago?!?). If anyone will be a new MOM..I'd put my fingers on Molly Weasley, Minerva McConnagal, Madame Hooch, Kingsley Shacklebold, Neville's Gran, Madam Marchbanks, and most likely Alastor Moody. Either way it goes, we do know that there WILL be a CHANGE, but we do not know who..Most of us are probably waiting to see what will happen to Percy and especially, if Umbridge is sanctioned/punished, then how much of her legislation will be allowed to pass... Or Will Umbridge simply disappear one night during a full moon? I cannot wait to find out. Doddiemoe From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com Fri Aug 27 13:03:56 2004 From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 13:03:56 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?FILK:_I_Won=92t_Curry_Love?= Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111388 I Won't Curry Love To the tune of You Can't Hurry Love by The Supremes MIDI at: http://www.garyrog.50megs.com/midi3.html Dedicated to Ravenclaw Bookworm >From the Edinburgh Book Festival, Aug. 15 2004 QUESTION: Has Voldemort or Tom Riddle ever cared for or loved anyone? JKR: Now, that's a cracking question to end with?very good. No, never. [Laughter.] If he had, he couldn't possibly be what he is. ******************************************************** VOLDEMORT (with vocal back-up from CHORUS OF DEATH EATERS): Jo said love, love Would make me kind I won't be wined, dined by nothin' benign I've always said I won't curry love No, I'd much rather hate Like that dwarf who went crazy So he could the Rhinegold take I won't curry love No, I'd much rather hate I've got to curse ev'ry time To hurt, control, annihilate But how many headaches Did I bear before I found a way To let me live again I was an ugly thing But I kept hangin' `round Till I felt my strength, yeah On the rebound And so ever since I've said: I won't curry love It's a miserable fake For the dove is too spotless I'll take wisdom from the snake How much must I hate How much more can they take Before wickedness will cause their skulls Skulls to break? No I can't stand to young Potter possess He's got that ancient form of love that I detest He made me feel that I, I can't hold him But vicious words help renew my vim And so ever since I've said: I won't curry love No, I'd much rather hate For hate is the feeling Jo misunderestimates. I won't curry love No, I'd much rather hate My disgust and my crime Halts their metabolic rate No, love, love, I do not see For I keep rejecting And disrespecting with my cold voice All through the day and night With offensive arms And hellish might I keep hating I keep negating They can't appease me Can't appease me I've always said I won't curry love No, I'd much rather hate I say it's just muck and slime Though it can be used as bait I won't curry love No, I'd much rather hate . - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm NOTE: The second stanza refers to Alberich, the dwarf in Wagner's Das Rheingold (the first of The Ring of the Nibelung tetralogy), whose renunciation of love enables him to steal the Rhinegold and harness its immeasurable power. From lszydlowski at hotmail.com Fri Aug 27 13:07:13 2004 From: lszydlowski at hotmail.com (mizstorge) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 13:07:13 -0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin redeux Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111389 Having gone back to review the original ESE!Lupin thread, I've been skimming through the books looking for confirmation. What I discovered is that Harry only hears the events of the night of James' and Lily's murders when Remus Lupin is around - on the train, during the Quidditch match and confronting the Boggart/Dementor under Lupin's supervision when learning the Patronus charm. In the woods on the night of the Shrieking Shack, with Sirius and Hermione, Harry hears screams and we are told he thinks he is going to die with his mother's screaming the last sound he hears - but we don't have the dialog ("Not Harry!") to confirm it is not actually Hermione he's hearing. The common denominator is Lupin, not Dementors, since the Boggart wasn't a real Dementor and Lupin wasn't at the lake with Harry, Hermione and Sirius. So, having been made suspicious of Lupin, I wonder: is it actually because of Lupin's presence Harry hears the dialog? Is it because Lupin was at Godric's Hollow that night? Does Harry pick up thoughts not just from Voldemort, but maybe also those working closely with him? From mnaperrone at aol.com Fri Aug 27 13:21:01 2004 From: mnaperrone at aol.com (mnaper2001) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 13:21:01 -0000 Subject: "Sevvie" (was Re: Snape's DE past (for the record)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111390 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > Totorivers wrote: > snip > And please give me quote of Snape > > being particularly witty or something, because it is an assumption > > everyone makes, and there *are* scenes where Snape seems > > particularly dumb. > > > > Potioncat: > Fair enough! I'll show you witty if you'll show me dumb. I have to > apologise for not providing actual quotes. Everything will be > paraphrased. > > SS/PS: Logic puzzle. Opening speech in Potions class. > > CoS: After Ginny is taken to the Chamber, Snape greets Lockhart as > the savior and tricks him into "Going after the monster." which all > the teachers go along with, knowing Lockhart will hide and get out > of their way. > > PoA: Wolfsbane Potion, which, if we believe Lupin, takes great > skill. Assigning the werewolf paper to reveal Lupin's secret. He > flips out in the Shrieking Shack...no, not a good example. He flips > out in the hospital wing...oops, not so good either. Well, he's no > James Bond. > > GoF: Keeping Harry distracted while DD comes down, while appearing > to be interfering with Harry's efforts. (Harry is looking for DD, > and Snape says DD is too busy to see him.) Making whatever > preparations to go do whatever DD was sending him to do. (Which I > think happened after the scene just mentioned.) > > OoP: He gives Umbridge fake veritaserum, knowing she doesn't have a > clue how to use it or whether it is real. And when she asks for > more asks, "You didn't use it all, did you? Three drops were enough." > > He gets Crabbe/Goyle(can't recall which) to loosen his hold on > Neville without seeming to really be concerned about Neville. > > > Snape is doing something for the Order. He isn't a trained spy. > He's a person in a position to find information. > > The main reason I follow Snape so closely is that the first book > was "spoiled" for me when someone gave it away that Snape wasn't the > bad guy. At that point on, I read Snape differently. I never did > suspect Quirrell! > > Potioncat Ally: I also disagree that there's any canon support for the idea of Snape as mediocre. Mean spirited, a bully, petty, yes. But also quite intelligent and clever and highly skilled as Potioncat pointed out above. Potioncat, I would add to your list a couple things: -the fact that Snape is known by the Order to be a superb occlumens, an archaic form of magic not many people know; -we know he successfully spied on Voldemort during his first reign, based on things DD has said, so obviously he has a fair degree of competence as a spy; -and doesn't even Sirius refer to his cleverness at one point? Snape has flaws as a character, but that doesn't make him mediocre. Ally From mnaperrone at aol.com Fri Aug 27 13:38:46 2004 From: mnaperrone at aol.com (mnaper2001) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 13:38:46 -0000 Subject: Severus Snape: The grudge and the very long LOLLIPOPS biography... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111391 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "aboutthe1910s" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "brandy" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tabouli" wrote: > snip > But instead he flips out and > > calls her the dirtiest name in the WW. How can we reconcile that > with the idea of him > > having a crush on her? Or maybe the crush didn't start until after > this event, when he > > realized that she was the only person being nice to him? > > > > -Brandy > aboutthe1910s: > I've often wondered if his reaction to Lily isn't what made that > memory Snape's *worst* (assuming that the chapter is objectively > titled by Jo, instead of according to Harry's assumtion, which it may > or may not have been, though it seems unlikely to have been Harry's > assumption because Harry doesn't ever really make that assumption in > the chapter) rather than what James did to him. I sincerely believe > that he must have known he had no chance with her anyway, but I've > considered the possibility that he blames himself for saying what he > said to her that day for ruining the chance that he has, in hindsight, > created for himself. > Ally: I also think that its possible that the whole reason this is Snape's worst memory is because it somehow affected his future. If Lily was the closest thing to a caring friend Snape had in school and she felt betrayed and this drove a wedge between them - well, who knows where Snape might have ended up if he had had the kind of support group Harry has? The only people with clearly bad home lifes in the books are Sirius, Harry and Snape, and I don't think its by chance that Sirius and Harry - both clearly heroic - are the ones with a tight circle of supportive friends. As for Snape having a crush and calling Lily a mudblood - I don't see these as inconsistent AT ALL. In fact, its a pet peeve that people dismiss the Lollipops theory based on that reason alone. When you're in love, everything is magnified - good feelings and bad. People say some of the most hurtful and hateful things to the people they care about the most, especially in the heat of an emotional moment and especially if they aren't very emotionally mature. For someone like Snape, who was young and not exactly well- versed in the emotion of love or the ability to control his emotions, to blurt out such a hateful comment is not only totally in character, but to me fits perfectly with the idea that he may have cared about her more than anyone else he knew at the time (whether in romantic love or friendship). I don't know if I explained it very well, but there's a movie that perfectly illustrates this point - A Bronx Tale, directed by Robert DeNiro. In the movie, the young Italian kid falls for a black girl, but all his friends and even his father are against the idea of interracial relationships. He grew up in an environment where hating folks because of the color of their skin was common, even if he didn't necessarily believe it. During a very passionate argument with the girl, who he's in love with, he blurts out the N-word without thinking. It's a terrible mistake he immediately regrets, but it doesn't change the fact that he could love her and still lash out at her with a terribly hateful word. I think Snape quite possibly did the same thing to Lily in that scene. Ally From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 13:39:17 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 13:39:17 -0000 Subject: Ron's dirt-smudged nose In-Reply-To: <009301c48be1$54b2c140$6466a8c0@CPQ21816182602> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111392 Melissa wrote: > I think it's most likely that the dirt smudge is to point out the stark difference between Ron and Hermione. Ron had already been told about the dirt but doesn't seem to care, and Hermione notices it right away. Maybe to lead us to believe these two could never get together, but a red herring, obviously :-) And notice that Harry doesn't seem to have been bothered by the dirt smudge, though he's been talking with Ron since the train ride began. > Now Cory: I think that's right, and just to add another thought -- remember that this incident occurred at a point in the story where Hermione was basically a bossy, annoying know-it-all. This is our first contact with her, and I think her pointing out the smudge was a way to introduce those elements of her personality. --Cory From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 27 13:50:05 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 13:50:05 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111393 I can tell from your answers, Totorivers, that you were responding to me, but since you didn't include any of my post, my points got lost. I am re-inserting some of what I was asking about. SSSusan previously: >>I don't have an objection per se with the possibility you've set out in the first paragraph here--that there was no epiphany but that Snape figured out he'd never gain power while w/ Voldy and didn't care for that fact--but I don't see how that translates into DD **accepting Snape back**. If it is all just about Snape going w/ the person with whom he thought he'd gain most power, then why work with DD? DD holds him in check; DD's not into gaining power for power's sake. Wouldn't this frustrate Snape, too, and tempt him to either go back to Voldy or set out on his own? More importantly, for me, is this: "I trust Severus Snape." DD says this more than once. Note it's not said as, "I trust Severus Snape *as a spy*" or "I trust Severus Snape, but not enough to let him be a spy," but simply "I trust Severus Snape." Would DD trust him so implicitly if he were just a power-hungry, switch-sides-willy-nilly kind of guy?<< Totorivers responded: > Ok, this is easy..... Dumbledore gave power to Snape. He most > likely helped him gain book about potions, plus Snape *is* an > authority figure at Hogwarts. Snape knows that when he is with > Dumbledore he isn't hated or made fun of. Snape has *power* during > the years Voldemort isn't there. Before, Snape wanted power as a DE, > but realised it was impossible. Plus, a non fanatical DE is soon > dead, so he had to lie. And if *helping* Dumbledore gives him power, > then why not. It explains why Dumbledore let Snape act like he does. > In the same way, Dumbledore does trust Snape, as Snape has what he > wants, and knows that betraying Dumbledore would be a very bad idea. > Dumbledore is right to trust Snape. But where do you take the idea > that Snape helped with his spying? Through the books, Snape has been > a liability for Dumbledore, and Dumbledore doesn't care, as it gives > Snape a chance for redemption -a chance Snape didn't take yet. SSSusan again: I still don't see this. DD probably gave Snape a book about potion- making, and that turned him into the skilled potions MASTER that he is?? I think you underestimate Severus. If Snape is all about WANTING POWER and felt he wasn't going to get anywhere with Voldy, then how is the type of power he has at Hogwarts/under DD *satisfying* to him? He gets to teach a bunch of teenaged "dunderheads," live in a boarding school, and have his preferences squashed by DD's decisions [wanting to expel Harry & Ron after the Whomping Willow; wanting to assume Harry was guilty when Mrs. Norris was petrified, etc.]. Snape has **a measure** of power at Hogwarts, but he certainly doesn't have tons of it. I also don't see anything in your response which explains why DD trusts Snape. You say "it explains" but I don't understand what "it" is. Snape wants power and DD gives him a measure of it, and that's enough to trust him?? It wouldn't be, in my book! I'd be assuming the guy would turn his back on me as soon as a better opportunity came along. [Lucius Malfoy, anyone, in the years Voldy was gone?] No, I fully believe there is MUCH more to the story of Snape's turn away from Voldy/towards DD. Totorivers, previously: >>>From cannon, James is known to not only bother Sevvie but loads of Slytherin: there is no rivalry in James part, except he is said to hate the dark arts. He is also *helped* along the way by Sirius, who hates Snape for being what he could have been...<<< SSSusan asked: >>I must have missed the bit where canon showed us James bothered "loads" of Slytherins. I recall hearing that Snape was part of a "gang of Slytherins" but I don't recall hearing that James pestered loads of Slytherins. Can you show me where I missed this? I also don't understand what you mean about Sirius hating Snape "for being what he could have been". Does the 'he' in that sentence refer to Sirius or to Snape? If Sirius, I really don't get it....<< Totorivers replied: > As for Sirius, he sees in Snape the perfect Black, the boy who > goes into the dark arts because he wants power, and he is too weak > to grab power in the normal way. Same thing with potion, does being > a potion master mean anything? Snape just made an effort that few > others did, but he has never shown true depth of character.. As I > said, Snape is a broken man that Dumbledore pities. He is the > perfect exemple for an uredeemable character. SSSusan: You keep talking about canon, but I don't see your canon evidence for this. HOW do you know Snape has shown no true depth of character? DD says Snape turned away from Voldy *at great personal risk*. DD sends him on missions [yes, whether spying or not is debatable] that are clearly dangerous to him [see end of GoF]. Snape saved Harry's life even though he can't stand the snot. THESE are all in canon. As is his ability with potions [wolfsbane, seeing what's wrong w/ a potion just by glancing at it,...]. Until I see **canon** for dumb Snape, unintelligent Snape, mediocre Snape, no-depth Snape, I'm not buying it. Siriusly Snapey Susan From aphrodeia at gmail.com Fri Aug 27 14:22:07 2004 From: aphrodeia at gmail.com (aphrodeia) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 10:22:07 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111394 <> I apologise if I'm being thick.... but how hasn't Snape taken his chance for redemption? He's apparently (allegedly) turned spy for the good guys. I'd think that's a pretty big redeeming quality, considering that Voldemort isn't the touchy-feely type who would view betrayal as a minor bummer and let spies leave his circle with a consolation prize. I think that, in the important ways, it appears he /has/ achieved redemption. (Barring any startling revelations that Snape is really truly evil - a premise that I don't buy.) Or can redemption only come in the form of big hugs for the Golden Trio? Unredeemable? I don't think so. Lisa From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 13:37:49 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 06:37:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: PERCY: DD's Personal Spy or Ministry's Puppet? (Long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040827133749.40252.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111395 > I said this before, but I think it was in a different Percy thread > (not even sure anymore). I think that Percy's loyalty is not to DD, > or Fudge, or Crouch, but to the Ministry itself as an institution. > He sees DD not necessarily as a threat to Fudge himself, but as a > threat to "the way things work" at the Ministry. If he were to > stage a coup,the entire basis of how the Ministry works would be > thrown into confusion. I think Percy would just as easily have > followed Dumbledore if he had been elected MoM, but he wasn't, so > he follows Fudge. Same > for his admiration of Umbridge - she is carrying the party line, > therefore she is good (in Percy's view). > > -Brandy Poor misunderstood Percy. Even prats have feelings, you know. I don't believe that Percy is evil or overly-ambitious, or even really ambitious actually. He's no 007-Percy spying on Dumbledore's behalf and he's not under imperius either. He's just....Percy. And right now that's bad enough. Let's look at Percy's younger years for some clues as to his behaviour now. All through his school years he was "perfect Percy", him mom's golden child who was held up as an example for the twins and Ron to emulate. And Percy did all the appropriate good-school-boy stuff, studied hard (12 OWLS!), gathered honours (Prefect AND Head Boy!), lived up to Molly's expectations (watch how she pets him in front of the other kids and then turns a much less friendly aspect on the twins) and in general did everything the way he was supposed to. Percy has it hard-wired into his brain that if you do the appropriate things and please your elders (first Molly, then your boss) you'll be amply rewarded with the recognition you deserve. This isn't always easy to accomplish: studying for all those OWLS while you're doing your prefect duties is a stress and Percy is a much more dutiful prefect than Ron was. And for the twins it's always open season on pranking Percy. But he's lived his life by the rules and he's benefited accordingly. He's the perfect Mama's boy. And then he gets his new job - a really wonderful opportunity - and his parents openly doubt that he earned it! What a betrayal! In mid-stream, with no warning, they've changed the rules on him. Darn right he's in a temper. His feelings are incredibly hurt. And he lashes out in an immature manner and hurts his parents badly. Because Percy doesn't want power - he wouldn't recognize real power if it danced in front of him wearing Dobby's teacozy, to paraphrase Ron. What Percy wants is recognition - he wants praise, acclaim, he wants to be looked up to. Lucius Malfoy and Umbridge understand that power is different from recognition - they don't want to be recognized, they just want to call the shots. That's why they find it easy to manipulate Percy and Fudge (another head-boy type who finds it stressful to actually do his job rather than just be known as the Minister) by fawning on them and praising them lavishly. Guys like Percy and Fudge are duck soup for those who REALLY understand power. And when the Percy's and Fudge's of the world do feel that they're being treated unfairly or think they're being disrespected, they lash out nastily - Percy at his family, Fudge at Dumbledore. As Brandy says, Percy has elevated the institution of the Ministry into something that deserves his entire and unthinking loyalty. I would go so far as to say that it's become his new family. And he's making that point to his old family every way he can. As for the letter to Ron: no secret codes or hidden meanings, basically it's the first opportunity he's had to spell out the terms on which he'll graciously forgive his family for their treatment of him and return to their bosom. He was probably in a quandary about how to get this message across before since he wasn't on speaking terms with Molly and Arthur. Ron's appointment - with the suggestion of Percy imitation it implied on Ron's part - was the perfect opportunity. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 13:18:48 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 06:18:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Snape, Lily and that nasty "M" word.... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040827131848.61228.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111396 >> But instead he flips out and calls her the dirtiest name in the >> WW. How can we reconcile that with the idea of him having a crush >> on her? Or maybe the crush didn't start until after this event, >> when he realized that she was the only person being nice to him? > > > > -Brandy Actually, Snape didn't address his comment to Lily, he addressed it to James. "I don't help from mudbloods like HER". He didn't give a toss for Lily's feelings then (or later, IMO); I think he knew that Potter liked Evans (it does strike me as the kind of thing that was painfully apparent to onlookers even if James himself probably thought he was being subtle and debonair) and that to call the Divine Lily that word would really bug James. And he was right, James did get really upset after that. Not exactly a brilliant example of foresight on Snape's part but he was, shall we say, extremely stressed himself at the time and possibly not very logical. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Fri Aug 27 15:12:55 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:12:55 -0000 Subject: PERCY: DD's Personal Spy or Ministry's Puppet? (Long) In-Reply-To: <20040827133749.40252.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111397 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > Let's look at Percy's younger years for some clues as to his > behaviour now. All through his school years he was "perfect Percy", > him mom's golden child who was held up as an example for the twins > and Ron to emulate. And Percy did all the appropriate > good-school-boy stuff, studied hard (12 OWLS!), gathered honours > (Prefect AND Head Boy!), lived up to Molly's expectations (watch how > she pets him in front of the other kids and then turns a much less > friendly aspect on the twins) and in general did everything the way > he was supposed to. > > Percy has it hard-wired into his brain that if you do the > appropriate things and please your elders (first Molly, then your > boss) you'll be amply rewarded with the recognition you deserve. > This isn't always easy to accomplish: studying for all those OWLS > while you're doing your prefect duties is a stress and Percy is a > much more dutiful prefect than Ron was. And for the twins it's > always open season on pranking Percy. But he's lived his life by > the rules and he's benefited accordingly. He's the perfect Mama's > boy. A variation of this further explains the situation. Percy's view that he was doing the right thing was forever affirmed by Molly... so when Percy continues as before, following his immediate superior faithfully, and his mother objects... what has changed? Well, since Percy is doing what he's always done, obviously from his POV his mother is who changed, and for the worse... now agreeing with the twins and them instead of himself. This is why he rejects his family. Josh From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 15:56:04 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 08:56:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: <103.4e18595b.2e5fffb9@aol.com> Message-ID: <20040827155604.46570.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111398 > I do think that part of Snape's job is to keep Harry's ego in > check. > I'm not sure Snape *knows* it, but I think that is why Dumbledore > allows their contentious relationship to follow its course rather > than putting a stop to it. And if Snape is aware of this, or has > figured it out from Dumbledore's lack of action, there's no doubt > he very much enjoys this part. He doesn't like Harry, or certainly > not those personality traits of Harry's that remind him of James-- > which is pretty much all of them!--and I'm sure he gets a perverse > pleasure in bringing the brat down a peg or two whenever he can. > > It's always nice when you love your job, isn't it ;-) > > Julie I so completely agree! There's a lot of casual talk on HP sites about how Snape "hates" Harry and treats him "like dirt" (or worse) but I don't see it that way. Dumbledore just wouldn't allow it to happen. And once you remove the Harry filter (ie, all events coloured by Harry's perceptions of a person) it's possible to see things in a clearer light. Snape isn't nice but he's not a monster. Umbridge is a monster - not least because she's always so poisonously nice about the whole thing. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 16:42:31 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 16:42:31 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: <20040827155604.46570.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111399 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > I so completely agree! > > There's a lot of casual talk on HP sites about how Snape "hates" > Harry and treats him "like dirt" (or worse) but I don't see it that > way. Dumbledore just wouldn't allow it to happen. And once you > remove the Harry filter (ie, all events coloured by Harry's > perceptions of a person) it's possible to see things in a clearer > light. Snape isn't nice but he's not a monster. Umbridge is a > monster - not least because she's always so poisonously nice about > the whole thing. > > Magda > Alla: Casual talk? I disagree. Even if you remove "Harry's filter" you are still left with Snape wilingly letting Harry to be possessed by Voldemort, even if you remove "Harry's filter" you are still left with Snape insulting Harry's dead father every chance he gets. (And. no I don't think that interaction in PoA was on private grounds, because it was still in Hogwarts). Nobody can take away "monster" title from Umbridge, because she clearly is. But Snape is a sadist, IMO. Someone who never got a chance to set his score with James, even though James is dead and now he tries to settle it through his son. I think he is on his way to redemption, but nope, he is nowhere close yet. I don't want him to hug the Trio, but I want him to treat human beings, who are under his supervision,not his size, and never did anything bad to him , accordingly. From cruthw at earthlink.net Fri Aug 27 17:03:51 2004 From: cruthw at earthlink.net (caspenzoe) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 17:03:51 -0000 Subject: Theory of theme (was Re: What did Riddle want from Ginny?) In-Reply-To: <4EB7FA32-F80C-11D8-94D9-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111400 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, caesian wrote: > Question: In 'Chamber of Secrets', what would have happened if Ginny > had died and Tom Riddle had escaped the diary? > Answer: I can't answer that fully until all seven books are finished, > but it would have strengthened the present-day Voldemort considerably. [snip!] Interesting that it was included. It was > posted before the whole HBP announcement, or any mention of a long- lost > link between CoS and HBP. (Sneaky.) > > Second, could this be the plot that was entirely removed from CoS? > I.e., is the explanation of what happened between Ginny and Riddle, and > what he stood to gain, removed from CoS to be included later? I would > assume it pertains to the nature of the present-day Voldemort. What > was he getting from Ginny? > > According to the text: > "So Ginny poured out her soul to me, and her soul happened to be > exactly what I wanted." > > hmmm. Very changelling hypothesis. > (http://www.redhen-publications.com/Changeling.html) > > Also: > "All the while he spoke, Riddle's eyes never left Harry's face. There > was an almost hungry look in them." > > yikes, watch your soul. > > Caesian Hi Caesian! (Brief aside: I haven't yet followed up on our previous off-board conversation only because I'm currently in the process of moving, home and office both!) Since reading the transcript of JKR's latest interview this is exactly the conclusion that my thoughts turn to. I agree with you and Pat largely - but for possibly expanded reasons, that both Vm's ability to survive and his problems have to do with his lacking or altogether missing soul. I think that to get to where he is "survive"(ing), but not "live"(ing) Tom/VM had to surrender and/or sell his own soul at some point, to I can't guess what. Therefore, while his body may have been nearly destroyed when his curse on HP rebounded, he did not quite die because either a. The bargain he made at the cost of his own soul precluded his complete bodily, let alone absent soul's, destruction, even by AK; or b. In JKR's universe, one can't truly die unless one's soul and body are truly together; or c. Possibly for both reasons. In any case, at some point whatever soul Tom had became the posession of some other and probably more generalized force of evil either through some remnant of SS's left in the Chamber proper of COS, or some more stereotypical "deal with the devil" transaction. I think, therefore, that HP is in the process of purging evil or it's capacity (greatly enhanced in him, HP, through his toddler encounter with and survival of VM's [enhanced from his TR stage] evil) both on a personal level, and for the wizarding world at large - thus the applicability of alchemical symbolism (though I'm still working at a grave disadvantage here without all of the available literature). I think the overall theme of the books will be that contrary to Vernon Dursley's pronouncement in Book 1 that "There's no such thing as magic," "magic" does, in fact, exist in JKR'S view - but (this is JKR'S raelly brilliant point) only on a spiritual, as opposed to physical, plane. (Hence JKR's obvious disdain for real world silliness that is a literal interpretaion of the occult as it survives today.) Likewise, however, "evil" and "good" also exist primarily on a spiritual plane. Therfore, Voldemort (evil), while not really alive, and thus immune to death does survive in HP (spiritually and threfore physically to the extent HP allows him/it expression), the WW (again spiritually to the extent of souls that support him/it and physically to the extent souls allow him/it expression), and, by metaphorical extension, in us as we allow him/it to live in us. Hence the need for HP's, the WW's, and by implication our, "purification" by "alchemical" or other meatphorical means. I would emphasize the use of metaphorical means, because I think (and again this is what makes JKR brilliant, IMO) JKR's point is double edged in that JKR's handling of the subject is not only a good old-fashioned metaphorical morality tale, but also a metaphor about metaphor itself. I think her work may also, ultimately be interpreted, not only as pro-Christian, but as anti-fundamentalist (anti-literalist) in the broadest sense both for fundamentalists/literalists who openly identify with and consider themselves on the side of good (but are actually rule-obsessed Percy's) and for fundamentalist occultists who actually believe in real world magic (there are some out there). And, I might add, even HP fans who, for instance, have become certain that beheadings of major characters are essential to JKR's story! Not only do JKR'S books in this series make metaphysical statements using metaphor, but they also say something about the proper place of metaphor in metaphysical discussion. Very clever and skillful, IMO. Does any of this make sense to anyone else, or am I just all wet here? Caspen From ellydan at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 17:20:50 2004 From: ellydan at yahoo.com (Melete) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 10:20:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hagrid as HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040827172050.3723.qmail@web40811.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111401 Hagrid as Half Blood Prince I think is perhaps the best theory I've found so far. If you think about the events in COS, we have Harry seeing Hagrid in the past through Tom Riddle's diary. Then of course we have the scene with Aragog defending Hagrid as his friend. Any number of these moments could have had a reveal about Hagrid's past as a half-giant and perhaps Half Prince. Now that Hagrid has found his brother Grawp couldn't this be an opportune time for him to regain some family connections and find out that he is partial royalty. This would certainly solve some of the problems with the giants' loyalty. (or perhaps create more...) At any rate, I'm happy to see someone else mention this because I've been stewing over Hagrid as the possible Prince for a while now. --Melete --- syroun wrote: > > > > I am new at this, but I read another post...sorry no > #/name that I > remembered, but the person supported a theory that > Hagrid could be > giant royalty and is certainly a half-blood. I > thought it was an > interesting idea and ties in well with what went on > in CoS. What do > you think? > > Syroun > > > > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 27 17:32:34 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 17:32:34 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111402 Magda wrote: > > There's a lot of casual talk on HP sites about how Snape "hates" > > Harry and treats him "like dirt" (or worse) but I don't see it > > that way. Dumbledore just wouldn't allow it to happen. And once > > you remove the Harry filter (ie, all events coloured by Harry's > > perceptions of a person) it's possible to see things in a clearer > > light. Snape isn't nice but he's not a monster. Umbridge is a > > monster - not least because she's always so poisonously nice about > > the whole thing. Alla: > Casual talk? I disagree. Even if you remove "Harry's filter" you > are still left with Snape wilingly letting Harry to be possessed by > Voldemort, even if you remove "Harry's filter" you are still left > with Snape insulting Harry's dead father every chance he gets. > > Nobody can take away "monster" title from Umbridge, because she > clearly is. > > But Snape is a sadist, IMO. Someone who never got a chance to set > his score with James, even though James is dead and now he tries to > settle it through his son. > > I think he is on his way to redemption, but nope, he is nowhere > close yet. SSSusan: And you've got JKR's word on it, Alla. Here 'tis: "Snape is a very sadistic teacher, loosely based on a teacher I myself had, I have to say. I think children are very aware and we are kidding ourselves if we don't think that they are, that teachers do sometimes abuse their power and this particular teacher does abuse his power. He's not a particularly pleasant person at all." [The Connection, Oct. 12, 1999] Snape has his strengths--heck, I was just "defending" him as NOT being dumb or mediocre this morning--but he IS mean and he HAS singled out kids who haven't deserved his nasty treatment. He HAS abused his power. JKR said so herself. Siriusly Snapey Susan From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Aug 27 17:42:35 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 17:42:35 -0000 Subject: PERCY: DD's Personal Spy or Ministry's Puppet? (Long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111403 Ministry puppet or Spy for the Order, what was Percy trying to accomplish with this letter? Suppose on the ministry puppet side, he actually wants Ron to break with Harry, his family and Dumbledore--what does that accomplish for Percy? How does it further his aims, or the Ministry's? Dumbledore and Harry lose the valuable support of --Ron? It will hurt Harry's feelings, sure, but what does that do for the cause? Ron's not even of age! Ron's not going to have any useful information to feed to Umbridge if he breaks contact with Harry and alienates his parents, so it can't be that. Anyway, would Powerhungry!Percy want Ron to give info to Umbridge? Wouldn't he want it for himself? And wasn't it the idea that the Ministry wanted to pump the Weasley family for information that got Percy into such a tizzy in the first place? So now, he thinks it's okay? More than that, Percy has been a head boy and a prefect. Presumably he knows something about how to motivate teenagers. Anybody who works with teens knows that you need to offer a reward that's concrete, immediate and highly desirable -- now, if Percy had dangled an extra trip to Hogsmeade in front of Ron, I'd be worried, but head boy ship, possibly, in two years? No way! Furthermore, Percy worries about having his letter intercepted, but never checks to see if Ron actually got it. That doesn't sound like detail-oriented Percy to me. Now, looking at the other side, what would Spy!Percy accomplish by sending the letter? Is there any information in it that the trio doesn't already have? Well, there's Umbridge's appointment as High Inquisitor, but that must be a red herring, since they're going to find out all about it in a few hours, and it's hardly something the Trio would overlook. The Order has already told them that communications are hazardous, that Dumbledore's in trouble, and that Umbridge is not to be trusted. Oh, and that Percy is a git. So what else is new? Only this: Dumbledore's friend Sturgis Podmore is being sent to Azkaban. The Trio already know something about this because it was in the newspaper. But where was it? In a one inch item at the bottom of a column, under a huge ad for a sale at Madame Malkin's. The Order could hardly be sure that the trio had seen it, or that they would remember that Sturgis is a member of the Order. As for its significance, Harry had contacted the Order wanting to know why his scar was hurting. Well, here's one possible answer--it just might have something to do with Voldemort's reaction to the news about Podmore. This is not something it would be safe to have Sirius tell Harry through the fire. Dumbledore would not want Voldemort to know that he'd made a connection between Harry's scar hurting and the Podmore matter. Of course the ploy works a little too well, since Harry doesn't make the connection between his scar hurting and Podmore either. And the saga continues... Pippin From drliss at comcast.net Fri Aug 27 17:44:47 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (drliss at comcast.net) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 17:44:47 +0000 Subject: ESE!Lupin Reduex Message-ID: <082720041744.15363.412F730E00051C1B00003C0322007589429C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 111404 mizstorge: The common denominator is Lupin, not Dementors, since the Boggart wasn't a real Dementor and Lupin wasn't at the lake with Harry, Hermione and Sirius. So, having been made suspicious of Lupin, I wonder: is it actually because of Lupin's presence Harry hears the dialog? Is it because Lupin was at Godric's Hollow that night? Does Harry pick up thoughts not just from Voldemort, but maybe also those working closely with him? Lissa: (please bear in mind the teasing tone intended in much of this post! ;)) ::cracks her knuckles in readiness:: Oh, come on. You so knew I'd be on this one in a heartbeat! Okay, first of all, let's get one thing straight. I was at the American Chemical Society conference for most of this week, and didn't have access to my computer for long periods of time. Don't think I didn't see you all ganging up on Lupin. The reason I didn't protect my werewolf was because I didn't have time, not because I have the slightest doubts about his innocence. Thank you to all those protecting him! I will defend my werewolf to the death, even if my death is inflicted by monotoned scientists intent on boring me silly. (And if the guy I ran into in the B. Dalton's that had the conversation with me and two junior high kids is on here- thank you!) Anyway. To the point. Specifically, I don't think that Lupin is the common demonenator- I think it IS the dementor. However, you do admittedly have a point about Lupin not being at the Lake. Explanations for that: 1.) Author's perogative. Let's get technical. If the Boggart truly affected everyone with all the powers of whatever it was imitating, wouldn't Lupin start to transform every time he saw his? JKR gets a bit selective here when she allows the Boggart-Dementor to have such powers. However, I'd think that Harry might feel his fear much more intensely than others feel theirs. Lupin is almost weary whenever he faces his boggart- not surprising as he faces it every month. The other boggarts we've seen (Ron's spider, Hermione's failure, Mrs. Weasley's dead family), while certainly intense, don't have any magical powers. 2.) At the lake, Harry is so focused on other things that he is NOT overwhelmed by the fear and the voices. Notice that when he IS able to successfully produce a Patronus, he can't hear his parents so well. Those two things are connected. And at the lake, real time Harry (as opposed to the time traveling Harry) CAN hear the dementors- he mentions that his mother screaming would be the last thing he ever heard. I think JKR just doesn't give great detail to the voices because we know they're there, it's getting old, and let's focus on the external action. Now, the next question: Harry's alone with Lupin at other crucial times. And yet, even then he doesn't hear his parents' voices. It's only when the dementors are around. He's just fortunate not to be around them much when Lupin's not there! As for ESE!Lupin in general... I've kind of been waiting for Pippin's masterwork, but I'll argue these two points. One is canon, one is not. The not canon one: I've said this before, and I know the argument against it. JKR is playing with the theme of intolerance with Lupin. Making him ESE! says "see? He deserved not to be trusted all along!" I know the argument is that it's the years of prejudice and pain that he's endured to turn Lupin ESE! I don't refute that this is a valid possibility- I just think it's not the path JKR has chosen to go with this character. Does she acknowledge the possiblity? Heck YES! What do you think Kreacher is? Kreacher is the way Lupin COULD have gone, and I think the way many people would go if they were forced into Lupin's situation. But I think her point with Lupin is that he is someone that is truly wonderful and that, although damaged and severely hurt, has risen above what the world has done to him. He's been left with pretty high walls and is probably one of the loneliest characters in the series, and keeps people at arm's length (just look at how he treats Harry, the son of his best friend), but he does not falter from what's right, despite his own pain. Okay, okay. He doesn't falter FAR. (If he didn't falter at all, that would be pretty nauseating.) JKR has said that Lupin is one of her favorite characters- someone she really likes. Not that she likes writing him, but that she likes HIM. I'd say that's indicating he's not ESE. Now, the canon reason: Even disregarding the non-canon reason, I could possibly waver (although I doubt it). But here's the other thing. There are 6 people that we know of in Remus Lupin's life that have actively tried to help him. His parents (they tried everything to find a cure, and that's all we know about them), James Potter, Sirius Black, Peter Pettigrew, and Albus Dumbledore. Even in the current Order, people might be nice enough to him, but those are the main people that have taken risks and proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that they care about HIM. (Even if Peter ended up a traitor.) Would you be able to convince me that Lupin was ESE if it was just a matter of joining up with Voldie to go against the world? It might have more weight with me. But to join up with Voldemort is to go -directly against- James, Sirius, (obstensibly) Peter, and most especially Dumbledore. Remus knows this. I can not believe that he would turn so violently against the only people in his life that have ever actively taken a risk on his behalf- and heavy ones as well. Even by OotP, when so much time has gone by, Lupin would still know that to side with Voldemort is to align himself directly opposite Dumbledore, and I don't think Remus would ever do that. We've seen him let those he loves get away with things, yes, but only when the victim is himself or someone he's not too fond of anyway. Threaten his friends and he'll be there. He would have killed Peter, I think, once he knew that Peter WAS the spy. He isn't afraid to tell Snape to step back in line after Snape refuses to keep teaching Harry occlumency. (Any failure on Remus's part is not attributed by me to lack of trying, but the fact that Snape is INCREDIBLY stubborn.) He was ready to die to protect Harry, when he jumped in front of Harry as Lucius Malfoy was turning to curse him. And while he couldn't get to Sirius, he did hold Harry back from the veil, which to me means he knew exactly what that veil was and didn't want Harry anywhere near it. (NOT that he killed Sirius. Yeah, I'm glaring around ;) ) He does love a few people, and those people are so clearly aligned against Voldemort I can't see Lupin being on the opposite side. He's not the hero of the novel and he's not perfect, but working for Voldemort and ESE? To quote JKR, "How dare you!" (Of course, she was speaking about Lily being a DE, but....) A worker from the Official Werewolf Protection Agency (WPA), Lissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From DBoyken at aol.com Fri Aug 27 17:56:38 2004 From: DBoyken at aol.com (Deb) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 17:56:38 -0000 Subject: Arthur Weasley in Gryffindor? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111405 I just finished rereading GOF last night. Molly specifically tells Harry (when visiting before Task 3) that she was yelled at by the Fat Lady one night for sneaking in at 4:00 am, out walking with Arthur. She definitely says, "I was" not "We were" told off . . . so . . . she obviously came back on her own. Is that because Arthur was detained by Filch's predecessor, or because he was trying to sneak into the Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff dorm at the time? Deb in NJ From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 17:57:17 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 17:57:17 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111406 > SSSusan: snip. > Snape has his strengths--heck, I was just "defending" him as NOT > being dumb or mediocre this morning--but he IS mean and he HAS > singled out kids who haven't deserved his nasty treatment. He HAS > abused his power. JKR said so herself. > Alla: I like the part of Snape's personality, which decided to leave Voldemort. :o) I respect him for that. It does not stop me from despising his personality as reflected in his relationship with Harry. :) He is a complex character, no doubt about that and of course I am still to see the canon which shows that Snape is dumb. :o) Could be driven by emotions? Definitely. Dumb? No. From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 18:29:06 2004 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 18:29:06 -0000 Subject: What did Riddle want from Ginny? In-Reply-To: <4EB7FA32-F80C-11D8-94D9-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111407 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, caesian wrote: > Well, I feel like Hannah Abbott: I lost my head completely and somehow > managed to multiply a ferret into a flock of flamingos (OotP, O.W.L.S.) > over on the Snape thread. I might have driven Kneasy to swear off > romance entirely - and he used to have a thing for Madam Rosmerta! Oh > well. Sorry. (wait a minute - do you think she's on to us with that > ferret-flamingo reference? Draco would be the ferret, and then... > nevermind.) > > So, in penance, I went digging around for some really, really obscure > Canon. > > For example, anyone else notice that poor wizard Barruffio, the one who > pedals Brain Elixer (OotP, O.W.L.S.), said 's' instead of 'f' and found > himself on the floor with a buffalo on his chest (PS, Hallowe'en). > > But what got my interest was this question and answer on JKR's official > Website in the FAQ section: > > Question: In 'Chamber of Secrets', what would have happened if Ginny > had died and Tom Riddle had escaped the diary? > Answer: I can't answer that fully until all seven books are finished, > but it would have strengthened the present-day Voldemort considerably. > > My first thought was, is that really a frequently asked question? I > mean, who are these genius kids? And who cares? He didn't escape and > the diary is destroyed. Interesting that it was included. It was > posted before the whole HBP announcement, or any mention of a long- lost > link between CoS and HBP. (Sneaky.) > > Second, could this be the plot that was entirely removed from CoS? > I.e., is the explanation of what happened between Ginny and Riddle, and > what he stood to gain, removed from CoS to be included later? I would > assume it pertains to the nature of the present-day Voldemort. What > was he getting from Ginny? > > According to the text: > "So Ginny poured out her soul to me, and her soul happened to be > exactly what I wanted." > > hmmm. Very changelling hypothesis. > (http://www.redhen-publications.com/Changeling.html) > > Also: > "All the while he spoke, Riddle's eyes never left Harry's face. There > was an almost hungry look in them." > > yikes, watch your soul. > > Caesian This reminded me of the theory that the soul of Tom Riddle was transferred to baby Harry that night at Godric's Hollow. This would explain why he did not die. His body may have vaporized (hence, "Vapormort") but his soul still lived in Harry. This provides explanations to others issues as well. First, the prophecy. This soul transference marked Harry as his equal. Equal because of Tom's soul residing in him. Second, the connection. If Tom's soul is residing in Harry, then Harry can sense what Tom is thinking/feeling. This may also explain why the name "Tom Riddle" was familiar to Harry. Third, the scar. Perhaps a scar of this kind was the mark of a "soul bearer." DD said this was "ancient magic." Perhaps it was done with greater frequency in an earlier time. For what reason? I haven't the foggiest. One guess would be to escape persecution. One's soul would be transferred to another, their bodies "killed" then their soul reunited. (Far-fetched, I know, but it's just birdwalking anyway.) Fourth, the intensity. The more Harry is around LV and learns of him (and vice versa), the greater the intensity of the pain in his scar, the darkness of his mood, the "insight" of his nightmares, etc. LV may be trying to pull his soul from Harry, but unintentionally. I don't think LV knows his soul is in Harry. (Chamber of Secrets, ch. 17 "Well," said Riddle, smiling pleasantly, "how is it the you -- a skinny boy with no extraordinary magical talent -- managed to defeat the greatest wizard of all time? How did you escape with nothing but a scar, while Lord Voldemort's powers were destroyed?" There was an odd red gleam in his hungry eyes now. American hardback page 313.) SO, yes, Tom may have been after Ginny's soul because he was missing his own soul. Then again, Tom may have been looking for love. Or would this be the same thing? Chamber of Secrets, chapter 17 "It's very boring, having to listen to the silly troubles of an eleven-year-old girl," he went on. "But I was patient. I wrote back. I was sympathetic, I was kind. Ginny simply /loved/ me." American hardback page 309 Julie -- things that make you go Hmmmmmm... From nrenka at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 18:50:15 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (Nora Renka) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 18:50:15 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111408 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > SSSusan: > And you've got JKR's word on it, Alla. Here 'tis: > > "Snape is a very sadistic teacher, loosely based on a teacher I > myself had, I have to say. I think children are very aware and we > are kidding ourselves if we don't think that they are, that > teachers do sometimes abuse their power and this particular teacher > does abuse his power. He's not a particularly pleasant person at > all." [The Connection, Oct. 12, 1999] Ah, that quote. Curse you all for inspiring me when I should be studying. :) That nails the aspects of Snape's character that I ethically find most troubling. Now, I'm not a believer in ESE!Snape, and I think he is/was/has been/probably will be doing good things. But he's got some serious vices on the Ordinary level, and those are what I'm going to focus on. Note: this discussion of moral failures does not invalidate or really have any bearing on thinking about the positive, selfless, daring acts that Snape has done. This is all about the little things. I think he is indeed something of a sadist. Certainly not Bellatrix class or particular type, so no slippery slope arguments please. I think it fits him, though, because he seems to genuinely *enjoy* the discomfiture of the children--those scenes that always make me think 'Right point, perhaps, but do you have to do it THAT WAY?' (his reprimand of Harry sneaking out in PoA, Harry and Ron coming in with the car in CoS, reading the Skeeter article about Hermione out loud to the class, etc.). The 'abuse of power' issue has been discussed over and over again, so I refer any doubters to our past discussions there. To be short, none of the other faculty seem to be capricious in the same way, except Umbridge (who is far, *far* worse than Snape, for her sadism is moral, physical, clearly malicious, and overtly damaging). I do buy the argument that Snape has fairly good relationships with the rest of the faculty. A large part of it is that, well, he can't and doesn't treat them like he does the students. You think McGongagall is going to take crap from anyone, not to mention someone she probably taught as a snot-nosed 11-year old? The teachers are all on the same level--of course, the PoA issues with Lupin are another can of worms. So why does Snape treat the students like poo? In part, I think-- because he can. For some unknown reason, Dumbledore hasn't dramatically stepped in, partially (I suppose, much in line with the BADD ANGSTers), because he actually *doesn't* want to meddle all the time. And it's that element of choice, letting one's baser desires override the intellectual knowledge that you really shouldn't treat people like that, that's so frustrating about Snape (and makes him a more interesting character, for sure). How you treat your inferiors... [Intermezzo to clarify: I think that how you treat people in general, everyday, is a moral issue of great significance. It's not only doing the big things that matters. How you treat people everyday is a strong reflection on your own character, because it indicates that you do or don't respect the rights, the subjectness, of other people.] I guess that's why the OotP Pensieve scene failed to really make Snape more sympathetic for me. We see one scene with no context, but that scene *is* horrifying--honestly, I find it difficult to read-- and there Snape is victim, while in the present time he is bully. Shklar has the great quote on this, about overvaluing victims. I know that people who are abused often end up being abusers, but I also credit Severus Snape with being sharp enough that he really ought to know better. I make no claims as to knowing whether he does know better, if that made any sense. And now, I'm going to go back to studying German grammar. -Nora, who is a big fan of Diana and thinks that's part of why 'I see no difference' can be read as a problematic moral statement, not just a harsh comment to Hermione From terpnurse at qwest.net Fri Aug 27 18:47:13 2004 From: terpnurse at qwest.net (Steven Spencer) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 11:47:13 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hagrid/Ogg (was: Arthur Weasley in Gryffindor?) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8271DFDC-F859-11D8-9D66-0003930C168E@qwest.net> No: HPFGUIDX 111409 Deb wrote: > I just finished rereading GOF last night. Molly specifically tells > Harry (when visiting before Task 3) that she was yelled at by the Fat > Lady one night for sneaking in at 4:00 am, out walking with Arthur. > She definitely says, "I was" not "We were" told off . . . so . . . > she obviously came back on her own. Is that because Arthur was > detained by Filch's predecessor, or because he was trying to sneak > into the Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff dorm at the time? Huh. You're right. I never noticed that before! Just as a niggling observation I made from that same scene, and I apologize if it's been gone over to death already - Molly makes a comment about the Gameskeeper before Hagrid, a man named Ogg. If Hagrid indeed became gameskeeper shortly after his expulsion from school, wouldn't that mean that Molly was there *before* (thus making her older than) Tom Riddle and Hagrid? Either it's an erroneous assumption based on when Hagrid actually did become GK, or it's a Flint, or else the elder Weasleys are considerably older than they seem, which would then beg the question why she and Arthur waited so very many years before starting a family. Any ideas? Terpnurse From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Fri Aug 27 19:03:43 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 19:03:43 -0000 Subject: Smart "Sevvie" (was Snape's DE past) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111410 > Potioncat: > Fair enough! I'll show you witty if you'll show me dumb. I have to > apologise for not providing actual quotes. Everything will be > paraphrased. Bren: I hear ya! When was our SSSnivellus ever DUMB? He had been impulsive and irrational sometimes (around the Marauders) but that's about it! >>> SS/PS: Logic puzzle. Opening speech in Potions class. <<< Bren: Absolutely. Recall Hermione's reaction to the logic puzzle: " 'Brilliant', said Hermione. 'This isn't magic - it's logic - a puzzle. A lot of the greatest wizards haven't got an ounce of logic, they'd be stuck in here for ever' " (PS, 207. UK) Not to mention he was the *only* one to have suspected Quirrell all along, that we know of (not sure about DD). > CoS: After Ginny is taken to the Chamber, Snape greets Lockhart as > the savior and tricks him into "Going after the monster." which all > the teachers go along with, knowing Lockhart will hide and get out > of their way. That was quite well done, hehe. > PoA: Wolfsbane Potion, which, if we believe Lupin, takes great > skill. Assigning the werewolf paper to reveal Lupin's secret. He > flips out in the Shrieking Shack...no, not a good example. He > flips out in the hospital wing...oops, not so good either. > Well, he's no James Bond. Yes, he is quite a superb potions master. Another thing about Snape that really impresses me is how well he knows his potion - he knows it inside out! Those countless times when he will look at Neville's or Harry's cauldron and figure out exactly why it's gone wrong! He notices right away which ingredient students forgot to add, etc. LOL! James-Bond!Snape!! After a few bath, then maybe... Or maybe he puts too much gel on his hair, that's why it *looks* greasy?? Harry wouldn't know whether it was actually greasy... hoping he never finds out the hard way. Does Harry ever mention how stinky Snape is? or was it just hair that we assume he doesn't take bath? > GoF: Keeping Harry distracted while DD comes down, while appearing > to be interfering with Harry's efforts. (Harry is looking for DD, > and Snape says DD is too busy to see him.) Making whatever > preparations to go do whatever DD was sending him to do. (Which I > think happened after the scene just mentioned.) I love that scene in GoF, it is so typical of Snape to have helped Harry and resisting the temptation to show it. > OoP: He gives Umbridge fake veritaserum, knowing she doesn't have a > clue how to use it or whether it is real. And when she asks for > more asks, "You didn't use it all, did you? Three drops were > enough." Well, with that old hag... it wouldn't take a rocket scientiest to figure out how incompetent she really is, now would it? ;) And solving the "Padfoot" message from Harry... I know it wasn't a particularly tricky one, but still... > Ally: > the fact that Snape is known by the Order to be a superb occlumens, > an archaic form of magic not many people know; > > -we know he successfully spied on Voldemort during his first reign, > based on things DD has said, so obviously he has a fair degree of > competence as a spy; > > -and doesn't even Sirius refer to his cleverness at one point? Bren: Most definitely! *grin* Brenda, closing on the record of longest "Me Too!" post From jjpandy at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 19:49:25 2004 From: jjpandy at yahoo.com (jjpandy) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 19:49:25 -0000 Subject: Arthur Weasley in Gryffindor? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111411 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Deb" wrote: > I just finished rereading GOF last night. Molly specifically tells > Harry (when visiting before Task 3) that she was yelled at by the Fat > Lady one night for sneaking in at 4:00 am, out walking with Arthur. > She definitely says, "I was" not "We were" told off . . . so . . . > she obviously came back on her own. Is that because Arthur was > detained by Filch's predecessor, or because he was trying to sneak > into the Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff dorm at the time? > > Deb in NJ Nice catch! Maybe Molly went back first and Aurthur was either waiting a bit before he approached the Gryffindor entrance or he was standing guard down the hall? Or as you say, maybe he was in a different house. JJPandy From dontask2much at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 19:51:33 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:51:33 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: What did Riddle want from Ginny? References: Message-ID: <001201c48c6f$420970f0$6501a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 111412 From: "fanofminerva" < > > "So Ginny poured out her soul to me, and her soul happened to be > > exactly what I wanted." > > charme: Hmmm factor for me is does anyone else notice the similiarity between that statement and what the Dementors want? One wonders if a Dementor possessed Lord Voldemort, or perhaps in LV's quest for immortality, he made a pact with a devil that ended up biting him back. No doubt though, I do think Ginny is more than what she seems and is probably more plot oriented than some of the other characters. charme From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 10:47:19 2004 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 10:47:19 -0000 Subject: What did Riddle want from Ginny? In-Reply-To: <4EB7FA32-F80C-11D8-94D9-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111413 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, caesian wrote: > Well, I feel like Hannah Abbott: I lost my head completely and > somehow managed to multiply a ferret into a flock of flamingos > (OotP, O.W.L.S.)> (snip) We may all be "Hannah Abbotts"...but we all are at times (even HP and gang in OOP...) The creation of the magical flock of flamingos originates when we either belive OR refuse to believe in the best OR the worst of the story/characters/themes/plotlines etc.. I know this because everytime I post here I have little vistions of flocks of flamingos flying out of my fingertips and envision that anyone who clicks upon what I post will have flocks upon flock flying out of their cursor indicator on their monitors. (teehee) > For example, anyone else notice that poor wizard Barruffio, the > one who pedals Brain Elixer (OotP, O.W.L.S.), said 's' instead > of 'f' and found himself on the floor with a buffalo on his chest > (PS, Hallowe'en). Yes, I thought be careful what you wish for...and be even more careful of the words that escape your lips.---perhaps this was why DD had the triumphant gleam in his eye at the end of OOP..(perhaps it was something Voldemort said rather than what he DID to Harry.) > But what got my interest was this question and answer on JKR's > official Website in the FAQ section: > > Question: In 'Chamber of Secrets', what would have happened if > Ginny had died and Tom Riddle had escaped the diary? > Answer: I can't answer that fully until all seven books are > finished, but it would have strengthened the present-day Voldemort > considerably. <> Doddie here: Of course it would be...he consumed Ginny's soul..I'd reckon Voldemorts soul is quite shallow compared to Ginny, what with such a large family, so many friends(one of Hermione's only female friends in the series thus far), and one of a few characters in the books thus far that have been able to fight Voldemort(she threw the diary into the toilet even after months of posssesion); and she did all this at the tender age of 11.(or I suppose anywhere from 10 to 12 according to JKR's timeline) All the "good" in Ginny's soul would probably have been left in the diary..he's interested in the part of her soul that would make him more powerful. (which unfortunatly for me makes me wonder if harry destroyed the last vestiges of the memory of Tom Riddle pretending to be good, but perfectly capable of being evil and gaining power when he sank the seprents fang in to the diary...AND/OR did he destroy a part or most of Ginny whose partial soul was also in the diary.(does this make sense?) caesian wrote > My first thought was, is that really a frequently asked question? > I mean, who are these genius kids? Doddie again: naaa not geniuses just kids trying to figure out the end of the story. At the end of each book my kids have read they always ask me a "what if" question. My responses usually have them go back reread the book because they are so curious (like we are), before they go on to the next book. caesian asked: > And who cares? He didn't escape and the diary is destroyed. > Interesting that it was included. It was posted before the whole > HBP announcement, or any mention of a long-lost link between CoS > and HBP. (Sneaky.) Doodie: Other diaries could be out there, in COS it seemed like it was only a year long diary as I remember characters turning it from one month to the next...wouldn't we all like to see a diary of the year when Harry became a "marked man"? caesian: > Second, could this be the plot that was entirely removed from > CoS? I.e., is the explanation of what happened between Ginny and > Riddle, and what he stood to gain, removed from CoS to be included > later? I would assume it pertains to the nature of the present-day > Voldemort. What was he getting from Ginny? Doddie: He was gaining the "magical dna and soul" from a pureblood family-- once Voldemort/Tom Riddle had assured himself of that (in his mind)...Killing mud-bloods would not be his first priority would it? What if the Chamber of Secrets title had been changed to HP and the Pure-blood Soul? What if book six has a side plot about how Voldemort is proving to his followers that he is more than a half- blood...and the Half-blood prince is the instrument he needs to prove it? caesian wrote: > "All the while he spoke, Riddle's eyes never left Harry's face. > There was an almost hungry look in them." My guess it that he was simply power hungry...hungry for the power that Ginny's death would bring him, and hungry to defeat Harry and establish his power/dominance once and for all.. Doddiemoe From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Aug 27 20:01:15 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 20:01:15 -0000 Subject: Arthur Weasley in Gryffindor? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111414 Deb wrote: snip > > She definitely says, "I was" not "We were" told off . . . so . . . > > she obviously came back on her own. Is that because Arthur was > > detained by Filch's predecessor, or because he was trying to sneak into the Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff dorm at the time? > > Potioncat: I also recall something about the two of them getting into trouble, but Molly got away while Arthur was caught and "still has the scars to prove it." My understanding perhaps from the first conversation between Ron and Harry, that both parents were in Gryffindor. From shalimar07 at aol.com Fri Aug 27 11:31:11 2004 From: shalimar07 at aol.com (mumweasley7) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 11:31:11 -0000 Subject: Ron's Dirt Smudged Nose Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111415 macfotuk wrote: >Any comments or theories about Ron's dirt-smudged nose would be >appreciated here. Is it just, perhaps, that JKR is saying 'typical >boy doesn't even know his nose is dirty because he doesn't care >about his appearance'? Or something else? Melissa wrote: > I think it's most likely that the dirt smudge is to point out the > stark difference between Ron and Hermione. Ron had already been > told about the dirt but doesn't seem to care, and Hermione notices > it right away. Maybe to lead us to believe these two could never get > together, but a red herring, obviously :-) I believe the dirt-smudged nose was the beginning of Ron and Hermoine. I am re-reading OOTP and I was noticing that Ron and Hermoine are becoming more and more like Arthur and Molly..Hermione doesn't like to break rules, is outspoken and has even taken up knitting..hmmmm. Ron is more laid back, (but doesn't back down to Hermione) and is amused by the simple things. Mary From gretchen.bakies at prodigy.net Fri Aug 27 14:48:05 2004 From: gretchen.bakies at prodigy.net (gretchen.bakies) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 10:48:05 -0400 Subject: The graves of James and Lily References: Message-ID: <00b401c48c49$0e90fa20$fe9c9f04@y8t1q8> No: HPFGUIDX 111416 > Juli wrote: > > Still, if your parents died when you were young, wouldn't where > > they were buried be something you'd long to know? Understandably, > > if Harry asked the Dursleys and they refused to tell him, he > > wouldn't have kept pursuing the issue. But once he entered the WW, > > it's hard to believe he wouldn't have asked where they were buried > > (or if their bodies survived the conflagration at Godric's Hollow). > > But, as far as we know, Harry's never even thought about it in the > > past five years. > Cory: > Yes, if my parents had died, I would want to know where they were > buried, but that's a separate issue. My point is > that, given that he has not asked and nobody has told him, it doesn't > seem so unbelievable to me that he would not have found them on his > own. Yes, if I were Harry, I would have probably asked a lot more > questions about my parents by now than he has (including, possibly, > where they are buried), but Harry is apparently a lot less curious > about certain things than a lot of us are. Now Gretchen - I don't find it totally unbelievable. When I was in elementary school several older relatives died, but at that time, my mother didn't feel it was good for a child that young to go to funerals. So I had no idea where any of them were buried until I was into my 20's and interested in genealogy. And these were people I knew and remembered. Since no extended family is ever mentioned in the books for either the Evans or Dursleys, it's possible Harry hasn't been to a funeral either and just doesn't think about them or cemeteries. Add that to the "don't ask questions" mode in the family, his lack of interest isn't out of line. Gretchen - okay, I'll go back to lurking now and try to catch up with the hundreds of unread emails yet in my inbox! From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Fri Aug 27 16:13:23 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 16:13:23 -0000 Subject: How many people know the full prophecy? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111417 I've been wondering about this for a while. The only people we are certain know the full prophecy are Harry and Dumbledore. (Trelawney wouldn't know, as she doesn't appear to remember her prophecies). McGonagall didn't appear to know about it at the beginning of PS, (in fact from her surprise, she didn't appear to even know that You Know Who was after the Potters) and *she* was in the Order of the Phoenix at the time. Pettigrew doesn't know, (he was also in the Order - see photograph that Moody shows Harry in Grimmauld Place) or he'd have told You Know Who and there wouldn't have been a story for OotP. If Pettigrew didn't know before the attack at Godric's Hollow, then is it a safe assumption that Sirius and Lupin didn't know at that time, either? My biggest question is: Did Lily and James know? If they did, why on earth did they refuse Dumbledore as secret-keeper in favour of Sirius, and then (absurdly) in favour of *Pettigrew*? If you know you're hiding the only person who can defeat the Dark Lord, that's a pretty dangerous double-bluff. And if they didn't know... Was Dumbledore trying to stop the possibility of the information coming out under torture? Would he not have used every piece of information he could to impress upon Lily and James the importance of keeping Harry safe? (At this point no-one knew that he'd survive the AK.) Presumably Dumbledore has now told members of the Order, as they were guarding the prophecy throughout OotP, (though not necessarily - they do trust him rather a lot, he may have just told them that it was important, rather than revealing the contents). I would assume (if this is the case) that he told them *after* You Know Who got his body back at the end of GoF when the Order re-formed, otherwise the real Moody would have known, and Crouch Jnr would have got the information out of him, and told You Know Who, and again, there'd have been no story for OotP. But if now the whole Order knows the full contents, that's dangerous - there was a spy within the Order last time, there could be again now (or in the future). Perhaps he's only told them the first part, the part that You Know Who already knows. Ugh, I'm going round in circles. Can anyone help? Is anyone even interested? Dungrollin.x From zanelupin at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 20:17:49 2004 From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 20:17:49 -0000 Subject: Arthur Weasley in Gryffindor? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111418 Deb wrote: > >She definitely says, "I was" not "We were" told off . . . > > so . . . > >she obviously came back on her own. Is that because Arthur was > >detained by Filch's predecessor, or because he was trying to > >sneak into the Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff dorm at the time? Potioncat said: > I also recall something about the two of them getting into > trouble, but Molly got away while Arthur was caught and "still has the scars to prove it." > My understanding perhaps from the first conversation between Ron > and Harry, that both parents were in Gryffindor. KathyK, with book in hand: Potioncat is correct on both counts. The incident where the Fat Lady told off Molly and the incident where Arthur was caught are the same. ************ GoF Ch. 31, US ed. pg 616: "She was here in my time, said Mrs. Weasley. "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 morning?" said Bill, surveying his mother with amazement. Mrs. Weaslely grinned, her eyes twinkling. "Your father and I had been for a nighttime stroll," she said. "He got caught by Apollyn Pringle-he was the caretaker in those days- your father's still got the marks." *********** And Ron does state his parents were both in Gryffindor: ********** PS/SS Ch. 6, US ed. pg 106 "What house are your brothers in?" asked Harry. "Gryffindor," said Ron. Gloom seemed to be settling on him again. "Mom and Dad were in it, too." *********** KathyK, good for looking up quotes but not much else these days ;-) From restlesspoetry at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 16:30:52 2004 From: restlesspoetry at yahoo.com (karyn) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:30:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: What drives You Know Who? [Non-sequitur] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040827163052.82879.qmail@web60503.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111419 Ester wrote: >> I would like to add that in Catalan (Spanish language/dialect) Vol has two meanings: Vol - he wants (from de verb voler = to want) Vol - flight (noun) de - "of" is a preoposition in Spanish and Catalan. mort - is the Catalan word for "death" Then my translations are "he wants of death" and "flight of death". The first one doesn't fit very well... anyway I thought it could be interesting. << Now, Karyn says: Yes, that is an interesting point. But JKR used to be a French teacher, right, so I take it she's fluent in French, which leads me to believe that it's French she's using. --Karyn... who also agrees with the person (sorry, I deleted that e-mail and don't know who it was) that said that she had Voldemort before Tom Marvolo Riddle... From adragh at bcpl.net Fri Aug 27 16:55:21 2004 From: adragh at bcpl.net (adragh) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 16:55:21 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Snape=92s_DE_Past_&_HBP?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111420 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tonks_op" wrote: > Here is an idea that I don't know if anyone has come up with before. > I think that it ties many of the loose ends about Snape together. > > Lets say that Snape's father was a vampire. (I am not sure if this > makes Snape one or not, but he might have some tendencies in that > direction.) First of all, JKR has said Snape is not a vampire. Now, you might argue that being a descendent of one is not the same as being one. But now is where we must clarify which particular vampire mythos JKR is using. I would guess the standard (original) one. So let's take a quick look at that. Vampires in the standard form are not living human beings. Indeed, according to the AHD (American Heritage Dictionary) a vampire is "a preternatural being, in the common belief a reanimated corpse of a person improperly buried, supposed to suck the blood of sleeping persons at night." In any case, certainy NOT capable of procreating with a (living) human being. Any other sort of vampire is a derivation from a fairly recent source and therefore is not in the common domain and I rather doubt that Ms Rowling is going to commit flagrant theft of an idea that properly belongs to another author (or games company). Adragh From syroun at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 17:19:01 2004 From: syroun at yahoo.com (syroun) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 17:19:01 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: <20040827155604.46570.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111421 Julie wrote: > > I do think that part of Snape's job is to keep Harry's ego in > > check. I'm not sure Snape *knows* it, but I think that is why > > Dumbledore allows their contentious relationship to follow its > > course rather than putting a stop to it. And if Snape is aware > > of this, or has figured it out from Dumbledore's lack of action, > > there's no doubt he very much enjoys this part. He doesn't like > > Harry, or certainly not those personality traits of Harry's that > > remind him of James-- which is pretty much all of them!--and I'm > > sure he gets a perverse pleasure in bringing the brat down a peg > > or two whenever he can. > Magda: > I so completely agree! > > There's a lot of casual talk on HP sites about how Snape "hates" > Harry and treats him "like dirt" (or worse) but I don't see it that > way. Dumbledore just wouldn't allow it to happen. And once you > remove the Harry filter (ie, all events coloured by Harry's > perceptions of a person) it's possible to see things in a clearer > light. Snape isn't nice but he's not a monster. Umbridge is a > monster - not least because she's always so poisonously nice about > the whole thing. I tend to agree with Magda. I find that Snape may be awful towards Gryffindors but, on the other hand, he did save (try to save) Harry in CoS. He isn't insisting on torture punishment like Filch, but he is a Slytherin at heart, not only as the head of the house but in every way, and must keep in character, whether or not he is remains on the side of LV. If he did not maintain this premise, there would be great concern on the part of his own students that would ultimately lead to his dismissal and/or harm at the hands of the DE's. He seemed genuinely alarmed when showing his dark mark and explaining it as proof of LV's return. I think that his hatred of muggles is innate and will not easily be turned, as is the case for Nazis or the KKK but this does not mean that he cannot otherwise see that the entire system of destruction to come is not productive for wizardkind. Also, his skills, dark or otherwise, may be more formidable than has been apparent to this point. He is valuable as a teacher, regardless of his personal slant on muggles. I find it good, that people can be valued for their most admirable qualities, rather than merely villified for their worst. I anticipate that Snape will play a significant role in keeping Harry safe, and Harry will see past his treatment at the hand of Snape to recognize that he (Snape) was the victim of the mistreatment that he himself grew up with, leading to a type of understanding between the two. When Harry saw his own father treat someone, albeit Snape, as he had been treated by Dudley for years, that he gained a bit of sympathy for him...and Harry is much like his mother in that regard. I predict that this connection will lead to something significant in books 6 & 7. Compassion tends to get Harry into trouble. Snape is intelligent- he must be to have his position at Hogwarts, but he is no spy; DD would see through that. He is simply a profoundly unhappy man still scarred by his childhood. That, in and of itself, should be a lesson to Harry... Syroun From frugalarugala at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 17:27:28 2004 From: frugalarugala at yahoo.com (frugalarugala) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 17:27:28 -0000 Subject: Occlumens frame of mind Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111422 Hello. I'm brand-new, so apologies if this message isn't acceptable or if the subject has already been kicked over, but it occured to me last night and its just aching to get out of my head! I was re-reading OotP last night with the tv on in the background. They were talking about the effects of child abuse and neglect--how the effects can be difficult to treat because the kid is MENTALLY CLOSED OFF for self-preservation. It popped into my head that two of the three occlumens we know had (presumably) crappy childhoods--Snape and Riddle. We don't know about DD. But maybe this is one of the reasons why DD wasn't inclined to step in and "rescue" Harry from the Dursleys--he had the Order keeping watch to keep things from getting out of hand, but was allowing the Dursleys to instill the frame of mind that would be able to keep Voldemort out of the kid's head?! If that's the case, maybe some of Snape's behavior in the classroom is not just a self-indulgent power-trip. Maybe his picking on Harry functions to keep Harry's mental gaurd up when he's around a DE (Snape), because of either what Voldemort can sense or do through the Dark Mark. Perhaps his over-indulgence of Draco is to lower the boy's mental defences. Not that I don't think Snape is a total git, I just think he might have various reasons for nearly everything-- sarcasm/hidden complexities, Snape?!--Oh, never!/sarcasm Thank you for letting me vent my brain --Arugala From kinsfire at earthlink.net Fri Aug 27 18:37:06 2004 From: kinsfire at earthlink.net (Kinsfire) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 14:37:06 -0400 Subject: Arthur Weasley in Gryffindor? References: Message-ID: <001301c48c64$db6b3130$5b11fb0a@7z6mn11> No: HPFGUIDX 111423 Deb in NJ: I just finished rereading GOF last night. Molly specifically tells Harry (when visiting before Task 3) that she was yelled at by the Fat Lady one night for sneaking in at 4:00 am, out walking with Arthur. She definitely says, "I was" not "We were" told off . . . so . . . she obviously came back on her own. Is that because Arthur was detained by Filch's predecessor, or because he was trying to sneak into the Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff dorm at the time? ============== My thought is that they might have decided to come in at different times. (Bad enough coming in at 4 AM - but to come in together? Arthur was protecting her reputation as best he can. If that required him getting a detention to keep her rep pure, then I think Arthur would.) I believe there was a comment in one of the earlier books about Weasleys and Gryffindor. Kinsfire From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Fri Aug 27 18:45:41 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 18:45:41 -0000 Subject: What did Riddle want from Ginny? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111424 Julie "fanofminerva" wrote: > This reminded me of the theory that the soul of Tom Riddle was > transferred to baby Harry that night at Godric's Hollow. This > would explain why he did not die. His body may have vaporized > (hence, "Vapormort") but his soul still lived in Harry. This > provides explanations to others issues as well. > > First, the prophecy. This soul transference marked Harry as his > equal. Equal because of Tom's soul residing in him. > > Second, the connection. If Tom's soul is residing in Harry, then > Harry can sense what Tom is thinking/feeling. This may also > explain why the name "Tom Riddle" was familiar to Harry. snip > SO, yes, Tom may have been after Ginny's soul because he was > missing his own soul. Dungrollin: Sorry, I just don't buy it. If Voldemort's soul was transferred to Harry, and his body was destroyed, then what part of him was wandering around that forest in Albania, possessing small mammals, and wondering if his beloved (*sniff*) Death Eaters would ever find him? Dungrollin.x From tonks_op at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 20:15:15 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 20:15:15 -0000 Subject: What did Riddle want from Ginny? In-Reply-To: <001201c48c6f$420970f0$6501a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111425 Julie "fanofminerva": > > "So Ginny poured out her soul to me, and her soul happened to > > be exactly what I wanted." ----------------- Charme: (snip) > One wonders if a Dementor possessed Lord Voldemort, or perhaps > in LV's quest for immortality, he made a pact with a devil that > ended up biting him back. (snip> --------------------- Tonks: Yes, it sounds like Tom Riddle kissed a Dementor somewhere along the way. When I think of Dementors I think of Demons.. LV may be possessed by pure Evil, after he messed around with Dark Magic and he became more and more of something that is no longer human. A part of him wants the souls of others... as some sort of food like the unicorns blood.. the blood of the innocent... the soul of the innocent. Ginny and Harry are both innocent (pure of heart). Tonks_op From adragh at bcpl.net Fri Aug 27 20:41:36 2004 From: adragh at bcpl.net (adragh) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 20:41:36 -0000 Subject: Theory of theme (was Re: What did Riddle want from Ginny?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111426 Caspen wrote: > I would emphasize the use of metaphorical means, because I think > (and again this is what makes JKR brilliant, IMO) JKR's point is > double-edged in that JKR's handling of the subject is not only a > good old-fashioned metaphorical morality tale, but also a metaphor > about metaphor itself. Not only do JKR'S books in this > series make metaphysical statements using metaphor, but they also > say something about the proper place of metaphor in metaphysical > discussion. Herein lies the point. HP series has a reality defined by author JKR. And here we sit, like students of the Midrash, trying to interpret her reality because she does present much of it subtly and often with much a certain amount of humor and wit. Great fun, indeed. :) Adragh From dontask2much at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 20:56:56 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 16:56:56 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] How many people know the full prophecy? References: Message-ID: <014301c48c78$63ebf9f0$6501a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 111427 From: "dungrollin" > I've been wondering about this for a while. The only people we are > certain know the full prophecy are Harry and Dumbledore. (Trelawney > wouldn't know, as she doesn't appear to remember her prophecies). > snip> > My biggest question is: Did Lily and James know? If they did, why > on earth did they refuse Dumbledore as secret-keeper in favour of > Sirius, and then (absurdly) in favour of *Pettigrew*? If you know > you're hiding the only person who can defeat the Dark Lord, that's a > pretty dangerous double-bluff. > charme: Ok, my hand is up for this one. However I'm donning abestos glasses just in case for what I'm about to say: I don't believe (gut feeling on my part) the prophecy is set in stone and it's quite possible LV was after Lily & James for a completely different reason - all we have is DD's word that that's why LV attacked Harry. Poor DD, he's already been known to be fallible in OoP, hasn't he? Maybe Lily & James didn't really believe what had been predicted, or thought it secondary to another reason LV might be after them. I think the prophecy, while part of the plot, isn't the main reason LV went there that night, which might answer your latter question regarding the double bluff. More to the point, there are *numerous* references about the viability of predicting the future in the books, including Firenze's lesson in OoP where he tells the class that they shouldn't put too much stock in such things and even centaurs get their predictions wrong. To me, he's honest about it. I wish someone in the books would ask Firenze what the future holds for Harry - I'd probably be more apt to believe it. (Trelawny "predictions," both of them , refer to LV as "The Dark Lord." What was she? A Death Eater? Is she another person who DD has "redeemed?") I 'm also not sure Minerva would give a rat's butt if Trelawny made a prediction about anything, including Harry. From DBoyken at aol.com Fri Aug 27 18:06:18 2004 From: DBoyken at aol.com (Deb) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 18:06:18 -0000 Subject: Owls to hidden places/people Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111428 Here's something else I'm wondering about: Owls are obviously VERY smart, since they can find people whose whereabouts are unknown to the people writing to them. Harry sends letters off to Sirius via Hedwig, but he also sends him mail with the school owls in GOF when he's hiding. So, owls obviously have some special instinct in finding people in their postal duties. Taking that a step further, two questions: 1. If an owl can find a man on the run from dementors and part of a huge manhunt (CoS), why did no-one in the ministry think to send a "Dear Sirius, hope you are well" letter and just track the owl?? 2. But also . . . Hogwarts is unplottable, yet it receives mail. Fine. But what about places and people who are hidden by a Secret Keeper? Can people send mail to the OofP headquarters without knowing the location? Can they send mail to anybody LIVING at HQ if they don't know. Or if they do know the secret--like Harry when he writes Sirius at the beginning of OotP--does that mean the owl is let into the secret, too? And, say, the Potters 15 years ago . . . in the brief time between casting the spell to set up Wormtail as Secret Keeper and the time Voldemort showed up at their door . . . could they receive mail? How? Did their Daily Prophet arrive?? Deb in NJ From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Fri Aug 27 18:09:01 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 11:09:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040827180901.34127.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111429 > Alla: > > Casual talk? I disagree. Even if you remove "Harry's filter" you > are > still left with Snape wilingly letting Harry to be possessed by > Voldemort, even if you remove "Harry's filter" you are still left > with Snape insulting Harry's dead father every chance he gets. After what we saw in OOTP, I think Snape's comments about James are actually pretty accurate, since he has good personal reasons to back up his comments. As for the other, I assume you're referring to Snape throwing Harry out of his office and ending the occlumency lessons. IMO, Snape kept trying for several months even though it was clear that Harry wasn't trying (as Harry admits himself in Chapter 37: "I didn't practice, I didn't bother, I could have stopped myself having those dreams...") until Harry poked his head where it didn't belong and Snape snapped. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo From jlawlor at gmail.com Fri Aug 27 21:34:37 2004 From: jlawlor at gmail.com (James Lawlor) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 16:34:37 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hagrid/Ogg (was: Arthur Weasley in Gryffindor?) In-Reply-To: <8271DFDC-F859-11D8-9D66-0003930C168E@qwest.net> References: <8271DFDC-F859-11D8-9D66-0003930C168E@qwest.net> Message-ID: <96773c88040827143435af4e17@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111430 Terpnurse: > Just as a niggling observation I made from that same scene, and I > apologize if it's been gone over to death already - Molly makes a > comment about the Gameskeeper before Hagrid, a man named Ogg. If Hagrid > indeed became gameskeeper shortly after his expulsion from school, > wouldn't that mean that Molly was there *before* (thus making her older > than) Tom Riddle and Hagrid? Either it's an erroneous assumption based > on when Hagrid actually did become GK, or it's a Flint, or else the > elder Weasleys are considerably older than they seem, which would then > beg the question why she and Arthur waited so very many years before > starting a family. > James: Perhaps Hagrid started out as an apprentice/assistant to Ogg? In fact, I think Harry thought of that as a possibility in CoS when he thought he might be expelled - being allowed to stay on as an assistant to Hagrid. - James Lawlor jlawlor at gmail.com From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Fri Aug 27 21:58:17 2004 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 21:58:17 -0000 Subject: Savior complex? (was "Harry and Tom") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111431 Sorry to be catching up to this so late. Anyhow, I wanted to put in this much: I don't think that Harry's "savior" behavior is crazy, nor do I think it is unduly immature. Sure, Pippin, I'll give you that Harry doesn't act like an adult. He's *not* an adult yet. Indeed, part of the point Rowling is making (and the charm of the books) is precisely that: maturity doesn't result strictly from the number of life-threatening, emotionally-wrenching situations a child is put through. Ultimately, growing up takes time and a more rounded experience. Some may do it earlier; some later; but few have made it there by 15 (or 16 or 17, for that matter). I wrote (in response to the comment that Harry's "saving people thing" was psychologically bent): > > [M]ost of the adventures in the books begin when Harry > > is put in a situation in which he feels that if he does > > not stick his neck out to help someone (or solve a > > problem), no one will. Pippin responded: > Yes, but he keeps trying to do it in such ridiculously > extravagant ways. He's like Don Quixote. . . . [H]e > keeps galloping off to tilt with the windmills, imagining > threats where none exist, while meantime the real ogres, > who mostly look just like you and me, go about their > business snickering in their sleeves at him. > [Example from Sorcerer's Stone, transposed to Coca- > Cola factory.] > It's excusable, because in PS/SS Harry's an eleven year > old kid who thinks he's fallen into a fairy tale, and that > the world really is an arena for him to demonstrate his > heroism, but at almost sixteen, he really needs to stop > thinking like that. Yes, he's 11, but more importantly he's been set up through the whole book to believe that if he does nothing he'll be faced with the return of Voldemort. He's also not set up to think that his chances of saving the stone are that hopeless. I don't think Harry's trying to play the hero for others; he's trying to solve the problem that's in front of him. I guess what I'm saying is that the psychological set-up for Harry works for me (not just in SS, but throughout the series, I can understand why he does what he does). And I think it works for a lot of people -- ultimately, if the central character were not believable (or if, to understand him, you had to think him crazy) these books would not be as well-received as they are. No, we are not supposed to think that Harry is acting perfectly rationally by the time he goes after Sirius. But we are supposed to be able to understand why he acts the way he does: He acts out of love, out of incomplete information (and a distrust of those, including Dumbledore, who have shut him off from that information), and out of the terrible fear that, once again, he is the only one who can (or will) help. --Matt From cruthw at earthlink.net Fri Aug 27 22:03:42 2004 From: cruthw at earthlink.net (caspenzoe) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 22:03:42 -0000 Subject: What did Riddle want from Ginny? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111432 > Dungrollin: > Sorry, I just don't buy it. If Voldemort's soul was transferred to > Harry, and his body was destroyed, then what part of him was > wandering around that forest in Albania, possessing small mammals, > and wondering if his beloved (*sniff*) Death Eaters would ever find > him? > > Dungrollin.x I agree with you Dungrollin.x. I made another comment on this thread above. If Vm didn't die because his body and soul weren't together, then his soul, per se, wasn't transferred to HP, although some of his powers were, because his soul wasn't there to be transferred. I do think that VM's soul was missing due to some bargain he made to achieve physical immortality and that and a few cinders (insufficient to form a new body) were all that were left of him after his AK rebounded from infant HP. Where his soul was kept, I don't know - probably at least partially dissolved into whatever greater evil force he made his deal with, the remainder having an existence of a sort, but hardly an independent, healthy existence. At least, so far that's the most feasible idea I can think of. From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Aug 27 22:23:22 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 22:23:22 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Snape=92s_DE_Past_&_HBP?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111433 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "adragh" wrote: > First of all, JKR has said Snape is not a vampire. < She was asked if there was any link between Snape and vampires, and she said, "Erm...I don't think so." Some people think that was a devious answer. Some don't. Adragh: >Now, you might argue that being a descendent of one is not the same as being one. But now is where we must clarify which particular vampire mythos JKR is using. I would guess the standard (original) one. < Pippin: Many cultures have vampire legends and some include the possibility of sexual congress and reproduction with humans. It's not an idea that comes strictly from games or anime. Interestingly, there is no ancient British vampire folklore -- all vampire stories in English must ultimately draw on foreign or literary sources. Under those circumstances, it's hard to say what a particular author would consider standard or original. Pippin From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Fri Aug 27 22:46:39 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 22:46:39 -0000 Subject: What Pettigrew did at Godric's Hollow - new info from JKR chat Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111434 Did anyone else pick up on these two supplementary questions that a fan asked at the Edinburgh festival, which got answered by JKR (reported on TLC)? Q1: 'I asked JK Rowling would Professor Lockhart get out of St Mungos, get his memory back and be in any of the next books?, she said no to all of these questions.' So, she got some vindictive pleasure about finishing off that character then, whoever he is supposed to be based on! Much more interesting was the answer to this one: Q2:'I also asked when Harries parents were killed by Voldermort, Wormtail turned into a rat and pretended to be dead. How then did he give Voldermort his wand and robe back once he found him and helped give him back his body ?, she told me (after tapping her nose!) 'he hid them'. So this confirms that Pettigrew definitely entered the house at Godric's Hollow either with Voldemort, or at some point after the AK backfired. Presumably the wand and robes would have been just lying on the ground, with nobody in them any more. Why would Pettigrew want to take the robes as well as the wand? Why did he try to preserve either - wasn't it dangerous evidence to risk being caught with? Did he just think they might come in handy for something later? [The classic image of the servant trying on his master's things and staring at himself in the mirror comes to mind; perhaps he thought he would become great too, if he had all the trappings]. This scenario also suggests that the AK backfiring on Voldie did *not* destroy the house - as many of us have pointed out in the past, AK's don't generally do this kind of damage [Voldie/DD scene at the MoM rather a special case]. Or at least the house was not so badly damaged that Pettigrew could not enter it. Could he have then blown up the house using Voldie's powerful wand, trying to destroy the evidence of his treachery? Perhaps he somehow thought it would get rid of James & Lily's bodies, which must have given him a queasy moment or two to look at? And don't forget Teflon!Harry, grinning up at him from the cot - perhaps it was an instinctive move of Pettigrew's to try and finish the job? So, where did Pettigrew hide the robes and wand, and did he do it before he blew up the muggle street the next day, or was he still clutching them as he turned into a rat and scarpered down the sewer? Can you transform, cluttered up with all that gear? If he took it with him, did he subsequently hide the stuff at the Weasleys all those years? Could anyone else, who may have been keeping watch on the house on DD's behalf, see Pettigrew do any of this? So, has DD known all along what really happened? Carolyn From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Aug 28 00:03:56 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 00:03:56 -0000 Subject: Savior complex? (was "Harry and Tom") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111435 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Matt" wrote: > > No, we are not supposed to think that Harry is acting perfectly rationally by the time he goes after Sirius. But we are supposed to be able to understand why he acts the way he does: He acts out of love, out of incomplete information (and a distrust of those, including Dumbledore, who have shut him off from that information), and out of the terrible fear that, once again, he is the only one whocan (or will) help. > That's true. But he also acts, as the Sorting Hat told him, out of a powerful thirst to prove himself, and this, IMO, is what Hermione calls the "saving people thing." I am not saying that Harry only wants acclaim, or only wants to be worthy of acclaim. It is by no means wrong or inappropriate for Harry to want to prove himself worthy of the terrible sacrifices which others have made for him, nor do I think he is crazy because he feels a powerful need to do so. But Voldemort knows this about him, and can manipulate those feelings, so Harry needs to be on his guard about it. That is a lot to ask of a sixteen year old, I agree, but that is what Dumbledore is talking about when he says that Harry has taken on the burden of an adult wizard. Pippin From macfotuk at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 00:08:50 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 00:08:50 -0000 Subject: Owls to hidden places/people In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111436 IMO this is one of JKR's most classic 'Flints' (mistakes) excepting that there is no way for her to get out of it. The attempt she made relatively recently was in my view absolute rubbish (* below). You just have to accept that it is necessary for the story for owls to be able to find Sirius *somehow* but noone, even with all the diverse and advanced magic available to the WW, at the Ministry having the nonce to be able to do the same. It's a similar 'mistake' in my view to the emptiness of the MoM when Harry and crew arrive there to 'rescue' Sirius (except that if DE's ensured this emptiness by magic it would be explainable, unlike the owls finding Sirius thing)- it makes literary sense but not sense when analysed calmly, logically, consistently etc. Another example in my view would be the so-called mistake of Lily emerging from Voldemort's wand AFTER instead of before James: It made much more impact, especially emotionally, for Harry to see his mum AFTER his dad because (a) we love our mums most of all (don't give me flak please if you disagree!) and (b) he'd already 'seen' his dad or thought he had and dealt with it (when he saw his time-turned self as rescuer in PoA). JKR did a lot of back-tracking on this one (order of emergence) blaming her editor, but I believe it made lots of sense in terms of better writing that Harry would see his mum after his dad and that this was only later noted as being inconsistent with a reverse order of their deaths (which is ABSOLUTE undoubtable canon and hence needed to be corrected). I spotted this on the very 1st read of GoF and it tripped me up mentally, but hey she can't do everything perfectly. We spotted a 0.01% 'error' - who else gets it right 99.99%? No-one, that's who - just look at the sales/popularity. * this is what JKR said about owls at www.jkrowling.com: http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/faq_view.cfm?id=18 Section: F.A.Q. In 'Prisoner of Azkaban', why couldn't the Ministry of Magic have sent Sirius an owl, and then followed it, to find him? Just as wizards can make buildings unplottable, they can also make themselves untraceable. Voldemort would have been found long ago if it had been as simple as sending him an owl! this is *REALLY* unsatisafctory - it simply says it can't be done, not (really) WHY. --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Deb" wrote: > Here's something else I'm wondering about: Owls are obviously VERY > smart, since they can find people whose whereabouts are unknown to > the people writing to them. Harry sends letters off to Sirius via > Hedwig, but he also sends him mail with the school owls in GOF when > he's hiding. So, owls obviously have some special instinct in finding > people in their postal duties. > > Taking that a step further, two questions: > > 1. If an owl can find a man on the run from dementors and part of a > huge manhunt (CoS), why did no-one in the ministry think to send > a "Dear Sirius, hope you are well" letter and just track the owl?? > > 2. But also . . . Hogwarts is unplottable, yet it receives mail. > Fine. But what about places and people who are hidden by a Secret > Keeper? Can people send mail to the OofP headquarters without knowing > the location? Can they send mail to anybody LIVING at HQ if they > don't know. Or if they do know the secret--like Harry when he writes > Sirius at the beginning of OotP--does that mean the owl is let into > the secret, too? And, say, the Potters 15 years ago . . . in the > brief time between casting the spell to set up Wormtail as Secret > Keeper and the time Voldemort showed up at their door . . . could > they receive mail? How? Did their Daily Prophet arrive?? > > Deb in NJ From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Aug 28 00:16:10 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 00:16:10 -0000 Subject: What Pettigrew did at Godric's Hollow - new info from JKR chat In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111437 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "carolynwhite2" wrote: > Why would Pettigrew want to take the robes as well as the wand? Why did he try to preserve either - wasn't it dangerous evidence to risk being caught with? Pippin: I think he hoped to conceal the evidence of Voldemort's downfall. If the other DE's thought Voldemort had disappeared of his own volition, they wouldn't blame him for leading their master to his doom. Fudge mentions that there was "a heap of bloodstained robes" in front of Black when he was captured, which was all that was left of Peter. So that makes *three* sets of robes our little rat friend has to account for. Curiouser and curiouser. Maybe he was wearing Voldemort's robes when he disappeared? They'd have to be magically altered to fit, I suppose. Carolyn: > This scenario also suggests that the AK backfiring on Voldie did *not* destroy the house - as many of us have pointed out in the past, AK's don't generally do this kind of damage< Pippin: Missed AK's seem capable of doing a lot of damge though. Interesting that the rebounding spell destroyed Voldemort's body but not his clothes or wand. Of course, it could have blown them right off (sorry for the image ) Pippin From spaced_out_space_cadet at hotmail.com Sat Aug 28 00:39:27 2004 From: spaced_out_space_cadet at hotmail.com (spacedoutspacecadet) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 00:39:27 -0000 Subject: Ron Weasley - Death of a friend? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111438 Hey All, now I know that this has probably been talked about before but I couldn't find what I was looking for so I would like to pose this question. Will Ron Weasley die? I have no doubt that he will survive to the final showdown with LV, but will he sacrifice himself so that Harry will live? I have read about the "Running Weasel" story, where he is killed by his pet rat. I think that if *sobs* Ron is going to die LV will get him, I'm not sure if Wormtail has the guts. Which leads me to my next question, if Wormtail is indebted to Harry, how will he pay him back? Perhaps him paying Harry back will be not killing Ron. However, even if he does spare him I fear that this will not save Ron in the end. As I said I'm sure it has been spoken about before but I would love to hear some thoughts about it! :) Spaced Out From poppytheelf at hotmail.com Sat Aug 28 01:12:16 2004 From: poppytheelf at hotmail.com (Phyllis) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 01:12:16 -0000 Subject: Ron Weasley - Death of a friend? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111439 Spaced Out asked: > Will Ron Weasley die? IMO, Ron will be one of the deaths in the last book, the alchemical "work of reddening." The alchemical Great Work is divided "into three or four essential phases: `the work of blackening' (Nigredo or Melanosis), `the work of whitening' (Albedo or Leucosis), and finally `the work of reddening,' which alchemists originally separated into two complementary moments, that of gold (Citrinitas or Xantosis) and that of purple or transmutation of venom (Iosis)" (see: Maurice Aniane, Alchemy: The Cosmological Yoga, Part 2: Phases of the Work, http://www. alchemylab.com/AJ2-1.htm). In alchemy, the work of reddening is symbolized by the ceremonial meeting of the Red King and the White Queen. I believe that, before Harry and Voldemort's final battle, Ron will face Voldemort (the White Queen) and die in the process. In order for Harry to pass through the chessboard obstacle to reach the Philosopher's Stone at the end of PS, it is Ron who sacrifices himself to the white queen so that Harry can checkmate the king. The books are also full of red references to Ron. The first time Ron is referred to in PS, he's described as having "flaming red hair" (PS, UK version p. 69). We then learn that Ron's mother makes him a sweater every year, and that his sweater is "always maroon" (PS, UK version p. 147) Ron's pyjamas are even "maroon paisley" (GoF, UK version p. 294) Interestingly, Ron complains that he "hate[s] maroon," (PS, UK version p. 149) but wears his maroon sweaters and maroon pyjamas anyway, which could be suggestive of his acceptance of his eventual fate, however abhorrent. Moreover, Maurice Aniane maintains that "it would be better to translate rubedo as `work in the purple' rather than `work in the red.' The purple results from the union of light and darkness, a union which marks the victory of light. Purple is the royal color." In GoF, Ron hands Dobby "a pair of violet socks he had just unwrapped" (GoF, UK version p. 356) along with his annual maroon Christmas sweater. In addition, Mundungus Fletcher "rescu[es] Ron from an ancient set of purple robes " (OotP, UK version p. 110). It will be sad for a time, but after Harry dies (which I also think is inevitable), he'll be reunited with Ron beyond the veil. ~Phyllis From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 01:41:35 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 01:41:35 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: <20040827180901.34127.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111440 Magda: > After what we saw in OOTP, I think Snape's comments about James are > actually pretty accurate, since he has good personal reasons to back > up his comments. > Alla: Oh, so far they are pretty accurate indeed (based on ONE scene from seven years of their school life), even though I am inclined to believe that that we are sooo far from seeing the ful picture yet and Snape was not always a victim in his relationship with Marauders, but hey, this is just speculation and you have a right to call me on it for lack of canon. :o) But , that is not the issue for me. Even if James was an evil reincarnation and Snape a dear white angel in all their interactions (which I don't believe), Snape would lost said title for me in a second, he started rubbing an orphan's wounds. Calling child's dead parents names is more than low to me and as an icing on a cake , Snape is his teacher. Magda: > As for the other, I assume you're referring to Snape throwing Harry > out of his office and ending the occlumency lessons. IMO, Snape kept > trying for several months even though it was clear that Harry wasn't > trying (as Harry admits himself in Chapter 37: "I didn't practice, I > didn't bother, I could have stopped myself having those dreams...") > until Harry poked his head where it didn't belong and Snape snapped. Alla: The original issue was that talk about Snape hating Harry is often casual. I was responding with the argument that Snape was so wrapped up in his old wounds that he was willing to let Harry be possessed by Voldemort and probably die. It is more than "casual" situation to me. It does not matter to me that Harry poked his head where it did not belong ( and before I hear anything , let me repeat again - Harry was wrong, wrong, wrong :o)) Snape snapped knowing what would happen if Occlumency lessons stop. I understand why he did it, but I take exception to the argument that he can draw a distingshion between Harry and James . Sounds more than casual to me. From DBoyken at aol.com Sat Aug 28 02:17:20 2004 From: DBoyken at aol.com (Deb) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 02:17:20 -0000 Subject: Can you Apparate Within Hogwarts? How about Portkeys? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111441 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, macfotuk at y... wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tory Santillie" > wrote: > > Apparition, yes, hmmmmmmmmmmm............. when does Harry get to > learn it? My guess is that this may be taught in 6th year . . . sort of like Driver's Ed, where you learn the rules so that you're "ready" when you're old enough to actually get behind the wheel. But, I was also thinking--Crouch Jr. turned the Triwizard cup into a portkey; Dumbledore makes a portkey to transport Harry and the Weasleys at Christmas, and Harry back again after the disaster at the MOM . . . I know that you cannot apparate at Hogwarts, but if portkeys are so easy to make . . . why don't people just use them, then? It's obviously not just a perk for the Headmaster, since Crouch Jr. made one, so . . . what's stopping ill-wishers from port-keying in and out of the grounds? I mean, even if you need some kind of permission to enter the grounds, theoretically you can leave at any time, right? Deb in NJ From DBoyken at aol.com Sat Aug 28 02:25:27 2004 From: DBoyken at aol.com (Deb) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 02:25:27 -0000 Subject: Wizards travelling with children Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111442 So . . . wizards travel by broom, floo powder, portkeys, apparating, and (illegal) flying carpets. It appears that apparating is an individual activity--not something you can do by holding on to someone else. The Weasleys use floo powder as a family. Arthur takes Harry to the MOM by the muggle route . . . the only time people apparate/disapparate seems to be just as themselves. The only way we've seen to travel as a group (i.e., not under individual effort to get to the same place) is a port-key. So . . . how do you suppose wizards with young children travel? CAN you apparate while holding a baby? You certainly can't (safely) spin up a flu with floo powder. And since portkeys don't seem to be that widely used--the only ones we've seen seem like special occasions-- World Cup, Triwizard trap, Mr. Weasley's medical emergency, getting Harry back to Hogwarts after the debacle at the MOM. They don't seem to be something that just every witch would have around to tuck into her baby's hands when running to Diagon Alley to do some shopping! Just a thought . . . Deb in NJ From agreensaver at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 00:08:33 2004 From: agreensaver at yahoo.com (agreensaver) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 00:08:33 -0000 Subject: Hermione using the time turner in POA Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111443 Hi! newbie here...hopefully this hasn't been discussed to death already. In the book Hermione is always dead tired because she can't finish all her homework. What's keeping her from finding a secret room in Hogwarts, locking the door, holing up for three hours, and then repeating the hours with the time turner? Same goes for getting enough sleep. Also - although Hermione gave up on using the time turner after third year, we would assume that she would continue using it had she decided to keep the courses. So she would actually be repeating at least two hours out of every day, from third to seventh year. Wouldn't someone notice that she ages unnaturally quickly? This might be a problem with people who use time turners routinely for their jobs as well... From chris.henson at ntlworld.com Fri Aug 27 22:28:43 2004 From: chris.henson at ntlworld.com (Sarah Henson) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 22:28:43 -0000 Subject: What drives You Know Who? [Non-sequitur] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111444 Dungrollin wrote: > I originally thought that 'flight from' was better (ie. it fit in > with my secret theories), though with Riddle's (and later You Know > Who's) extreme arrogance in the chamber at the end of CoS, 'flight', > implying fleeing, doesn't entirely fit, and now I'm not sure... > > Unless he has a secret terror of death. My French is *very* far from perfect, but I was under the impression that flight (as in fleeing) would be fuite, not vol? Vol seems to be flight as in flying. That's rather disappointing as I thought the idea of fleeing from death fitted Voldemort quite well, but in this case I'll have to go with vol de mort as meaning theft of/from death. -- Sarah. From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 02:48:39 2004 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 02:48:39 -0000 Subject: What did Riddle want from Ginny? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111445 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "caspenzoe" wrote: > > Dungrollin: > > Sorry, I just don't buy it. If Voldemort's soul was transferred > to > > Harry, and his body was destroyed, then what part of him was > > wandering around that forest in Albania, possessing small mammals, > > and wondering if his beloved (*sniff*) Death Eaters would ever > find > > him? > > > > Dungrollin.x > > I agree with you Dungrollin.x. I made another comment on this thread > above. If Vm didn't die because his body and soul weren't together, > then his soul, per se, wasn't transferred to HP, although some of > his powers were, because his soul wasn't there to be transferred. > > I do think that VM's soul was missing due to some bargain he made to > achieve physical immortality and that and a few cinders > (insufficient to form a new body) were all that were left of him > after his AK rebounded from infant HP. Where his soul was kept, I > don't know - probably at least partially dissolved into whatever > greater evil force he made his deal with, the remainder having an > existence of a sort, but hardly an independent, healthy existence. > > At least, so far that's the most feasible idea I can think of. I, too, am not convinced of this idea. For a broader explanation, read the original "Changeling Hypothesis" on redhen and the two North Tower essays on Mugglenet. Some food for thought, even if it's not your favorite dish. From sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 02:51:58 2004 From: sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com (sevenhundredandthirteen) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 02:51:58 -0000 Subject: Theory of theme (was Re: What did Riddle want from Ginny?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111446 Caspen wrote: >"magic" does, in fact, exist in JKR'S view - but (this is >JKR'S raelly brilliant point) only on a spiritual, as opposed to >physical, plane. [The HP books are anti-fundamentalist even for] >HP fans who, for instance, have become certain that beheadings of >major characters are essential to JKR's story! Laurasia: I agree with the premise of what you've said: I do believe HP encourages the realisation of a spiritual plane of existence which is above the physical and mental. And I do believe the magic in the story symbolises this spiritual level of the world. However, I disagree with the interpretation that this has all been consciously arranged by JKR, but yet the plots of her books haven't been. I have the exact opposite opinion to you: think the plot is arranged, and the metaphysics coincidental. I think JKR is first and foremost a writer. She has been writing books since the age of 6. She has written other books which are unpublished. And she has intentions to write books after HP is concluded. She has told us, on numerous occasion what type of story-telling she likes, for example: books that don't leave loose ends; stories where all the rules are established at the very start (like The Simpsons). She has told us what types of books she doesn't like, for example books where the character is stuck at one age for all eternity (like The Famous Five). It seems natural that a writer who believes these things will write a book which events are meaningful to the overall plot and where there is nothing incidental which delays the story (everything is relevant), where we see rules of the universe established early on (foreshadowing), and in which the characters can grow up and change and be affected by the world around them (Harry's changing personality). This is the type of writer JKR *is*. Or else why did Ron have a pet rat called Scabbers in the first two books? Why did Harry Ron and Hermione make Polyjuice Potion in CoS? And why was Harry so deeply affected by Cedric's death that he became rash and reckless and charged off to the Ministry of Magic without thinking rationally? Saying that any major characters' death is not actually relevant to the story is going against these three of JKR's own statements. Sirius's death must either become relevant later on when he returns in a different form, OR be used to foreshadow a way in which the Veil can be used, OR be so distressing for Harry that he changes the way he lives his life in a way which allows him to ultimately triumph. If Sirius' death is really nothing at all, then JKR is either really stupid, a really bad writer, or else she doesn't actually care about the three things she has told us (but which have been expressed on numerous occasions). It also means she has been directly lying to us: From her Website FAQ -"Why did Harry have to forget the mirror he had been given by Sirius in 'Order of the Phoenix'?" I don't believe JKR is highly skilled and brilliant in the field of philosophy, I just believe she was lucky and inadvertently hit on a theme. I think *any* story which uses fantastical "magic" of any sort which is beyond the realms of science is unconsciously tapping into the spiritual level. There are thousands of them, but because there is such a long history of these fantasy stories and myth-making I think many authors refer to this level without realising it. It comes with the territory. Any fantasy book suggests that there is a higher plane of existence which does not obey the physical laws of Earth, that is the very nautre of what defines fanstay as a genre. Even the video game Final Fantasy taps into this theme. Just because HP shows it, I see no reason to suggest JKR *meant* it. If JKR had purposely decided to write a book which had the overriding them of anti-fundamentalist/anti-literalist then, like you said, the idea of us readers convincing ourselves that "just because Sirius is dead there must be a reason for it" is amazingly absurd. But I see too much evidence that as an author she actively *enjoys* this- JKR congratulates readers on picking up on these tiny points, eg Aberforth. Therefore, the only option I can see is that JKR *accidentally* included the theme. The theme must have grown organically inside the fantasy context that JKR has put Harry into (like every other fantasy book I have ever read) But, like I said above, I agree that there is a metaphysical level of magic present and I think the best stories are those which do tap into this higher domain. JKR's story is so popular and works on so many levels from children to academics because it is a very good example of issues beyond the physical domain of the universe. ~<(Laurasia)>~ From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 03:09:36 2004 From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 03:09:36 -0000 Subject: What drives You Know Who? [Non-sequitur] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111447 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dungrollin" > > I originally thought that 'flight from' was better (ie. it fit in > with my secret theories), though with Riddle's (and later You Know > Who's) extreme arrogance in the chamber at the end of CoS, 'flight', > implying fleeing, doesn't entirely fit, and now I'm not sure... > > Unless he has a secret terror of death. > Dungrollin.x But Voldie does have a terror of death. He said so explicitly. He said he fears only death; horrible to contemplate non-being. I believe that is in GoF. Haggridd From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Sat Aug 28 03:22:09 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 03:22:09 -0000 Subject: Hermione using the time turner in POA In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111448 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "agreensaver" wrote: > In the book Hermione is always dead tired because she can't finish all > her homework. What's keeping her from finding a secret room in > Hogwarts, locking the door, holing up for three hours, and then > repeating the hours with the time turner? Same goes for getting enough > sleep. > > Also - although Hermione gave up on using the time turner after third > year, we would assume that she would continue using it had she decided > to keep the courses. So she would actually be repeating at least two > hours out of every day, from third to seventh year. Wouldn't someone > notice that she ages unnaturally quickly? > This might be a problem with people who use time turners routinely for > their jobs as well... For sake of answering... :) First, I'd assume that Hermione would have adhered strictly to the rules on that score... she only breaks them to help Harry, not just herself. So, since she only had it for the purpose of attending classes, she only used it for the classes themselves. As for the aging, assuming 4 hrs every weekday for 9 months would add up to ~32 days worth of doubled-up time. That wouldn't be noticable even with her youth, and the cumalitive effect would still pale in comparison to her natural aging over any length of time. Josh From thrennish at gmail.com Sat Aug 28 03:23:40 2004 From: thrennish at gmail.com (Thren Summers) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 23:23:40 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Wizards travelling with children In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1ee818a804082720232df8529a@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111449 Deb: > So . . . how do you suppose wizards with young children travel? Thren: Well, since George can travel via Floo with Harry's trunk (GOF), I'd think you'd be able to Floo with a baby or small child in arms (so long as you kept them close to you, arms in and all that- wonder if the WW still uses swadling clothes? :P), or with an older child if you held them tight. It'd be handy if they were able to use some sort of Charm to stick a child to a parent's broomstick, to travel without being afraid of them falling off. My favourite idea is to have some kind of a sling or harness for babies hanging from the broom, the way they have them for carrying trunks (or Norbert ;) ). All of these things depend on having small families, though. Carrying children on or by broomstick only works if you're not outnumbered by much. Maybe that's why families run small- it's a hassle to go anywhere if you've got more than one or two children. -- "Whatever is done cannot be undone. But whatever is lost can, sometimes, be found." From alina at distantplace.net Sat Aug 28 03:46:26 2004 From: alina at distantplace.net (Alina) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 23:46:26 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Owls to hidden places/people References: Message-ID: <006001c48cb1$9c288de0$6500a8c0@Pandemonium> No: HPFGUIDX 111450 > 2. But also . . . Hogwarts is unplottable, yet it receives mail. > Fine. But what about places and people who are hidden by a Secret > Keeper? Can people send mail to the OofP headquarters without knowing > the location? Can they send mail to anybody LIVING at HQ if they > don't know. Or if they do know the secret--like Harry when he writes > Sirius at the beginning of OotP--does that mean the owl is let into > the secret, too? And, say, the Potters 15 years ago . . . in the > brief time between casting the spell to set up Wormtail as Secret > Keeper and the time Voldemort showed up at their door . . . could > they receive mail? How? Did their Daily Prophet arrive?? > > Deb in NJ Actually, we already know you can send owls to OOP headquarters, Harry sent Hedwig to Hermione and Ron all summer without knowing that they were actually there, Hermione had her bleeding, pecked fingers to prove it. I guess that means that the Potters, when in hiding, could receive owl mail as well. Alina. From Zarleycat at aol.com Sat Aug 28 04:45:29 2004 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 04:45:29 -0000 Subject: Is Peter evil? was Re: Is Percy A Spy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111451 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > Jen: Yeah, except I don't want to think of Lupin & Sirius as evil > because they were willing and able to kill Peter in POA! If we use > the logic that anyone who is willing to kill another is evil, then > in a time of war that would pretty much include everyone. I'm sure > Snape is intimately familiar with the AK curse, but I don't think of > him as evil either. > > I guess you could say the Cedric/Peter situation isn't a good > analogy because Cedric was completely innocent and no threat to > anyone when he was killed. Marianne: I wonder if the intended victim of an AK makes a difference as to how much the caster of the spell has to mean it. In the Peter/Cedric case, would it be relatively easy for Peter to kill Cedric because, 1) Cedric probably did not in his wildest dreams think that someone might kill him or 2) as a young person, still a student, would he have been easier to kill simply because he was not a hardened warrior? Is it harder for someone like Peter to use an AK to kill an Auror than it is to kill a kid? Jne Reese: Peter the betrayer was a different case. > Even though unarmed (like Cedric), at the time Sirius/Lupin > threatened him Peter was a *future* risk if left alive. Still, it > bothered me just a little with how comfortable Sirius & Lupin were, > casually rolling up their sleeves to off Peter. I know it's naive to > think in a time of war people don't take matters into their own > hands on occasion. But the war was over!! That was a personal war. Marianne: I tend to think that JKR threw that in just to give the reader a little thrill of "Aha! That little rat is going to get exactly what he deserves!" And that makes us feel good for a few seconds. But, then JKR pulls us back from that because, yes, it would be a cold- blooded murder. So, she doesn't let it happen. Instead, Harry is allowed to act very adult and mature, and Sirius and Remus do not walk out of the Shack with blood on their hands. The reader is left with that vicarious feeling of the power of holding the fate of an execrable human being in their hands, and doing the right (not easy) thing by deciding to let him live. To throw my two cents in on the question of whether Peter is evil - well, what's your definition of evil? He's always struck me as more amoral than evil. I've never had the sense that Peter enjoys other's suffering or likes to cause others pain. My feeling is that he does whatever he has to do to survive. If that means killing Cedric, then fine, he'll do it. If it means shining Bellatrix's shoes, okay he'll do that. If it means setting himself on fire, sure, no problem. Voldmeort calles the shots, and Peter obeys him because it's easier than taking a stand to defy him. Marianne From Meliss9900 at aol.com Sat Aug 28 04:46:34 2004 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 00:46:34 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Owls to hidden places/people Message-ID: <7e.573e6f83.2e61682a@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111452 In a message dated 08/27/2004 16.05 Central Daylight Time, DBoyken at aol.com writes: > Taking that a step further, two questions: > > 1. If an owl can find a man on the run from dementors and part of a > huge manhunt (CoS), why did no-one in the ministry think to send > a "Dear Sirius, hope you are well" letter and just track the owl?? > JKR answered this one. She said that people can make themselves unplottable as well. As for the Owls getting to Hogwarts. . Perhaps Hogwarts is charmed so that only Owls (and Magical creatures) can locate it. Or maybe its charmed so that only people who have a legitimate right to be looking for it can find it? Melissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Zarleycat at aol.com Sat Aug 28 05:06:39 2004 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 05:06:39 -0000 Subject: Owls to hidden places/people In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111453 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, macfotuk at y... wrote: > IMO this is one of JKR's most classic 'Flints' (mistakes) excepting > that there is no way for her to get out of it. The attempt she made > relatively recently was in my view absolute rubbish (* below). You > just have to accept that it is necessary for the story for owls to > be able to find Sirius *somehow* but noone, even with all the > diverse and advanced magic available to the WW, at the Ministry > having the nonce to be able to do the same. > * this is what JKR said about owls at www.jkrowling.com: > > http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/faq_view.cfm?id=18 > > Section: F.A.Q. > In 'Prisoner of Azkaban', why couldn't the Ministry of Magic have > sent Sirius an owl, and then followed it, to find him? > Just as wizards can make buildings unplottable, they can also make > themselves untraceable. Voldemort would have been found long ago if > it had been as simple as sending him an owl! > > this is *REALLY* unsatisafctory - it simply says it can't be done, > not (really) WHY. Marianne: Yes, that is one of those things that irks me. It says, in essence, that Voldemort can't be found because he can make himself untraceable. So, he's safe anywhere at anytime unless perhaps in a moment of carelessness a bunch of Aurors happens to stumble across him sitting on a park bench. And, according to JKR's explanation, Fugitive!Sirius also could not be found by the simple method of sending him an owl because he, too could make himself untraceable. But, in OoP, Sirius must remain hidden at 12 Grimmauld Place in perpetuity because to simply set foot outside could lead to his discovery and capture or death. Wouldn't the same scenario apply? Could he not make himself untraceable, and thus, unless someone stumbled across him, could he not also do the same thing as Voldemort - move about when necessary and hide in any one of a million places? Marianne Marianne From Zarleycat at aol.com Sat Aug 28 05:14:13 2004 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 05:14:13 -0000 Subject: Wizards travelling with children In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111454 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Deb" wrote: > So . . . wizards travel by broom, floo powder, portkeys, apparating, > and (illegal) flying carpets. It appears that apparating is an > individual activity--not something you can do by holding on to > someone else. Marianne: Voldemort apparently Apparated out of the MoM carrying Bellatrix at the end of OoP. Perhaps one has to be very powerful to carry this off, but, unless the eyewitness reporting this was mistaken, one person can apparate while carrying another. From eeyore6771 at comcast.net Sat Aug 28 08:32:49 2004 From: eeyore6771 at comcast.net (Pat) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 08:32:49 -0000 Subject: Hermione using the time turner in POA In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111455 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "agreensaver" wrote: [snip] > Also - although Hermione gave up on using the time turner after third > year, we would assume that she would continue using it had she decided > to keep the courses. So she would actually be repeating at least two > hours out of every day, from third to seventh year. [snipped] Pat here: Except that she tells Harry at the end of POA that she gave the Time Turner back to McGonnagal and was giving up the extra class that made it necessary in the first place. So it's not a possiblity that she would be using it after POA anyway. Pat From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 08:57:33 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 08:57:33 -0000 Subject: How about Portkeys? (was: Can't Apparate...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111456 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Deb" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, macfotuk at y... wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tory Santillie" > > wrote: > > > > Apparition, yes, hmmmmmmmmmmm............. when does Harry get to > > learn it? > > Deb: > > My guess is that this may be taught in 6th year . . . sort of like > Driver's Ed, where you learn the rules so that you're "ready" when > you're old enough to actually get behind the wheel. > Asian_lovr2: I thought the same thing, and to some extent, still do. It seems reasonable that they would train students before they were eligible to take the test so they would be ready. I too based that on my own USA model where you get your 'learning permit' at 15 so you are ready to go when you turn 16 and take your test (ages vary from state to state). However, that's not how it's done in the UK. In the UK, you wait until you reach driving age, then get a learner's permit, then take driver's training which you pay for yourself, then after paying substantial fees, you are allowed to take the test. Regardless of that slight difference in the driver's license model, I still believe the class will be taught in 6th year. Part of my motivation is an intense desire to learn the details of Apparation. Many people have asked how can they possibly learn Apparation when the school is protected, and we are lead to believe that you definitely can't apparate into and out-of the school boundaries; that is, you can't cross the perimeter. And, in all likelihood, you can't apparate within the school boundaries; say from room to room, floor to floor, or house to house. The solution is simple, you just step outside the front gate. I assume that, to begin with, you just try to apparate five feet or so. Once you get the hang of it, you begin expanding the distance; you apparate from the front gate down to the train station and back. Then you apparate down to Hogsmeade's High Street and back. The following step would be to apparate to a farm field that was nearby but out of sight (apparate to a place you can't actually see). Etc... Like I said, I'm convinced we will see it in book 6, but am not sure whether that conclusion is based in my own biased desire, or logical analysis. Either way, that's my story and I'm sticking to it. > Deb: > > ...; Dumbledore makes a portkey to transport Harry and the > Weasleys at Christmas, and Harry back again after the disaster at > the MOM . . . I know that you cannot apparate at Hogwarts, but if > portkeys are so easy to make . . . why don't people just use them, > then? ... I mean, even if you need some kind of permission to enter > the grounds, theoretically you can leave at any time, right? > > Deb in NJ Asian_lovr2: Well, it just so happens I have an elaborate theory on Portkeys too, unfortunately the detail have been proven wrong by the latest book. However, I think the foundation of my theory is still reasonable. That foundation was that Portkeys are difficult and dangerous magic. Well, Dumbledore has now shown us that the incantation in nothing more complex than "Portus", and while the incantation might be simple, I still say that the intent, magical complexity, and difficulty in getting it right make it a very dangerous spell for the average wizard. Several times in the book people have said something to the effect that, it's more than my life's worth to create a portkey. Part of that is that the Ministry very strictly controls Portkey, and anyone creating an unauthorized Portkey will be in some deep legal trouble. Minister Fudge even starts to take Dumbledore to task for creating an unauthorized Portkey to take Harry back to Hogwarts. So now we must ask, why? Why does the Ministry control Portkeys so strictly? It could be that they want to control all transportation, sort of a monopoly, and while they do control Floo and brooms, and test and license people's apparation skills, those seem to be freely available mode of transportation. In addition, let's not forget the Knight Bus. So, we have many way in which wizard's can freely transport themselves by magic. So, if all these alternates are available, and just as magical, why such stict control on Portkeys? The only logical conclusion I can come up with is that they must be much more dangerous and difficult than these readily available means. The incantation 'Portus' seems simple, but magic is driven by intent. Dumbldore shatters what I assume is a strong door and stuns fake!Moody, yet Harry, Ron, Hermione, and the DA class stun each other freely with out any damage or destruction. That's just an attempt at an illustration that what is behind a spell matters as much as the spell itself. In the case of a Portkey, timing and destination are critical. If not properly programmed by magical intent, it's possible that a poorly implimented Portkey could have the same disasterous results as a poorly implimented attempt at Apparation (Splinching). So, my theory is that despite the simple incantation, implimenting a Portkey is difficult and dangerous, so dangerous that the Ministry must restrict it to experts. Also, as I have said in the past, as headmaster, Dumbledore controls the protective enchantments on Hogwarts, since he controls the protections, he also controls the exceptions. Can't prove it, but once again, that is my story and I am sticking to it. Steve/asian_lovr2 (whose 'b_boymn' username crapped out after only a few weeks) From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Sat Aug 28 10:07:03 2004 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:07:03 -0000 Subject: Hermione using the time turner in POA In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111457 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "agreensaver" wrote: ...snip... So she would actually be repeating at least two hours out of every day, from third to seventh year. Wouldn't someone notice that she ages unnaturally quickly? This might be a problem with people who use time turners routinely for their jobs as well... ...snip... Inge replies: Hermione may have stopped using the TT - but somebody else could still be using it regularly: OOTP (chap The Advanced Guard): "Remus Lupin stood nearest to him [Harry]. Though still quite young, Lupin looked tired and rather ill; he had more grey hairs than when Harry had last said goodbye to him..." I also seem to remember that Harry looked at Dumbledore one time in OOTP (can't find the exact line of course - help me out?) and noticed how old he really looked - something Harry never really realised before. Well - I for one, do hope that the TT will come into play once more in the final books if only JK can make it work as believable (and necessary) as she did in POA. From vmonte at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 11:28:28 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 11:28:28 -0000 Subject: Hermione using the time turner in POA In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111458 Inge replies: Hermione may have stopped using the TT - but somebody else could still be using it regularly: OOTP (chap The Advanced Guard): "Remus Lupin stood nearest to him [Harry]. Though still quite young, Lupin looked tired and rather ill; he had more grey hairs than when Harry had last said goodbye to him..." I also seem to remember that Harry looked at Dumbledore one time in OOTP (can't find the exact line of course - help me out?) and noticed how old he really looked - something Harry never really realised before. Well - I for one, do hope that the TT will come into play once more in the final books if only JK can make it work as believable (and necessary) as she did in POA. vmonte responds: I was just about to post these same quotes!!! I've been collecting evidence of TT in the books myself. Nice work! I think that there are a lot of behind the scenes stuff going on in the books that we are probably going to later be made aware of. (JKR even mentioned that events from all 5 books would come up again in book 6.) I think that Dumbledore is TT throughout OOTP specifically. (He probably has been throughout books 1-5, but I think more in book 5.) He even mentions at Harry's trial that by a lucky mistake he arrived at the DoM three hours early. Did he miscalculate on his time-turning watch? Lupin's work for DD may also involve TT, although it seems particularly risky considering his condition. (Aside from Hermione, Lupin would be the next most responsible person I would trust with a time-turner.) I hate to quote movie cannon but I still remember what Lupin said to Harry in PoA. He told Harry that he recognized him immediately, not because he looked like his father, but because he had his mother's eyes. Was teenage Harry also at GH (sorry to mention this again)? Did Lupin (and perhaps Snape) realize who he was because of Lily's eyes? Will that be Harry's weakness? How about when wormtail got right up in Harry's face during the PoA movie and commented on Harry's physical appearance? Did he just recognize Harry from a past event? Where has wormtail been recently anyway? Is it possible that 17/18-year-old Harry is killed at GH but then brought back to the present and revived by Snape? Did he put a stopper on Harry's death? Is this the reason why there is a 24-hour time gap between the events of GH and when baby Harry is dropped off? Is the house at GH destroyed because Harry and Voldemort's wand will meet up together again? Were the Longbottoms tortured because the DEs were trying to find out who the mystery person (adult Harry) at GH was? Who is yelling to Lily to run at GH? Is it really James? Why was this man's voice not heard during the PoA movie? Would we have recognized it as someone else's? (Could James have been killed right before?) If Sirius thought that he might die during OOTP do you think he would have left a penseive filled with memories for Harry in his will? Memories of the good times with Harry's parents perhaps? How about the party in Moody's picture? Do you think that the children will see suspicious happenings at the party? Will they realize that Aberforth is the bartender? Was an Order member acting suspiciously? Just some thoughts. vivian From Lynx412 at AOL.com Sat Aug 28 12:43:47 2004 From: Lynx412 at AOL.com (Lynx412 at AOL.com) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 08:43:47 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Owls to hidden places/people Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111459 In a message dated 8/28/2004 12:47:50 AM Eastern Standard Time, Meliss9900 at aol.com writes: > As for the Owls getting to Hogwarts. . Perhaps Hogwarts is charmed so that > only Owls (and Magical creatures) can locate it. Or maybe its charmed so > that > only people who have a legitimate right to be looking for it can find it? Good point. After all, the Knight Bus finds it, too. Montague's parents also arrive to discuss his problems after he's found in the toilet. [I wonder what Myrtle thought about his presence.] The Other Cheryl [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Sat Aug 28 12:45:12 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 12:45:12 -0000 Subject: Owls to hidden places/people In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111460 Marianne: > Yes, that is one of those things that irks me. It says, in essence, > that Voldemort can't be found because he can make himself > untraceable. So, he's safe anywhere at anytime unless perhaps in a > moment of carelessness a bunch of Aurors happens to stumble across > him sitting on a park bench. And, according to JKR's explanation, > Fugitive!Sirius also could not be found by the simple method of > sending him an owl because he, too could make himself untraceable. > But, in OoP, Sirius must remain hidden at 12 Grimmauld Place in > perpetuity because to simply set foot outside could lead to his > discovery and capture or death. Wouldn't the same scenario apply? > Could he not make himself untraceable, and thus, unless someone > stumbled across him, could he not also do the same thing as > Voldemort - move about when necessary and hide in any one of a > million places? > SSSusan: I think it's an issue of untraceable vs. unseeable. Being untraceable likely does not make the person unseeable. Sirius *could* have made himself untraceable and hung out wherever he wanted, but I believe he wanted to be near the others in the Order. Siriusly Snapey Susan From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Aug 28 13:14:51 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 13:14:51 -0000 Subject: Wizards travelling with children In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111461 > Marianne: > > Voldemort apparently Apparated out of the MoM carrying Bellatrix at > the end of OoP. Perhaps one has to be very powerful to carry this > off, but, unless the eyewitness reporting this was mistaken, one > person can apparate while carrying another. Potioncat: Perhaps they Apparated together. Both of them knew how. But a child wouldn't be able to co-Apparate. From theotokos_8679 at sbcglobal.net Sat Aug 28 03:34:46 2004 From: theotokos_8679 at sbcglobal.net (theotokos_8679) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 22:34:46 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Wizards travelling with children References: Message-ID: <006f01c48caf$f7c89660$6966fea9@yourus67pi6luv> No: HPFGUIDX 111462 From: Deb >So . . . wizards travel by broom, floo powder, portkeys, apparating, >and (illegal) flying carpets. It appears that apparating is an >individual activity--not something you can do by holding on to >someone else.[snip]So . . . how do you suppose wizards with young children travel? CAN >you apparate while holding a baby? I have often wondered how that bloke from OotP carried a bundle of cauldrons on the back of a broom stick. Obviously, not very well as they dropped and ended in the possession of Mundungus. Even so, how was such a load even attempted? Broom-trailer hitches? theotokos From adragh at bcpl.net Sat Aug 28 03:50:19 2004 From: adragh at bcpl.net (adragh) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 03:50:19 -0000 Subject: Snapes DE Past & HBP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111463 Adragh: > >Now, you might argue that being a descendent of one is not > the same as being one. But now is where we must clarify which > particular vampire mythos JKR is using. I would guess the > standard (original) one. < > Pippin: > Many cultures have vampire legends and some include the > possibility of sexual congress and reproduction with humans. It's > not an idea that comes strictly from games or anime. I have not heard of any! Give me a valid scholarly reference, please. otherwise this is mere hearsay. (Not to be confused with heresy which is something else entirely.) Pippin: > Interestingly, there is no ancient British vampire folklore -- all > vampire stories in English must ultimately draw on foreign or > literary sources. Under those circumstances, it's hard to say > what a particular author would consider standard or original. The very first modern vampire retelling, "Dracula" was made by an English speaker (I consider a person born in Dublin to be an English speaker), Abraham Stoker. His research delved into the stories of Vlad the Impaler upon whom he based his title character. I should be rather surprised if Ms Rowling simply stayed with this version, but I would be equally surprised if she embraced a much different one. Adragh From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Sat Aug 28 13:26:37 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 13:26:37 -0000 Subject: How many people know the full prophecy? In-Reply-To: <014301c48c78$63ebf9f0$6501a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111464 charme: I don't believe (gut feeling on my part)the prophecy is set in stone and it's quite possible LV was after Lily & James for a completely different reason - all we have is DD's word that that's why LV attacked Harry. Poor DD, he's already been known to be fallible in OoP, hasn't he? Maybe Lily & James didn't really believe what had been predicted, or thought it secondary to another reason LV might be after them. More to the point, there are *numerous* references about the viability of predicting the future in the books, including Firenze's lesson in OoP where he tells the class that they shouldn't put too much stock in such things and even centaurs get their predictions wrong. (Trelawny "predictions," both of them , refer to LV as "The Dark Lord." What was she? A Death Eater? Is she another person who DD has "redeemed?") I 'm also not sure Minerva would give a rat's butt if Trelawny made a prediction about anything, including Harry. Now Dungrollin: There seems to be a big difference between *trying* to tell the future (divination), and the two (supposedly) 'real' predictions that Trelawney has made (actually being posessed of the 'seeing eye'). In both 'true' prophecies, she is unaware of what she has said afterwards. And this goes along with what she says to Umbridge when being inspected... Er... Here it is: "The inner eye does not See upon command!" (Which is obviously the sort of excuse that she'd think of, but at the same time is probably a well-known wizarding fact.) Dumbledore was against continuing the teaching of Divination at Hogwarts, and Trelawney above the Hog's Head inn shows no trace of the gift herself, until she prophesies that Harry's special. Presumably he thought 'Aha, here we have the real thing!' and is slowly disillusioned over the course of the next few years. As for Trelawney being an ex-DE... Nah. Sorry. What use would she be to anyone? (She's only useful to DD as he's got a healthy respect for his students and realises that anyone with an ounce of brains will see through her, which is a life-lesson in itself.) But back to whether James and Lily knew about the prophecy... I suspect that they didn't. Dumbledore believes it, and everyone in the Order trusts him ... Except that James (and presumably Lily) trusted Sirius and Pettigrew more. Frankly if I'd had the chance of Dumbledore as my secret-keeper, no matter how much I trusted my other friends, I'd have said *Yes please, that's very kind* and got on with not letting You Know Who find me. May be James really was an idiot. Dungrollin From DBoyken at aol.com Sat Aug 28 13:48:32 2004 From: DBoyken at aol.com (Deb) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 13:48:32 -0000 Subject: Wizards travelling with children In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111465 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: >> Perhaps they Apparated together. Both of them knew how. But a child > wouldn't be able to co-Apparate. First . . . I'm laughing at "co-apparate"--what a great word! Second . . . I had forgotten about Voldemort's departure with Bellatrix. (On this most recent re-read of the series, I'm only at about page 250 in OotP, so haven't gotten there yet!) If I remember correctly, she's more or less unconscious, so I'm guessing that she's not helping much there. It's pretty well determined, though, that Voldemort IS particulaly skilled in wizardry. I mean, he's evil and heartless and all-around not a nice guy but he DOES have skill with a wand! He may well be capable of apparating with someone else (and Dumbledore probably could, too, if he hadn't needed to settle Fudge at the MOM), but that doesn't mean your average witch-on-the-street would be able to. Interesting, though! Deb in NJ From DBoyken at aol.com Sat Aug 28 13:51:51 2004 From: DBoyken at aol.com (Deb) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 13:51:51 -0000 Subject: Learning Voldemort's Name Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111466 So . . . most people flat-out refuse to use You-Know-Who's name. He's obliquely referred to in speaking and in print--up until very recently (Harry, the OotP, and then the DA), no-one but Dumbledore uses the man's name. How, then, have all of Harry's classmates LEARNED the name so that they know to shudder, shake, fall off chairs when they hear it? I mean, if you've heard your whole life about "Harry Potter and He Who Must Not Be Named" and then you hear somebody say "Voldemort" . . . how DO you know that that's the same person?? (grin) Deb in NJ From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Aug 28 14:19:22 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 14:19:22 -0000 Subject: Learning Voldemort's Name In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111467 Deb in NJ wrote: > > How, then, have all of Harry's classmates LEARNED the name so that > they know to shudder, shake, fall off chairs when they hear it? I > mean, if you've heard your whole life about "Harry Potter and He Who > Must Not Be Named" and then you hear somebody say "Voldemort" . . . > how DO you know that that's the same person?? (grin) > Potioncat: Funny. Very funny! JKR better hurry up with that next book or we'll be discussing how many wizards can dance on the head of a pin. Potioncat whose children were born in NJ From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 14:25:16 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 07:25:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040828142516.5600.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111468 > Alla: > But , that is not the issue for me. Even if James was an evil > reincarnation and Snape a dear white angel in all their > interactions (which I don't believe), Snape would lost said title > for me in a second, he > started rubbing an orphan's wounds. Calling child's dead parents > names is more than low to me and as an icing on a cake , Snape is > his teacher. Magda: Hey, reality bites, doesn't it? Lupin spent part of POA telling Harry about James because he was a friend, he knew one aspect of him well and it was information that Harry needed to form an accurate picture of his father. Ditto for Snape. Had Snape lied about James, calling him evil or vicious or depraved or pick-your-own-insult-here then I agree it would have been out of line. But Snape doesn't lie (unless it's to Dolores Umbridge) and he gives Harry the truth as he personally experienced it and his description - "His [James'] head was so swollen..." - is the same one that Sirius and Lupin use in OOTP to describe how Lily started going out with James once he'd "deflated his head a bit". I don't think Harry is so fragile that he can't handle the truth and both versions of James are true - one version from a friend, one from a non-friend (enemy sounds too heavy). > Alla: > > I was responding with the argument that Snape was so wrapped up in > his old wounds that he was willing to let Harry be possessed by > Voldemort and probably die. It is more than "casual" situation to > me. > > It does not matter to me that Harry poked his head where it did not > belong ( and before I hear anything , let me repeat again - Harry > was wrong, wrong, wrong :o)) > > Snape snapped knowing what would happen if Occlumency lessons stop. > I understand why he did it, but I take exception to the argument > that he can draw a distingshion between Harry and James . Sounds > more than casual to me. Magda: Again, I assume you're referring to Snape ending the occlumency lessons? Am I right? Assuming I am, let's try an experiment. Let's say Harry didn't see Snape's memories, didn't get thrown out of Snape's office and the occlumency lessons continued. All right? So Harry's in exam period, and sees his "vision" of Sirius being tortured. Would Harry have seen that vision even if the occlumency lessons had continued? Yes he would have because he wasn't learning occlumency - he didn't want the visions to stop because he was curious, because he was vicariously experiencing Voldemort's elation and longing for what was behind the door, and because after saving Arthur's life he wasn't convinced that the visions weren't a good (or at least not completely bad) thing. He would still have done everything he did in the course of the book anyway. Stopping the occlumency lessons did not leave Harry any more vulnerable than he already was. Magda _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sat Aug 28 14:50:59 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 14:50:59 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111469 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > I was responding with the argument that Snape was so wrapped up in > his old wounds that he was willing to let Harry be possessed by > Voldemort and probably die. It is more than "casual" situation to me. > > Snape snapped knowing what would happen if Occlumency lessons stop. > I understand why he did it, but I take exception to the argument > that he can draw a distingshion between Harry and James . Sounds > more than casual to me. Perhaps we are misinterpreting the situation with all this guff about confusing Harry with James - after all there is minimal canon evidence for this. Perhaps he's confusing him with someone else entirely - Voldemort. There is canon evidence that Harry has been on the receiving end of Voldy's powers and there is heavy speculation that there may be even more to it than that. As an ex-DE who shows extreme reactions to just the mention of Voldy's name Snape would be hyper-sensitive to any Voldy connection. As an Occlumens/Legilimens perhaps Snape sees more of Harry's mind than we give him credit for. An email from Lyn Mangiameli reminded me that it was Snape who almost certainly got Malfoy to provoke Harry into revealing that he's a Parselmouth - a Salazar/Voldy/Tom Riddle attribute. What else has Snape seen in Harry's head? Those who tend to castigate Snape for his attitude generally regard Harry as a somewhat stubborn, slightly rash, adventurous youth. Impetuous but very definitely on the side of angels. Not necessarily so. They ignore the fact that he could turn into something much, much worse. He could be Voldy Mk II. Doesn't the Prophecy say "..his equal.."? Nothing in there about being his opposite, or is my copy of OoP faulty? This is what DD fears could happen, too. The "..in essence divided.." bit. The transplant into Harry has not grown and flourished - yet. There is still time for it to do so. Harry's personality shows signs of change; he's more or less permanently angry, even with friends that wish him nothing but good; he acts as if his wishes over-ride all others, even to the extent of ignoring clear instructions from DD; he's deliberately uncooperative - and anti-Snape to the point of obsession. His anti-Snape stance can be explained, if you're willing to make enough excuses (though it shows him to be an ungrateful little snot after Snape saved him from injury or worse in PS/SS), but his behaviour generally would probably meet with the full approval of Tom Riddle. All through OoP he acted like a nasty little tyke getting ready to blossom into a complete shit. Or I may be doing him an injustice - perhaps it's the Voldy in him that's obsessively anti-Snape. Voldy does have reason to be, what with Sevvy getting his little chums banged up in chokey. Harry has not yet proved that he is 'good'. Oh, yes, he's battled with Voldy, but that's personal, between the two of them, and Harry has been purely on the defensive anyway. He's the one that's been attacked - and he hates Voldy for killing his parents. Entirely understandable, but just the fact of being an orphan does not make you pure - Tom was one too. Harry is in the 'good' corner by default - he's had little or no choice in the matter. Maybe Snape can see what Harry could turn into if he did have a free choice and that is what he's reacting to. Kneasy From karen at dacafe.com Sat Aug 28 15:15:04 2004 From: karen at dacafe.com (kmcbears1) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 15:15:04 -0000 Subject: How many people know the full prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111470 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dungrollin" wrote: > charme: > > I don't believe (gut feeling on my part)the prophecy is set in stone > and it's quite possible LV was after Lily & James for a completely > different reason - all we have is DD's word that that's why LV > attacked Harry. Poor DD, he's already been known to be fallible in > OoP, hasn't he? Maybe Lily & James didn't really believe what had > been predicted, or thought it secondary to another reason LV might be > after them. > > Now Dungrollin: > There seems to be a big difference between *trying* to tell the > future (divination), and the two (supposedly) 'real' predictions > that Trelawney has made (actually being posessed of the 'seeing > eye'). > > Dumbledore was against continuing the teaching of Divination at > Hogwarts, and Trelawney above the Hog's Head inn shows no trace of > the gift herself, until she prophesies that Harry's special. > Presumably he thought 'Aha, here we have the real thing!' and is > slowly disillusioned over the course of the next few years. > > But back to whether James and Lily knew about the prophecy... I > suspect that they didn't. Dumbledore believes it, and everyone in > the Order trusts him ... Except that James (and presumably Lily) > trusted Sirius and Pettigrew more. Frankly if I'd had the chance of > Dumbledore as my secret-keeper, no matter how much I trusted my > other friends, I'd have said *Yes please, that's very kind* and got > on with not letting You Know Who find me. > May be James really was an idiot. > > Dungrollin Please remember that there were two boys born at the end of July - Neville and Harry. Until the events of GH when Voldemort marked Harry as his equal, did the prophesy point to Harry? I agree with the previous suggestion that Voldemort was planning to kill both boys. I also feel that Voldemort had it in for the Potter family. We know that James' parents were alive when James and Sirius were 17. (OotP Chapter 6 - quotes from Siruis' comments to Harry while viewing the tapestry: "When I was about sixteen" "Your dad's place," said Sirius. "Your grandparents.....sort of adopted me as a second son." "when I was seventeen I got a place of my own" "I was always welcome at Mr. and Mrs. Potter's for Sunday lunch." The Potter family died or were killed sometime between Sirius getting a place of his own and the events of Gordic Hollow. So far according to cannon, Harry has no living blood relative except Petunia and Dudley. The fact that there are Longbottom relatives mention in the books leads me to believe that there were additional reasons Voldemort was after the Potter's. He was willing to spare Lily (a mudblood) if she would give him Harry. This supports to a vendetta against the Potter's since Voldemort endorsed "pure-blood" mania and killing a mudblood would be following his policy. I don't think Dumbledore revealed the complete prophesy to the Potter's and Longbottom's but gave them enough information to know there was a chance that Voldemort would come looking for the babies. I believe Voldemort chose to eliminate Harry first because of the vendetta against the Potter's. - Karen From ellydan at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 16:04:26 2004 From: ellydan at yahoo.com (Melete) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 09:04:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: What drives You Know Who? [Non-sequitur] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040828160426.93049.qmail@web40811.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111471 --- Sarah Henson wrote: > Dungrollin wrote: > > > I originally thought that 'flight from' was better > (ie. it fit in > > with my secret theories), though with Riddle's > (and later You Know > > Who's) extreme arrogance in the chamber at the end > of CoS, 'flight', > > implying fleeing, doesn't entirely fit, and now > I'm not sure... > > > > Unless he has a secret terror of death. > > > My French is *very* far from perfect, but I was > under the impression > that flight (as in fleeing) would be fuite, not vol? > Vol seems to be > flight as in flying. That's rather disappointing as > I thought the > idea of fleeing from death fitted Voldemort quite > well, but in this > case I'll have to go with vol de mort as meaning > theft of/from death. > > -- Sarah. > > > Hmm I like to think both translations have some accuracy towards painting Voldemort's character. Truly think of how insecure he must have been when he was still Tom Riddle. He was an orphan, unloved and perhap s then insecure in himself and therefore wanting attention, power, vengeance. I definately see a trend in these books where personal insecurity leads to moments of faltering. Voldemort's hunger for power and fear of death are the prime motivators for his hunt for Harry Potter. Why else would Voldmort try to discover the prophecy? He wanted to eliminate any possibilities of his own downfall. Its an easy step to realize that belief in a prophecy is what lends it power. As for the Harry Potter/Tom Riddle connection in personality. Harry's friends provide the needed security to differentiate his life from the path Tom Riddle took. Its the moments when Harry is feeling insecure, alone and afraid that we see him at his worst. i.e. all of his explosive moments towards Hermione & Ron in OOTP, his charge into the Ministry of Magic, etc. It is fear that drives Harry to these moments of anger and isolation. Luckily his fear is not one usually of personal death (more often its fear for the safety of others that he loves). At any rate, Voldemort as we see does steal death and flees from it too during his first confrontation with the toddler Harry. And I certainly hope everyone will excuse this hastily put together ramble. There are some ideas I wanted to market but I'm not sure how successfully I've done this. (or if I've just repeated ideas already spoken of on this excellent list). Melete __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Aug 28 16:05:38 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 16:05:38 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Snape=92s_DE_Past_&_HBP?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111472 > Pippin: > > Many cultures have vampire legends and some include the possibility of sexual congress and reproduction with humans. It's not an idea that comes strictly from games or anime.<< Adragh: > I have not heard of any! Give me a valid scholarly reference, please. otherwise this is mere hearsay. (Not to be confused with heresy which is something else entirely.)< Pippin: Trachtenberg, Joshua, *Jewish Magic and Superstition*, University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004 p. 38 "It is difficult to determine whether the *estrie* was regarded as a true demon, or as a witch; it was described, sometimes in the same source, as both. Included among the incorporeal spirits, it was nonetheless also a woman, a flesh-and-blood member of the community. In either guise, her character was that of the vampire, whose particular prey was little children, though she did not disdain at times to include grown-ups in her diet. ...These creatures sustained themselves on human blood..." "If the precentor, during services, offers up a prayer for a sick woman who is known to be a vampire, the congregation must not respond with an "Amen!" When a *broxa* or *estrie* is being buried, one should notice whether or not her mouth is open; if it is, this is a sure sign that she will continue her vampirish activities for another year. Her mouth must be stopped up with earth, and she will be rendered harmless." --Sefer Hasidim, thirteenth century, quoted by Trachtenberg op cit Trachtenberg also relates that demons in general were considered capable of producing hybrid offspring--in fact he tells of a court case in which demon children attempted to sue for their human father's inheritance! (They lost.) He originally published in 1939, so his ideas are unlikely to have been influenced by anime or role-playing games I'm quoting from a Jewish source because that's my particular interest, but the name estrie derives from "strix" which ultimately comes from the Greek for night owl, so this legend must derive from the wider European community. To bring this back to the topic, it certainly sounds as if such a creature could successfully pretend to be a witch and have children by a wizard. Granted this is all a lot more obscure and foreign than Stoker's Dracula, but the folk elements in Dracula were also obscure and foreign to Britain before Stoker popularized them. JKR is not afraid of working obscure legends into her work: she's obviously delved much deeper into the lore of alchemy, for example, than most of her readers ever will. Pippin From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Sat Aug 28 16:12:37 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 16:12:37 -0000 Subject: What Pettigrew did at Godric's Hollow - new info from JKR chat In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111473 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" > Pippin: > > Interesting that the rebounding spell destroyed Voldemort's body > but not his clothes or wand. Of course, it could have blown them > right off (sorry for the image ) > Carolyn (more ): As DD said to Voldie at the MoM: 'your failure to understand that there are things much worse than death has always been your greatest weakness'... (Sevvie could have told him, judging by his worst memory). Does DE really stand for 'dead embarrassed', I wonder.. In a weak attempt to fend off the Elves and drag this back to a canon point, we don't know the rebounded AK destroyed his body. In the GOF graveyard scene, all he says is 'I was ripped from my body' and all she has said here is that Pettigrew hid the robes and wand. Perhaps Pettigrew stripped the body and then tried to blow up the house and all the bodies, in an attempt to hide what had happened. Carolyn From ryokas at hotmail.com Sat Aug 28 16:16:15 2004 From: ryokas at hotmail.com (kizor0) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 16:16:15 -0000 Subject: What Pettigrew did at Godric's Hollow - new info from JKR chat In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111474 > In a weak attempt to fend off the Elves and drag this back to a canon > point, we don't know the rebounded AK destroyed his body. In the GOF > graveyard scene, all he says is 'I was ripped from my body' and all > she has said here is that Pettigrew hid the robes and wand. Perhaps > Pettigrew stripped the body and then tried to blow up the house and > all the bodies, in an attempt to hide what had happened. > > Carolyn Note that Pettigrew has been linked to nice big explosions. XD - Kizor From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Sat Aug 28 16:22:23 2004 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 16:22:23 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Wizards travelling with children Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111475 "Deb" asked: >So . . . how do you suppose wizards with young children travel? CAN >you apparate while holding a baby? An excellent question. I have always supposed that you could not apparate while carrying another person, since I am sure Lily knew how to apparate and if she could have done so she would have been out of Godric's Hollow with Harry while James held off Voldemort. *If* Voldemort actually did apparate out of the MoM with Bellatrix (and Bellatrix was really unconscious), then there must be some other reason she didn't do so. Perhaps Godric's Hollow is another of those places where you can't apparate or disapparate? Janet Anderson _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From suzchiles at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 16:26:44 2004 From: suzchiles at yahoo.com (suzchiles at yahoo.com) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 09:26:44 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Wizards travelling with children In-Reply-To: <006f01c48caf$f7c89660$6966fea9@yourus67pi6luv> Message-ID: <000401c48d1b$cf6d59a0$0400a8c0@domain.actdsltmp> No: HPFGUIDX 111476 Are you referring to the line about the cauldrons "falling off the back of a broom"? If so, I wish to point out that this statement probably wasn't meant to be taken literally. Stolen merchandise is often described as having fallen off the back of a truck, which in fact means that the merchandise was stolen from the truck. Suzanne Theotokos ponders: > > I have often wondered how that bloke from OotP carried a > bundle of cauldrons on the back of a broom stick. Obviously, > not very well as they dropped and ended in the possession of > Mundungus. Even so, how was such a load even attempted? > Broom-trailer hitches? > > theotokos From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 16:33:35 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 16:33:35 -0000 Subject: Learning Voldemort's Name In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111477 Deb in NJ wrote: > > > > How, then, have all of Harry's classmates LEARNED the name so that > > they know to shudder, shake, fall off chairs when they hear it? I > > mean, if you've heard your whole life about "Harry Potter and He > Who > > Must Not Be Named" and then you hear somebody > say "Voldemort" . . . > > how DO you know that that's the same person?? (grin) > > > > Potioncat: > Funny. Very funny! > JKR better hurry up with that next book or we'll be discussing how > many wizards can dance on the head of a pin. > Now Cory: This is truly clever. On a slightly more serious note, I've always thought it was curious that people actually fear to speak Voldemort's name. I mean, there have been Muggles who could be likened to Voldemort (Hitler, et al), but nobody has ever feared to speak their names. I wonder if speaking the name actually has some kind of effect, like he draws power from those who fear him or something. --Cory, who has never lived in Jersey but can see Hoboken from the kitchen window of his apartment. From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 17:10:46 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 17:10:46 -0000 Subject: Fearing (was Learning) Voldemort's Name In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111478 [snip] > Now Cory: > > This is truly clever. On a slightly more serious note, I've always > thought it was curious that people actually fear to speak Voldemort's name. I mean, there have been Muggles who could be likened to Voldemort (Hitler, et al), but nobody has ever feared to speak their names. I wonder if speaking the name actually has some kind of effect, like he draws power from those who fear him or something. dcgmck: Ursula LeGuin in "Wizard of Earthsea" notes that in old magic the knowing of an object's or person's real name is power over that person/object. In many religions and cultures using a name is invoking that entity, whether for good or for ill. I've felt all along that the wizarding community in England reflects a residual, often subliminal awareness of this as truth. We have, after all, seen several references to the power and ongoing function of "old magic". The general attitude toward actually saying or hearing Voldemort's name is reflective of such a sensibility, almost of recognition of power approaching that of deity, malignant deity. Certainly that seems to be Riddle's aspiration. From cristelmc at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 15:14:47 2004 From: cristelmc at yahoo.com (cristelmc) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 15:14:47 -0000 Subject: TRAVELING BY FLOO Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111479 Floo travel is essential in the WW. Especially to those who are not old enough to apparate. Let's face it, there is not a portkey everywhere they go. So my question is how does someone with a speech problem travel long distances? Do they just take their broom? Can they travel by floo? (Just a floo for the empaired question) Comments? cristelmc From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 17:16:36 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:16:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: My very own personal HBP theory - for what it's worth In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040828171636.15072.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111480 "I shall name him Theory and he shall be mine and he shall be my Theory. Come on, little Theory, come on!" (paraphrasing Dorey in "Finding Nemo") What I don't believe: I don't believe the HBP is a living person. There has been no mention of wizard royalty in the series and it would be too late to suddenly drop a royal family on us out of the blue now. As far as we know, UK wizards are UK citizens and don't have alternative national ties. I don't believe the HBP is (deep breath) Dumbledore, Hagrid, Snape, Riddle, Voldemort, Draco, Lucius, Belletrix, Fudge, Arthur, Hermione, or the Giant Squid. Or the Sorting Hat, in case anyone's working on a theory about that one. What I believe: The HBP is a legend about a descendent of Godric Gryffindor, just like Riddle's Heir of Slytherin claim. It's not a well-known legend and those who do know it probably don't believe it, but to someone like Voldemort it's probably more real than a lot of what happens around him on a daily basis. Also the symmetry of the two heirs duking it out 1,000 years after the original division between the two male founders would appeal to Voldemort. James Potter was a descendent of Godric Gryffindor's. That's why he lived in Godric's Hollow (too much of a coincidence to not be connected to the founder) and that's why he was a particular target of Voldemort's. When yet another GG descendent (Harry) was born at the end of July, thus making him eligible to be the subject of the prophecy, Voldemort probably saw it as absolute proof that Harry was THE child. Thus his selection of Harry as the first to die. (I agree that he probably would have killed Neville next - just to be sure.) Voldemort intended to kill James and Harry to ensure the end of the Gryffindor line. The clue in COS about the HBP storyline is the sword of Godric Gryffindor. Ruby-encrusted swords ain't cheap, even 1,000 years ago, and it's a hint that Godric wasn't just a threadbare scholarly type. Godric's heirs probably did pretty well for themselves and if even a portion of the wealth descended to James Potter it would explain why he didn't have to work for a living. The recently revealed description of the lion-maned-yellow-eyed stranger is a new professor who will teach either DADA or potions, and who will also tell Harry about the HBP legend and begin the process of preparing Harry to face his destiny (kill or be killed). I realize this is disjointed but I don't think we have enough info to elaborate further about the plot. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 17:24:25 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 17:24:25 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: <20040828142516.5600.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111481 > Magda: > > Hey, reality bites, doesn't it? >snip. >> I don't think Harry is so fragile that he can't handle the truth and > both versions of James are true - one version from a friend, one from > a non-friend (enemy sounds too heavy). > Alla: If it is the reality. I will ask you that question again at the end of book 7. :o) I don't care what Harry can and cannot handle. Snape's behaviour is inappropriate regardless, IMO. Yes, Harry is not Neville (although I bet that in the book 6 Snape's insults will not get free pass from Neville either), but it should not matter, IMO. >> Magda: > > Again, I assume you're referring to Snape ending the occlumency > lessons? Am I right? Alla: Yes, of course. Sorry! Magda: snip. Stopping the occlumency lessons did not leave > Harry any more vulnerable than he already was. Alla: We don't know that. Yes, of course there is a big chance that he still could have that vision, OR he might have accomplished better results in Occlumency by that time. I think it left him significantly more vulnerable From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Sat Aug 28 16:14:55 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 16:14:55 -0000 Subject: Transferred soul (was Re: What did Riddle want from Ginny?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111482 Dungrollin: > If Voldemort's soul was transferred to Harry, and his body was > destroyed, then what part of him was wandering around that forest > in Albania, possessing small mammals, and wondering if his beloved > (*sniff*) Death Eaters would ever find him? caspenzoe: > If Vm didn't die because his body and soul weren't together, > then his soul, per se, wasn't transferred to HP, although some of > his powers were, because his soul wasn't there to be transferred. fanofminerva: > For a broader explanation, read the original "Changeling Hypothesis" > on redhen and the two North Tower essays on Mugglenet. Some food for > thought, even if it's not your favorite dish. Now Dungrollin: Okay, I've now read the Changeling Hypothesis and the two North Tower essays. Shamelessly borrowing from His Dark Materials, I'll just paraphrase Lyra: There must be a something else, because I can think about my body, and I can think about my daemon (=soul), so there must be a third part to do the thinking! So rather than using the rather vague `memories' that's used in the Changeling Hypothesis, I'll say `mind'. I'm no philosopher, but however you want to define it, I think most people (and please correct me if I'm wrong) would agree at least, that the soul is the bit that continues to exist after the death of the body and the mind. Bearing this in mind (ho ho), You Know Who's body was destroyed when the AK rebounded at GH, and it was his mind (containing his memories, knowledge and magical abilities) that fled to an Albanian forest and was able to possess small animals. That leaves his soul. Reading it this way, I have to go back and apologise to all and sundry. It's entirely possible that his soul is hiding within Harry. However, if the reason that he wasn't killed by the Akrebound was that he'd misplaced (or intentionally hidden) his soul, it can't be within Harry, as it wouldn't have been with him when he went to GH in the first place. And, going right back to the title of this thread, he would have had to have hidden his soul before he was sixteen, otherwise he wouldn't have needed Ginny's. Oh dear, my two knuts-worth turned into a handful of sickles. Dungrollin (He who slings mud generally loses ground.) From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 17:35:59 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 17:35:59 -0000 Subject: How many people know the full prophecy?/Secret Keeper In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111483 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dungrollin" wrote: > charme: > > > More to the point, there are *numerous* references about the > viability of predicting the future in the books, including Firenze's > lesson in OoP where he tells the class that they shouldn't put too much stock in such things and even centaurs get their predictions wrong. > > (Trelawny "predictions," both of them , refer to LV as "The Dark > Lord." What was she? A Death Eater? Is she another person who DD > has "redeemed?") I 'm also not sure Minerva would give a rat's butt if Trelawny made a prediction about anything, including Harry. > > Now Dungrollin: > There seems to be a big difference between *trying* to tell the > future (divination), and the two (supposedly) 'real' predictions > that Trelawney has made (actually being posessed of the 'seeing > eye'). > > In both 'true' prophecies, she is unaware of what she has said > afterwards. And this goes along with what she says to Umbridge when being inspected... Er... Here it is: "The inner eye does not See > upon command!" (Which is obviously the sort of excuse that she'd think of, but at the same time is probably a well-known wizarding > fact.) > > Dumbledore was against continuing the teaching of Divination at > Hogwarts, and Trelawney above the Hog's Head inn shows no trace of > the gift herself, until she prophesies that Harry's special. > Presumably he thought 'Aha, here we have the real thing!' and is > slowly disillusioned over the course of the next few years. snip snip mhbobbin: I think we should pay attention to everything that Trelawney sees-- but not the meaning she "divines" from her vision. Trelawney may be a fraud, but in PoA, she "sees" a black dog over and over. We now know that there actually was a black dog that was important to Harry. It just wasn't The Grim, or a death omen. At least not for Harry. However, that dog may have been a death omen for Sirius. (Ever notice how frequently he is described in OotP as saying something "grimly". He's not alone, other characters speak "grimly" including Remus. And of course, Sirius lived at Grim Old Place but I digress.) Sybil's divination skills seem like a joke, yes, but can she actually "see"? As for the Two Prophecies, it may have been that Cassandra Trelawney -- a seer of great reputation although I suspect only after the fact--was speaking through her great-grandaughter. mhbobbin > Dungrollin: > But back to whether James and Lily knew about the prophecy... I > suspect that they didn't. Dumbledore believes it, and everyone in > the Order trusts him ... Except that James (and presumably Lily) > trusted Sirius and Pettigrew more. Frankly if I'd had the chance of > Dumbledore as my secret-keeper, no matter how much I trusted my > other friends, I'd have said *Yes please, that's very kind* and got > on with not letting You Know Who find me. > May be James really was an idiot. > >mhbobbin: Why did James turn down DD as Secret Keeper? Perhaps it was as simple as James worried that this would be a burden to DD. I think there's more to the Secret Keeper choice than we yet know, as I posted before. I don't believe that James was an idiot, only over- confident. I think he turned DD down because he had his own plan to ferret out the Spy, which I believe he thought was either Sirius or Remus. Sirius didn't trust Remus. Remus didn't trust Sirius. They reveal that part in the Shrieking Shack scene in PoA. But we don't really know James' thoughts on this, only that Remus was not part of the Secret Keeper secret. As for the Rat, it appears that James misunderestimated him just as Sirius later miscalculated the damage Kreacher could do to him later. mhbobbin From meriaugust at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 17:42:24 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 17:42:24 -0000 Subject: Learning Voldemort's Name In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111484 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ohneill_2001" wrote: > > Deb in NJ wrote: > > > > > > > How, then, have all of Harry's classmates LEARNED the name so > that > > > they know to shudder, shake, fall off chairs when they hear it? I > > > mean, if you've heard your whole life about "Harry Potter and He > > Who > > > Must Not Be Named" and then you hear somebody > > say "Voldemort" . . . > > > how DO you know that that's the same person?? (grin) > > > > > > > Potioncat: > > Funny. Very funny! > > JKR better hurry up with that next book or we'll be discussing > how > > many wizards can dance on the head of a pin. > > > > Now Cory: > > This is truly clever. On a slightly more serious note, I've always > thought it was curious that people actually fear to speak Voldemort's > name. I mean, there have been Muggles who could be likened to > Voldemort (Hitler, et al), but nobody has ever feared to speak their > names. I wonder if speaking the name actually has some kind of > effect, like he draws power from those who fear him or something. > > --Cory, who has never lived in Jersey but can see Hoboken from the > kitchen window of his apartment. Meri adds in: Also it is possible that LV had some form of a mark that he left as a calling wherever he went, before he had the Dark Mark and the DEs, because we know from JKR that the DEs are an old group (and I always assumed that LV sort of took them over for himself at some point). Perhaps when people started disappearing or being killed in the first war rumors began about who was doing it and he slipped his name in somwhere for, oh I don't know, the publicity? Meri - who has been to Hoboken and had an aunt who lived in Jersey for many years... From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 17:47:22 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 17:47:22 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111485 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > Perhaps we are misinterpreting the situation with all this guff about > confusing Harry with James - after all there is minimal canon > evidence for this. > > Perhaps he's confusing him with someone else entirely - Voldemort. > There is canon evidence that Harry has been on the receiving end of > Voldy's powers and there is heavy speculation that there may be > even more to it than that. As an ex-DE who shows extreme reactions > to just the mention of Voldy's name Snape would be hyper-sensitive > to any Voldy connection. As an Occlumens/Legilimens perhaps Snape > sees more of Harry's mind than we give him credit for. > Alla: I don't follow you, sorry. I can buy that Snape is hypersensitive to any signs of Voldy. And that is why he threw Harry out of the room and never resumed Occlumency lessons? If Snape indeed saw some danger in Harry mind, would not he have stopped the lessons right in the beginning? > Kneasy: > Those who tend to castigate Snape for his attitude generally regard > Harry as a somewhat stubborn, slightly rash, adventurous youth. > Impetuous but very definitely on the side of angels. Not necessarily so. > They ignore the fact that he could turn into something much, much > worse. He could be Voldy Mk II. Doesn't the Prophecy say "..his equal.."? > Nothing in there about being his opposite, or is my copy of OoP faulty? > This is what DD fears could happen, too. The "..in essence divided.." > bit. The transplant into Harry has not grown and flourished - yet. > There is still time for it to do so. Harry's personality shows signs of > change; he's more or less permanently angry, even with friends that > wish him nothing but good; he acts as if his wishes over-ride all others, > even to the extent of ignoring clear instructions from DD; he's deliberately > uncooperative - and anti-Snape to the point of obsession. > > His anti-Snape stance can be explained, if you're willing to make enough > excuses (though it shows him to be an ungrateful little snot after Snape > saved him from injury or worse in PS/SS), but his behaviour generally > would probably meet with the full approval of Tom Riddle. All through > OoP he acted like a nasty little tyke getting ready to blossom into a > complete shit. > > Or I may be doing him an injustice - perhaps it's the Voldy in him that's > obsessively anti-Snape. Voldy does have reason to be, what with Sevvy > getting his little chums banged up in chokey. Alla: I am very very confused. What exactly the pretty much a given fact that Harry and Voldemort share strong connection has to do with Snape's idiotic behaviour? I am not going to go into how Harry acted in OOP, because you pretty much know my stance on it ( I wonder why Harry did not blew up much, much earlier in the series) Are you saying that even if Harry did not look into pensieve Snape would throw him out anyway, because Snape was scared of Voldemort? Dumbledore gave Snape a job to do. Snape blew the said task magnificently, IMO. Are you saying that that was supposed to happen from the beginning? Are we by any chance coming back to "Dumbledore and Snape planned all this"? Because if yes, I think it was Dzeytoun who made a very good point once. Does Dumbledore's behaviour in the battle at MOM sounds to you as someone, who was confident in what he was doing? He sounded and acted extremely SCARED for Harry TO ME at least, not as someone who methodically planned for the possession to happen. Kneasy: > Harry has not yet proved that he is 'good'. > Oh, yes, he's battled with Voldy, but that's personal, between the two of > them, and Harry has been purely on the defensive anyway. He's the one > that's been attacked - and he hates Voldy for killing his parents. Entirely > understandable, but just the fact of being an orphan does not make you > pure - Tom was one too. > > Harry is in the 'good' corner by default - he's had little or no choice in the > matter. . Alla: No, he did not prove that he is good yet? How is it personal rushing into Chamber to save Ginny? How is it personal to additionally endanger himself and bringing Cedric's dead body back? Harry may have started being on a good side by default, but he proved that he is on a good side by choice by now, IMO. Kneasy: > > Maybe Snape can see what Harry could turn into if he did have a free > choice and that is what he's reacting to. Alla: Oh, maybe Snape is reacting exactly to what text says he is reacting. ""So," said Snape, gripping Harry's arm so tightly Harry's hand was starting to feel numb. "So... beein enjoying yourself, Potter?" "N-no..."said Harry, trying to free his arm. It was scary: Snape's lips were shaking, his face was white, his teeth were bared. "Amusing man, your father, wasn't he?" said Snape, shaking Harry so hard that his glasses slipped down his nose. "I --- didn't----" Snape threw Harry from him with all his might. Harry fell hard onto the dungeon floor" "- OOP, p.649, paperback. Kneasy, I strongly believe that even in these series sometimes a cigar is just a cigar and conspiracies don't lurk around every corner of "potterverse", IMO. Does Snape sound to you as a man in control in this scene? From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk Sat Aug 28 17:55:35 2004 From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 17:55:35 -0000 Subject: PERCY: DD's Personal Spy or Ministry's Puppet? (Long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111486 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Ministry puppet or Spy for the Order, what was Percy trying to > accomplish with this letter? Suppose on the ministry puppet > side, he actually wants Ron to break with Harry, his family and > Dumbledore--what does that accomplish for Percy? How does it > further his aims, or the Ministry's? Dumbledore and Harry lose > the valuable support of --Ron? It will hurt Harry's feelings, sure, > but what does that do for the cause? Ron's not even of age! > Alshain: Adding my 2 Knuts a little late: Since Percy's priggish mask cracked in GOF during the second task (when he waded out in the water to help Ron -- probably destroying his robes with murky lake water -- white in the face and looking much younger than usual etc.) I suspect that he does care about his two youngest siblings, in his own way (like the situation with Ginny in CoS). And I don't think the letter to Ron is as much about furthering Percy's own or the Ministry's interests as it is about furthering what Percy believes should be Ron's interests. Even if Percy's letter as Ron says proclaims him to be a git, in this case he's a somewhat more selfless git than usual. But then, on the other hand, he may just wish for some support from someone in his family. Take your pick. Alshain From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Sat Aug 28 18:14:17 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 14:14:17 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] My very own personal HBP theory - for what it's worth In-Reply-To: <20040828171636.15072.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040828181417.31492.qmail@web52002.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111487 Magda What I believe: The HBP is a legend about a descendent of Godric Gryffindor, just like Riddle's Heir of Slytherin claim. It's not a well-known legend and those who do know it probably don't believe it, but to someone like Voldemort it's probably more real than a lot of what happens around him on a daily basis. Also the symmetry of the two heirs duking it out 1,000 years after the original division between the two male founders would appeal to Voldemort. James Potter was a descendent of Godric Gryffindor's. That's why he lived in Godric's Hollow (too much of a coincidence to not be connected to the founder) and that's why he was a particular target of Voldemort's. When yet another GG descendent (Harry) was born at the end of July, thus making him eligible to be the subject of the prophecy, Voldemort probably saw it as absolute proof that Harry was THE child. Thus his selection of Harry as the first to die. (I agree that he probably would have killed Neville next - just to be sure.) Voldemort intended to kill James and Harry to ensure the end of the Gryffindor line. The clue in COS about the HBP storyline is the sword of Godric Gryffindor. Ruby-encrusted swords ain't cheap, even 1,000 years ago, and it's a hint that Godric wasn't just a threadbare scholarly type. Godric's heirs probably did pretty well for themselves and if even a portion of the wealth descended to James Potter it would explain why he didn't have to work for a living. The recently revealed description of the lion-maned-yellow-eyed stranger is a new professor who will teach either DADA or potions, and who will also tell Harry about the HBP legend and begin the process of preparing Harry to face his destiny (kill or be killed). Luckdragon: I agree with most of this. I'm not sure the HBP is a descendant of GG or actually GG. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/Files/Admin_Files/hbfile.html Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT --------------------------------- Yahoo! Groups Links To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: HPforGrownups-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. --------------------------------- Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From manawydan at ntlworld.com Sat Aug 28 18:55:36 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 19:55:36 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] HarryMort (was many other things) References: <1093575269.4056.49290.m3@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <003501c48d30$9b0d4020$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 111488 Macfotuk wrote: >I had always thought that LV possessing Harry at the end of OotP and >then saying to DD 'kill me' was a kind of 'ner ner nee ner ner, >can't get me' (cos I'm in your favourite person who you'll also >kill) type thing. However, LV doesn't have a history of playing with >DD or under-estimating him. It may be that LV is trying to tempt DD >into some lapse either as a chess-like bluff (make this move and >you'll beat me - only in fact I know you won't cos you haven't seen >something that *I* have) or as temptation (Vader and Luke type >moment a la Star Wars) to expressing his 'dark side' and therefore >failing. However, it may be instead that LV recognises that he can >ONLY be killed when he and Harry are reunited as a single entity and >that DD knows this, but that as the strongest wizard he would surely >survive and be freed of the suppressive link he presently has with >HP so that DD's 'death blow' will kill Harry but not himself (LV). >All this fits with the 'neither can live while the other survives' >aspect of the prophecy. Further, it begs the question of what >happened to baby Harry when he and Voldemeort were fused. Part of LV >was sundered and became the spirit-like weakling that made its >comeback by dark magic as LV in GoF (to an associated twinkle of >triumph in DD's eye). HP now is the Voldie/Harry fusion. Where is >baby HP? The truely good (Lily/James fusion) bit? Is it (like LV >was) still floating disembodied to be reconstituted at a later date? >Or is it still there in Harry fighting to be free and independent of >LV's bit? I've wondered similar things. JKR asked us to muse on what Voldemort did to try to ward off death. She's also said that the clues to the story are there all along. Also that the latest book will draw on something that Harry discovered in CoS. Also the question of why Dumbledore didn't kill Voldemort in the Ministry. I wonder if it's something to do with transference of powers. Tom Riddle is the heir of Slytherin. The Founders transferred part of themselves into the Sorting Hat. Tom transferred part of himself into the diary. Voldemort transferred his essence to the back of Quirrel's head. Voldemort transferred his power to speak Parseltongue to Harry. Was this, perhaps, as a result of his survival spell? There are a number of questions around what happened when Voldemort tried to kill Harry, particularly - knowing only part of the prophecy, Voldemort would (we surmise) used an AK. But an AK doesn't mark its victim. Harry by contrast ends up with a scar. - Voldemort's body is never mentioned as having been found - the fact that the house fell down (which may just be a result of the interaction between Voldemort's and Lily's spells) - Harry's scar acts as a warning about what Voldemort is doing - curse scars don't do this (I have no reason to doubt Fudge on this) Two other possible clues are the "gleam" in Dumbledore's eye after hearing the story from the graveyard, where Voldemort transfers part of Harry (his blood) to himself, and the "in essence divided" quote By OoP, Harry's and Voldemort's minds are even more closely linked. Perhaps Dumbledore didn't try to kill Voldemort because he feared that part of Voldemort would be transferred to him if he tried. Or perhaps Voldemort and Harry are so closely linked now that you can't kill one without killing the other. Am I on the right lines here? Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From ellydan at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 19:02:41 2004 From: ellydan at yahoo.com (Melete) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 12:02:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Learning Voldemort's Name In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040828190241.91342.qmail@web40806.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111489 > > Now Cory: > > This is truly clever. On a slightly more serious > note, I've always > thought it was curious that people actually fear to > speak Voldemort's > name. I mean, there have been Muggles who could be > likened to > Voldemort (Hitler, et al), but nobody has ever > feared to speak their > names. I wonder if speaking the name actually has > some kind of > effect, like he draws power from those who fear him > or something. > > --Cory, who has never lived in Jersey but can see > Hoboken from the > kitchen window of his apartment. > I've run off a more simplistic idea being that sometimes saying the name of the thing invokes it. Perhaps I've read Wizard of Earthsea too many times. Melete --having had a few afternoons off writes a little too much perhaps about things she knows too little about. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From ellydan at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 19:05:25 2004 From: ellydan at yahoo.com (Melete) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 12:05:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Fearing (was Learning) Voldemort's Name In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040828190525.47148.qmail@web40808.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111490 --- dcgmck wrote: > > dcgmck: > Ursula LeGuin in "Wizard of Earthsea" notes that in > old magic the > knowing of an object's or person's real name is > power over that > person/object. In many religions and cultures using > a name is > invoking that entity, whether for good or for ill. > I've felt all > along that the wizarding community in England > reflects a residual, > often subliminal awareness of this as truth. We > have, after all, > seen several references to the power and ongoing > function of "old > magic". The general attitude toward actually saying > or hearing > Voldemort's name is reflective of such a > sensibility, almost of > recognition of power approaching that of deity, > malignant deity. > Certainly that seems to be Riddle's aspiration. ack. I'm sorry I've just realized I wrote something similar without having read your message first. Please accept my apologies. (Hmm your reference to Earthsea being better 'thunk' out anyway.) Melete (should go back to lurking now). _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Aug 28 20:11:13 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 20:11:13 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111491 > Magda: > snip. > Stopping the occlumency lessons did not leave > > Harry any more vulnerable than he already was. > Alla: > > We don't know that. Yes, of course there is a big chance that he still could have that vision, OR he might have accomplished better results in Occlumency by that time. > > I think it left him significantly more vulnerable Pippin: The trouble is, he wanted to be vulnerable. Harry's only problem with the dreams as the exams approach is that he's so tired most nights that he can hardly get to sleep and when he does, he has stupid dreams about exams instead. **The truth was that he was so intensely curious about what was hidden in that room full of dusty orbs that he was quite keen for the dreams to continue. [...] He also suspected that part of his mind -- the part that often spoke in Hermione's voice -- now felt guilty on the occasions it strayed down that corridor ending in the black door, and sought to wake him before he could reach the journey's end.** --OOP ch30. If Harry had mastered occlumency to a greater degree, he would have used it to shut down that 'Hermione' voice, not Voldemort's intrusions. Pippin From submarimon15 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 20:30:32 2004 From: submarimon15 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 20:30:32 -0000 Subject: Trelawney isn't a fraud Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111492 I'm sorry if this has been discussed from this viewpoint already, but I have never seen it. Also, before you want to look at me with a Snape-like disgust, there is quite a bit of proof the shows Professor Trelawney to be an actual Seer, though obviously not as great as her great-great-great grandmother, Cassandra, or whatever relation she was. This means however, that Harry, Ron, Hermione, McGonagall, Umbridge and even Dumbledore are wrong about her. Right now you may be thinking that this is a little much to push aside, but I'd appreciate it if you hear me out. The fact that these people don't like Trelawney, is that well to be blunt: She's annoying and likes to make large productions of drama while she talks. (ie: PoA Christmas Feast) First off a question: Why do we automatically think Trelawney is a fraud? The answer to this is quite simple: Everyone Harry interacts with and trusts thinks she is. His opinion is biased due to the fact that he doesn't have the Sight. We are reading the story from his POV, thus he is taking nearly everything she does into a negative light. Harry dislikes her because he isn't a Seer, and thus he cannot understand and cannot be taught Divination. Because of this, he finds it very annoying and frustrating. Ron is also not a Seer (yes yes, I've heard arguements on this board saying otherwise, but the point is he doesn't know it if he is) so he finds it annoying too. Same for Hermione, and the fact that she can't learn it without being a Seer frustrates her quite a bit. McGonagall dislikes Trelawney because like Hermione, she is not a Seer and likes to research things. She's strict. She likes rules and facts, not Interpretation and Divination. Umbridge is determined to sack Dumbledore's teachers all year round. Trelawney is seen as an annoying figure. Umbridge would sack nearly all of the teachers given the chance, but because Trelawney teaches Divination and Umbridge isn't a Seer, she is once again labeled a fraud and set on Probation. Lastly, Dumbledore. I know that a lot of people like to assume he's right when he tells Harry things, but in this case he isn't right, or he worded his thoughts about Trelawney wrong. He says that Trelawney has only made two actual PREDICTIONS that were true. This isn't the case. She has made only two PROPHECIES. There is a difference. Though it is not firmly stated in canon, there is nothing to suggest that for each regular 'prediction' made, she must go into a trance and remember nothing after. Let's look at the predictions she makes in the first Divination class in Harry's 3rd Year. Trelawney predicts that Neville will break a teacup in the first class. It does happen, and knowing Neville we could say that she easily knew he was clumsy. But how did she know he was clumsy? The students have probably never even seen her before as she rarely leaves her tower (not even for meals!). There is a very slim chance that Trelawney would know Neville is clumsy and has a habit of breaking things as soon as the first class starts. Another of Trelawney's predictions in the first Divination class is that "the thing Lavender is dreading will happen" and she gives an esimated date. Right on schedule, Lavender's bunny dies. This could be a complete coincidence yes, but given her other two predictions right after each other that come true I find it hard to give this one to pure coincidence. The last prediction is that a student will leave around Easter for good. This may not like a hard thing to guess, given that you either have the Sight and do well or don't have it and struggle, but she gets the date right on again. This is the second time she has predicted the correct time frame so I once again find it hard to give it to pure luck. Throughout Harry's third year she constantly tells him about his problems with the Grim and how she keeps seeing it while reading his tea leaves and the like. She's not seeing the Grim, she's seeing Sirius in his Animagus form. She calls it the Grim because that's what she knows as she doesn't know anything about Sirius' animagus form. Since the Grim means peril, she constantly tells him he is in mortal danger. Harry shrugs this off because it's laughable to him and Ron- he's always in danger! So basically, why can't Trelawney predict correctly all the time or especially, when Umbridge asks her to? She's told us this many times over: The Inner-Eye does not work on command. Why does she constantly predict Harry's doom, and love all the miserable predictions Harry and Ron make? She's very dramatic, I think we can all agree on that. Trelawney is stuck teaching an unteachable subject. You will either have the Sight, or you will not (she even says this). From what we can understand you will either have the Gift, or you will struggle and be un-able to learn it. What she says at the beginning of the first lesson is true: Books can only take you so far in this field. Trelawney teaching Divination would be like Harry trying to teach other's to talk to Snakes. You're either a Parselmouth or you aren't. If you aren't, it's hard to learn and you're going to have a biased opinion of the whole subject. I definitely think that Trelawney is actually a Seer now, but as we've heard many times "The Inner-Eye does not work on command." Add in her thirst for drama and the biased opinions we keep getting, it's no wonder we always quickly assume she's a fraud. Mike From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 20:51:15 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 13:51:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Voldemort and Dementors In-Reply-To: <20040828190525.47148.qmail@web40808.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040828205115.35134.qmail@web53509.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111493 I have been doing a lot of thinking about the comment that JKR made about knowing why Voldermort did not die instead of why did Harry live. She further made the comment about what he did to himself. I am sure that this theory has already been discussed but as I am dying in an avalanche of wonderful e-mails and have a hard time searching the archives, can someone direct me to any references to Voldermort and Dementors? I keep replaying different things in my head such as how he looked at the end of GoF and how he never loved anyone, how dementors suck the happiness out. I do not have the book in front of me but we have been listening to the books on tape while going to dog shows and something in PoA seems to keep coming back to me - how the prisoners lost their humanity (or something to that effect). What if Voldermort turned himself into a dementor - but not just any dementor but the "Super Dementor" or "King Dementor"? Does anyone know where any discussion on this idea can be found? Thanks Moonmyyst (who's own little "sugar quill" is becoming quite the little terror!!) --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From meriaugust at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 20:59:59 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 20:59:59 -0000 Subject: Trelawney isn't a fraud In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111494 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: > I'm sorry if this has been discussed from this viewpoint already, but > I have never seen it. Also, before you want to look at me with a > Snape-like disgust, there is quite a bit of proof the shows Professor > Trelawney to be an actual Seer, though obviously not as great as her > great-great-great grandmother, Cassandra, or whatever relation she > was. > > This means however, that Harry, Ron, Hermione, McGonagall, Umbridge > and even Dumbledore are wrong about her. Right now you may be > thinking that this is a little much to push aside, but I'd appreciate > it if you hear me out. The fact that these people don't like > Trelawney, is that well to be blunt: She's annoying and likes to make > large productions of drama while she talks. (ie: PoA Christmas Feast) Meri now: I don't think it is that they don't like her, per se. IMHO they find her a flighty, flaky person, but Sybil isn't someone they hate. She's overly dramatic, yes, and she's bats out of her belfry but I'm pretty sure they don't detest her. > First off a question: Why do we automatically think Trelawney is a > fraud? > > The answer to this is quite simple: Everyone Harry interacts with and > trusts thinks she is. His opinion is biased due to the fact that he > doesn't have the Sight. We are reading the story from his POV, thus > he is taking nearly everything she does into a negative light. > > Harry dislikes her because he isn't a Seer, and thus he cannot > understand and cannot be taught Divination. Because of this, he finds > it very annoying and frustrating. Ron is also not a Seer (yes yes, > I've heard arguements on this board saying otherwise, but the point > is he doesn't know it if he is) so he finds it annoying too. Meri: I'm not sure it's their lack of posession of the Sight that makes Harry and Ron dislike Trelawny and her classes, it is probably more due to the fact that she gives them lots of busy work homework and keeps, inconvienently predicting Harry's death. Which can, I am sure get rather depressing. In all of Harry's words, and I've read PoA and GoF at least a dozen times, I am sure that I never percieved him as being frustrated by not being able to See. Same for > Hermione, and the fact that she can't learn it without being a Seer > frustrates her quite a bit. Meri: I agree with you here. If Hermione can't learn something out of a book it is just not worth learning for her. As Ron says, she's just not used to not being the top at something for a change. > McGonagall dislikes Trelawney because like Hermione, she is not a > Seer and likes to research things. She's strict. She likes rules and > facts, not Interpretation and Divination. Meri: Again, I agree, but I don't think that MM dislikes Trelawny personally. It is her subject that MM has a problem with. And if MM is not friendly to Trelawny she's not overtly hostile either, no matter how much Trelawny's flightiness and battyness might annoy her. Just look in the scene where she gets fired in Order. Who comes to Trelawny's aid? McGonogal. > Umbridge is determined to sack Dumbledore's teachers all year round. > Trelawney is seen as an annoying figure. Umbridge would sack nearly > all of the teachers given the chance, but because Trelawney teaches > Divination and Umbridge isn't a Seer, she is once again labeled a > fraud and set on Probation. Meri: Well, we don't really know DU's motivations, do we? She seemed to have been targeting people important to DD and his cause, so Trelawny seems an odd choice as she is not close to DD or the other faculty, she isn't (that we know of, anyway) a member of the Order, nor is she seemingly aware that she made the Prophecy that started this whole thing off. So, unless DU had ulterior motives to her actions then her attacks on Trelawny are a little out of character. > Lastly, Dumbledore. I know that a lot of people like to assume he's > right when he tells Harry things, but in this case he isn't right, or > he worded his thoughts about Trelawney wrong. He says that Trelawney > has only made two actual PREDICTIONS that were true. This isn't the > case. She has made only two PROPHECIES. There is a difference. Meri: Interesting distinction. I think that there is a difference as well. Here's hoping that the random predictions that Ron makes (especially that "die, Ron, die" one) don't ever come true like hers! Though > it is not firmly stated in canon, there is nothing to suggest that > for each regular 'prediction' made, she must go into a trance and > remember nothing after. Let's look at the predictions she makes in > the first Divination class in Harry's 3rd Year. > > Trelawney predicts that Neville will break a teacup in the first > class. It does happen, and knowing Neville we could say that she > easily knew he was clumsy. But how did she know he was clumsy? The > students have probably never even seen her before as she rarely > leaves her tower (not even for meals!). There is a very slim chance > that Trelawney would know Neville is clumsy and has a habit of > breaking things as soon as the first class starts. > > Another of Trelawney's predictions in the first Divination class is > that "the thing Lavender is dreading will happen" and she gives an > esimated date. Right on schedule, Lavender's bunny dies. This could > be a complete coincidence yes, but given her other two predictions > right after each other that come true I find it hard to give this one > to pure coincidence. > > The last prediction is that a student will leave around Easter for > good. This may not like a hard thing to guess, given that you either > have the Sight and do well or don't have it and struggle, but she > gets the date right on again. This is the second time she has > predicted the correct time frame so I once again find it hard to give > it to pure luck. > > Throughout Harry's third year she constantly tells him about his > problems with the Grim and how she keeps seeing it while reading his > tea leaves and the like. She's not seeing the Grim, she's seeing > Sirius in his Animagus form. She calls it the Grim because that's > what she knows as she doesn't know anything about Sirius' animagus > form. Since the Grim means peril, she constantly tells him he is in > mortal danger. Harry shrugs this off because it's laughable to him > and Ron- he's always in danger! > > So basically, why can't Trelawney predict correctly all the time or > especially, when Umbridge asks her to? She's told us this many times > over: The Inner-Eye does not work on command. Why does she constantly > predict Harry's doom, and love all the miserable predictions Harry > and Ron make? She's very dramatic, I think we can all agree on that. > Meri: You forget that she did predict correctly on demand. In Order she tells DU, when asked to make a prediction, that DU is (and I don't have my book with me, so this is a paraphrase) in grave danger, and of course she is, because she gets smacked around pretty good by the centaurs at the end of the year, so there's another one right for Sybil. Meri From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Aug 28 21:00:28 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 21:00:28 -0000 Subject: Percy's Letter (Was: Is Percy a spy?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111495 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "brandy" wrote: > Potioncat: > > If Hermione had sent Ron a note saying what a delightful woman > > Umbridge was, Ron would know she didn't mean it, and would > > understand to read carefully. It could be that Percy expected Ron > > to see through some of these comments as well. Brandy: > That is one point - he seems pretty oblivious to others' opinions of him, > so he may not realize at all that this is exactly the kind of thing Ron > might expect to hear from him. Geoff: Remember that Percy is not renowned for seeing the funny side of things I am away from home for a couple of days and cannot locate it immediately but there is the instance where Ron says of Percy something like "he wouldn't recognise a joke if it danced in front of him with nothing on.." Geoff: who invites everyone to enjoy pictures of Exmoor scenery heritage railway at www.aspectsofexmoor.com From MadameSSnape at aol.com Sat Aug 28 21:13:50 2004 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 17:13:50 EDT Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re:=20[HPforGrownups]=20Re:=20Snape=E2=80=99s=20DE=20P?= =?UTF-8?Q?ast=20&=20HBP?= Message-ID: <1e8.290c9b5f.2e624f8e@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111496 In a message dated 8/28/2004 12:07:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time, foxmoth at qnet.com writes: Trachtenberg also relates that demons in general were considered capable of producing hybrid offspring-- ================================= Sherrie here: As I recall, Merlin (Myrddin) was supposed to be the son of the Prince of Darkness himself by a mortal princess - at least, so some of the myths say. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Aug 28 21:17:17 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 21:17:17 -0000 Subject: Ron's dirt-smudged nose In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111497 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, macfotuk at y... wrote: > Someone MUST have posted on this because you are mostly very clever > and mostly very observant but it isn't something I've seen anything > on: > > Please tell me if I'm being thick and/or have missed something (a > joke for example), but exactly why is Ron's nose smudged when Harry > first meets him on the Hogwart's express (SS/PS)? Mrs Weasley makes > a point of noticing it and so does Hermione (also meeting Ron for > the very first time) and it was in the film (sorry spit I hate them - > well, no I don't actually, but yes they're not 'canon'). > Any comments or theories about Ron's dirt-smudged nose would be > appreciated here. Is it just, perhaps, that JKR is saying 'typical > boy doesn't even know his nose is dirty because he doesn't care > about his appearance'? Or something else? Geoff: I am inclined to agree with many of the other posters who say that it is a way for Jo Rowling to point up Hermione's superior attitude. There are several other instances of her using this to patronise and belittle others - Ron for instance over the "Wingardium Leviosa" practice in Professor Flitwick's lesson in PS and Ron and Harry after their first encounter with Fluffy. And remember, on the occasion when Snape calls her an insufferable know-it-all (in POA I think), the Gryffindors are sympathetic to her although it is pointed out that most of them had thought the same on occasions. If you recall, after the spell incident, mentioned above, Hermione goes off and we are told that she is in the toilet crying after barging past the boys - unhappiness or frustration or both? It is only then, after Ron and Harry save her from the troll, that their friendship really begins to flourish and she begins to mellow a little. Excuse me for not being my usual Hermione-like self and showering everyone with canon. I am in a foreign country [Wales :-)] using a friend's computer and separated from my books by 25 miles as the crow flies and 110 miles by road. Geoff: Who invites everyone to find out about Exmoor and its scenery at www.aspectsofexmoor.com From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Aug 28 21:31:49 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 21:31:49 -0000 Subject: Trelawney isn't a fraud In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111498 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: Mike:> I'm sorry if this has been discussed from this viewpoint already, but > I have never seen it. Also, before you want to look at me with a > Snape-like disgust, there is quite a bit of proof the shows Professor > Trelawney to be an actual Seer, though obviously not as great as her > great-great-great grandmother, Cassandra, or whatever relation she > was. > > This means however, that Harry, Ron, Hermione, McGonagall, Umbridge > and even Dumbledore are wrong about her. Right now you may be > thinking that this is a little much to push aside, but I'd appreciate > it if you hear me out. The fact that these people don't like > Trelawney, is that well to be blunt: She's annoying and likes to make > large productions of drama while she talks. (ie: PoA Christmas Feast) > > First off a question: Why do we automatically think Trelawney is a > fraud? Geoff: Just to add a little spice to the mixture, may I draw the attention of posters to a thread "Trelawney's predictions" which I started and to the replies which followed. The thread began at message 103170. Geoff: Enjoy pictures of Exmoor at www.aspectsofexmoor.com From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Aug 28 22:54:55 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 22:54:55 -0000 Subject: Trelawney isn't a fraud In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111499 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: > > Trelawney predicts that Neville will break a teacup in the first > class. It does happen, and knowing Neville we could say that she easily knew he was clumsy. But how did she know he was clumsy? The students have probably never even seen her before as she rarely leaves her tower (not even for meals!). There is a very slim chance that Trelawney would know Neville is clumsy and has a habit of breaking things as soon as the first class starts.< Trelawney seldom leaves her tower, but students come to visit her! Lavender and Parvati are up there for tea all the time. Are they her only student friends? Unlikely. Trelawney also allows her classes time to visit among themselves before class begins. That gives her plenty of opportunities to pick up student gossip-- such as that Neville is a klutz and lives with his grandmother . Of course everyone knows that the Potter boy has an enemy. Lavender is suggestible --she's very impressed by Trelawney's dramatic manner -- and having been told to dread something happening on the sixteenth of October, no doubt spent the ensuing 6 weeks pondering all the dreadful things that could happen. If it hadn't been Binky's death, it would have been something else Trelawney is herself suggestible -- look at the way Umbridge throws her into a tither--so it's no surprise that she sees death omens around Harry. You don't need to be a Seer to predict that the homework load increases around the Easter holidays when the students start preparing for exams. That would be when one of them is likely to quit. It probably happens often enough, especially to overly ambitious third years who bite off more than they can chew. Still, Trelawney could be an unconscious Seer the way Ron seems to be---maybe she only *thinks* she's a fraud. According to McGonagall, Trelawney has incorrectly predicted the death of a student each year -- wonder if she was right about poor Cedric? Pippin From navarro198 at hotmail.com Sat Aug 28 23:03:02 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 23:03:02 -0000 Subject: How many people know the full prophecy? In-Reply-To: <014301c48c78$63ebf9f0$6501a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111500 charme: Maybe Lily & James didn't really believe what had been predicted, or thought it secondary to another reason LV might be after them. I think the prophecy, while part of the plot, isn't the main reason LV went there that night, which might answer your latter question regarding the double bluff. Bookworm: "... born to those who have thrice defied him" Of course Voldemort had a reason to be looking for the Potters and Longbottoms even without the prophecy. He just doesn't seem to be the type to forgive and forget. Ravenclaw Bookworm From mauranen at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 23:26:36 2004 From: mauranen at yahoo.com (jekatiska) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 23:26:36 -0000 Subject: How did Tom kill his father? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111501 I came accross an old thread about Tom Riddle's path to evil. It struck me that we donn't actually know how he killed his father and his grandparents. So far I have assumed that he used Avada Kedavra, but as Moody said in GoF, it requires powerful dark magic. Tom was only a teenager when he killed his father, and don't think he could have used such a powerful curse at such a young age. Moreover, undetected by the MoM, who would have tracked him down for the murder of three people, I believe, even if he was 17 and allowed to perform magic outside school. What if it was the Basilisk? Ok, the idea may sound ludicrous, because when we met the Basilisk, it was very big indeed. But what if it was a lot smaller 50 years earlier? Small enough to be transported to Little Hangleton? What gave me this idea was the fact that the three of them had frightened expressions on their faces, like those petrified by the Basilisk, and unlike Cedric who was killed by Avada Kedavra. Just a thought. Jekatiska From navarro198 at hotmail.com Sat Aug 28 23:29:40 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 23:29:40 -0000 Subject: Trelawney isn't a fraud In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111502 Meri: Well, we don't really know DU's motivations, do we? She seemed to have been targeting people important to DD and his cause, so Trelawny seems an odd choice So, unless DU had ulterior motives to her actions then her attacks on Trelawny are a little out of character. Bookworm: I found this very *in* character for Dolores. She is a bully who found someone who wouldn't/couldn't stand up for herself ? Trelawney might as well have conjured a target on her forehead. Ravenclaw Bookworm From vmonte at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 23:43:22 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 23:43:22 -0000 Subject: Trelawney isn't a fraud In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111503 Mike wrote: Harry dislikes her because he isn't a Seer, and thus he cannot understand and cannot be taught Divination. Because of this, he finds it very annoying and frustrating. Ron is also not a Seer (yes yes, I've heard arguments on this board saying otherwise, but the point is he doesn't know it if he is) so he finds it annoying too. Same for Hermione, and the fact that she can't learn it without being a Seer frustrates her quite a bit. McGonagall dislikes Trelawney because like Hermione, she is not a Seer and likes to research things. She's strict. She likes rules and facts, not Interpretation and Divination. vmonte responds: I don't know if Trelawny is for real but my gut feeling is that she is a fraud. There is nothing I've read that would suggest any talent what-so-ever (except for the prophecies, which are somewhat vague). In the U.S. there is a man on TV that makes a fortune talking to families about their dead relatives (he channels the dead). He is a fake! He is a con artist who is skilled at reading a room. These people are very theatrical! They target "certain" individuals, and make broad sweeping statements without ever mentioning specifics, and/or time and place of events. They are glorified versions of the daily horoscope. Trelawny obviously reads the newspaper and probably gossips with the other teachers (as well as with Lavendar and that other student). She would have to know what Harry's background is, and probably Neville's. Predicting that Harry will die, or is in danger, is not much of a prediction (anyone in her class could come up with that). If the grim is an omen for approaching death, then it would have to be the grim that she saw in the tea leaves. I also don't think that Ron and Harry dislike Trelawny because they are jealous of her seer abilities. I do think however that her time on earth is probably very limited. I think she will be killed soon--and if I'm right, that still doesn't make me a seer. (I just think that two teachers for the same subject is just one too many.) vivian From meidbh at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 00:14:58 2004 From: meidbh at yahoo.com (meidbh) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 00:14:58 -0000 Subject: My very own personal HBP theory In-Reply-To: <20040828171636.15072.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111504 Magda writes: "What I believe: The HBP is a legend about a descendent of Godric Gryffindor, just like Riddle's Heir of Slytherin claim. ... "James Potter was a descendent of Godric Gryffindor's. ... "The clue in COS about the HBP storyline is the sword of Godric Gryffindor. Ruby-encrusted swords ain't cheap, even 1,000 years ago, and it's a hint that Godric wasn't just a threadbare scholarly type. Godric's heirs probably did pretty well for themselves and if even a portion of the wealth descended to James Potter it would explain why he didn't have to work for a living." Meidbh now: Nice point about James's wealth. And the descendant of GG angle too. You're in good company here with your personal theory - the current favoutites in the HBP poll are GG and "A New Character" with almost 40% of the HPFGU voters between them. (Although backing the favourites when predicting what JKR may do has not always proven to be the wisest move ) I'm a firm believer that the prince will not be a contemporary character for two reasons. The first is that JKR tells us the HBP storyline includes a strand of plot which could have been placed in CoS . It seems to have a flexibility that just shouts out 'backstory'. The second, well princes just aren't a very modern concept are they? If there is a dusty old royal family rattling around in the background of todays WW I think we would have had a hint of them by now. At the very least a coronation or jubilee mug in Molly's kitchen. I suppose that a modern Muggle world prince could turn up as a secret halfblood but I don't think it's Jo's style to involve contemporary muggle world politics in the books. IMO our HBP has to be a blast from the past. And for myself I'm backing GG (or possibly a descendant!)because of the sword (the Chamber connection) and because I think he has one of the best chances of having royal blood. When I try to imagine the kind of people who could have founded Hogwarts in the year 1000 I think they must have been educated (in the important skills of their time) and powerful. Professor Binns confirms this by telling us that they were "the greatest wizards of the age" and that they built the castle where Hogwarts now stands. Britain 1000 years ago was a feudal society, you would expect school founders to either be nobles or very powerful in the church. If the WW reflects our world (which it does to some extent) I think it is fair to assume that people with the resources to become great wizards and construct a castle would have been nobility in their world. Add GGs ruby studded sword into the equation and I would put all my galleons on GG being at the very least Sir GG. With nobility being notorious for inbreeding royal blood would not be unexpected. In fact it would be quite expected. So backing a favourite here, much as it goes against the grain. Meidbh From griffin782002 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 17:47:44 2004 From: griffin782002 at yahoo.com (sp. sot.) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:47:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Transferred soul (was Re: What did Riddle want from Ginny?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040828174744.98638.qmail@web90006.mail.scd.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111505 dungrollin wrote: (EDIT) Dungrollin: Reading it this way, I have to go back and apologise to all and sundry. It's entirely possible that his soul is hiding within Harry. However, if the reason that he wasn't killed by the Akrebound was that he'd misplaced (or intentionally hidden) his soul, it can't be within Harry, as it wouldn't have been with him when he went to GH in the first place. And, going right back to the title of this thread, he would have had to have hidden his soul before he was sixteen, otherwise he wouldn't have needed Ginny's. Oh dear, my two knuts-worth turned into a handful of sickles. Dungrollin (He who slings mud generally loses ground.) Griffin782002 now: I affraid you have mixed up the facts. The "person" that appeared in the chamber had nothing to do with L.V. that was living during that time in Albania. T.R. was a memory that was preserved in a diary. L.V.'s memories, mind, whatever it is ended up like this because of the failed A.K. curse. Griffin782002 Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/Files/Admin_Files/hbfile.html Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT --------------------------------- Yahoo! Groups Links To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: HPforGrownups-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 18:42:51 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 18:42:51 -0000 Subject: My very own personal HBP theory - for what it's worth In-Reply-To: <20040828171636.15072.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111506 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > > I don't believe the HBP is a living person. (snip) > What I believe: > > The HBP is a legend about a descendent of Godric Gryffindor, just > like Riddle's Heir of Slytherin claim. snip > James Potter was a descendent of Godric Gryffindor's. snip > The recently revealed description of the lion-maned-yellow-eyed > stranger is a new professor who will teach either DADA or potions, > and who will also tell Harry about the HBP legend and begin the > process of preparing Harry to face his destiny (kill or be killed). > > > Magda Tonks replies: I agree with some of this, but I don't think the description is of a new teacher. When I heard the description of the "lion-maned"... it must be someone that is a Gryffindor.. maybe even Goderic himself. Maybe Harry sees him in a dream or a pensive or something. I think that it is a description of Goderic Gryffindor and that Goderic is the HBP (half wizard royality/ half ? comon wizard?, and yes that Harry is his decendent... But there is something about the eyes. This person has yellow eyes.. very rare. Harry's are green. and this point is mentioned a lot... that he has his mothers eyes. Somehow I think this eye color thing mean something, but I don't know what. Yellow eyes... hum... Do only cats and lions have yellow eyes? Tonks_op From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 18:55:08 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 18:55:08 -0000 Subject: Wizard Death (Lily and James Grave & What Pettigrew did at Godric's Hollow) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111507 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kizor0" wrote: , we don't know the rebounded AK destroyed his body. In the GOF > > graveyard scene, all he says is 'I was ripped from my body' and all > > she has said here is that Pettigrew hid the robes and wand. Perhaps > > Pettigrew stripped the body and then tried to blow up the house and > > all the bodies, in an attempt to hide what had happened. > > > > Carolyn ----- > Note that Pettigrew has been linked to nice big explosions. XD > > - Kizor ------------ Tonks (posting in the daylight instead of the dead of night in hopes that someone will read this one.) Do we ever hear of a wizard's death where there were bodies? Do wizards bury their dead or do they just "go behind the veil" physical body and all? Tonks_op From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 19:00:04 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 19:00:04 -0000 Subject: Fearing (was Learning) Voldemort's Name In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111508 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dcgmck" wrote: > > dcgmck: > Ursula LeGuin in "Wizard of Earthsea" notes that in old magic the > knowing of an object's or person's real name is power over that > person/object. Tonks: C.S. Lewis says this too. In "Till We Have Faces". And JKR is fan of his. Tonks_op From denver_potterfan at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 19:34:17 2004 From: denver_potterfan at yahoo.com (denver_potterfan) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 19:34:17 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111509 > Magda: > snip. > > > Stopping the occlumency lessons did not leave > > Harry any more vulnerable than he already was. > > > > > Alla: > > We don't know that. Yes, of course there is a big chance that he > still could have that vision, OR he might have accomplished better > results in Occlumency by that time. > > I think it left him significantly more vulnerable Now Odette: I am of the opinion that had Snape continued with the occlumency lessons Harry may not have had the vision. On a couple of occasions in OOTP (sorry don't have book with me so can't give page numbers) Harry wakes himself up before reaching the door and thinks to himself that it is his guilt or conscious mind waking him because he knows that he is supposed to be stopping himself from having those dreams. As poor as the occlumency lessons may have been, they seemed to be working and had Harry practiced they might have been successful. IMHO. Odette (first post so feel free to rip it to shreds) From hockeybug1994 at yahoo.com Sat Aug 28 22:16:47 2004 From: hockeybug1994 at yahoo.com (DawnnieC) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 15:16:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Hermione using the time turner in POA In-Reply-To: <1093708433.6385.16484.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20040828221647.8415.qmail@web60710.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111510 Hi ? been lurking for a bit, finally decided to join in. **Waves to entire list** Vmonte writes: Is it possible that 17/18-year-old Harry is killed at GH but then brought back to the present and revived by Snape? Did he put a stopper on Harry's death? Is this the reason why there is a 24-hour time gap between the events of GH and when baby Harry is dropped off? Is the house at GH destroyed because Harry and Voldemort's wand will meet up together again? Dawnnie (me) response: That?s an interesting theory, but it doesn?t sit quite ?right? for me mainly because of Dumbledore?s warnings to Harry and Hermione when they attempt to rescue Sirus and Buckbeak. >From Chapt 21 PoA: ?But remember this both of you: you must not be seen. Miss Grainger, you know the law ? you know what is at stake . . . . you ? must ? not ? be ? seen.? Granted that Dumbledore was speaking of the possibility of ?current? Harry and Hermione meeting ?future? Harry and Hermione (or indeed anyone else out of the proper time line) and its implied disastrous effect on the time continuum. Could not one extrapolate that such a warning/consequence if the time-turner was used to ?undo? Harry?s death? Yes, I know Harry and Hermione went back to ?undo? Buckbeak?s death, but did they really? Was Buckbeak really excuted? Recall that none of Harry, Hermione, or Ron witnessed the execution. **shrug** Just something that?s been tickling my brain a bit. ~ ~ Dawnnie otherwise known as Bug ~ ~ --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ABadgerFan2 at msn.com Sat Aug 28 22:54:04 2004 From: ABadgerFan2 at msn.com (abadgerfan2) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 22:54:04 -0000 Subject: Book Two Discoveries! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111511 On her site, Rowling's answer to a FAQ discloses that one of Harry's Book Two discoveries "foreshadows" something that he finds out in Book Six. Has anyone made an inventory, in chronological order, of Harry's Book Two discoveries? One could then methodically go through and consider (with a chance of more accurately predicting) what is to come in Book Six! Thanks! From adragh at bcpl.net Sat Aug 28 23:08:32 2004 From: adragh at bcpl.net (adragh) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 23:08:32 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Snape=92s_DE_Past_&_HBP?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111512 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Pippin: > Trachtenberg, Joshua, *Jewish Magic and Superstition*, > University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004 p. 38 > [snip] Excellent! Thank you. I found this to be fascinating reading! I concede the point. > Pippin: > To bring this back to the topic, it certainly sounds as if such a > creature could successfully pretend to be a witch and have > children by a wizard. Granted this is all a lot more obscure and > foreign than Stoker's Dracula, but the folk elements in Dracula > were also obscure and foreign to Britain before Stoker > popularized them. Very much so. > Pippin: > JKR is not afraid of working obscure legends into her work: > she's obviously delved much deeper into the lore of alchemy, for > example, than most of her readers ever will. > I think this is one of the characteristics of a good writer, that the writer researches backgrounds even if they don't get set into type. Adragh From ellyn337 at earthlink.net Sun Aug 29 00:50:38 2004 From: ellyn337 at earthlink.net (mclellyn) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 00:50:38 -0000 Subject: Mimble & Catchpole or Greyfriars vs. Gryffindors Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111513 Gadfly McLellyn: I've been listening to the Harry Potter books in the background while I work and just letting my subconscious/unconscious pick up clues. I listen to the books in order. So I listened to ORDER OF THE PHOENIX with the plant and password of Mimbulus Mimbletonia. Then I listened to SORCERER'S STONE, and to my amazement there was that word mimble again. They are in the hut on the rock and the Dursley's are being confronted by Hagrid who is aghast that Harry knows nothing about the wizarding world. P50 of the US paperback: Hagrid looked like he was about to explode. "DURSLEY", he boomed. Uncle Vernon, who had gone very pale, whispered something that sounded like "Mimblewimble" So on a lark, I decided to GOOGLE mimble. (I suggest GOOGLEing Mrs. Mimble and you'll will get there quicker.) What I found was an author of children's magazine stories named William Leslie Catchpole who wrote Greyfriars and St. Jim's stories. Does Ottery St. Catchpole come to anyone's mind? He also wrote under the pseudonyms of Mrs. Mimble and of Potter and Greene. I was wondering what I had found. So I got on EBAY and started ordering some MAGNET magazines. Many of you from Great Britain or Australia are probably familiar with the MAGNET magazine stories of Billy Bunter at the Greyfriar's boarding school by Frank Richards and other assorted ghost writers - one being Catchpole. I ordered one that had Potter and Greene's "My Own Page" that described these characters (from MAGNET No 1623 Vol LV page 2): "Coker's two chums are normally quiet fellows, studious and well- behaved, with a decided taste for sport. Of the two, George Potter is more assertive and has a stronger character than Greene; but the truth is they are both fellows of much the same temperament. They would prefer to lead a quiet life of study and sport. They never do. Coker's forceful personality sees to that. Against their will Potter and Greene are dragged into all manner of shindies, and are forced to listen by the hour when Coker declaims against beaks and prefects. Most fellows wouldn't put up with it, but their motto is "Anything for a quiet life!" Potter's home is in London; Greene's on the Sussex coast. They are both going to the Varsity when they leave Greyfriars, but not with Coker!" Kind of sounds like Harry's life. Decided taste for Quidditch. Against their will dragged into all manner of shindies. Does POA p74 "I don't go looking for trouble," said Harry, nettled. "Trouble usually finds me." come to mind? I believe it is Coker, by the way, who is famous for his motorbike. Is anyone thinking of Sirius Black? Mrs. Mimbles "My Own Page" has one paragraph that could be Harry Potter related it is from MAGNET no 1631 vol LV page 2: "My shop is quaint and curious, and I will gladly show you round if you come to Greyfriars. It is part of the old monastery building, with walls built of flint and about six feet thick. There's the remains of a secret passage in the cellar, and they say that the abbey treasure may be buried somewhere down there, though I have never had the luck to find it. Spiders there are plenty, so you never catch me down there if I can help it." Hmmmm secret passageways, treasure and spiders. Chamber of Secrets or the passage way to Honeydukes, Philosopher/Sorcerer Stones and Aragog, OH MY. Flint is the Slytherin team captain, but that may be reaching. Bustrode has been a character in this series as well as someone named Figgy (Mundungus's nickname for Mrs. Figg.) The main story of this particular magazine is "The Mystery of Vernon- Smith". Vernon-Smith seems to be in two places at once this term. It turns out that he has a cousin who is almost a dead ringer for Vernon-Smith. Reminds me of the twin archetype I wrote about in my Humungus Bighead Post of Harry/Voldemort Fusion Theory see post 110941. In MAN AND HIS SYMBOLS edited by Carl Gustov Jung, they explain different types of hero journeys in mythology. One is the Twin archetype which seems to correspond with the conscious (Harry)and unconscious (Voldemort) uniting journey. "Though the Twins are said to be the sons of the Sun, they are essentially human and together constitute a single person. Originally united in the mother's womb, they were forced apart at birth. Yet they belong together, and it is necessary - though exceedingly difficult to reunite them." p113 MAN AND HIS SYMBOLS. Hmmmm, reminds me of what JKR says in interviews on how she knows what troubles are coming for Harry. Is anyone out there familiar with the MAGNET's Greyfriar series? Do you find other similarities between Greyfriar's and Hogwarts? You will be glad to know that this is probably my last research project until the next book comes out. No more gadfly swatting for a while. Gadfly McLellyn From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 01:10:35 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 01:10:35 -0000 Subject: Wizard Death (Lily and James Grave & What Pettigrew did at Godric's Hollow) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111514 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tonks_op" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kizor0" wrote: > > , we don't know the rebounded AK destroyed his body. In the GOF > > > graveyard scene, all he says is 'I was ripped from my body' and > all > > > she has said here is that Pettigrew hid the robes and wand. > Perhaps > > > Pettigrew stripped the body and then tried to blow up the house > and > > > all the bodies, in an attempt to hide what had happened. > > > > > > Carolyn > ----- > > > Note that Pettigrew has been linked to nice big explosions. XD > > > > - Kizor > > ------------ > Tonks (posting in the daylight instead of the dead of night in hopes > that someone will read this one.) > > Do we ever hear of a wizard's death where there were bodies? Do > wizards bury their dead or do they just "go behind the veil" > physical body and all? > > > Tonks_op mhbobbin writes: Missing bodies are much commented on, which implies that bodies don't usually go missing. In GOF Crouch!Moody tells his class that the AK curse does not leave any marks on the bodies--implies bodies. It's important to Cedric's shadow self to tell Harry to grab Cedric's body on his way back via port key. In PoA, it is much commented on that the only part left of Pettigrew, to return to his mum, was his finger. And in OotP, Moody shows Harry the picture of the Order members past, and comments on those who didn't survive-- commenting on Caradoc Dearborn's body never having been found and Benji Fenwick only found in bits. Missing dead bodies are uncommon enough to generate comment. That said, we know nothing of what became of the bodies of James and Lily, only that they were initially there at Godric Hollow. In PoA, Chapter 19, Sirius comments on having seen the bodies. We don't know what is normal for the Veil. Certainly Sirius's missing body lends uncertainty to his peculiar death, and is fuel to those of us who theorize that JKR has more plans for him. mhbobbin From ConstanceVigilance at gmail.com Sun Aug 29 01:15:20 2004 From: ConstanceVigilance at gmail.com (Susan Miller) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 01:15:20 -0000 Subject: Trelawney as a teacher (was: Trelawney isn't a fraud) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111515 I'm snipping the whole post, not because I have an opinion on Trelawney's skills as a seer, but because I want to defend her as a teacher. What I noticed in her classes is that she offers a collection of reference books on the various areas of her subject. To me this is a sign of a good teacher. The other classes that we are aware of seem to take the curriculum out of a single textbook along with practical practice. In no other class are we aware that the instructor maintains a library of specialized texts for the students' additional use in their studies. Does one always need to be an expert practitioner of a subject before being able to be a good teacher? I think it helps, but I think one can teach without being able to perform the skill - which is why we can see big men coaching tiny gymnastic pixies in the Olympics. Do we really think these guys need to be able to dance on a balance beam before being able to coach? One could point to the disagreement between Firenze and Trelawney on the meaning of certain astrologic formations to an indicator of fraud on the part of Trelawney. Firenze apparently does have practical skills at astrological forcasting that Trelawney does not. Does this mean that Trelawney's interpretation is fraudulent? We don't know where she got her information. Maybe she made it up. Or maybe she learned it from her resources and was passing on her knowledge. What I'm saying is that we can't point to this incident as conclusive proof that Trelawney is a poor teacher. We just don't know. I'm standing by my opinion that she runs her class as a good teacher should - using multiple authors' opinions and references. ~Constance Vigilance, who also believes that Quirrell was also a good teacher. Maybe not a good MAN during the one year that we knew him, but not a poor teacher. But don't get me started on the Q-man. From juli17 at aol.com Sun Aug 29 02:17:22 2004 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 22:17:22 EDT Subject: Snape's DE past Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111516 Magda wrote: > > > Stopping the occlumency lessons did not leave > >Harry any more vulnerable than he already was. > > > > > Alla: > > We don't know that. Yes, of course there is a big chance that he > still could have that vision, OR he might have accomplished better > results in Occlumency by that time. > > I think it left him significantly more vulnerable > We can't really know if Harry would have improved if he'd continued the Occlumency lessons, but I tend to think he wouldn't have, at least not enough to keep the visions away. But when it comes to blame, I place it pretty equally on all three involved--Dumbledore, Snape and Harry. After the MoM disaster, Dumbledore tells Harry that he blamed himself because he thought Snape could overcome his feelings about James. But why didn't Dumbledore take into account *Harry's* feelings about Snape, and the entire past relationship between the two? Why did he believe Harry could trust Snape enough to let his least favorite teacher into his mind? And more, why didn't Dumbledore recognize how strong these visions were, and how easily a 15 year old boy might be seduced by them? Also, while Snape certainly let his feelings about James impel him to end the Occlumency lessons, the reason Harry hadn't achieved good results to that point is because Harry didn't *want* to achieve results. He didn't want to practice, and he wanted the visions to continue. Even if Snape had resumed the lessons after the Pensieve business, there's not a lot of reason to believe Harry's attitude would have changed, or that he would have learned what he needed to know. While a bad teacher can make it difficult to learn, nothing is as detrimental to the process as a student who doesn't want to learn. That's what Dumbledore should have realized, after the fact if not before. Dumbledore may have given Snape a task to do, but it wasn't really achievable, due to the factors mentioned above--Snape's inability to forget the past, Harry's inability to fully trust Snape, their entire past relationship (largely Snape's doing of course), and Harry's lack of interest in learning. Clearly Dumbeldore isn't all-seeing, but he is usually right in the end, so maybe in blaming himself he is placing the blame where it most belongs, after all! Juli [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From submarimon15 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 03:09:40 2004 From: submarimon15 at yahoo.com (Mike) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 03:09:40 -0000 Subject: Trelawney as a teacher (was: Trelawney isn't a fraud) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111517 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Susan Miller" wrote: > I'm saying is that we can't point to this incident as conclusive > proof that Trelawney is a poor teacher. We just don't know. > > I'm standing by my opinion that she runs her class as a good teacher > should - using multiple authors' opinions and references. > > ~Constance Vigilance, who also believes that Quirrell was also a good > teacher. Maybe not a good MAN during the one year that we knew him, > but not a poor teacher. But don't get me started on the Q-man. Mike, replying to a bunch of the previous posts: I never meant to say that Trelawney was a poor teacher. It was in fact quite the opposite. I stated that Divination is a very hard subject to teach as most predictions and prophecies seem to be interpreted. This also follows with Crystal Ball Gazing and Tea Leaf reading. Sure, Trelawney's students visit her and I fully believe that Parvati and Lavender would fit into that category. However, she makes the Neville prediction on the first day of class. This means that Neville has had no reason to visit her previous to this occasion and I sincerely doubt that Sybill spends her time talking about other students in the teachers lounge ;) As for Harry and Ron disliking Divination, I do believe that Trelawney's behavior is what makes her more annoying to them. She loves drama, so all of her predictions (wether true or not) all seem to have to be negative in some way. (Harry's doomed, broken teacups, things being dreaded, students leaving class and grave danger). I don't think they'd mind half as much if she would just lay off the "you're doomed" drama. As for the Timelined predictions: You're right, it could have easily been a "good guess." It happened three times however which is a little more coincidental than I can ignore. Trelawney didn't actually make a prediction with the Sight for Umbridge. She was loathing her, so she said Umbridge was in grave peril in hopes to scare her. Either way, that guess could have went 50-50. Umbridge would either triumph in her regime at Hogwarts, or the students would rebel/she would be kicked out etc. Mike, hoping that clears it up a bit. From snow15145 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 03:29:29 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 03:29:29 -0000 Subject: Transferred soul (was Re: What did Riddle want from Ginny?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111518 I've been following this thread and it occurred to me that it may not have been Ginny's soul Tom was after but more simply the fact that she was a pureblood, something that would give Tom the boost he needed to be of any true worth to Salazar Slytherin. Although Tom was the last heir of Slytherin he was not a pureblood heir. If Tom had rematerialized his sixteen year old self by way of a pureblood would that have made him stronger and possibly more worthy to continue Salazar's noble work? What set Ginny apart from any other student attending Hogwarts that year? Malfoy had the answer! It may have been two-fold on Malfoy's part to place the diary in Ginny's possession. The first part was that he had to get this diary into the hands of a pureblood who wouldn't be old enough or bright enough (yet) to be suspicious, the second would be to inconspicuously approach such a person. There aren't many young pureblood wizards left who would fit this description. However, first-year-student Ginny, daughter of that muggle loving blood traitor Arthur Weasley, was the perfect unsuspecting victim. So not only did Malfoy do a service for his master but he also took great satisfaction in using the daughter of Arthur to do it with. I do have a few questions though, how was it that Tom Riddle was able to possess Ginny when Voldemort could not possess Harry? Doesn't Ginny possess any of the `power' that Harry has in abundance? If Ginny does possess some of the `power', was it just not enough of this `power' to stop the possession by Riddle? Or, was Voldemort very different somehow than young Tom Riddle before all the transformations? Snow From tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr Sat Aug 28 18:36:50 2004 From: tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr (totorivers) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 18:36:50 -0000 Subject: Purebloods fear of the muggleborn Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111519 I was just wondering wha exactly you think are the reasons for that. Do you think the pureblood fears the muggle as a whole, muggle culture, or the more progressive mind of the muggleborn who have a tendency to be better wizards than pureblood? I may talk about my opinion later, but was wondering what would be yours. From soulbrotha at mikaelmartin.com Sun Aug 29 02:07:09 2004 From: soulbrotha at mikaelmartin.com (rockstar064) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 02:07:09 -0000 Subject: Snape as baddie/Snape in the foe glass/Snape's Duty for the Order In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111520 I was rereading the Goblet of Fire, and could not help but notice the fake Moody's foe glass. In the end of GOF, when the fake Moody drags Harry up to his office, revealing himself as Crouch Jr., Harry notices the people in the foe glass becoming clearer. The foes in the glass, in fact, turn out to be Crouch Jr.'s foes, not Moody's, and they are indeed Dumbledore, McGonagall, and SNAPE. I personally believe (and hope) that Snape is indeed on the Order's side. If he was still a Death Eater, why would he be in that foe glass? I believe that he is indeed resuming his job as spy for the order. How could he still be a spy when Dumbledore outed him in Karkaroff's trial? (I think it was Karkaroff's). Well, if it was Karkaroff's trial, I don't believe anyone was there that would spread this around, so I don't think Voldemort ever found out. It was interesting to notice the end of GOF after Fudge left in disbelief, and Dumbledore began handing out assignments. ["Severus," said Dumbledore, turning to Snape, "you know what I must ask you to do. If you are ready... if you are prepared..." "I am," said Snape. He looked slightly paler than usual, and his cold, black eyes glittered strangely. "Then good luck," said Dumbledore, and he watched, with a trace of apprehension on his face, as Snape swept wordlessly after Sirius. It was several minutes before Dumbledore spoke again.] (GOF-36) I interpret Snape's paler look and glittering eyes to be a kind of fear or apprehension, and I immediately notice Dumbledore's apprehension in this passage. The silence as he leaves is so loud to me as well. The books say numerous times that Snape was a spy at great personal risk. I believe that Dumbledore was asking Snape to resume his post as spy, and by doing this, he would have to face Voldemort again, possibly facing torture or death if Voldemort did not accept Snape back. This is why they were so apprehensive, in my theory. From swirskyr at rogers.com Sun Aug 29 04:42:54 2004 From: swirskyr at rogers.com (Rachel) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 04:42:54 -0000 Subject: Petunia -- More fuel for the fire Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111521 I know that common thought on Petunia being a witch or at the very least from a wizarding family swings both ways, however on a recent reread I had a thought I am not sure I have seen here in the year or so that I have been trying ot keep up with the list. Why is the fireplace in the kitchen boarded up? It seems a rather unusual thing to do... especially as fireplaces tend to bring UP the value of a house (at least in my neighbourhood). Could it be that at one point it was hooked up to the floo network? Mr. Weasley said he had it hooked up for a bit in order to come get Harry, but that does not preclude the fact that it might not be an entirely new hookup. Anyhow, just a thought. Rachel From tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr Sun Aug 29 06:43:44 2004 From: tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr (totorivers) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 06:43:44 -0000 Subject: Transferred soul (was Re: What did Riddle want from Ginny?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111522 Snow: > I do have a few questions though, how was it that Tom Riddle was able > to possess Ginny when Voldemort could not possess Harry? Doesn't > Ginny possess any of the `power' that Harry has in abundance? If > Ginny does possess some of the `power', was it just not enough of > this `power' to stop the possession by Riddle? Or, was Voldemort very > different somehow than young Tom Riddle before all the > transformations? The method of possession is different. Voldemort is pitting his soul against Harry's, while Tom was using Ginny against herself. In order to possess Ginny, Tom had to wait until Ginny had lent sufficient life force to Tom by writing in the diary. In fact, it is Ginny that brought along the possession , and the (tacit) agreement may have helped. From ms_melanie1999 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 09:27:48 2004 From: ms_melanie1999 at yahoo.com (Miss Melanie) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 02:27:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Purebloods fear of the muggleborn In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040829092748.30935.qmail@web53407.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111523 totoriver wrote: I was just wondering wha exactly you think are the reasons for that. Do you think the pureblood fears the muggle as a whole, muggle culture, or the more progressive mind of the muggleborn who have a tendency to be better wizards than pureblood? I may talk about my opinion later, but was wondering what would be yours. My reply: Why were the Nazis scared of the Jews? Why were white men scared of black men? I mean it all goes back to the idea that people hate those that are different. If you are different then you are inherently wrong in the minds of many people. However, on a certain level I can see where the purebloods are coming from with this..it is hard to accept that a someone who is knew to your world, essentially an outsider, can be as good if not better than you. Hermione is a great example of this, it has to be hard for a successful pureblood family like the Malfoy's that have no doubt worked for centuries to build up their wizarding reputation to see Hermione Granger, a muggle born, be probably the most talented witch of her age. Also, people like Hermione, that are not as constrained by cultural traditons are more likely to bring about change. And while change is neccesary, it is very hard for many people to accept. For example, SPEW..the truth is house elves should be treated better. However, even families such as the Weasley's aren't really willing to stand behind Hermione in support of house elf liberation. This is just one example of probably hundreds of others that I can find in the book that indicates that the wizarding society is one that is so rooted in tradition that a person who upsets the fold, or the lineage, is not very welcome I'm not saying, and I repeat this NOT saying that I agree with this sentimates of the purebloods, I definitely do not. However, if I sit back and look at it constructively I can see where they are coming from. ~Melanie --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From patientx3 at aol.com Sun Aug 29 09:32:12 2004 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 09:32:12 -0000 Subject: Trelawney as a teacher In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111524 Constance Vigilance wrote: >>Does one always need to be an expert practitioner of a subject before being able to be a good teacher? I think it helps, but I think one can teach without being able to perform the skill - which is why we can see big men coaching tiny gymnastic pixies in the Olympics. Do we really think these guys need to be able to dance on a balance beam before being able to coach?<< HunterGreen: I think that's very true (although I do think she has more seer ability than just the two prophecies). The problem with divination is not the teacher but the subject itself. There's such a small percentage of seers out there that it seems silly to devote a class to it. And in the case of a student (like Ron for example) who might actually be a seer, its harder to recognize it in a classroom full of students. Personally, I think that Trelawnley should be available for private tutoring in case a seer comes along who would like instruction. Or perhaps divination 'theory' should be the main part of the class with very limited time devoted to trying to make predictions. That way they would learn about the subject without wasting time looking into crystal balls and such (although it might make for a rather boring class). From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 29 09:49:06 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 05:49:06 -0400 Subject: Montague (was Re: Owls to hidden places/people) Message-ID: <002601c48dad$6d3c3f20$51c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 111525 The Other Cheryl said: "Good point. After all, the Knight Bus finds it, too. Montague's parents also arrive to discuss his problems after he's found in the toilet. [I wonder what Myrtle thought about his presence.]" DuffyPoo: Montague wasn't in Myrtle's first floor toilet: "They've found Montague, sir, he's turned up jammed inside a toilet on the fourth floor." [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 10:24:44 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 10:24:44 -0000 Subject: Wizards travelling with children In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111526 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Deb" wrote: > > ...edited... > > So . . . how do you suppose wizards with young children travel? CAN > you apparate while holding a baby? ...edited... > > Just a thought . . . > > Deb in NJ Asian_lovr2: Naturally, I have a theory. (HA! Like that's news to anyone.) You can Apparate with another person, but it is a difficult and dangerous thing to do. Reasonably, you can apparate with inanimate objects; your clothes, your shopping bags, etc.... But all magic has an element of intent behind it. The simple 'Portus' Portkey Charm belies the complexity of the magic intent behind that simple word which is necessary to program all the complex parameters of the spell. Now when you try to Apparate with another person, you have the potential for conflicting intent. Let's say you pick up a young child intent on apparating to Diagon Alley. At the moment you attempt to apparate, the child sees it's favorite toy on the floor and desires to play with it. Now you have the parent desiring one destination and the child desiring a different destination. That could have serious consequences. The child may not know how to apparate but it does have magical ability, and while not actually initiating the magic required to move itself, it could still manifest a magical desire to be in another location which I logically assume is the precursor to apparating. I, therefore, speculate that the parent and child's magical desires could create conflict. Also, I would assume that apparating with some shopping bags is easier than the magical energy and focus necessary to apparate while carrying a 100 pound sack of potatoes. So to, to apparate with another 150 pound person would require substantial effort and concentration. Further speculated in this theory, is the belief that the key to apparating with something, whatever that something might be, is whether you are in possession of it. Let's use a chair for an example; if you are sitting on a chair and apparate, the chair stays behind because you do not 'possess' it. If you pick up the chair and hold it, then it is in your possession and it comes with you just as your clothes do. I could assume that it is possible to kidnap someone by apparating to their location, grabbing them, and disapparating before they have time to form their own conflicting magical intent. But, as I said in the pervious paragraphs, that would require a tremendous effort and involve tremendous risk. Just a few thoughts. Steve/asian_lovr2 (whose new 'b_boymn' username lasted hardly more than a month before Yahoo lost it.) From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 12:00:57 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 05:00:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape as baddie/Snape in the foe glass/Snape's Duty for the Order In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040829120057.41940.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111527 --- rockstar064 wrote: > I interpret Snape's paler look and glittering eyes to be a kind of > fear or apprehension, and I > immediately notice Dumbledore's apprehension in this passage. The > silence as he leaves > is so loud to me as well. The books say numerous times that Snape > was a spy at great > personal risk. I believe that Dumbledore was asking Snape to resume > his post as spy, and > by doing this, he would have to face Voldemort again, possibly > facing torture or death if > Voldemort did not accept Snape back. This is why they were so > apprehensive, in my theory. I think Snape's eyes "glittered" because he was excited. The Second War is about to begin - finally. As for what Snape is doing for the Order this time out, I really don't think he's a spy again. At least not the way he was the first time. There are way too many people - including six Hogwarts students - who know about it, for one thing. And I don't believe he has been in Voldemort's presence since he was harassing Quirrell in PS/SS. Whatever Snape is doing, it probably involves some magic we haven't seen before (there's always at least one new magic technique introduced in every book). Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 12:02:05 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 12:02:05 -0000 Subject: Petunia -- More fuel for the fire In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111528 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Rachel" wrote: > > Why is the fireplace in the kitchen boarded up? It seems a rather > unusual thing to do... especially as fireplaces tend to bring UP the > value of a house (at least in my neighbourhood). Could it be that at > one point it was hooked up to the floo network? Mr. Weasley said he > had it hooked up for a bit in order to come get Harry, but that does > not preclude the fact that it might not be an entirely new hookup. > > Anyhow, just a thought. > > Rachel Asian_lovr2: Not quite... The fireplace in the kitchen works (owls fly down it), it's the fireplace in the living room that is boarded up, and it's not really boarded up, that's just a convinient way of explaining the problem to Mr. Weasley. The fireplace has had a 'fake' electric coal fire insert built into the normal fireplace. They can make some very realistic looking fake fires now. One reason to insert a fake fireplace into a real fireplace is because fireplaces are drafty and if you don't seal them up, you actually lose heat. In addition, as romantic as they may seem, they take a lot of work. You have to fetch dirty wood, bust it up, gather kindling, light the fire, etc.... I had a house with a fireplace and generally found that after I went through all the trouble of building a real fire, I was very much out of the romantic mood. Most people who like having a fire, but don't like the struggle, have converted their wood fireplace to burn natural gas, or have blocked them with an electric fake fire. Just a thought. Steve/asian_lovr2 (whose new 'b_boymn' username hardly lasted a few weeks before Yahoo lost it. Thanks Yahoo.) From cmjohnstone at hotmail.com Sun Aug 29 12:57:43 2004 From: cmjohnstone at hotmail.com (littleleahstill) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 12:57:43 -0000 Subject: alchemy in HP(was: Ron-death of a friend?/theme Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111529 Phyllis wrote: >IMO, Ron will be one of the deaths in the last book, the >alchemical "work of reddening." The alchemical Great Work is >divided "into three or four essential phases: `the work of >blackening' (Nigredo or Melanosis), `the work of whitening' (Albedo >or Leucosis), and finally `the work of reddening,' which alchemists >originally separated into two complementary moments, that of gold >(Citrinitas or Xantosis) and that of purple or transmutation of venom >(Iosis)" (see: Maurice Aniane, Alchemy: The Cosmological Yoga, Part >2: Phases of the Work, http://www. alchemylab.com/AJ2-1.htm). In >alchemy, the work of reddening is symbolized by the ceremonial >meeting of the Red King and the White Queen. Leah: I understand JKR to have suggested during an interview that Ron's death was not part of her plan. I believe she said something like, 'As if I'd kill Harry's best friend'. So while that's not a complete denial, it leans in that direction. I do agree that Ron's sacrifice in the chess game seems to foreshadow something, and of course there is the Ron=DD timeturning theory as one explanation. (Though of course in the context of the PS/SS tasks, it's Hermione who gets sent back). Couldn't the reddening you refer to be a reference to Rubeus Hagrid? (I assume you are thinking of Sirius for the blackening stage and Albus DD for the whitening (though there could be a Lily reference there). You point out all the maroon references to Ron (isn't DD wearing maroon robes in the diary vision?), but couldn't this be a reference to royalty rather than the reddening process? And Harry sees Ron and Hermione wearing crowns- and I understand that kings and queens are an alchemical image. I'm taking the alchemical idea at face value there, because I do find it interesting. My question is, do you think this a deliberate theme by JKR? There are a number of what seem to be reasonably overt references to alchemy in the text- not only the PS itself, but to alchemists- Nicholas Flamel, Paracelsus, John Dee. However it does seem to be a rather obscure subject to form a major theme in the series. Laurasia wrote: > But, like I said above, I agree that there is a metaphysical >level of magic present and I think the best stories are those >which do tap into this higher domain. JKR's story is so popular >and works on so many levels from children to academics because >it is a very good example of issues beyond the physical >domain of the universe. Do these 'alchemical' references tap into this metaphysical level of magic? From Lynx412 at AOL.com Sun Aug 29 13:12:13 2004 From: Lynx412 at AOL.com (Lynx412 at AOL.com) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 09:12:13 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Montague (was Re: Owls to hidden places/people) Message-ID: <159.3dd5ce4d.2e63302d@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111530 In a message dated 8/29/2004 6:10:21 AM Eastern Standard Time, cldrolet at sympatico.ca writes: > DuffyPoo: > Montague wasn't in Myrtle's first floor toilet: "They've found Montague, > sir, he's turned up jammed inside a toilet on the fourth floor." > True, but Myrtle isn't limited to her own toilet. She can travel, she's been in the prefect's bath and the lake. The Other Cheryl [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From crobocker at aol.com Sun Aug 29 13:30:17 2004 From: crobocker at aol.com (c_robocker) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 13:30:17 -0000 Subject: HarryMort (was many other things) In-Reply-To: <003501c48d30$9b0d4020$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111531 >> Macfotuk wrote (and I snipped a bit of the first): >> (snip) >> ONLY be killed when he and Harry are reunited as a single entity >> (snip) > Ffred continued: > > (snip) > Two other possible clues are the "gleam" in Dumbledore's eye after > hearing the story from the graveyard, where Voldemort transfers > part of Harry (hisblood) to himself, CRobo pipes up: Interesting. I quite like the theory. Words from these posts popped a thought into my head that might explain the "gleam" (I'm miles behind in reading posts so I hope this hasn't been beaten into nothingness already.) Perhaps Voldie's plan to escape death was, if he was ever mortally wounded, to leave his old body and possess the body of the one who 'killed' him. That way he would never die. So at GH, Lily's charm prevented the entire Voldie from possessing Harry. Oops, now he's got problems. He's split. Let's say that Harry receives some fraction or part of Voldie at GH. Maybe a 50/50 split for argument's sake (it could be more or less) the night Harry gets the scar. The curse rebounds, putting Voldie in a life/death situation. So recognizing that, he attempts to possess little Harry (the only possibility left since Voldie killed everyone else in the house) in entirety. But there's the charm and so only 50% of Voldie's 'being' merges into Harry for its survival. The other 50% rebounds from Harry's forehead and remains as a spirit that can possess snakes and drifts off to the forests in Albania. However, when Voldie uses Harry's blood to restore his body, he has now altered the percentages - Voldie is now a combination of his first 50% + 17% muggle dust (bones of his father) + 17% Wormtail (flesh of a servant) and say, 16% Harry. (Hope I didn't forget anything.) Now if there is a Harry/Voldie combo - Voldie still could be whole - 50%+50% but Harry has more, 100%+16%. Now what would that mean? Well, hopefully that Harry 'wins' and defeats Volie. But what else. Hmmm. I must ponder on this. Begs a number of questions. Thanks for getting me thinking. CRobo. From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Aug 29 14:08:30 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 14:08:30 -0000 Subject: Trelawney as a teacher (was: Trelawney isn't a fraud) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111532 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: > Sure, Trelawney's students visit her and I fully believe that Parvati > and Lavender would fit into that category. However, she makes the > Neville prediction on the first day of class. This means that Neville > has had no reason to visit her previous to this occasion and I > sincerely doubt that Sybill spends her time talking about other > students in the teachers lounge ;) > After his first year, Neville is a school celebrity in his own right; he's the dark horse who won the House Cup for Gryffindor. That's the kind of thing that gets talked about. Trelawney could have heard gossip about him long before Neville showed up for his first lesson. Pippin From tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr Sun Aug 29 14:22:46 2004 From: tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr (totorivers) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 14:22:46 -0000 Subject: HarryMort (was many other things) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111533 CRobo, interesting theory......... I am just going to tell you another one just to have fun: What if the curse didn't simply *rebound* but linked them, and that, as they both had protection against it, they both lost something. Both Harry and Voldemort lost let's say 20 % of their souls, and another 10% was mixed between them, outside of the block (20% tied up in the spell, 10% sharing, a bit like electrons). Then that makes Harry *dead*, or *undead*. Which may explain a part of the prophecy. "totorivers" From tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr Sun Aug 29 14:26:47 2004 From: tombadgerlock at freesurf.fr (totorivers) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 14:26:47 -0000 Subject: Trelawney as a teacher (was: Trelawney isn't a fraud) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111534 Mike wrote: > > However, she makes the Neville prediction on the first day of > > class. This means that Neville has had no reason to visit her > > previous to this occasion and I sincerely doubt that Sybill > > spends her time talking about other students in the teachers > > lounge. ;) Pippin: > After his first year, Neville is a school celebrity in his own > right; he's the dark horse who won the House Cup for Gryffindor. > That's the kind of thing that gets talked about. Trelawney could > have heard gossip about him long before Neville showed up for his > first lesson. Plus, you may remember that what happened to Neville's parent and maybe Neville himself is pretty well known. Everybody knows that Neville is maybe even worse that Tonks, and she could see by his behaviour that it was right. It doesn't take a genius to guess that. Plus, we know that Trelawney always makes predictions, we just have heard of the 0.1% that comes true. toto From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 14:40:39 2004 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 14:40:39 -0000 Subject: HarryMort (was many other things) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111535 > CRobo pipes up: > Let's say that Harry receives some fraction or part of Voldie at > GH. Maybe a 50/50 split for argument's sake (it could be more or > less) the night Harry gets the scar. The curse rebounds, putting > Voldie in a life/death situation. So recognizing that, he > attempts to possess little Harry (the only possibility left since > Voldie killed everyone else in the house) in entirety. But there's > the charm and so only 50% of Voldie's 'being' merges into Harry for > its survival. The other 50% rebounds from Harry's forehead and > remains as a spirit that can possess snakes and drifts off to the > forests in Albania. > > However, when Voldie uses Harry's blood to restore his body, he > has now altered the percentages - Voldie is now a combination of his > first 50% + 17% muggle dust (bones of his father) + 17% Wormtail > (flesh of a servant) and say, 16% Harry. (Hope I didn't forget > anything.) Now if there is a Harry/Voldie combo - Voldie still > could be whole - 50%+50% but Harry has more, 100%+16%. Now what > would that mean? Well, hopefully that Harry 'wins' and defeats > Volie. But what else. Hmmm. I must ponder on this. Begs a > number of questions. ********* LOL - I don't know about this math you did. If we follow your line of thought, I believe Harry should have at least his 100% own, 50% given by Voldy on Halloween night... then we would have to subtract the 16% Voldy took away at the graveyard (?), and add some % that Lily gave him (would you think that Lily's Love should add up in that equation?)... I don't think that this mystery can be solved with math. On the other hand, I do strongly believe that Harry has an 'alien' voice/soul/demon inside himself, which talked to him while resisting the Imperious Curse, which set him to action when in the Chamber -he dug the Basilisk fang in the Diary without thinking beforehand, he somehow knew that he had to 'push' the golden bead away from him when the Priori Incantatem effect at the graveyard... I don't know, that 'voice' that makes him act without being completely knowledgeable/aware of his actions is very 'fishy' to me. Marcela From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Aug 29 15:02:50 2004 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 29 Aug 2004 15:02:50 -0000 Subject: Reminder - Weekly Chat Message-ID: <1093791770.77.14241.m18@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111536 We would like to remind you of this upcoming event. Weekly Chat Date: Sunday, August 29, 2004 Time: 11:00AM CDT (GMT-05:00) Don't forget, chat happens today, 11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern, 7 pm UK time. Chat times do not change 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 Hope to see you there! From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Aug 29 15:08:28 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:08:28 -0000 Subject: Snape as baddie/Snape in the foe glass/Snape's Duty for the Order In-Reply-To: <20040829120057.41940.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111537 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > > As for what Snape is doing for the Order this time out, I really > don't think he's a spy again. At least not the way he was the first time. There are way too many people - including six Hogwarts students - who know about it, for one thing. And I don't believe he has been in Voldemort's presence since he was harassing Quirrell in PS/SS. Whatever Snape is doing, it probably involves some magic we haven't seen before (there's always at least one new magic technique introduced in every book).< Six? Unless I'm missing something, only Harry, Ron and Hermione know that Snape was a spy before. Fred,George and Ginny know that he's doing something for the Order, but they don't know what it is. Only Harry has been told that it's Snape's present job to find out what Voldemort is telling his Death Eaters. I wonder, could the "Snape hasn't returned to Voldemort because Voldemort would have killed him" theorists explain how staying out of Voldemort's presence would protect Snape? Defectors are murdered -- no exceptions. Voldemort might not want to risk going after Snape in person, but now that he's returned, Voldemort has plenty of people to do his killing for him. How could it be safe for Snape to associate with Lucius Malfoy, for example? The way I see it, the only way Snape is alive is because he *has* returned to Voldemort. He must have convinced his Master that he only took the teaching post at Hogwarts so that he would be well placed to aid Lord Voldemort on his inevitable return. It was in playing this role that he defended Harry and tried to expose Quirrell. After all, how could he think Dumbledore would have allowed his precious Potter to do such obviously dangerous things: play Quidditch in his first year, wander around the school after hours, not to mention sending him into the Forbidden Forest with only that half-giant oaf for protection? Obviously it was all for show --a test to see who could be trusted. And Snape has now passed with Outstanding in all subjects. I'm sure Voldemort levelled a crucio or two at Snape for his obtuseness in the matter...but in the end, there's a vacancy for "faithful servant at Hogwarts" and Snape is an offer Voldie can't refuse. Perhaps Snape has convinced Voldemort that Dumbledore's defense of Snape during Karkaroff's hearing was a double bluff, designed to protect his *real* spy, Karkaroff, from DE vengeance. "And, now, consider the beauty of it, master, the old fool thinks he's sent me here to spy on you for him! Mwahahaha!" Pippin who sincerely hopes Igor has found a deep dark hole to hide in From meriaugust at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 15:10:08 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:10:08 -0000 Subject: Trelawney isn't a fraud In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111538 Excellent point, RB. What I meant was in terms of strategy Trelawny was an odd choice for DU to pick on, meaning that she wasn't as important to DD as MM or Snape or Hagrid, unless of course DU knew about the prophecy and had some ulterior motive, but I never considered that DU would just pick on people to pick on them. Thanks for pointing that one out to me. Anyway, see you back on the lists. Meri - who actually felt bad for Trelawny in Order when she was all drunk and depressed... --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "scoutmom21113" wrote: > Meri: > Well, we don't really know DU's motivations, do we? She seemed to > have been targeting people important to DD and his cause, so > Trelawny seems an odd choice So, unless DU had ulterior > motives to her actions then her attacks on Trelawny are a little out > of character. > > Bookworm: > I found this very *in* character for Dolores. She is a bully who > found someone who wouldn't/couldn't stand up for herself > ? Trelawney might as well have conjured a target on her forehead. > > Ravenclaw Bookworm From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk Sun Aug 29 15:14:55 2004 From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:14:55 -0000 Subject: Trelawney as a teacher (was: Trelawney isn't a fraud) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111539 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: > > > Sure, Trelawney's students visit her and I fully believe that Parvati > > and Lavender would fit into that category. However, she makes the > > Neville prediction on the first day of class. This means that Neville > > has had no reason to visit her previous to this occasion and I > > sincerely doubt that Sybill spends her time talking about other > > students in the teachers lounge ;) > > > > > After his first year, Neville is a school celebrity in his own right; he's the dark horse who > won the House Cup for Gryffindor. That's the kind of thing that gets talked about. > Trelawney could have heard gossip about him long before Neville showed up for his first > lesson. > > Pippin ...and Alshain adds: Furthermore, there are such things as self-fulfilling prophecies. Tell a shy and clumsy boy (you can tell from his body language and general demeanour) that he is going to drop a teacup, and the probability that he'll do it increases drastically. A lot of vagueness also helps since that allows the victim to interpret the predictionfor him/herself -- "the thing you are dreading" could be anything from a bad mark on your homework to someone dying. Then add a suitable delay, six weeks in this case, and selective bias - Lavender had almost forgotten about the prediction and didn't remember until she got the letter from home. If she'd been perfectly happy all day she wouldn't have thought twice about it. A view on Trelawney that I don't think anyone put forward yet (at least not in this thread) is that she probably isn't conscious of the fact that much of what she's doing is cold reading, clever guesses and self-fulfilling prophecies, so I really don't know if 'fraud' is the right word since she's acting in good faith. A lot of people involved in ESP, communication with spirits etc. really and truly believe in what they do. I'm not denying that she has some talent in Seeing, but only when her specific, extraordinary predictions begin to come true (like the people whose deaths she has predicted, they have to be, what, fourteen with Harry?) I'm going to believe that she is a True Seer. Alshain, obviously a skeptic From meriaugust at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 15:17:44 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:17:44 -0000 Subject: Purebloods fear of the muggleborn In-Reply-To: <20040829092748.30935.qmail@web53407.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111540 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Miss Melanie wrote: > totoriver wrote: I was just wondering wha exactly you think are the reasons for > that. Do you think the pureblood fears the muggle as a whole, muggle > culture, or the more progressive mind of the muggleborn who have a > tendency to be better wizards than pureblood? > > I may talk about my opinion later, but was wondering what would be > yours. > > > > My reply: Why were the Nazis scared of the Jews? Why were white men scared of black men? I mean it all goes back to the idea that people hate those that are different. If you are different then you are inherently wrong in the minds of many people. > > However, on a certain level I can see where the purebloods are coming from with this..it is hard to accept that a someone who is knew to your world, essentially an outsider, can be as good if not better than you. Hermione is a great example of this, it has to be hard for a successful pureblood family like the Malfoy's that have no doubt worked for centuries to build up their wizarding reputation to see Hermione Granger, a muggle born, be probably the most talented witch of her age. > > Also, people like Hermione, that are not as constrained by cultural traditons are more likely to bring about change. And while change is neccesary, it is very hard for many people to accept. For example, SPEW..the truth is house elves should be treated better. However, even families such as the Weasley's aren't really willing to stand behind Hermione in support of house elf liberation. This is just one example of probably hundreds of others that I can find in the book that indicates that the wizarding society is one that is so rooted in tradition that a person who upsets the fold, or the lineage, is not very welcome > > > > I'm not saying, and I repeat this NOT saying that I agree with this sentimates of the purebloods, I definitely do not. However, if I sit back and look at it constructively I can see where they are coming from. > > ~Melanie > Excellent points all. I'd just like to add one. When the so-called breach between the magical world and the muggles occured over a thousand years ago witchcraft was feared and hated by muggles and so, while I am not condoning this kind of attitude, it is reasonable to think that some witches and wizards might develop a kind of hatred against the muggles (even the muggle born of their own kind) who would have burned anyone with magical powers at the stake if they had their druthers. Fear works both ways after all. If I was a witch living a thousand years ago I don't know if I would trust a muggle born, especially in trying times. Just a thought. Meri From kempermentor at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 15:19:59 2004 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:19:59 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111541 Magda: Stopping the occlumency lessons did not leave Harry any more vulnerable than he already was. Alla: We don't know that. Yes, of course there is a big chance that he still could have that vision, OR he might have accomplished better results in Occlumency by that time. I think it left him significantly more vulnerable Odette: I am of the opinion that had Snape continued with the occlumency lessons Harry may not have had the vision. On a couple of occasions in OOTP (sorry don't have book with me so can't give page numbers) Harry wakes himself up before reaching the door and thinks to himself that it is his guilt or conscious mind waking him because he knows that he is supposed to be stopping himself from having those dreams. As poor as the occlumency lessons may have been, they seemed to be working and had Harry practiced they might have been successful. IMHO. Kemper now: I agree with Magda. And with Odette to the extent that had Harry practiced he would have been successful at occulemency, but Harry chose NOT to practice even though he was told/encouraged to by people who had a grasp on the gravity of the situation: DD indirectly through Snape, Hermione, Sirius and Lupin. It is not as though Harry thought Occulemency was another class to pass. He knew the importance of it and chose not to practice. Wait... that's wrong. He chose to continue the dreams rather than practice. Harry has some misdirected anger at Snape. If it's anyone's fault that Harry's Godfather is dead, it's Harry's. From kempermentor at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 15:40:44 2004 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:40:44 -0000 Subject: Wizard Death (Lily and James Grave & What Pettigrew did at Godric's Hollow) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111542 mhbobbin : We don't know what is normal for the Veil. Certainly Sirius's missing body lends uncertainty to his peculiar death, and is fuel to those of us who theorize that JKR has more plans for him. Kemper now: Regarding Sirius' death... will there at least be a private wake or something similar for Harry's grief? Or does the WW not have death ceremonies because they're so enlightened? From crobocker at aol.com Sun Aug 29 15:57:15 2004 From: crobocker at aol.com (c_robocker) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:57:15 -0000 Subject: HarryMort (was many other things) long In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111543 wrote: > > CRobo pipes up: > > Let's say that Harry receives some fraction or part of Voldie at > > GH. > >snip > > However, when Voldie uses Harry's blood to restore his > > body, he has now altered the percentages >>snip > ********* > > Marcela points out a couple flaws!!: > LOL - I don't know about this math you did. If we follow your > line > of thought, I believe Harry should have at least his 100% own, 50% > given by Voldy on Halloween night... then we would have to > subtract > the 16% Voldy took away at the graveyard (?), and add some % that > Lily gave him (would you think that Lily's Love should add up in > that equation?)... I don't think that this mystery can be solved > with math. > snip Good points!! Second attempt. Let's see if I can fix this. I haven't added in Lily's love yet, but that's a good thought. At GH, before the rebounded curse, the standings of 'being' are: Harry - 100% Harry Voldie - 100% Voldie (whether he is in fact some combination of Slytherin, Grindlewald (sp?), Riddle, etc is a whole other contemplation). Perhaps, since Voldie believes that Harry is more powerful from the portion of the prophesy that he knows, he thinks he'll just assimilate (too much Star Trek, I know!) Harry and become more powerful than he (Voldie) already is. But Lily's charm prevents the assimilation of Harry, and instead Voldie's curse backfires and put into motion the backup plan, that when Voldie is about to be killed, he escapes his body and lodges in another. Harry, the only living person around, is the target. But only a portion of Voldie gets in because of the charm, and the rest is left to sulk in Albania. So now, the standings would be: Harry - 100% Harry, plus some portion of Voldie, say 50% Voldie - 50% The theorist pauses here to wonder if a single person can be more than 100%. Well, I guess the answer is 'yes' if Quirrel!Mort can be Quirrel and Voldie. As a side comment, Trelawney may actually be sensing the Voldie in Harry, hence the mistake about when his birthday is, etc. And Ron's sarcastic comment about Harry having to be some extra concentrated ghost to die as many times as Trelawney predicts might fit here too, but I digress.... Fast forward to the cemetery near the Riddle's manor and the dark magic that Voldie uses to get a/his body back. So does Harry lose any of himself when his blood is used in the spell or does there become 'more' of Harry? I suppose that depends on what this dark magic does. I'm proposing first that taking Harry's blood or Wormtail's hand, does not lessen their own percentages of being, but just adds to Voldie. And let's assume that he has to be 100% of whatever combination he can come up with to have a body. With that in mind, Harry - still 100% Harry, 50% Voldie Voldie - 50% that he started with, plus the new ingredients from the spell: 17% muggle dust, 17% Wormtail, 16% Harry. So the bottom line is that there is 'more' of Harry than there is of Voldie. Now, what if Harry loses some of himself at the Riddle Manor? Harry - 100% Harry, 34% Voldie (50-16) or 84% Harry (100-16), 50% Voldie Voldie - 66% Voldie, 17% muggle dust, 17% Wormtail or 50% Voldie, 17% muggle dust, 17% Wormtail, 16%Harry. But what about Wormtail? If Harry loses some of himself, wouldn't Wormtail lose some too? The whole exercise could be done from the top if Harry lost some of himself at GH to the expense of the curse. Back to GH and assess just after the curse: Harry - 50% Harry, 50% Voldie Voldie - 50% Now there isn't enough of Harry on his own to exist. And back to the cemetery: First theory that the dark magic doesn't remove anything from Harry but only adds to Voldie: Harry - 50% Harry, 50% Voldie Voldie - 50% Voldie, 17% muggle dust, 17% Wormtail, 16% Harry Now if there was a Harry/Voldie combination, Harry has more than he would have had - he'd be up to 66%, but out %'d by Voldie's 100%. This post is already too long, I'll go back and play with some numbers so that they come out the way I want! :) Cheers! CRobo. From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 16:08:48 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:08:48 -0000 Subject: Wizard Death / Settlement of Estate etc. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111544 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kempermentor" wrote: > > mhbobbin : > > We don't know what is normal for the Veil. Certainly Sirius's > missing body lends uncertainty to his peculiar death, and is fuel to > those of us who theorize that JKR has more plans for him. > > > Kemper now: > > Regarding Sirius' death... will there at least be a private wake or > something similar for Harry's grief? Or does the WW not have death > ceremonies because they're so enlightened? mhbobbin: Further to that--how does one verify the death so that there would be a settlement of his estate, funeral etc. Witnesses to Sirius falling through the Veil are either DEs in prison, Bellatrix on the run, members of the OotP who may have an interest in concealment of Sirius' death or the kids--only Harry and Neville are still around to witness the Sirius / Veil event. There's no benefit, that I can see, for Phoenix members revealing that they saw their ally Sirius die. After all, the Phoenix is a secret society and no member would want to be publicly linked with a criminal until such time they could prove his innocence. Unless the Veil spits out some sort of receipt, how would the WW know of Sirius' death? As far as the WW is concerned, Sirius would still be missing and on the lam. Death Eaters would know but right now they might have a credibility problem and have other problems like whether they'll break out of Azkaban in Chapter 1 or Chapter 2 of Book Six. Seems to me that for the time being, DD can hold back the info about Sirius' presumed death from the Ministry etc. so that the estate continues to be the headquarters for the Phoenix. Even if Grimauld Place passes to Narcissa Black Malfoy, how is she going to make a claim if she can't prove Sirius' death. I am assuming there's a legal process which may be a poor assumption. Secrecy about the death of Sirius would also depend on how the Secret Keeper charm works--whether suddenly people who used to know where Grimauld Place, can now find it. Or if Kreacher can now reveal previously forbidden information about the Order to Narcissa Malfoy. mhbobbin From lupinesque at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 16:38:35 2004 From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:38:35 -0000 Subject: Fabian & Gideon's namesakes Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111545 Hi all, Old member here, posting the way I do about 2-3x/year nowadays. It just occurred to me that Fred & George's initials are the same as those of Fabian and Gideon Prewett, who were, most likely, Molly's brothers. Coincidence, or were they named (initialled) for their recently-killed uncles? I lean toward the latter. Amy Z --------------------------------------------------------------------- "Ah, well . . . wand still in your jeans? Both buttocks still on? OK, let's go." From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 16:58:12 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 09:58:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape as baddie/Snape in the foe glass/Snape's Duty for the Order In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040829165812.89400.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111546 --- pippin_999 wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich > > As for what Snape is doing for the Order this time out, I really > don't think he's a spy again. At least not the way he was the > first time. There are way too many people - including six > Hogwarts students - who know about it, for one thing. And I don't > believe he has been in Voldemort's presence since he was > harassing Quirrell in PS/SS. Whatever Snape is doing, it > probably involves some magic we haven't seen before (there's > always at least one new magic technique introduced in every > book).< > Pippin: > Six? Unless I'm missing something, only Harry, Ron and > Hermione know that Snape was a spy before. Fred,George and > Ginny know that he's doing something for the Order, but they > don't know what it is. Only Harry has been told that it's Snape's > present job to find out what Voldemort is telling his Death Eaters. Magda's Response: Obviously I wasn't clear. I wasn't referring to the first time. Six students know that Snape is a member of the Order in OOTP. That means IF Snape is spying again then six students know about it. Therefore, whatever Snape is doing, he's not a spy otherwise more care would be taken that he not be seen by anyone or his involvement known. Is that better? > Pippin > The way I see it, the only way Snape is alive is because he *has* > returned to Voldemort. Magda's Response Not necessarily. Noting that one DE "has left me forever - he will be killed, of course" doesn't mean "I'm going to drop everything and hunt him down and exterminate him RIGHT NOW!" When - not if, - Voldemort wins there will be plenty of time to whack all those traitors and cowards who didn't come back when they were summoned. Also there will be the opportunity to stage a little scene whereby Snape is brought into the Dark Lord's precence and is forced to grovel and moan for his life while being tortured before he's finally killed. Sends a little lesson out to the other DE's who might be having second thoughts. Also even as a future target of the Dark Lord's wrath and an acknowledged enemy to the cause, Snape has his uses. Thanks to his job, he has access pretty much any time he wants to Albus Dumbledore. I would not be surprised if Voldemort doesn't have some kind of phony "bring me Dumbledore and I'll spare your life" deal in the back of his mind. Of course he'd kill Snape as soon he killed Dumbledore but he assumes Snape wouldn't realize that, since of course the mere mention of the DL's name is enough to strike terror into strong wizards' hearts, blah blah blah... No, killing Snape just to cross him off the to-do list doesn't make much sense for Voldemort. Especially since I think he's got another desire up his sleeve: he wants to take over Hogwarts and make it his HQ. Think about it: Salazar Slytherin was a founder, its wards and protective spells are second to none, you can't apparate onto the grounds, it's a perfect defensive fortress for a paranoid Dark Lord. Sort of like...coming home...in a way. Snape, being present at Hogwarts, might in some way be seen as an advantage for that. Another reason Voldemort might need Snape alive is that Snape was the potions lackey back in the old days and he needs a good potions man to get those immortality spells going again. So I don't assume that just because Snape's not dead yet it means that Voldemort has changed his mind. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From quigonginger at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 17:00:30 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 17:00:30 -0000 Subject: Trelawney isn't a fraud In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111547 Mike wrote (sorry about all the snipping, Mike, but I only wanted to comment on this one part): > The last prediction is that a student will leave around Easter for > good. This may not like a hard thing to guess, given that you either > have the Sight and do well or don't have it and struggle, but she > gets the date right on again. This is the second time she has > predicted the correct time frame so I once again find it hard to give > it to pure luck. (snip the rest) Ginger wonders: You know, now that you mention it, we've never heard of anyone dropping a class mid-year. Malfoy continues with COMC (why do I always try to leave out the O? ;o)) after he is injured. No one ducks out during blast-ended Skrewts that we know of. They don't even leave after they find out Hagrid is a half-giant. I would think that leaving one of the core classes isn't an option, but we've never heard of anyone dropping an elective. So that prophesy is actually not one of SPT's usual playing-the-odds type. She is predicting something that isn't commonly done. And she gives a time frame. Around Easter is pretty vague. She could have just said that one would leave, and left it at that. If you're hedging your bets, it's safer, and you can still claim bragging rights later. Maybe you're on to something, Mike. I'll say one thing about SPT, I do think she's sincere. But then JKR said the same thing about the Sorting Hat. Ginger, who predicts that someone will join this group soon. From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Aug 29 17:37:35 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 17:37:35 -0000 Subject: Trelawney isn't a fraud In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111548 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: vmonte: > > I don't know if Trelawny is for real but my gut feeling is that she > is a fraud. There is nothing I've read that would suggest any talent > what-so-ever (except for the prophecies, which are somewhat vague). Geoff: But the fact remains that she has made two prophecies which Dumbledore seems to accept. She also appears to have been possessed in some way to make them and certainly didn't recall the second one after she made it. So there seems to be summat there.... Geoff: Who invites group members to enjoy the delights of Exmoor at www.aspectsofexmoor.com From manawydan at ntlworld.com Sun Aug 29 18:20:01 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 19:20:01 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] My very own personal HBP theory References: <1093765442.6247.23302.m21@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <002a01c48df4$cd52aa60$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 111549 Meidbh write: >Britain 1000 years ago was a feudal society, you would expect school >founders to either be nobles or very powerful in the church. If the >WW reflects our world (which it does to some extent) I think it is >fair to assume that people with the resources to become great >wizards and construct a castle would have been nobility in their >world. Add GGs ruby studded sword into the equation and I would put >all my galleons on GG being at the very least Sir GG. With nobility >being notorious for inbreeding royal blood would not be unexpected. >In fact it would be quite expected. Well, you'd have expected _Muggle_ school founders to be nobility or clergy, but this is the WW! My surmise is that the fall of the Roman Empire actually had little effect on the WW: some wizarding families may well have moved out into the countryside and taken over estates out there (suitably enchanted so that when the barbarians came by looting and pillaging, they'd just have gone straight past) while others would have stayed in what was left of the cities. But that the WW was dominated by its ancient families, whose stability and lineage had also given them the opportunity to become sufficiently wealthy to be independent. So that the Founders (and indeed the other wizarding aristocrats) would have regarded titles from nasty little Muggle barbarian monarchs as very much beneath their contempt: they just didn't need them. Though I do agree with the theory that the HBP is a legend rather than a person. But JKR alone knows all Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Sun Aug 29 19:35:07 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 19:35:07 -0000 Subject: Harry... Tsk Tsk (Re: Snape's DE past) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111550 > Magda: > Stopping the occlumency lessons did not leave Harry any more > vulnerable than he already was. > > Alla: > We don't know that. Yes, of course there is a big chance that he > still could have that vision, OR he might have accomplished better > results in Occlumency by that time. > I think it left him significantly more vulnerable > > Odette: > I am of the opinion that had Snape continued with the occlumency > lessons Harry may not have had the vision. On a couple of occasions > in OOTP (sorry don't have book with me so can't give page numbers) Harry wakes himself up before reaching the door and thinks to himself > that it is his guilt or conscious mind waking him because he knows that he is supposed to be stopping himself from having those dreams. > As poor as the occlumency lessons may have been, they seemed to be working and had Harry practiced they might have been successful. IMHO. > > Kemper: > I agree with Magda. And with Odette to the extent that had Harry > practiced he would have been successful at occulemency, but Harry > chose NOT to practice even though he was told/encouraged to by people > who had a grasp on the gravity of the situation: DD indirectly > through Snape, Hermione, Sirius and Lupin. It is not as though Harry > thought Occulemency was another class to pass. He knew the > importance of it and chose not to practice. Brenda happily butting in: YES! Absolutely. Just how many times in the book does it say that Harry chooses not to practice Occlumency? I lost counts after the following chapter. If one needs the canon proof of this, koinonia02 has composed a post full of references in Message #100571. But I understand Harry's curiosity of the long corridor dream. The lad has been dreaming about it since the summer. He knows his dreams are somewhat unusual: Frank Bryce's dream, attack on Arthur Weasley, torture on Rockwood... Harry knew his dreams hold crucial clues in figuring out what Voldemort was up to. What he should have realized though, is the fact that his Sirius dream came AFTER Voldemort became aware of the mental connection. Snape tells Harry during their first Occlumency lesson: " 'The important point is that 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 -' 'And he might TRY and MAKE ME DO THINGS?' asked Harry. " [OoP, 471. UK. My emphasis added] Snape answers "He might" to this. I have seen other posters defending Harry by saying that Harry didn't know Voldemort could send him false visions and lure Harry out. That all the visions/dreams he had so far were all true. BUT he was informed by Snape that there IS a possibility that Voldemort will use the connection to "try and make [Harry] do things". Is it only me, or does that imply the scnerio where Harry does things because Voldemort tried and made him? As for those who point out that the Occlumency lessons leaving Harry vulnerable, have you conveniently forgotten what Hermione had to say about this? " 'Maybe it's a bit like illness,' said Hermoine, looking concerned when Harry confided in her and Ron. 'A fever or something. It has to get worse before it gets better.' " [OoP, 489. UK] Don't know about you, but that makes perfect sense to me. Physical immune system works the same way, after all. In JKR and Steven Kloves' interview in CoS DVD, she roughly said that Hermione and Dumbledore easily fill the role of providing necessarily information, because Hermione's read it somewhere and Dumbledore speaks for JKR. It seems to be the common argument that if Dumbledore had informed Harry of the prophecy, then Harry would have tried Occlumency harder. But IMO that is not necessarily true. I believe learning the prophecy should have come AFTER Harry had mastered Occlumency, for the following reason: 1. His destiny as "murderer or else, victim" would have left him quite unsettling, he would have spent the whole summer dreaming about it, nightmares. This would have left Harry emotionally vulnerable, making him a very easy target for Voldemort. Voldemort could have readily accessed the full content of prophecy right then. 2. Even if DD told Harry 'everything', DD wouldn't have mentioned the fact that the record is being kept at DoM, now would he? He probably did not think it necessary, since he wasn't aware of H-LV connection running deeper than merely on emotional/ distance level. So either way, Harry became the victim of Voldemort's Legilimens trickery. At least now that Harry learned Occlumency then prophecy, Voldemort is still in dark concerning prophecy. >>> Kemper: If it's anyone's fault that Harry's Godfather is dead, it's Harry's. <<< YES, I LOVE YOU FOR SAYING THAT! Finally *somebody* agrees with me! My long rant on the topic is in Post #100627: "Who's to Blame for Sirius' Death" While I'm not too sure about whether Occlumency would have helped with Sirius' chance, (Harry-Voldy connection seems to be more than traditional Occlumency-Legilemency to me, Harry was understandably curious about the long corridor...) he should have been more careful *judging* the dream logically and act accordingly, instead of rashing out and impulsively flying to MoM. But it doesn't matter who was at fault, really. Sirius' death supposedly plays a significant role, and he is much better off in the "next adventure", happily ever after, then running and hiding from WW... Brenda From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun Aug 29 19:38:35 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 19:38:35 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111551 Kemper wrote: > Wait... that's wrong. He chose to continue the dreams rather than > practice. Harry has some misdirected anger at Snape. If it's > anyone's fault that Harry's Godfather is dead, it's Harry's. Potioncat: Serius Black is dead because of a lot of things that happened. Even if everything had gone as it did, if Black had not taunted Bella he might not be dead. If Black had followed intructions and waited to give DD the report, he might not be dead..both because he wouldn't have been there and because DD would have gotten there sooner. If DD had not left Hogwarts in the first place, neither Hagrid nor McGonagall would have been injured and Harry would have been better protected... I don't see the value in choosing one person to blame. Or by saying if this one thing, and this one thing only, had been different... Potioncat From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Aug 29 19:57:41 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 19:57:41 -0000 Subject: Snape as spy was Re: Snape as baddie In-Reply-To: <20040829165812.89400.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111552 > Magda's Response: > > Obviously I wasn't clear. I wasn't referring to the first time. Six > students know that Snape is a member of the Order in OOTP. That means IF Snape is spying again then six students know about it. Therefore, whatever Snape is doing, he's not a spy otherwise more care would be taken that he not be seen by anyone or his involvement known. Is that better?< Pippin: Erm, it's not exactly a secret that Snape is working for Dumbledore! Even if Snape never showed up at Order meetings, Voldemort would still need proof that Snape wasn't secretly helping Dumbledore, and I can't see him being satisfied with anything less than a personal interview with Snape. Meanwhile, there's nothing much that Snape can give away if Voldemort knows he's been at Order meetings. All the old members have already been given away by Peter. The only new ones that we see coming to the meetings are people who would be targets anyway: McGonagall, the aurors Kingsley and Tonks, and the Weasleys. It will not increase their peril if Snape lets slip (with Dumbledore's secret permission) that they were at the meetings, since they'd be suspected anyway. I agree with all your reasons for Voldemort finding Snape handy even if he has doubts about him, but they all still work if Snape is still a spy. > Magda's Response > > Noting that one DE "has left me forever - he will > be killed, of course" doesn't mean "I'm going to drop everything and hunt him down and exterminate him RIGHT NOW!" < Pippin: Take it from an old Chicago girl--squealers have a very short life span. It's not so much what they say on their own account, it's that they set such a bad example for the others. Voldemort can't afford to let his not-so-faithful supporters think they can go over to Dumbledore and get away with it. Every second he puts off dealing with Knowndefector!Snape increases the odds that someone else will be knocking on Dumbledore's office door asking for their second chance. Why else would Snape have had to go on his errand immediately, the night of the third task, and why did Karkaroff flee at once? Voldemort has to make sure that any Death Eaters who know that Snape was a Death Eater believe that Snape's been faithful to Voldemort all along. LV can cherish his private doubts, but he can't allow Snape to be seen leading a normal life as a known defector. Pippin From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Sun Aug 29 20:04:36 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 20:04:36 -0000 Subject: How did Tom kill his father? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111553 >>> Jekatiska wrote: > Tom was only a teenager when he killed his father, and don't think he could have used such a powerful curse at such a young age. > Moreover, undetected by the MoM, who would have tracked him down for the murder of three people, I believe, even if he was 17 and allowed to perform magic outside school. <<< Brenda now: You know, I wondered about the same thing. I imagined one would need powerful Dark desire and much practice to perform Unforgivable Curses, especially AK. But we know Hogwarts doesn't teach Dark Arts. Does this mean Tom Riddle practiced AK secretly in his dorm? On... animals? I don't understand why MoM wasn't involved in the homocide investigation of the Riddles. I thought the Muggle authorities were aware of the Wizarding World? They knew about Voldemort and Sirius Black, during the First War... and when Sirius escaped from Azkaban, the Muggle media reported it. > What if it was the Basilisk? Ok, the idea may > sound ludicrous, because when we met the Basilisk, it was very big > indeed. But what if it was a lot smaller 50 years earlier? Small > enough to be transported to Little Hangleton? What gave me this idea > was the fact that the three of them had frightened expressions on > their faces, like those petrified by the Basilisk, and unlike Cedric > who was killed by Avada Kedavra. Just a thought. But wasn't Basilisk around since the times of Salazar Slytherin? According to Aragog, the monster was born in the castle. I don't think snakes reproduce asexually, do they? The page from library book says "capable of living for hundreds of years..." So I'm not so sure if Basilisk was much smaller mere 50 years ago and when the Chamber was closed, it *suddenly* grew up to how-many-feet- long? If (regardless of its size) Basilisk was transported to Little Hangleton, it would have had to be Transfigured. How much of powerful magic one would need to Transfigure that giant snake into something portable? You brought up an interesting point. I believe the AK victims have the expressions of "empty" as opposed to "frightened". Perhaps the Riddles were petrified, by some Dark Art object that works as those giant yellow eyes. Or... Nagini, anyone? Brenda From carodave92 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 15:03:52 2004 From: carodave92 at yahoo.com (carodave92) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:03:52 -0000 Subject: Godric's Hollow Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111554 Did James and Lily actually live at Godric's Hollow? If so, it strikes me as odd that they choose their actual home as their hiding place? Maybe they were living elsewhere (at Hogwarts?...I've seen theories on this here...sorry not to credit the originator) and Godric's Hollow was James' family home chosen for safety, similar to choosing Sirius' family home at 12 Grimmauld Place as a hiding place for the safety of the Order. Since we don't really hear much about it, I always imagine that Godric's Hollow is relatively remote... Carodave From munns at uwalumni.com Sun Aug 29 18:57:58 2004 From: munns at uwalumni.com (hienuf2001) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 18:57:58 -0000 Subject: What drives You Know Who? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111555 Dungrollin, > Hello everyone, I'm new. > I was re-reading CoS the other day, and started making a list in my > head on what drives You Know Who. Then it occurred to me that it's > probably been discussed on the web, but though I have trawled and > trawled I haven't found much. I have to agree wholeheartedly! I'm new to this forum, too, and just started reading HP in the last 3 months. I've re-read all 5 books, and this topic seems VERY nebulous, and very little on-line discussion that I've been able to find. > I only have three things on my list... > 1.Purity of blood... > 2.Killing Harry... > 3.Immortality... I'm not sure I agree 100% with you three motivations listed above. I think the Purity of Blood issue was just a means to an end - LV just used them to draw other followers. I think that killing Harry was "new" after Trelawney made her prophecy. He must be eliminated in LV's quest for POWER. I totally agree with the person who responded to you that LV wanted POWER. Immortality is a way to guarantee power, for eternity. However, WHY does LV want power? It seems to me that he could have become MoM if he wanted to - after all, Cornelius Fudge did! Obviously, his "movement" crossed geographic borders, since Karkaroff was a Death Eater. Does LV want to be a world-wide dictator with all Muggles as slaves? I've seen some comparisons to Hitler, and even he had a "goal" - an empire as big as... What did LV want to be as "big as"? LV had been working toward his "goal" for 9 or 10 years, and the "goal" was never stated that I can tell. I'd like to hear if anyone read any of the passages differently than I did. Is there a goal that I'm missing? R. From myminizoo at aol.com Sun Aug 29 20:02:12 2004 From: myminizoo at aol.com (nailteacher) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 20:02:12 -0000 Subject: The Prophesy Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111556 Howdy all- After finishing OoTP for the second time the other night, I got to looking at the Prophesy a bit more closely, and something occurred to me- it could be interpreted to make reference to a third party. "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches...Born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies...And the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have power the Dark Lord knows not...AND EITHER MUST DIE AT THE HAND OF THE OTHER FOR NEITHER CAN LIVE WHILE THE OTHER SURVIVES....." Ok, so upon closer examination of the last line of the Prophesy, it could be interpreted that the "other" is a third party, and either Harry or Voldemort must die at the hand of the Third party (other) for neither Harry nor Voldemort can live while the third pary (other) survives. Could this third party be the Half-Blood Prince? Just a thought. nailteacher From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun Aug 29 20:16:23 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 20:16:23 -0000 Subject: Snape as baddie/Snape in the foe glass/Snape's Duty for the Order In-Reply-To: <20040829165812.89400.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111557 Magda wrote: > Another reason Voldemort might need Snape alive is that Snape was the > potions lackey back in the old days and he needs a good potions man > to get those immortality spells going again. > > So I don't assume that just because Snape's not dead yet it means > that Voldemort has changed his mind. > potioncat: You've made some very valid points. I'd add that no one...or least not everyone knew who should have been at that spot. So not all of the DEs know who the one who left me forever is or who the coward is. (I wonder if they chat about it as much as we do?) Some of them may be waiting to see if someone disappears. I'd also add, that for some reason almost all of us think Snape was LV's personal potionmaker. We don't really know that. He could have been Court Hexter. Potioncat who really can imagine Snape whispering to the Dark Lord, "The flagon with the dragon has the brew that is true..." From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 20:16:40 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 20:16:40 -0000 Subject: Harry... Tsk Tsk (Re: Snape's DE past) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111558 > Brenda happily butting in: > > YES! Absolutely. Just how many times in the book does it say that > Harry chooses not to practice Occlumency? I lost counts after the > following chapter. If one needs the canon proof of this, koinonia02 > has composed a post full of references in Message #100571. > I have seen other posters defending Harry by saying that Harry didn't > know Voldemort could send him false visions and lure Harry out. That > all the visions/dreams he had so far were all true. BUT he was > informed by Snape that there IS a possibility that Voldemort will use > the connection to "try and make [Harry] do things". Is it only me, or > does that imply the scnerio where Harry does things because Voldemort > tried and made him? Alla: I was certainly among those posters. I absolutely do NOT read "try and make do things" as "sending false visions". I read it as more like trying to put you under Imperium curse. You know, forcing you do stuff, but your reading is certainly just as valid as mine. I don't think Harry was informed nearly enough the level he should be informed, I don't think Dumbledore gave him the right teacher to practice Occlumency with, la la la (you know the gist :o)) I think teacher, whom Harry would trust made a HUGE difference in such important matter You know, I just recently got over being upset with Dumbledore and here you go. :) Your post reminded me how much of an idiot I consider Dumbledore to be since he ever thought in the first place that that could work EVER. But at least I think that Dumbledore wanted to protect Harry. Such decision turned out to be erroneous one, IMO. Brenda: > As for those who point out that the Occlumency lessons leaving Harry > vulnerable, have you conveniently forgotten what Hermione had to say > about this? > > " 'Maybe it's a bit like illness,' said Hermoine, looking concerned > when Harry confided in her and Ron. 'A fever or something. It has to > get worse before it gets better.' " [OoP, 489. UK] > > Don't know about you, but that makes perfect sense to me. Physical > immune system works the same way, after all. Alla: Are you refering to the fact that Harry felt weakened after the lessons? I don't know. I don't consider direct attack of Harry's mind to be the best teaching method. You know, Snape, what about starting VERY slowly with the beginner student, not from knocking him out almost? But, we don't know how the Occlumency supposed to be taught, that I happily concede. Regardless, I would be cautious of taking Hermione's words for granted, always. You know, we have SPEW as an example that she does not always do things the right way. I think she was right waaay too many times in OOP and JKR is setting her for a fall in the next one. Brenda: > > I believe learning the prophecy > should have come AFTER Harry had mastered Occlumency, for the > following reason: Alla: I strongly disagree with this one, of course, but I see your point. Brenda: > > While I'm not too sure about whether Occlumency would have helped > with Sirius' chance, (Harry-Voldy connection seems to be more than > traditional Occlumency-Legilemency to me, Harry was understandably > curious about the long corridor...) he should have been more careful > *judging* the dream logically and act accordingly, instead of rashing > out and impulsively flying to MoM. > Alla: Can you explain to me how Harry was supposed to see that his dream about Sirius is different from his other dreams , specifically from the dream about Arthur, which helped to save the man? Specifically, how Harry was supposed to figure out that the dream was false? From cruthw at earthlink.net Sun Aug 29 20:39:47 2004 From: cruthw at earthlink.net (caspenzoe) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 20:39:47 -0000 Subject: Theory of theme (was Re: What did Riddle want from Ginny?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111559 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sevenhundredandthirteen" wrote: > Caspen wrote: > > >"magic" does, in fact, exist in JKR'S view - but (this is > >JKR'S raelly brilliant point) only on a spiritual, as opposed to > >physical, plane. > > [The HP books are anti-fundamentalist even for] > >HP fans who, for instance, have become certain that beheadings of > >major characters are essential to JKR's story! > > Laurasia: > > I agree with the premise of what you've said: I do believe HP > encourages the realisation of a spiritual plane of existence > which is above the physical and mental. And I do believe the > magic in the story symbolises this spiritual level of the > world. > > However, I disagree with the interpretation that this has > all been consciously arranged by JKR, but yet the plots of > her books haven't been. I have the exact opposite opinion > to you: think the plot is arranged, and the metaphysics > coincidental. > > I think JKR is first and foremost a writer. She has been > writing books since the age of 6. She has written other > books which are unpublished. And she has intentions to > write books after HP is concluded. She has told us, on > numerous occasion what type of story-telling she likes, > for example: books that don't leave loose ends; stories > where all the rules are established at the very start > (like The Simpsons). > She has told us what types of books she doesn't like, > for example books where the character is stuck at one age > for all eternity (like The Famous Five). > > It seems natural that a writer who believes these things > will write a book which events are meaningful to the overall > plot and where there is nothing incidental which delays > the story (everything is relevant), where we see rules of > the universe established early on (foreshadowing), and > in which the characters can grow up and change and be > affected by the world around them (Harry's changing > personality). > > This is the type of writer JKR *is*. Or else why did Ron > have a pet rat called Scabbers in the first two books? > Why did Harry Ron and Hermione make Polyjuice Potion in CoS? > And why was Harry so deeply affected by Cedric's death > that he became rash and reckless and charged off to the > Ministry of Magic without thinking rationally? > > Saying that any major characters' death is not actually > relevant to the story is going against these three of > JKR's own statements. Sirius's death must either become > relevant later on when he returns in a different form, > OR be used to foreshadow a way in which the Veil can be > used, OR be so distressing for Harry that he changes the > way he lives his life in a way which allows him to > ultimately triumph. > > If Sirius' death is really nothing at all, then JKR is > either really stupid, a really bad writer, or else she > doesn't actually care about the three things she has told > us (but which have been expressed on numerous occasions). > It also means she has been directly lying to us: From her > Website FAQ -"Why did Harry have to forget the mirror he > had been given by Sirius in 'Order of the Phoenix'?" > > I don't believe JKR is highly skilled and brilliant in the > field of philosophy, I just believe she was lucky and > inadvertently hit on a theme. > > I think *any* story which uses fantastical "magic" of any > sort which is beyond the realms of science is unconsciously > tapping into the spiritual level. There are thousands of them, > but because there is such a long history of these fantasy > stories and myth-making I think many authors refer to this > level without realising it. It comes with the territory. > > Any fantasy book suggests that there is a higher plane of > existence which does not obey the physical laws of Earth, > that is the very nautre of what defines fanstay as a genre. > Even the video game Final Fantasy taps into this theme. Just > because HP shows it, I see no reason to suggest JKR *meant* it. > > If JKR had purposely decided to write a book which had the > overriding them of anti-fundamentalist/anti-literalist then, > like you said, the idea of us readers convincing ourselves > that "just because Sirius is dead there must be a reason for > it" is amazingly absurd. But I see too much evidence that as > an author she actively *enjoys* this- JKR congratulates > readers on picking up on these tiny points, eg Aberforth. > Therefore, the only option I can see is that JKR *accidentally* > included the theme. The theme must have grown organically > inside the fantasy context that JKR has put Harry into (like > every other fantasy book I have ever read) > > But, like I said above, I agree that there is a metaphysical > level of magic present and I think the best stories are those > which do tap into this higher domain. JKR's story is so popular > and works on so many levels from children to academics because > it is a very good example of issues beyond the physical > domain of the universe. > > ~<(Laurasia)>~ I apprecate your response Laurasia, but I'm a littl confused. Nowhere have I said that "[although] ... the magic in the story symbolises this spiritual level of the world.... that this has all been consciously arranged by JKR, but yet the plots of her books haven't been." Nor did I say that "...any major characters' death is not actually relevant to the story." If I thought so, perhaps I'd be inclined to be more of an HP fundamentalist. As for the JKR's specific creative process, one can only really speculate, but I think there is more than ample evidence that JKR is a t least more than passingly familiar with "the field of philosophy." However, and more to the point, evaluating an author's "brilliance" based upon speculation about how consciously or not the themes developed in his/her work are, is just plain absurd. If fiction authors worked on a purely conscious level they'd be technical writers, not artists. As it is very few of them, particularly in the fantasy genre, IMO rise to any level meriting the term artist (and are in fact just technicians applying formulas), although JKR, conscious or only semi-counscious or completely unconscious, if you like, does. (Hence, by the way, I certainly do not agree with you that "...*any* story which uses fantastical "magic" of any sort which is beyond the realms of science is unconsciously tapping into the spiritual level." A lot of it, IMO is just silly trash). Herman Melville's works have been analyzed in terms of alchemical symbolism, but nowhere have I read any assertions of great expertise in the occult on his part. Does that undermine his work? Hardly! The quality and effectiveness of the artist's expression of thematic content and the artist's degree of "consciousness" of any particular theme are entirely separate issues. Finally, whole psycholgical and artistic theories are base upon the hypothesis of the inevitability of recurring themes in very diverse human experience. The idea behind Jung's notion of archetypes, for instance, is that certain human concerns show up repeatedly in the cultural and artistic production of all humans. Alchemy is one manifestaion of certain spiritual ideas, and HP is another. The fact that there are similarities dervies as much (if not more) from the fact that their respective creators are human as from any consciously applied formula. Therefore, your conclusion that "...the only option I can see is that JKR *accidentally* included the theme" is not only, once again, an example of another very "fundamentalist" view ,expressed on this board, but also simply illogical. There are many options, degrees of options, combinations of options, and combinations of degrees of options, etc. Caspen From MadameSSnape at aol.com Sun Aug 29 20:41:03 2004 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:41:03 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Purebloods fear of the muggleborn Message-ID: <1a3.28ca4ab6.2e63995f@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111560 In a message dated 8/29/2004 11:19:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time, meriaugust at yahoo.com writes: When the so-called breach between the magical world and the muggles occured over a thousand years ago witchcraft was feared and hated by muggles and so, while I am not condoning this kind of attitude, it is reasonable to think that some witches and wizards might develop a kind of hatred against the muggles (even the muggle born of their own kind) who would have burned anyone with magical powers at the stake if they had their druthers. Fear works both ways after all. If I was a witch living a thousand years ago I don't know if I would trust a muggle born, especially in trying times. Just a thought. =================== Sherrie here: Perhaps most especially the Muggleborn of their own kind. They lived in both worlds - unless they completely cut themselves off from their Muggle families. Therefore, they were more likely to come to the attention of the Muggle authorities. and bring their wrath and fear down upon Wizardkind - particularly when they were young, and not yet used to the laws of secrecy. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Aug 29 20:51:18 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 20:51:18 -0000 Subject: Harry... Tsk Tsk (Re: Snape's DE past) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111561 > Alla: > > Can you explain to me how Harry was supposed to see that his dream about Sirius is different from his other dreams , specifically from the dream about Arthur, which helped to save the man? Specifically, how Harry was supposed to figure out that the dream was false?< To quote Gildor Inglorion: Is it not enough to know that they are servants of the Enemy? It doesn't matter to the adults whether the dreams are true or false. They have plenty of experience with Voldemort twisting the truth to his own ends. I think this prospect is so obvious to the adults, who all have experience with Voldemort's craftiness, that they never realize that Harry isn't viewing the intrusions on his mind with the same horror that they do. They've all made the Dumbledore mistake of not being in tune with the way youth thinks and feels. They don't realize that Harry, having determined that he's not being possessed, is regarding it all as quite a fine adventure. I think Dumbledore wishes that he had taught Harry Occlumency because he might have picked up on that problem sooner than Snape, who blamed Harry's failures on laziness and wanting to feel important. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 21:00:10 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 21:00:10 -0000 Subject: Harry... Tsk Tsk (Re: Snape's DE past) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111562 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > It doesn't matter to the adults whether the dreams are true or > false. They have plenty of experience with Voldemort twisting the > truth to his own ends. I think this prospect is so obvious to the > adults, who all have experience with Voldemort's craftiness, that > they never realize that Harry isn't viewing the intrusions on his > mind with the same horror that they do. They've all made the > Dumbledore mistake of not being in tune with the way youth > thinks and feels. > Alla: Oh, Pippin, yes, yes indeed. I think I can agree with that, BUT I also want to add that adults and Dumbledore specifically had a hand in Harry's not viewing the intrusions with the same horror they did in OOP. Specifically that nothing was done about the connection In GoF. Absolutely nothing. Isn't it logical for Harry to assume that Dumbledore VALUES his connection with Voldemort, if the only thing Harry was asked to do is to tell Dumbledore when his scar hurts. Pippin: > They don't realize that Harry, having determined that he's not > being possessed, is regarding it all as quite a fine adventure. I > think Dumbledore wishes that he had taught Harry Occlumency > because he might have picked up on that problem sooner than > Snape, who blamed Harry's failures on laziness and wanting to > feel important. > Alla: I don't know whether I agree that Harry regards his dreams as fine adventure, but definitely he considers them useful. Dumbledore should have been the one teaching Harry for so many reasons indeed From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 21:10:13 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 14:10:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape as baddie/Snape in the foe glass/Snape's Duty for the Order In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040829211013.47158.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111563 > potioncat: > I'd also add, that for some reason almost all of us think Snape was > LV's personal potionmaker. We don't really know that. He could > have been Court Hexter. Actually I don't think he was the personal potionmaker. I think he was the personal potionmaker's assistant. The guy in the back of the secret laboratory cutting up flobberworm parts or gutting human sacrifices so that essential ingredients can be assembled while Voldemort chats at the other end of the room with the Chief Potions Wizard (aka CPW). Snape at 19-21 years would be way too young to be the CPW himself but it might explain why no one suspected he was a DE (according to Sirius in GOF) and how he gained the expertise to be a Potions Master at one of the best wizarding schools in Europe at the tender age of 22. And I don't believe it's because he kept really, really good notes in his seventh year. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now. http://messenger.yahoo.com From lupinesque at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 21:27:33 2004 From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 21:27:33 -0000 Subject: Harry... Tsk Tsk (Re: Snape's DE past) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111564 Pippin wrote: > > They don't realize that Harry, having determined that he's not > > being possessed, is regarding it all as quite a fine adventure. I > > think Dumbledore wishes that he had taught Harry Occlumency > > because he might have picked up on that problem sooner than > > Snape, who blamed Harry's failures on laziness and wanting to > > feel important. Alla wrote: > I don't know whether I agree that Harry regards his dreams as fine > adventure, but definitely he considers them useful. Mostly I think he is wildly curious. And maybe that drive--that absolutely unbearable need to know--is not just Harry's usual curiosity, but is part of the effect Voldemort is having on him. It is Voldemort, not Harry, who desperately wants to see what's at the end of the corridor (and thus makes Harry want the dreams to continue). Amy Z --------------------------------------------------------------------- "This is the weirdest thing we've ever done," Harry said fervently. From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Aug 29 22:15:04 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 22:15:04 -0000 Subject: How did Tom kill his father? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111565 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Brenda M." wrote: Brenda: > > I don't understand why MoM wasn't involved in the homocide > investigation of the Riddles. I thought the Muggle authorities were > aware of the Wizarding World? They knew about Voldemort and Sirius > Black, during the First War... and when Sirius escaped from Azkaban, > the Muggle media reported it. Geoff: Why should the MoM have been involved? OK, the police had a case which left them perplexed. But why should somebody suddenly say "Ah, perhaps this is something to do with the Wizarding world?" Being away on holiday, I haven't got the benefit of access to my books but I seem to recall that the incident involving Peter Pettigrew and Sirius was hushed up as a gas leak and consequent explosion. When Sirius escaped from Azkaban, the Muggle media only got hold of the story because Fudge approached the Muggle Prime Minister. I would think that the existence of the Wizarding world would be a classified matter in Whitehall and not for every Tom, Dick or Harry police officer or civil servant to know. Brenda: > > What if it was the Basilisk? Ok, the idea may > > sound ludicrous, because when we met the Basilisk, it was very big > > indeed. But what if it was a lot smaller 50 years earlier? Small > > enough to be transported to Little Hangleton? What gave me this idea > > was the fact that the three of them had frightened expressions on > > their faces, like those petrified by the Basilisk, and unlike Cedric > > who was killed by Avada Kedavra. Just a thought. Geoff: Yes, but possibly the circumstances differed slightly. I suspect that Tom Riddle intended his father and grandparents to know what was coming to them; anyway, they must have known because he presumably killed them one by one; they were in the same room and so had time to be terrified. Cedric's death came out of the blue. A high voice says "Kill the spare" and PP says "Avadra Kedavra" before anyone has time to blink. Hence, he didn't know what hit him. Brenda: > But wasn't Basilisk around since the times of Salazar Slytherin? > According to Aragog, the monster was born in the castle. I don't > think snakes reproduce asexually, do they? The page from library book > says "capable of living for hundreds of years..." Geoff: This was my take on the idea also. We are told that the Chamber contained a monster. If Slytherin had left Hogwarts and not returned, then the Basilisk could easily be the one he left. Unless there is evidence that there were a pair of the little treasures, Baby Basilisk doesn't come into the equation. Geoff: Who invites group memebrs to enjoy a virtual visit to the delights of Exmoor at: www.aspectsofexmoor.com From estelblau2002 at yahoo.es Sun Aug 29 20:12:52 2004 From: estelblau2002 at yahoo.es (estel) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 20:12:52 -0000 Subject: My very own personal HBP theory - for what it's worth In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111566 Tonks: > > When I heard the description of the "lion-maned"... it > must be someone that is a Gryffindor.. maybe even Goderic himself. > Maybe Harry sees him in a dream or a pensive or something. I think > that it is a description of Goderic Gryffindor and that Goderic is > the HBP (half wizard royality/ half ? comon wizard?, and yes that > Harry is his decendent... > > But there is something about the eyes. This person has yellow eyes.. > very rare. Harry's are green. and this point is mentioned a lot... > that he has his mothers eyes. Somehow I think this eye color thing > mean something, but I don't know what. Yellow eyes... hum... Do > only cats and lions have yellow eyes? I was thinking about the yellow eyes... Maybe it isn't a person it could be a magical creature or when he is transforming. I thinK that owls have yellow eyes and some birds too... From porcupine88 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 21:56:26 2004 From: porcupine88 at yahoo.com (brandy) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 21:56:26 -0000 Subject: Book Two Discoveries! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111567 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "abadgerfan2" wrote: > On her site, Rowling's answer to a FAQ discloses that one of Harry's > Book Two discoveries "foreshadows" something that he finds out in > Book Six. Has anyone made an inventory, in chronological order, of > Harry's Book Two discoveries? One could then methodically go through > and consider (with a chance of more accurately predicting) what is > to come in Book Six! Thanks! She also specifically states that whatever it was, she made sure that it was left in the movie or else it would create a plot hole later in the series. (I cannot for the life of me find this statement now, but I know I read it the day HBP was announced.) Which implies that it's something that doesn't *seem* important, and thus might easily have been cut from the movie originally. -Brandy From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Sun Aug 29 22:46:04 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 22:46:04 -0000 Subject: Harry... Tsk Tsk (Re: Snape's DE past) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111568 > Alla: > Alla waves to Brenda and decides to have a little disagree > ment with her. :o) <<< Brenda waves back to Alla and decides to go head-to-head with Alla, only friendly :o) > Brenda earlier: > BUT he was informed by Snape that there IS a possibility that > Voldemort will use the connection to "try and make [Harry] do > things". Is it only me, or does that imply the scnerio where Harry > does things because Voldemort tried and made him? > > Alla: > I was certainly among those posters. I absolutely do NOT read "try > and make do things" as "sending false visions". I read it as more > like trying to put you under Imperium curse. You know, forcing you > do stuff, but your reading is certainly just as valid as mine. I > don't think Harry was informed nearly enough the level he should be > informed, I don't think Dumbledore gave him the right teacher to > practice Occlumency with, la la la (you know the gist :o)) Bren butting in, yet again: True, it sounds rather like Imperius curse than sending false visions. BUT, Imperio is much broader and inclusive concept compared to false visions, meaning sending false visions is certainly one of the means to manipulate someone. Of course I wish that Snape had told Harry of what Voldemort can actually do with this mental connection, to scare Harry into practicing, per se. My first-round of OoP I certainly didn't read "try and make do things" as "sending false visions", but now I can understand it as one of the clue seeds from JKR. I very much agree with you that Harry should have been informed more, after all, he is the *weapon* with the serial number "Boy-Who- Lived". On the second thought, we don't know if Snape was even aware of this possibility of sending false visions. His use of Occlumency in spying Voldemort doesn't involve making up memories, just "to shut down those feelings and memories that contradict the life, and so can utter falsehoods in his presence without detection". [OoP, 469. UK] Hmm, I wonder if Voldemort *did* attempt Imperio Harry throughout OoP, when Harry was feeling strongly outrageous... > I think teacher, whom Harry would trust made a HUGE difference in > such important matter Agreed ;) For second, I was afraid you will compare Occlumency lessons to Patronous lessons, 'cause those two are incomparable, IMO. Crouch!Moody's Imprerio lessons are better suited, but Harry at least respected him. > You know, I just recently got over being upset with Dumbledore and > here you go. :) > Your post reminded me how much of an idiot I consider Dumbledore to > be since he ever thought in the first place that that could work > EVER. Now, now, easy on the oldie, we don't want to upset him, it's not good for his health ya know *wink* I for one feel sympathy towards DD for having to arrange this. I mean, if Snape couldn't teach Harry, then who could? You mentioned in later post Dumbledore should have taught Harry himself, but uhh... So you want DD to be attacked and (possibly) murdered by Harry?!?! He felt intense impulse to attack DD the second he made eyecontact with DD! Any longer than that, we don't know what would have happened. Besides, Umbridge would have gone any length to prevent Harry's private lesson from DD once she found out about it. Speaking of the devil, I suppose she was part of reasons Snape was chosen to teach Harry, not other Occlumens. Snape had good references from Malfoy and co, Umbridge trusted him to be on her side. And the hatred between Harry and Snape was well publicized, no one would have suspected Snape to be actually *helping* Harry. I wondered why Lupin wasn't asked, because it appears that he is a Legilimens himself. But if Umbridge was the one who implemented the act against werewolves, then Lupin can only do so much... > Me earlier, quoting Hermione from OoP, 489. UK: > 'A fever or something. It has to get worse before it gets better.' > > Alla: > Are you refering to the fact that Harry felt weakened after the > lessons? I don't know. I don't consider direct attack of Harry's > mind to be the best teaching method. You know, Snape, what about > starting VERY slowly with the beginner student, not from knocking > him out almost? But, we don't know how the Occlumency supposed to be taught, that I happily concede. Me again, unable to keep my nosy butt out of it: Yes, that's precisely what I'm refering to. It's a nice parallel, the immune mechanism between physical and mental system. Lol, can you imagine, Snape being considerate in teaching Harry, it'll take all the fun out of it!! ;) What I really wanted Harry to do, after seeing in Snape's Pensieve, was to apologize to Snape. Not just because he invaded Snape's privacy, but because Harry realized Snape had been right about James, and actually felt bad. "... it was that he knew 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 just seen, his fathe had been every bit as arrogant as Snape had always told him." [OoP, 573. UK] I had such high hopes that Harry might have the nerves to apologize to Snape, but alas being Harry he didn't. At least they have better understanding of each other, I was surprised to see Snape didn't taunt him with memories from Harry's childhood. That can only prove to be useful in the future, no? > Alla: > Regardless, I would be cautious of taking Hermione's words for > granted, always. You know, we have SPEW as an example that she does > not always do things the right way. I think she was right waaay too > many times in OOP and JKR is setting her for a fall in the next one. While SPEW mania comes from being Muggle-born and not comprehending the Wizarding World as whole, she certainly rocks in Department of Logic. If her logic makes sense to me, I'm happy to go along with it. It is true that she is almost always right throughout the series, but then Harry doesn't listen to her very much, now does he. *grinning at the thought of Alla getting impatient here* > Brenda: > I believe learning the prophecy should have come AFTER Harry had mastered Occlumency, for the following reason: > > Alla: > I strongly disagree with this one, of course, but I see your point. Bren: I made my peace with whatever happened, in the particular order and everything. I believe it was for the best, overall. > Alla: > Can you explain to me how Harry was supposed to see that his dream > about Sirius is different from his other dreams, specifically from > the dream about Arthur, which helped to save the man? Specifically, > how Harry was supposed to figure out that the dream was false? Bren: That's why I said "he should have been more careful *judging* the dream logically and act accordingly, instead of rashing out and impulsively flying to MoM". It was obviously hard for him to tell whether it was real or fake, his godfather was involved! I will have to quote Hermione yet again... 'It's five o'clock in the afternoon ... the Ministry of Magic must be full of workers ... how would Voldemort and Sirius have got in without being seen? Harry ... they're probably the two most wanted wizards in the world ... you think they could get into a building full of Aurors undetected?' [OoP, 645. UK] Remember, he only went to use Umbridge's fireplace because Hermione begged him to. What would have happened if he just marched straight to MoM? Without alerting the Order? I bet you wouldn't want to think about that ;) But Pippin's right, it doesn't matter whether it was real or false. Sirius is in much better place than 12 Grimmauld Place, as long as he's happy I'm good. Brenda From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Sun Aug 29 23:04:18 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 23:04:18 -0000 Subject: How did Tom kill his father? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111569 > Geoff wrote: When Sirius > escaped from Azkaban, the Muggle media only got hold of the story > because Fudge approached the Muggle Prime Minister. I would think > that the existence of the Wizarding world would be a classified > matter in Whitehall and not for every Tom, Dick or Harry police > officer or civil servant to know. Brenda now: Hmm, perhaps I watch too much X-Files or similar movies. I thought if the case was this odd, then perhaps the top officers would hear about it and deduce that it had to be magic. After all, there were 3 deaths from prominent rich family. Presumably important people. Or, for all we know, the Muggle authorities might have learned the existence of WW during Voldemort's reign of terror. When Muggle police started wondering why there are so many unexplained death. > Jekatiska: > What if it was the Basilisk? Ok, the idea may sound ludicrous, > because when we met the Basilisk, it was very big indeed. > But what if it was a lot smaller 50 years earlier? Small enough to be transported to Little Hangleton? What gave me this idea > was the fact that the three of them had frightened expressions on > their faces, like those petrified by the Basilisk, and unlike > Cedric who was killed by Avada Kedavra. Just a thought. > > Geoff: > Yes, but possibly the circumstances differed slightly. I suspect that > Tom Riddle intended his father and grandparents to know what was > coming to them; anyway, they must have known because he presumably > killed them one by one; they were in the same room and so had time to be terrified. Bren: Hmm, that's true. Tom Riddle made them die of fear and fright, literally. There was a very interesting thread a while ago on the Mystery of Riddle's Death, discussing British tradition of dinner, servant, lifestyle of the riches, etc... > Geoff wrote: > Cedric's death came out of the blue. A high voice says "Kill the > spare" and PP says "Avadra Kedavra" before anyone has time to blink. Hence, he didn't know what hit him. <<< Brenda: I was thinking of Mrs Weasley's boggart in 12 Grimmauld Place: "Ron's body turned into Bill's, spread-eagled on his back, his eyes wide open and empty." [OoP, 160. UK] So I assumed that AK victims have the empty expression, although any death curse comes suddenly so one wouldn't have time to react properly, I suppose. Brenda From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 23:06:06 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 23:06:06 -0000 Subject: The Prophesy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111570 nailteacher wrote: > Ok, so upon closer examination of the last line of the Prophesy, it > could be interpreted that the "other" is a third party, and either > Harry or Voldemort must die at the hand of the Third party (other) > for neither Harry nor Voldemort can live while the third pary (other) > survives. Could this third party be the Half-Blood Prince? Now Cory: Different versions of this theory have been discussed at length on here before. However, there is one thing I don't quite understand: assuming "the other" is a third party, wouldn't the last line imply that *both* Harry and Voldemort must die? For if "neither" can live while the other survives, that would indicate that both must die, right? In the end, I think the real answer is that the prophecy must refer to Harry and Voldemort, and no third party. Otherwise, it is internally inconsistent. If we assume that "the other" is a third party, then "either must die at the hand of the other" implies that only one of the two must die, but "neither can live while the other survives" implies that *both* must die. On the other hand, if we assume that it refers to Harry and Voldemort only, then the language fits: one of them must die at the hand of the other, for neither can live while the other survives. (Of course, I'm ignoring the possibility that it might not refer to Harry at all...hmm.) --Cory From sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 23:28:50 2004 From: sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com (sevenhundredandthirteen) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 23:28:50 -0000 Subject: Theory of theme & Jung's Archetypes & Love In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111571 Caspen wrote: > I apprecate your response Laurasia, but I'm a littl confused. > Nowhere have I said that "[although] ... the magic in the story > symbolises this spiritual level of the world.... that this has all > been consciously arranged by JKR, but yet the plots of her books > haven't been." Nor did I say that "...any major characters' death is > not actually relevant to the story." If I thought so, perhaps I'd be > inclined to be more of an HP fundamentalist. Laurasia: Hi Caspen, sorry if I got a wrong impression of what you were trying to say. I got the impression you felt that JKR was extremely conscious of the metaphysical layers in HP by your frequent comments such as (From your original post 111400): "(this is JKR'S raelly brilliant point)" "(and again this is what makes JKR brilliant, IMO)" "Very clever and skillful, IMO." which to me gave me the impression that you were saying that if JKR was truly to be clever, brilliant and skilled she *must* have been consciously including all the multi-layers. I got the impression that you considered this theme more planned out than plot issues from this comment (from 111400): "I think her work may also, ultimately be interpreted, not only as pro-Christian, but as anti-fundamentalist (anti-literalist) in the broadest sense both for fundamentalists/literalists who openly identify with and consider themselves on the side of good (but are actually rule-obsessed Percy's) and for fundamentalist occultists who actually believe in real world magic (there are some out there). And, I might add, even HP fans who, for instance, have become certain that beheadings of major characters are essential to JKR's story!" The last reference to the 'beheadings of major characters' gave me the impression that you thought HP fans who consider, eg Sirius's death absolutely relevant were just being too literal. It suggested to me that you were saying that JKR was creating a work which the thematic meaning of events (eg, death frees people from the physical plane of existence) was more important than any plot driven consequences they may cause (eg, Harry gets a connection to the other side of the Veil). Sorry if I misinterpreted you. Caspen: However, and more to the point, evaluating an > author's "brilliance" based upon speculation about how consciously > or not the themes developed in his/her work are, is just plain > absurd. Laurasia: And I'm afraid I disagree with you on how we should evaluate an author's brilliance. I don't think its fair to evaluate a *work* on what the author's intentions were- the work should stand by itself. HOWEVER, I *do* think it's fair to evaluate an author on what their intentions were. For example: If George Orwell just wrote a book about a farm and pigs taking over (Animal Farm) then I would still allow the books itself to be an allegory of Communism, but I would give Orwell no credit for it as an author. If C.S. Lewis just wrote a series of books about a magic wardrobe (The Chronicle of Narnia) I would still appreciate the book as an allegory of Christianity, but give no credit to Lewis as an accomplished writer. This point also goes back to my first impression that you considered JKR "brilliant, skilled and clever." I don't. I think she's written a few fun books. And I think the context she chose to put Harry into had theme type of themes inbuilt into it. I still stand by my opinion that *all* Fantasy literature has conventions, themes and meanings inbuilt into it simply because Fantasy literature is about the scientifically unexplainable. I think that any story which works on a level where The Age of Reason cannot explain it, it refers (however poorly or unimaginatively) to the notion that there is a higher plane of existence above the rational. To use your reference to Jung's archetypes: It is cliche beyond cliche to insert a wise white haired and beared wizard into Fantasy stories who acts as the hero's mentor. I've seen it a thousand times, and I continue to see it because this type of figure is, according to Jung, an essential archetype which we all need to see reaffirmed. The Mentor is somebody who we know we can immediately trust who has experience and wisdom and who will illuminate what path we must ultimately take. Mentor figures also are associated with gift-giving. JKR also uses extensively the archetype of The Shapeshifter. But werewolf stories are not new. Stories involving people who can transform into animals at will are not new. She also uses Jung's archetype of the Shadow. But, really, a bad guy who likes to dress in black? Not truly human, and not truly alive? These are all very worn-in roles. And we all respond to them because, like Jung says, we *need* these roles to appear so that we can "play out" all these different roles which we would never get the chance to live. I don't agree that JKR acts on a purely technical level. I think she acts on an intuitive level- the reason she inserted Dumbledore wasn't because she was unoriginal and couldn't think of any ideas. I think it was because he 'felt' right- as a subconscious level, right where Jung's archetypes operate. So, I agree with what you've said about universal themes. However, that to me only reinforces my opinion that JKR is not "brilliant, skilled and clever" but merely responding to a human need which only operates on a subconscious level. Caspen: > Herman Melville's works have been analyzed in terms of alchemical > symbolism, but nowhere have I read any assertions of great expertise > in the occult on his part. Does that undermine his work? Hardly! The > quality and effectiveness of the artist's expression of thematic > content and the artist's degree of "consciousness" of any particular > theme are entirely separate issues. Laurasia: Yes, I agree. That's why I stated in my previous post that whilst I do not agree these themes were conscious, they are still valid. Caspen: > Therefore, your conclusion that "...the only option I can see is > that JKR *accidentally* included the theme" is not only, once again, > an example of another very "fundamentalist" view ,expressed on this > board, but also simply illogical. Laurasia: I feel JKR's writing style and process (from what she has shown us in interviews) contradicts an anti-fundamentalist view. How can JKR insert an anti-literalist theme in her books when she is a pro- literalist writer? That conclusion was based only on logic and nothing else. I was referring to the one interpretation of theme (about the place of metaphor, about anti-literalists/anti- fundamentalists) which you brought up as opposed to all themes in general. However, I should've perhaps chosen a different word to 'accidental.' Maybe unconscious, intuitive, subconscious, instinctive would have served my intent better. There are some themes, relating to the spiritual domain, which, IMO, JKR has consciously inserted. What is the one force in HP that even wizards can offer no rational explanation for? That would be love. Instead of 'magic' existing in the real world (although beyond the physical and mental realms of human experience) I think her primary theme is that love (a very special and ancient kind of 'magic') is what links all humans on a spiritual level. The reason I think this is because magic is dealt with rationally in the books. Harry learns spells one wand-movement at a time. He focuses his mental energy to cast them. Muggles who will not accept magic are portrayed as stupid, backward, and even thought of as 'beasts' by some wizards. This all suggests, to me, that magic is an intelligence thing, as opposed to a pure, spiritual phenomena. Therefore, when even highly intelligent and rational wizards cannot explain 'love,' it confirms, in my mind, that JKR is consciously putting it on a much higher level than reason. Hope I clarified a few things and that you are now less confused. ~<(Laurasia)>~ From meidbh at yahoo.com Mon Aug 30 00:23:36 2004 From: meidbh at yahoo.com (meidbh) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 00:23:36 -0000 Subject: Where is our Prince? (was Re: My very own personal HBP theory) In-Reply-To: <002a01c48df4$cd52aa60$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111572 Ffred writes: "My surmise is that the fall of the Roman Empire actually had little effect on the WW: some wizarding families may well have moved out into the countryside and taken over estates out there (suitably enchanted so that when the barbarians came by looting and pillaging, they'd just have gone straight past) ... "But that the WW was dominated by its ancient families, whose stability and lineage had also given them the opportunity to become sufficiently wealthy to be independent. ... "So that the Founders (and indeed the other wizarding aristocrats) would have regarded titles from nasty little Muggle barbarian monarchs as very much beneath their contempt: they just didn't need them." Meidbh now: Our prince is a Halfblood so his title could come from either the WW or Muggleworld. As I said in my previous post, I'm really not convinced that JKR would bring RW royalty into her world (though ancient royalty in the form of King Arthur does get a mention). So far she has been careful to keep references to the Muggle world very general. And as far as we know none of the old families, the purebloods, appear to be titled. Now. In fact other than our self proclaimed Lord VM there we've seen no contemporary titled WWfolk at all. So where is our prince? Well, there appear to have been stronger links and similarities between Muggle society and the WW in the past, at least before the International Statute of Wizarding Secrecy of 1692. And we do have evidence of titled magical folk in the past. We have Sir Cadogan, a portrait knight in armour and the ghost Sir Patrick Delaney-Podmore of the Headless Hunt. Morgana le Fey, King Arthurs sorceress half sister, was Queen of Avalon. And of course, my personal favourite (), Queen Maeve was a mediaeval Irish witch (ref: JKRs chocolate frog cards). So our Prince may well be a blast from the WW past. Meidbh :-) From meidbh at yahoo.com Mon Aug 30 00:33:48 2004 From: meidbh at yahoo.com (meidbh) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 00:33:48 -0000 Subject: The Prophesy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111573 nailteacher wrote: "Howdy all- After finishing OoTP for the second time the other night, I got to looking at the Prophesy a bit more closely, and something occurred to me- it could be interpreted to make reference to a third party." Meidbh: Check out post #108241 and its thread :-) From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com Mon Aug 30 02:03:26 2004 From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 02:03:26 -0000 Subject: FILK: Magical Brethren Week Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111574 Magical Brethren Week To the tune of Tom Lehrer's National Brotherhood Week Dedicated to Haggridd MIDI at: http://members.aol.com/quentncree/lehrer/natbroth.htm THE SCENE: The Atrium at the Ministry of Magic. Standing before the Fountain of the Magical Brethren, Minister of Magic CORNELIUS FUDGE promotes the newly established Magical Brethren Week FUDGE: Oh the centaurs hate the wizards And the wizards hate the centaurs They would rather kiss dementors Than to treat each other with respect But during Magical Brethren Week Magical Brethren Week Bane lets Dolores practice her saddleback technique It's neat to act benign Towards them that's half equine And also it's politically correct Oh, the owners hate their house-elves And the house-elves hate their owners There are witches who've been known to Mount their severed heads in rows But during Magical Brethren Week Magical Brethren Week Narcissa and Lucius beg to wash down Dobby's feet `Cause being nice to imps Does not turn us to wimps So long as we don't have to give them clothes Oh the goblins hate the humans And the humans hate the goblins You can hear some vicious squabblin' During Goblin mutinies But during Magical Brethren Week Magical Brethren Week Gringotts says they'll give away each silverwork antique Step up and stoutly thank The folks who control your bank The robes of magic brotherhood we've donned Be grateful, though, that no one else has wands! - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 30 02:21:53 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 19:21:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Book Two Discoveries! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040830022153.58051.qmail@web53502.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111575 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "abadgerfan2" wrote: > On her site, Rowling's answer to a FAQ discloses that one of Harry's Book Two discoveries "foreshadows" something that he finds out in Book Six. Has anyone made an inventory, in chronological order, of Harry's Book Two discoveries? One could then methodically go through and consider (with a chance of more accurately predicting) what is to come in Book Six! Thanks! brandy wrote: She also specifically states that whatever it was, she made sure that it was left in the movie or else it would create a plot hole later in the series. (I cannot for the life of me find this statement now, but I know I read it the day HBP was announced.) Which implies that it's something that doesn't *seem* important, and thus might easily have been cut from the movie originally. This is a great ideas. Let me try to go through my memory and see if I can find anything that meets both criteria: 1) House elves - I do not see this as something that might be cut. 2) Womping Willow - I do not see this for the same reason. 3) Spiders - Same thing 4) Moaning Myrtle - ditto 5) Percy sneaking around - ?? has possibilities 6) Slytherin common room - ?? 7) entrance to chamber - don't think this is one 8) sword - don't think this is one either 9) bones can disappear - possible but I don't think so 10) diary - nah... moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From wjwarren4269 at comcast.net Mon Aug 30 02:44:35 2004 From: wjwarren4269 at comcast.net (Josh Warren) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 02:44:35 -0000 Subject: Book Two Discoveries! In-Reply-To: <20040830022153.58051.qmail@web53502.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111576 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, K G wrote: > This is a great ideas. Let me try to go through my memory and see if I can find anything that meets both criteria: > > 7) entrance to chamber - don't think this is one unless it was that there were two entrances... the sink and the chamber itself (anything else inbetween?) > 8) sword - don't think this is one either a sword was necessary, but they could have cut the GG ownership > 10) diary - nah... Hmm, well a Q&A did imply that we might find out what would have happened if Tom had been successful with Ginny, so perhaps some aspect of it... Josh From aphrodeia at gmail.com Mon Aug 30 02:50:11 2004 From: aphrodeia at gmail.com (aphrodeia) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 22:50:11 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Book Two Discoveries! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111577 <<(I cannot for the life of me find this statement now, but I know I read it the day HBP was announced.)>> I seem to recall this statement in one of the special featurette jobbies on the CoS DVD. It was an interview with JKR and a screenwriter. Lisa, fuzzy as ever but convinced she's heard this as well From juli17 at aol.com Mon Aug 30 03:04:30 2004 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 23:04:30 EDT Subject: Snape's DE past Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111578 > Potioncat: > Serius Black is dead because of a lot of things that happened. Even > if everything had gone as it did, if Black had not taunted Bella he > might not be dead. If Black had followed intructions and waited to > give DD the report, he might not be dead..both because he wouldn't > have been there and because DD would have gotten there sooner. If > DD had not left Hogwarts in the first place, neither Hagrid nor > McGonagall would have been injured and Harry would have been better > protected... > > I don't see the value in choosing one person to blame. Or by saying > if this one thing, and this one thing only, had been different... > > Potioncat I agree. There's never much point in saying "If only I had done this..." or "If only he hadn't done that..." etc. It won't change anything. In the end, I don't think anyone bears any real blame for Sirius's death. It was a comibination of a lot of individual choices colliding into one fateful moment. And the real reason he died is because someone--only one person--chose to kill him. Bellatrix. I do think Harry blames Snape because he wants/needs someone to blame, and of everyone involved, Snape is the one he already greatly disliked. Harry needs a target for his grief and rage, someone besides the person he truly blames deep down--himself. In the end, he will have to come to grips with the fact that neither he nor Snape caused Sirius's death. And I just hope it doesn't take all of book 6! Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From catlady at wicca.net Mon Aug 30 03:23:46 2004 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 03:23:46 -0000 Subject: Slyth!Herm/Percival/Gryff!Percy/LV'sWand/Hag!Petunia/Aberforth/F+G/LV intntl Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111579 DuffyPoo wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110909 : << I posted some time ago that I thought Hermione could be a candidate for Slytherin. >> Yes! I got that idea when she so competently arranged a magical Mickey Finn for Crabbe and Goyle in CoS. Spaced Cadet wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/110973 : << both Dumbledore and Percy Weasley have the name Percival, >> Not exactly. They both state their full names for the record in the Wizengamot scene: Albus Percival Wolfric Brian Dumbledore and Percy Ignatius Weasley. Why is no one theorizing about the name Ignatius? Kim BetterBeGryffindor wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/111068 : << Percy IS a Gryffindor! >> Some people admire Sirius's Gryffindor courage in breaking up with his whole family just because he detested their beliefs, If Percy broke up with his family because he sincerely joined the bad guys, that would be a close parallel. Adding to two older close parallels: Pettigrew betrayed his closest old friends and the people who trusted him to the bad guys. Snape appears to have betrayed his closest old friends and people who trusted him to the good guys. Dobby went against House Elf tradition and the requirement of punishing himself to serve his beliefs against his owner. Kreachur went against House Elf tradition and the requirement of punishing himself to serve his beliefs against his owner. Jekatiska wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/111132 : << Yes, how DID that wand find its way back to Voldemort? >> http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/ has posted someone's comment from the Edinburgh appearance : "I also asked when Harries [sic] parents were killed by Voldermort, Wormtail turned into a rat and pretended to be dead. How then did he give Voldermort his wand and robe back once he found him and helped give him back his body ?, she told me (after tapping her nose!) 'he hid them'. " Gina wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforG rownups/message/111216 : << I honestly think we are fixing to find out that dear old Aunt Petunia is a hag! >> I'm pretty sure (especially when reading FANTASTIC BEASTS) that hags are a non-human species, so Petunia would have to be adopted to be a hag. Anyway, if hags are a species, but 'hag' is such a female word, are they parthenogenic, or are there both male and female hags, or are trolls the males and hags the females of one species? The Edinburgh interview at http://www.jkrowling.co.uk/textonly/news_view.cfm?id=80 says: Q: Is Aunt Petunia a Squib? JKR: Good question. No, she is not, but -- [Laughter]. No, she is not a Squib. She is a Muggle, but -- [Laughter]. You will have to read the other books. You might have got the impression that there is a little bit more to Aunt Petunia than meets the eye, and you will find out what it is. She is not a squib, although that is a very good guess. Oh, I am giving a lot away here. I am being shockingly indiscreet. Sherri wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/111353 : << Where exactly in canon is it that we have "met" Aberforth? I have read all the books multiple times but do not remember a passage where it is stated that the barkeep is Aberforth. >> The Edinburgh interview says: Q: Why is the barman of the Hog's Head vaguely familiar to Harry? Is he Dumbledore's brother? JKR: Ooh -- you are getting good. Why do you think that it is Aberforth? [Audience member: Various clues. He smells of goats and he looks a bit like Dumbledore]. I was quite proud of that clue. That is all that I am going to say. [Laughter]. Well yes, obviously. I like the goat clue -- I sniggered to myself about that one. Amy Z wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/111545 : << It just occurred to me that Fred & George's initials are the same as those of Fabian and Gideon Prewett, who were, most likely, Molly's brothers. Coincidence, or were they named (initialled) for their recently-killed uncles? I lean toward the latter. >> I thought maybe they had been named Fabian and Gideon after their still-living uncles, then had their names changed (but inititals kept) because saying those names after the deaths made Molly cry too much. R. Heinuf wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/111555 : << Does LV wantto be a world-wide dictator with all Muggles as slaves? >> JKR answered the first half of that question in a chat, by saying that he wants to rule the whole world but is starting with Britain. As for the second half, I think he wants to kill all Muggles (because of hatred of his father) and have all wizards as slaves (because of hatred of purebloods who looked down on him in his student days). I << Obviously, his "movement" crossed geographic borders, since Karkaroff was a Death Eater.>> IMHO I don't think the Death Eater 'movement' crossed international boundaries, altho' Death Eaters might have received some money or informal assistance from their pureblood bigot relatives in other countries. Even if it was international, Karkaroff is not evidence. He could have been living in Britain when recruited (there is a theory that he was a teacher at Hogwarts when recruited). He could have been living in Britain temporarily, for some short-term job or study, or he could have been living in Britain for most of his life, maybe the offspring of a Slavic professional Quidditch player who was employed by a British pro team. Estil wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/111385 : << I would like to add that in Catalan (Spanish language/dialect) Vol has two meanings: Vol - he wants (from de verb voler = to want) Vol - flight (noun) de - "of" is a preoposition in Spanish and Catalan. mort - is the Catalan word for "death" Then my translations are "he wants of death" and "flight of death". The first one doesn't fit very well... anyway I thought it could be interesting. >> I don't know if there is a difference between "want" and "will" in Romance languages, but the English language seems to think that the Latin root of "vol" means "will", as in "voluntarily" is a word meaning "of one's own will". I have vague 30 year old memories of High School French class, where surely the verb "vouler" was "to want", as in the famous USA song lyric: "Voulez-vous coucher avec moi?", which must be related. And my constant question: "Que veux dire X?" for "What does X mean?" when X is just about any word. Anyway, the idea that LV has a want of death like I have a want of chocolate goes along with his followers being Death Eaters... and with the interpretation of Flight of Death meaning he's like a raptor bird, flying down to kill his victim -- I forget who posted that in this very thread. Also, while many listies pointed out that Theft from Death could refer to stealing his life from Death via immortality spells, Theft of Death could refer to him stealing the power of the Angel of Death by killing people before their time. From cruthw at earthlink.net Mon Aug 30 04:18:55 2004 From: cruthw at earthlink.net (caspenzoe) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 04:18:55 -0000 Subject: Theory of theme & Jung's Archetypes & Love In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111580 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sevenhundredandthirteen" wrote: > Caspen wrote: > > > I apprecate your response Laurasia, but I'm a littl confused. > > Nowhere have I said that "[although] ... the magic in the story > > symbolises this spiritual level of the world.... that this has all > > been consciously arranged by JKR, but yet the plots of her books > > haven't been." Nor did I say that "...any major characters' death > is > > not actually relevant to the story." If I thought so, perhaps I'd > be > > inclined to be more of an HP fundamentalist. > > > Laurasia: > > Hi Caspen, sorry if I got a wrong impression of what you were trying > to say. I got the impression you felt that JKR was extremely > conscious of the metaphysical layers in HP by your frequent comments > such as (From your original post 111400): > > "(this is JKR'S raelly brilliant point)" > "(and again this is what makes JKR brilliant, IMO)" > "Very clever and skillful, IMO." > > which to me gave me the impression that you were saying that if JKR > was truly to be clever, brilliant and skilled she *must* have been > consciously including all the multi-layers. > *Snip!* > The last reference to the 'beheadings of major characters' gave me > the impression that you thought HP fans who consider, eg Sirius's > death absolutely relevant were just being too literal. > *Snip!* > Caspen: > > However, and more to the point, evaluating an > > author's "brilliance" based upon speculation about how consciously > > or not the themes developed in his/her work are, is just plain > > absurd. > > Laurasia: > > And I'm afraid I disagree with you on how we should evaluate an > author's brilliance. I don't think its fair to evaluate a > *work* on what the author's intentions were- the work should > stand by itself. HOWEVER, I *do* think it's fair to evaluate an > author on what their intentions were. > > For example: If George Orwell just wrote a book about a farm and > pigs taking over (Animal Farm) then I would still allow the books > itself to be an allegory of Communism, but I would give Orwell no > credit for it as an author. *Snip!* > I don't agree that JKR acts on a purely technical level. I think she > acts on an intuitive level- the reason she inserted Dumbledore > wasn't because she was unoriginal and couldn't think of any ideas. I > think it was because he 'felt' right- as a subconscious level, right > where Jung's archetypes operate. So, I agree with what you've said > about universal themes. However, that to me only reinforces my > opinion that JKR is not "brilliant, skilled and clever" but merely > responding to a human need which only operates on a subconscious > level. *Snip!* > Laurasia: > > I feel JKR's writing style and process (from what she has shown us > in interviews) contradicts an anti-fundamentalist view. How can JKR > insert an anti-literalist theme in her books when she is a pro- > literalist writer? That conclusion was based only on logic and > nothing else. I was referring to the one interpretation of theme > (about the place of metaphor, about anti-literalists/anti- > fundamentalists) which you brought up as opposed to all themes in > general. > > However, I should've perhaps chosen a different word > to 'accidental.' Maybe unconscious, intuitive, subconscious, > instinctive would have served my intent better. Well thanks again Luarasia, for a very interesting post. I think I am a little clearer on what the confusion is about. For starters, when I describe an author as "brilliant" (and I still maintain that JKR is brilliant in the fantasy genre - and certainly in the children's fantasy genre - though I would certainly hesitate at this point to classify her among the world's greatest authors - she has certain stylistic problems - but that's another post) - I'm referring to the quality of her "intuition" (to use your word) which allows her to resonate with human archtypes - major and deep ones - thus far very well - and not to any supposed ability on her part (though I'll add, once more that I've never supposed it) to explain all of her decisions about her story according to some formula - as a rocket scientist might be expected to be able to explain all of his/her calculations according to proven mathematical theories. Art doesn't work that way, nor is it created that way (although bad fiction does - recycling the same tired archtypes with no new or interesting content repeatedly, because they sell to bored and boring people). What continues to astound me, however is that you seem to insist on concluding that an artist's "intuition" is accidental, precisely because their work - at it's best - is not strictly formulaic - like the rocket scientist's. Or, to use your new choice of words, JKR's instinctive and subconscious abilities somehow don't count for "brilliance" as far as your concerned. They do for me. Let me see if another example will help: William Shakespeare's "Hamlet" has been well-analysed in terms of Freud's formulation of the Oedipus complex, although all of his work precede's Freud's. Is it, therefore, an "accident" that Hamlet resonates so well with this particular theory of Freud's? I don't think so. I think it resonates so well, because both Shakespeare's and Freud's work is profound. Nevertheless, had Shakepeare been born in the nineteenth century and written in that century, I doubt he could have beaten Freud to the formulation of the theory of the Oedipus complex in psycho-analytic terms. Does he, therefore get no credit for anticipating Freud by three centuries? Seems, according to your principles, Shakespeare must just have been just lucky. My reference to HP fundamentalists and "beheadings" is direct to a poster here, Hans Andrea, (I think I got that name right) who not too long ago asserted here that there was a 99% certainty that Ron and Hermione would be beheaded before the end of the series, based on his analysis of the HP series in alchemical terms (borrowing heavily, I believe from John Granger.) I thought that assertion absurd too - not only because these are childrens' (as well as adults' - and working-on-many-levels - as covered ad infinitum in other posts) books, but, because to me, it smacks of exactly the kind of "fundamentalism" for lack of a better word, that JKR's work, again IMO, deliberately (in the artistic sense of the word - i.e.: intuitively) condmens. As for your carefully drawn distinction about the evaluation of an an artist's work as opposed to the artist him/herself, it is, unfortunately, devoid of a difference. You say that "I don't think its fair to evaluate a *work* on what the author's intentions were- the work should stand by itself. HOWEVER, I *do* think it's fair to evaluate an author on what their intentions were." Leaving aside the question of whether and how you and I can really know and understand JKR'S intentions, for now, as well as what "intentions" amount to in the creative process, I agree with you that the work stands alone. What I fail to understand, however is how you purport to have evaluated the artist's brilliance as an artist separate from the artist's work, which is the only context in which we are discussing JKR. Being bad at "maths" as the British put it, I doubt she's a brilliant rocket scientist, but rocket science ability is simply not the measure of brilliance for fiction writers. As far as "intentions" go, it's fair to evaluate a work in terms of what an author was shooting for and whether the author achieves it. It's done all the time. For example, it's fair to evaluate an author who intendes to write a satire about middle-class morality on whether or not the work is satirically effective, funny, etc., as opposed to whether or not it undermines values altogether. It's not fair, however to judge the author less brilliant if the author goes on to make a good case for more meaningful values as well, although the work was intended primarily to satirize. It may, in fact do so; and if it does so well, the author gets credit for it. Again, intentions, in and of themselves have nothing to do with "brilliance." Would a stated intention on JKR's part "to be brilliant" make it so? Conversely, using one of your examples this time, if a monkey playing on a PC had produced Animal Farm instead of George Orwell, I'd think the monkey would have a very hard time getting any publisher to read it. But assuming the monkey did, and it was published under the monkey's own name, I, personally would be too amazed to trouble myself overly about the actual I.Q. of the monkey. Nevertheless, if pressed, I think I'd be inclined to assume that the monkey's I.Q. was quite high, regardless of the monkey's "maths" ability, or even of it's "intentions." I think JKR should be accorded at least the same courtesy. Finally, JKR has briefly described what are years and years of work and a lot of unpublished material in a few interviews. How, therefore, have you determined that she, a fiction writer writing fiction about a boy who can do magic and dwell in a magical world, determined that she (or any other fiction writer, for that matter) is a "literalist" writer? I think you've missed the irony: she writes about these things (magical boy/magical world) not only because they make a good story and provide ample opportunity for whimsical fun, but also, because she has something to say about the concept of a supernatural altogether. Otherwise, she wouldn't chose these as her setting and subject matter while making it clear all along what dubious propsitions she believes most of what the real- world occult has to offer to be. In addition, she wouldn't have filled it with such delicious archetypes as the rule-bound Percy, and the fanatically righteous Crouch who ends up alienating and condemning his own son. She wouldn't, for that matter have raised the issue of whether and to what extent the supernatural exists in the first chapters of her first book via Vernon Dursely, IMO, either. Caspen From sad1199 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 30 05:29:29 2004 From: sad1199 at yahoo.com (sad1199) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 05:29:29 -0000 Subject: Lupin visiting Sirius at Azkaban Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111581 sad1199 here: If one of my very best freinds supposedly betrayed one of my other very best friends and the other best friend ended up dying... I think I would find that former best friend and confront them. I would beg and cry and yell and plead to find out what had happened. Now, it says in the books that Fudge visited Sirius in Azkaban and Crouch and his wife visited their son and did the big switcheroo. WHY DIDN'T LUPIN GO ASK SIRIUS WHAT HAPPENED? Yes, I am yelling. This is truly irritating me. In my fifth reread of PoA and have so many more questions now than before. I just can't belive that Lupin didn't go to Azkaban and confront Sirius. Also, how does the extreme personality change in Fudge get explained. In PoA he is SOOO concerned for Harry's safety; he blows off his underage wizarding and offers him refuge at the Leaky Cauldren, BUT! In OotP he is a complete horses behind to Harry. I know adults hate to admit they are wrong but the turn around is so totally 360, I can't buy that it's because Fudge does not want to admit he was wrong about the return of Voldemort. And! Crookshanks is part Kneazle and part what? Why is the cat so protective and friendly to Sirius? I'm thinking Crookshanks is someone that Sirius knows well. Anyone? Happy, Caring, Loving... sad1199 From alina at distantplace.net Mon Aug 30 06:01:06 2004 From: alina at distantplace.net (Alina) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 02:01:06 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry... Tsk Tsk (Re: Snape's DE past) References: Message-ID: <003301c48e56$be724cf0$6500a8c0@Pandemonium> No: HPFGUIDX 111582 > Alla: > > Can you explain to me how Harry was supposed to see that his dream > about Sirius is different from his other dreams , specifically from > the dream about Arthur, which helped to save the man? Specifically > how Harry was supposed to figure out that the dream was false? Well, this actually has bugged me ever since I finished reading the book. The Sirius Dream was different! It wasn't just a dream he had one night. It was a continuation of a dream he's been having all year long. He kept on dreaming about the corridor and every time he dreams, he thinks just a little further. He dreams further and sees Sirius tortured. Did Harry seriously think Voldemort was in MOM every time he had that dream? Voldemort would practically be living there if that was true! As I was reading the book, I wanted to yell at Harry, "It's the same dream you've been having all year, Sirius didn't spend that year in MOM being tortured!" I don't know, Harry's logic just didn't make sense to me. But then again, I suppose logic had little to none to do with his actions. Alina, who is one of those people who wants to throttle Harry right now. From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Aug 30 06:04:31 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 06:04:31 -0000 Subject: Snape as spy was Re: Snape as baddie In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111583 > Pippin: > > Voldemort has to make sure that any Death Eaters who know > that Snape was a Death Eater believe that Snape's been faithful > to Voldemort all along. LV can cherish his private doubts, but he > can't allow Snape to be seen leading a normal life as a known > defector. > Finwitch: Something that came up to me: Snape is a traitor, only question is in _who_ he's betraying. 1) He betrays Voldemort for Dumbledore. (mind you, I think he _did_ join DEs earlier, but left them for some reason). Dumbledore gave such testimony in court for him, and is constantly telling Harry he trusts Professor Snape. (BTW, speaking of that 'professor' - Snape set the level of formality between himself and Harry during the first lesson, with his snapping Potter! so Harry calls him Snape. And Dumbledore - well, he's the one who _made_ Severus Snape a professor by giving him a teaching job! I think he'd like very much to hear some student to approve of this by calling him professor... He at least _was_ a Death Eater, and I think some of those unsavory Owls complain about that... Like from Neville's gran, perhaps?) 2)He betrays Dumbledore for Voldemort He _does_ support the desire Tom Riddle had: a name wizards would fear to say. "Saving" Harry: not very effective, in any case. Why didn't he just 'accidentally' knock Quirrell over if he truly was attempting to save Harry, as Hermione did? But, in this pretext: if he wants to keep Dumbledore's trust, he must at least _pretend_ to be watching over. And, with him being the Potions Master, he knew Voldemort would need him alive for that potion made in the graveyard... 3) He's betraying both and playing his own game. In *any* case, he is a traitor - and Sirius could never accept that. Finwitch From alina at distantplace.net Mon Aug 30 06:11:23 2004 From: alina at distantplace.net (Alina) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 02:11:23 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry... Tsk Tsk (Re: Snape's DE past) References: Message-ID: <004501c48e58$2d895e20$6500a8c0@Pandemonium> No: HPFGUIDX 111584 > Brenda: > > Yes, that's precisely what I'm refering to. It's a nice parallel, the > immune mechanism between physical and mental system. Lol, can you > imagine, Snape being considerate in teaching Harry, it'll take all > the fun out of it!! ;) > > What I really wanted Harry to do, after seeing in Snape's Pensieve, > was to apologize to Snape. Not just because he invaded Snape's > privacy, but because Harry realized Snape had been right about James, > and actually felt bad. > > "... it was that he knew 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 just seen, > his fathe had been every bit as arrogant as Snape had always told > him." [OoP, 573. UK] > > I had such high hopes that Harry might have the nerves to apologize > to Snape, but alas being Harry he didn't. > > At least they have better understanding of each other, I was > surprised to see Snape didn't taunt him with memories from Harry's > childhood. That can only prove to be useful in the future, no? I know how you feel, Brenda. Although I didn't want Harry to apologize per se, I did think this was an opportunity for him to say what he was thinking, to say, "I'm not a pampered little prince, I know what it's like to be publically humiliated." Although, in my mind, Harry adds, "So if you're think you're teaching me something new by doing it in class, you're not." ^^ I think Harry was probably in shock. Despite all proof to the contrary, he was comfortably believing Snape as the evil incarnate. Snape saving his life on the Quidditch pitch wasn't enough, Snape not being the one to steal the Stone wasn't enough, DD trusting Snape wasn't enough. Finally, Harry's nose got rubbed in something he couldn't ignore, I bet more than anything he wanted to not sympathize with Snape, but he couldn't help it. Actually, empathize is the right word. What I want to know is, did Snape have similar thoughts when he peeked into Harry's memories and saw that Harry's childhood wasn't all peaches and cream? Alina. P.S. sorry for not posting it together with my previous email. From alina at distantplace.net Mon Aug 30 06:13:49 2004 From: alina at distantplace.net (Alina) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 02:13:49 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lupin visiting Sirius at Azkaban References: Message-ID: <005901c48e58$84690d80$6500a8c0@Pandemonium> No: HPFGUIDX 111585 > sad1199 here: > If one of my very best freinds supposedly betrayed one of my other > very best friends and the other best friend ended up dying... I > think I would find that former best friend and confront them. I > would beg and cry and yell and plead to find out what had happened. > Now, it says in the books that Fudge visited Sirius in Azkaban and > Crouch and his wife visited their son and did the big switcheroo. > WHY DIDN'T LUPIN GO ASK SIRIUS WHAT HAPPENED? Yes, I am yelling. > This is truly irritating me. In my fifth reread of PoA and have so > many more questions now than before. I just can't belive that Lupin > didn't go to Azkaban and confront Sirius. I can theorize that maybe because he's a werewolf he's not allowed to go to certain places, like Azkaban? Maybe the Potters and Sirius weren't the only ones suspecting Lupin of being a spy either, so he could've been in hiding or avoiding persecution when it first happened and when he finally could go, he didn't think there'd be enough of Sirius left to answer any questions. alina. From kempermentor at yahoo.com Mon Aug 30 06:18:17 2004 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 06:18:17 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111586 Kemper wrote: Wait... that's wrong. He chose to continue the dreams rather than practice. Harry has some misdirected anger at Snape. If it's anyone's fault that Harry's Godfather is dead, it's Harry's. Potioncat replied : I don't see the value in choosing one person to blame. Or by saying if this one thing, and this one thing only, had been different... Kemper responds: I'm suggesting Harry take a good look at his actions (or lack of). The value derived from doing so can allow him to be a better wizard and, in the end, a better human. Personal accountability is a major step towards maturity. From snow15145 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 30 06:30:34 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 06:30:34 -0000 Subject: Is time changing or are people changing in time? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111587 Do you think that it could be possible to change your appearance before you go back in time? If say Tonks were to go back in time, I would think that she could do so without recognizing herself if she just changed her appearance before she went back. I guess the reason I thought of this is because of dear old Albus and his crazy watch along with the dreaded time-turner situations: How could Dumbledore have worked with Flamel in alchemy when Flamel is significantly older? How did Dumbledore eat a vomit flavored Bernie Bott Bean in his youth when the company was established well after Dumbledore's considered youth? Could Dumbledore time travel by altering his appearance so that no one, including his former self, would recognize him? Is it possible that Albus is like Tonks, a metamorphagus? If Albus is a metamorphagus, is he really as old as he appears? How would you know how old a metamorphagus is, really, unless you knew when exactly they were born? And now the watch! Could Dumbledore be checking his watch to see where else he is at another time in space? Snow From hockeybug1994 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 29 22:55:39 2004 From: hockeybug1994 at yahoo.com (DawnnieC) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:55:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Transferred Soul In-Reply-To: <1093792816.35721.86352.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20040829225539.94787.qmail@web60708.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111588 >> Snow writes: >> I do have a few questions though, how was it that Tom Riddle was >> able to possess Ginny when Voldemort could not possess Harry? > Totorivers writes: > The method of possession is different. Voldemort is pitting his soul against > Harry's, while Tom was using Ginny against herself. Dawnnie responds: Interesting thoughts. Perhaps the difference might be that Voldemort/Tom Riddle was seducing Ginny whereas he was attempting to destroy/overpower Harry. A seduction is more difficult to identify and therefore more difficult to defend against. ~ ~ Dawnnie, otherwise known as Bug ~ ~ From zendemort at yahoo.co.uk Mon Aug 30 03:37:17 2004 From: zendemort at yahoo.co.uk (zendemort) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 03:37:17 -0000 Subject: Theory of theme & Jung's Archetypes & Love In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111589 > Laurasia: > > And I'm afraid I disagree with you on how we should evaluate an > author's brilliance. I don't think its fair to evaluate a > *work* on what the author's intentions were- the work should > stand by itself. HOWEVER, I *do* think it's fair to evaluate an > author on what their intentions were. > Zendemort: I am sorry, but this debate was so interesting. I just must add my two-cents worth of opinion. Art is a form of human expression. Being thus, we must keep in mind that "the mind is not a book that can be opened at will and read by any intruder... etc. etc. The mind is a complex and many layered thing." Keeping that statement in mind, we cannot judge an artist based on their explicit intentions. Because, like the master chess player completing agaist a computer, the artist might not be aware of her/his subconcious intentions. The master chess player can know only several moves in advance while the computer can calculate the entire game in terms of probability, thus seeing many more moves in advance than the master chess player. Yet, somehow the master chess player wins, not because knowing or seeing the outcome in advance, but something a little more intuitive. This intuition is not apart of the "heart" like some people would like to believe, it is apart of the mind (all of our decision come from our mind, especially our emotions). Thus, one cannot really distinguish properly between thinking and feeling, because they essentially come from one and of the same source. Thus, if JKR "felt" something worked or was right, and in doing so, made an interesting and brilliant series, it should be just as significant in judging her brilliance as what she logically and carefully "thought" through and "intended" for her work. It still pertains to her genie. > Laurasia: > For example: If George Orwell just wrote a book about a farm and > pigs taking over (Animal Farm) then I would still allow the books > itself to be an allegory of Communism, but I would give Orwell no > credit for it as an author. If C.S. Lewis just wrote a series of > books about a magic wardrobe (The Chronicle of Narnia) I would still > appreciate the book as an allegory of Christianity, but give no > credit to Lewis as an accomplished writer. Zendemort: Sometimes, the artist might not realize on the subconcious level that they are writing an allegory, but that is what they create because of the times and the surrounding circumstances. Now, a writer doesn't write a story and it just happens to turn out to be this magnificent allegory of Communism or Christianity. A writer sits down and projects her/his thoughts to paper. What develops from these thoughts are truly the writers brilliance. JKR projected her thoughts onto paper, and what has come out of these thoughts is truly brilliance. I give the author full credit for his/her creation. Yes, JKR intended to write a children's series, but the result was not only a children's series, but a complex story with many issues of our world. Her "thoughts" and "feelings" on paper are what make her an author, not her "intentions." Now, Let's go ahead and judge everyone by their "intentions." The court of law will only put people in jail for their "intentions," not their actual actions. Just imagine that world. As I have said, we must remember that the brain is very, very complex, and sometime are intentions that we think at the time are not really our true intentions, or we do something completely different that undermines our initial intentions. JKR said she sat down and first started writing as though she was talking down to the child, but then she decided to write the books only for herself, not for any child, and the HP series is the result. > Laurasia: > This point also goes back to my first impression that you considered > JKR "brilliant, skilled and clever." I don't. I think she's written > a few fun books. And I think the context she chose to put Harry into > had theme type of themes inbuilt into it. Zendemort: Humm... SHE built the context into which she put Harry. I have never read anything with such a context. I have read various fantasy literature, but NOTHING and I mean nothing like Harry Potter. It is completely unique. Yes, we might see some similarities here and there. The werewolf, the old wizard, the shape shifter... but adding these to her story doesn't necessarily make her books cliche ridden. In fact, it makes them unique. It's not the fact that they are what they are, but it is how she deals with them, what these figures represent in her books. I can tell you, I have never seen a werewolf represent an outcaste from society in the way Lupin is, distrusted and misjudged by the community just because of an illness, who cannot find a job because of prejudice and suspicion. It is much like someone with AIDS. This is part of JKR's brilliance. Her ability to integrate folklore, and use it as a means of displaying our society and its workings. > Laurasia: > I still stand by my opinion that *all* Fantasy literature has > conventions, themes and meanings inbuilt into it simply because > Fantasy literature is about the scientifically unexplainable. I > think that any story which works on a level where The Age of Reason > cannot explain it, it refers (however poorly or unimaginatively) to > the notion that there is a higher plane of existence above the > rational. Zendemort: Sorry, but I don't really see how "all" Fantasy literature has the same conventions and themes. I have come across many different types of Fantasy literature, and many, many are very different than the "conventions" associated with Fantasy. CS Lewis is fantasy, but it represents a christian allegory, this is very different from JKR where her books are essentially absent of any religious nature (although some themes come up which could be attributed to religion, her books attribute all significant power NOT to a god, but to the force itself). But, I will agree with you that fantasy does give "the notion that there is a higher plane of existence above rational." > Laurasia: > To use your reference to Jung's archetypes: It is cliche beyond > cliche to insert a wise white haired and beared wizard into Fantasy > stories who acts as the hero's mentor. I've seen it a thousand > times, and I continue to see it because this type of figure is, > according to Jung, an essential archetype which we all need to see > reaffirmed. The Mentor is somebody who we know we can immediately > trust who has experience and wisdom and who will illuminate what > path we must ultimately take. Mentor figures also are associated > with gift-giving. Zendemort: But, it's just that. In life, don't we all have mentors or have come across mentors. I certainly have. JKR's books are not just about following the "cliche" archetypes. They are about representing LIFE. And whether or not this is cliche, in most lives, there are mentors or "grandfather/mother" figures. I mean, you might as well go after the idea of including friends in her book as cliche. How many times has that been done? to give the protagonist friends? Come on, this is life! But you must realize that even her cliche of a mentor has his own character. Unlike many old grandfather mentors, Dumbledore is not just the nice old man, but eccentric and strange. He is not the know all nor is he the person to solve all, but is a person with much experience and knowledge that must also confront his weaknesses and difficulties. This aspect of Dumbledore is very interesting. Most cliche literature does not show the weakness of the mentor, but JKR DOES!!!!!! and this is part of what makes Dumbledore different form the mentor archetype. > Laurasia: > JKR also uses extensively the archetype of The Shapeshifter. But > werewolf stories are not new. Stories involving people who can > transform into animals at will are not new. Zendemort: No, shapeshifting is not new. But again, how JKR includes it in her book is very new. It seems that JKR is merging Native American folklore with western folklore. Animigus turns into the animal that symbolizes the personality of the person. This is very new. This merge between Native American thought and western folklore. > Laurasia: > She also uses Jung's archetype of the Shadow. But, really, a bad guy > who likes to dress in black? Not truly human, and not truly alive? > These are all very worn-in roles. And we all respond to them > because, like Jung says, we *need* these roles to appear so that we > can "play out" all these different roles which we would never get > the chance to live. Zendemort: Ummm... I've met really really bad guys who like to wear black!!! But then again I've met really really good guys who like to wear black!! If I remember correctly, what is the color of the Hogwart's uniform? I believe that it was, umm, BLACK!!!!!!! So the cliche of the bad guy in black is not really true, because it seems that the traditional clothes for people in the wizarding community is black. Yes, the bad guy wears black, but don't forget... SO DOES HARRY!!!!! Actually, Voldemort is not "worn-in." He is a part of the "dark side," which is cliche, yes. But his whole person is very different. He WAS a child, he WAS a person, and he has his story... Much like Hilter. He is very complex, because not only is he the bad guy who claims to be for purification of the wizarding race, he himself is not pure. He is half muggle, Now this is NOT cliche (well, maybe in history considering that there was speculation that Hilter was part jewish...) > Laurasia: > I don't agree that JKR acts on a purely technical level. I think she > acts on an intuitive level- the reason she inserted Dumbledore > wasn't because she was unoriginal and couldn't think of any ideas. I > think it was because he 'felt' right- as a subconscious level, right > where Jung's archetypes operate. So, I agree with what you've said > about universal themes. However, that to me only reinforces my > opinion that JKR is not "brilliant, skilled and clever" but merely > responding to a human need which only operates on a subconscious > level. Zendemort: Clearing, I disagree. None of her characters are unoriginal. They might take on appearances of what we are familiar with. But they themselves are unique and complex. This is what makes JKR brilliant, taking these "cliche ridden" characters and putting a spin on them, making them new and different. But that is my experience in life. when I meet someone new, that person is usually just a spin on someone I have already met. But This is the same with ideas.. the same with life. Chimps didn't spawn directly out of bacteria, but it took ages for chimps and humans to evolve, with each new creature putting a spin on an existing one. Einstein didn't think about his new theories out of thin air. They were merely spins on existing theories. From idcre at imap2.asu.edu Mon Aug 30 07:09:44 2004 From: idcre at imap2.asu.edu (backstagemystic) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 07:09:44 -0000 Subject: Snape and expulsion (Re: Who knows about the Prophecy?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111590 Meidbh wrote: > Then again, JKR did tell us not to get too fond of Snape (Book Day > talk with Stephen Fry). Much as I hate the thought I think he may > turn out to be a baddie after all... No, she did not say that in regard to Snape, she expressed concern about fans becoming too fond of Draco. Of Snape, she said we shouldn't think he's "TOO nice." Here's a transcript, verbatim and in context, of what she said about Snape (SF=Stephen Fry): ---------- SF: Whereas most of the characters like Snape, for example, who are very hard to love, but there's a sort of - ambiguity I think is probably the best word - you can't quite decide - there's something rather sad about Snape as well, something very lonely... JKR: Yes SF: ...and you kind of... although he turns out of course to have had such a wicked past... and uh, it's fascinating to watch how he's, you know...in the first book we thought he was going to be the evil one... JKR: [overlapping in agreement] Mm hmmm... SF: ...you know, apart from Voldemort, the most evil...and in the second we thought that...and then slowly we just get this idea that maybe he's not so bad after all." JKR: Yes, but you shouldn't - you shouldn't think he's...TOO nice... SF: No JKR: ...let me just say that." SF: Right. I shall bear that in mind. Worth watching Severus Snape. JKR: But he's worth keeping an eye on, old Severus, definitely. ------------------ BM From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Aug 30 07:17:03 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 07:17:03 -0000 Subject: How did Tom kill his father? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111591 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Brenda M." wrote: Brenda: > > Hmm, perhaps I watch too much X-Files or similar movies. I thought if > the case was this odd, then perhaps the top officers would hear about > it and deduce that it had to be magic. After all, there were 3 deaths > from prominent rich family. Presumably important people. > > Or, for all we know, the Muggle authorities might have learned the > existence of WW during Voldemort's reign of terror. When Muggle > police started wondering why there are so many unexplained death. Geoff: Bear in mind again that it would seem that this happened round about 1944, i.e. during World War II. Many unusual things happened during that period in all walks of life and "national security" often hushed them up. Even today in the UK, there are some facts are only just emerging into the light under that heading dating from well after the war. It was probably put into a manilla file marked "Unsolved Cases" and gradually pushed to the back of a filing cabinet in a police station somewhere near Little Hangleton. Geoff Group members are invited to enjoy the delights of Exmoor in pictures at http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk Mon Aug 30 07:55:03 2004 From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Hans=20Andr=E9a?=) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 08:55:03 +0100 (BST) Subject: A Conspiracy Theory to Beat them All Message-ID: <20040830075503.98761.qmail@web25103.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111592 You must have all come across conspiracy theories. They're rife at the moment: the moon landing was all a fake, the Illuminati run the world, 9/11 was organised by the CIA, crop circles, the Third Reich is now happily carrying on underground in Antarctica, etc. Well I've got a much bigger and more exciting one, much more radical and revolutionary than anything man has dreamt of for centuries. It's called Harry Potter. The theory runs like this: humanity thinks it's living in the real world but is actually living in hell. For thousands of years it's been indoctrinated to believe that this IS the real world. This indoctrination is so successful there's hardly any one who knows that this is hell. The world governments and religious leaders are also reinforcing the belief that this is the real world. People have stood up in the past and proclaimed that the real world is somewhere else, but they've either been cruelly suppressed or their assertions made to look ridiculous. One of the ways to make us think we're not in hell is to tell us that hell is full of fire and brimstone whereas hell is actually quite a pretty world, especially in summer. The hellish characteristic is not in its superficial appearance but its laws of endless reincarnation and of evil always balancing good. Harry Potter is an attempt by people, who have escaped to the real world, to tell us that we're all in hell and to give us a guide book on how to escape. Of course this guide book is extremely cleverly disguised, and written by an author who is a genius, but who is also open to inspiration by the escaped prisoners. Fortunately such guide books have also been written in the past, and by comparing them to Harry Potter we can see what its real purpose is. And that is to drive into the human subconscious the idea that there is a real world out there, and that by a process of liberation we can escape hell and re-enter the real world. The conspiracy theory states that after the secret message of the guide book has been absorbed by millions of people, and they've started to accept the idea, there will be real attempts to escape en masse. The way of escape is something like this. I'm oversimplifying. The human being who wants to escape has to have a strong motivation to do it, obviously. James Potter, the stag, symbolises that. The person also has to have pure motives, symbolised by Lilly. They give birth to Harry, a new soul, which is the real soul, belonging to the real world. He's immortal and quite alien to this world, which rejects him, symbolised by the Dursleys. The force in the human being which imprisons him through all his incarnations is symbolised by Voldemort. He knows that the new soul will liberate the human being and take him into the real world, where Voldemort can't exist, and so Voldemort has no choice but to kill the new soul. However he can't if the person is willing to sacrifice his temporary life in hell for the real life in the real world. The power of the prison governor, Voldemort, is neutralised and the new soul can grow despite the harsh conditions. The new soul has two companions who will enter the real world with him: the old, mortal soul, symbolised by Ron, and the intellectual consciousness, symbolised by Hermione. Ron has a pet which he cherishes: Scabbers, the symbol of the mortal human ego. By this ego I mean the defender of the physical body, the force we feel in the solar plexus when we sense danger. It's our assertiveness, and the force that causes blind panic when we feel our life is threatened. The immortal soul now proceeds to liberate the human being in seven steps. The immortal soul learns that seven chains keep it imprisoned in hell. 1. The first chain is the attachment to material things. The human being longs for health, a long life and great wealth. However the immortal soul is not interested in that and it wrests the symbol of those things away from Voldemort's attempt to get it. The immortal soul has freed the human being from attachment to material things. 2. The second chain is the etheric body, symbolised by Dobby the elf. The etheric body is a slave to the physical body, which is a vassal of Voldemort. The new soul liberates the etheric body, which now becomes a willing and useful helper of the new soul. 3. The third chain is fear. Fear is the most basic of all emotions, and is an inbuilt mechanism to ensure survival in hell. The immortal soul learns to overcome fear by the longing for liberation, which lives within him as the stag. At this stage of liberation the soul is given a guide. This guide is the original divine mental plan for the development of the immortal human being in the real world. It has been imprisoned by the human ego (Scabbers) which is a vassal of Voldemort. The ego knows that it can't enter the real world because it's one of the gaolers that imprison the human being in hell. Hence by imprisoning the mental plan for the development of the new soul, it thinks it can stop the escape. The mental plan for life in the real world is symbolised by Sirius Black, the "bright morning star" for the new soul. To symbolise his job as role model, he is called Harry's God-Father. He drives the rat out of his hidy-hole in the solar plexus and the ego escapes to Voldemort where it helps him fight the new soul. The next chain to break is the will. Harry, the new soul, learns to develop a new will, which can resist our prison-governor, Voldemort. Voldemort sees his very existence threatened, because it has been foretold that the immortal new soul has the power to vanquish him. He tries three times to dominate Harry: 1. by possessing Harry's mental ego (in the head); 2. by possessing his emotional ego (in the heart); 3. in the final attempt, by possessing Harry's central consciousness. Each time Voldemort fails. These are the last three chains to hold the human being to hell. Meanwhile, during the fifth stage, the mental plan for the development of the immortal soul, as symbolised by Sirius Black, precedes the new soul through the Gate of Saturn. Harry will follow Sirius through the Gate later. To the people in hell this gate seems to lead to death, (and it does to people without an immortal soul) but to the immortal soul it leads to the real world. The old mortal soul (Ron) and the intellect (Hermione) know that the only way Harry can enter the real world is for them to sacrifice themselves. They die for him, knowing that they will live on in him when he enters the real world. Harry at the end enters the real world, where Sirius is the Sun shining in Harry's eternal life. Voldemort and Scabbers have dissipated like smoke. But wait! Harry looks back at us who are still imprisoned and deluded. His heart burns with indescribable compassion and he returns to the prison, where he keeps the keys to the real world for those who want to escape. OK that's my theory. Tell me I'm insane; I can take it. But let me tell you this: the same story is told in the Bible, the Alchemical Wedding of Christian Rosycross, and many other books. Hans ===== Hans Rieuwers see you at Harry Potter for Seekers http://groups.yahoo.com/group/harrypotterforseekers/ Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies. http://au.movies.yahoo.com From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 30 09:18:59 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 05:18:59 -0400 Subject: Lupin visiting Sirius at Azkaban Message-ID: <000e01c48e72$62998260$27c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 111593 sad1199 here "If one of my very best freinds supposedly betrayed one of my other very best friends and the other best friend ended up dying... I think I would find that former best friend and confront them. I would beg and cry and yell and plead to find out what had happened. Now, it says in the books that Fudge visited Sirius in Azkaban and Crouch and his wife visited their son and did the big switcheroo. WHY DIDN'T LUPIN GO ASK SIRIUS WHAT HAPPENED?" DuffyPoo: I have this same problem with why Dumbledore didn't see Sirius and find out what happened. Since EVERYBODY knows Dumbledore (according to Mrs. Figg) and he's supposed to be the second most powerful wizard in the world, and he was begged to take the MoM job, knowing what he knew about the situation I just can't see that he couldn't have gotten a visit with Sirius in Azkaban and got the truth of the story from him. Even if Lupin couldn't have gotten in, being just a common wizard, there's no reason DD couldn't have coerced is way in there. sad1199 here "And! Crookshanks is part Kneazle and part what? Why is the cat so protective and friendly to Sirius? I'm thinking Crookshanks is someone that Sirius knows well. Anyone?" DuffyPoo: Crookshanks is half Kneezle and half cat. He is protective and friendly to Sirius, IMO, because they got to know and trust each other over the school year. Crookshanks knew Scabbers was no rat the second he saw him in the Magical Menagerie (the Kneazle part of Crookshanks) and tried to get rid of him. Then he met Snuffles in the school yard and Snuffles spent some time convincing him of what he was after, so they worked together to get Scabbers. Built quite a bond since they both where after the same thing. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Aug 30 11:52:14 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 11:52:14 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111594 > Kemper responds: > I'm suggesting Harry take a good look at his actions (or lack of). The value derived from doing so can allow him to be a better wizard and, in the end, a better human. Personal accountability is a major step towards maturity. Potioncat: Oops. I was talking about us. As a group we keep rehashing whether it was Snape's fault or Harry's that Black died, based entirely on the outcome of Occlumency.(I don't blame either one.) As for Harry, the person or the character, his behavior at the end of OoP is right on for a grieving person: anger and blame. Potioncat From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Aug 30 12:01:06 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:01:06 -0000 Subject: Is time changing or are people changing in time? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111595 Snow wrote: > I guess the reason I thought of this is because of dear old Albus and his crazy watch along with the dreaded time-turner situations: > How could Dumbledore have worked with Flamel in alchemy when Flamel is significantly older? Potioncat: We don't know how old Flammel was when they worked togeter...Look at this group. Some of us could be parents (dare I say grandparents?) or other members. Snow: > How did Dumbledore eat a vomit flavored Bernie Bott Bean in his youth when the company was established well after Dumbledore's considered youth? Potioncat: When was Bertie Botts founded? Snow: > Could Dumbledore time travel by altering his appearance so that no > one, including his former self, would recognize him? Is it possible that Albus is like Tonks, a metamorphagus? If Albus is a > metamorphagus, is he really as old as he appears? How would you know how old a metamorphagus is, really, unless you knew when exactly they were born? Potioncat: I would not be surprised to discover that DD was moving about in time. It fits in a modern sort of way with the Merlin stories (Merlin aged backwards.) But, unless he was only going back a short time, he wouldn't need to change his appearance. Trust me. You will not recognise your older self. You will look in the mirror one day in 10 or 20 years and say "Who is that old person?" If that same person greeted you on the street today, you would not think "Whoa! That's my older me!" >Snow: > And now the watch! Could Dumbledore be checking his watch to see > where else he is at another time in space? > > Potioncat: That's one of the best ideas about the watch I've ever read! From drliss at comcast.net Mon Aug 30 12:09:38 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (drliss at comcast.net) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:09:38 +0000 Subject: Lupin visiting Sirius in Azkaban Message-ID: <083020041209.9183.4133190100064BCD000023DF22007511509C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 111596 sad1199 here: If one of my very best freinds supposedly betrayed one of my other very best friends and the other best friend ended up dying... I think I would find that former best friend and confront them. I would beg and cry and yell and plead to find out what had happened. Now, it says in the books that Fudge visited Sirius in Azkaban and Crouch and his wife visited their son and did the big switcheroo. WHY DIDN'T LUPIN GO ASK SIRIUS WHAT HAPPENED? Yes, I am yelling. This is truly irritating me. In my fifth reread of PoA and have so many more questions now than before. I just can't belive that Lupin didn't go to Azkaban and confront Sirius. Also, how does the extreme personality change in Fudge get explained. In PoA he is SOOO concerned for Harry's safety; he blows off his underage wizarding and offers him refuge at the Leaky Cauldren, BUT! In OotP he is a complete horses behind to Harry. I know adults hate to admit they are wrong but the turn around is so totally 360, I can't buy that it's because Fudge does not want to admit he was wrong about the return of Voldemort. And! Crookshanks is part Kneazle and part what? Why is the cat so protective and friendly to Sirius? I'm thinking Crookshanks is someone that Sirius knows well. Anyone? Lissa: Well, first of all, do we know Lupin didn't try? When Fudge is permitted to go to Azkaban, he's Minister of Magic. In GoF, Sirius mentions that Barty Crouch Sr. was allowed a deathbed visit because he was such an important Ministry official. That tells me one does not simply waltz into Mordor- oops, Azkaban, demanding to see relatives or friends. Lupin has no "rank" whatsoever. If he were permitted into Azkaban, it would probably be thanks to Dumbledore. So maybe Lupin DID try, but simply wasn't allowed. (Perhaps Dumbledore wouldn't pull strings for it. If you had a student that you cared for deeply who had just undergone the loss that Lupin had, would you let him into a place swarming with Dementors?) A popular version of fanfic is also that Lupin himself spent some time in Azkaban, accused of being an accomplice of Sirius. No canon to support that, naturally, but no canon not to, either. Regardless, given that Lupin is the last one left and his close friendship with Sirius is pretty well known, you'd think he'd be dragged in for questioning. If it was Peter that had been "left alive" and Lupin that was dead, I'd think the questioners might be more sympathetic, but given Lupin's lycanthropy, I'm guessing those two things added together made him look pretty suspicious. Lastly, Lupin may have very well feared for his life. (Or other people may have.) By all accounts, Sirius killed three of his four friends. I've always thought one of the reasons Dumbledore dragged Lupin to Hogwarts in PoA was because he was worried that Sirius was also after Lupin as well as Harry. Granted, there probably isn't much Sirius could do in Azkaban, but.... I also wonder if there's more to Fudge's turn around than meets the eye. As for Crookshanks, I think he's part Kneazle and part cat. JKR has specifically said that Crookshanks is not an Animagus, so I'm thinking that's all there is to him, right there. Sirius mentions it took time to win Crookshanks over, so it's not like the cat had an instant affinity for him. Anyway, that's my take! Lissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Aug 30 12:20:48 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:20:48 -0000 Subject: Trelawney as a Seer/teacher In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111597 > HunterGreen: > I think that's very true (although I do think she has more seer > ability than just the two prophecies). The problem with divination is > not the teacher but the subject itself. There's such a small > percentage of seers out there that it seems silly to devote a class > to it. And in the case of a student (like Ron for example) who might > actually be a seer, its harder to recognize it in a classroom full of > students. Personally, I think that Trelawnley should be available for > private tutoring in case a seer comes along who would like > instruction. > Or perhaps divination 'theory' should be the main part of the class > with very limited time devoted to trying to make predictions. That > way they would learn about the subject without wasting time looking > into crystal balls and such (although it might make for a rather > boring class). Finwitch: Trelawney as a Seer: She predicted: 'One of our number will leave us around Easter'. Hermione DID leave around Easter, thus fulfilling the prophecy Trelawney had made. I doubt it was just a good guess, considering even the time was given. Hermione could have chosen to leave around Christmas or any other time - she chose Easter, just as Trelawney had predicted. Hermione could have chosen another time, just to _prove_ that Trelawney is a fraud. She didn't. Instead she left 'around Easter' and so doing, proved her right. It may be based on experience, (a critic like Hermione _always_ left around Easter during her previous years), but never the less, it proved true, and it wasn't like those two *very* true prophecies! I think she _is_ a true Seer. I mean really, all she said DID come true, except for Harry (and others, according to McGonagall) being still alive. And also, if you change radically, the "old you" is dead. Harry, after meeting his 'grim' was no longer the same Harry: now he had someone to trust. (and um - he *almost* got himself kissed AND killed by a werewolf...! and secondly, Harry WILL die eventually, he's only human, after all...) Trelawney's main lesson is: "You're mortals. It means you will die. Bad things happen out there, and they WILL involve you, too. Prepare yourselves". She just takes all the drama out of it! And it is true... better check insurance... I wonder, though, whether there has been a third prophecy trough her, one that Percy witnessed. (And Percy didn't tell Dumbledore about it). After all, he's the one who recommended Divination to Harry... ------- Teacher: Indeed, she gives them the basic knowledge of all sorts of predictions. A good thing, I think. Tea leaves, Palm Reading, Astrology (which will at least help you know your Astronomy), Crystal Ball, Tarot Cards... How about Auguiries? Did they, perhaps, do it on Toads after Harry got his 'vision' (trough the scar) and, when Neville had to disembowel Toads for Snape, he was doing Auguiry on them, and the result was *very* unpleasant - possibly what happened in the end of the fifth book - he would be subject to the torture curse by the same person who tortured his parent...? I mean really, he WAS a nervous break-down, and as gentle as Neville is, he's ALSO been trough so much that well... bad omens to add with having to be alone with the boggart- like Professor Snape? Finwitch From squeakinby at tds.net Mon Aug 30 12:30:37 2004 From: squeakinby at tds.net (squeakinby) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 08:30:37 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] A Conspiracy Theory to Beat them All In-Reply-To: <20040830075503.98761.qmail@web25103.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <20040830075503.98761.qmail@web25103.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41331DED.5090301@tds.net> No: HPFGUIDX 111598 Hans Andra wrote: > The theory runs like this: humanity thinks it's living > in the real world but is actually living in hell. For > thousands of years it's been indoctrinated to believe > that this IS the real world. This indoctrination is so > successful there's hardly any one who knows that this > is hell. The world governments and religious leaders > are also reinforcing the belief that this is the real > world. Um...and who started the indoctrination? The Illuminati? The Jesuits? The Reptilians from Niburu? The Philadelphs? The Black Hand? Jem From streamerrules1 at hotmail.com Mon Aug 30 02:58:59 2004 From: streamerrules1 at hotmail.com (spandexmonkeyssmell) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 02:58:59 -0000 Subject: Book Two Discoveries! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111599 Josh: > > Hmm, well a Q&A did imply that we might find out what would have > happened if Tom had been successful with Ginny, so perhaps some > aspect of it... > I think that Tom Riddle may have let some clue slip unwittingly during his speech to Harry. Were I less lazy I'd read it. Perhaps something to do with Voldemort's (im)mortality, which is another theme J.K. tells us to look into. From sunflowerlaw at cox.net Mon Aug 30 07:49:35 2004 From: sunflowerlaw at cox.net (Lindsay W.) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 00:49:35 -0700 Subject: Why is Tonks clumbsy? Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040830004025.01eaaec0@pop.west.cox.net> No: HPFGUIDX 111600 Hi, I'm Lawless. Long time lurker, first time poster. I thought I'd bring something up, perhaps you all already have discussed this to great length before I signed up for the group, maybe not. :) Tonks. She's clumsy, we know this. In practically every scene where we see Tonks, she's clumsy. It's overly exagerrated, to a point. Why? Yes, she may be a great spy with her Metamorphagus abilities, but she can't walk down the hall without tripping over something. When I first read OotP, my questions regarding Tonks were - WHY is she in the Aurory if she's liable to fall over all the time? Do her spying abilities so outweigh the risks of her tripping over something and blowing an operation by the out-of-characterness of it? I couldn't justify "she's just that good" when faced with the risks. But as I revisited this connuudrum later on, an interesting question came to mind - WHY is Tonks clumby? She's a Metamorphagus...in theory (it would seem obvious to me, at least) she should be able to change her body so that it "feels" right, correct? The correct height, correct build...everything. So why doesn't she? Barring a "it just doesn't work like that" explaination. Maybe Tonks as we know her...is a disguise. OR...Tonks spends so much time in disguise that she can't easily adjust to her "original" body. Bear with me, here, because I go out on a limb. Men and women have different centers of balance. If you suddenly turned a man into a woman, he would, theoretically, have to get used to the lower center of balance, and vice-versa. Perhaps the reason for her clumbsiness is: A) She's "really" a he and has a hard time adjusting to the female center of balance. or B) She is a she, but spends a majority of her time as a he, so that when she finally becomes a female again, she has an extremely hard time getting used to it, again. Now, I /want/ to strike out B because she mentioned that she was clumsy in her Auror tests. But that could always be a cover-up. B still has a problem, though, because she would still be clumsy in her male "spy" body for a while as she readjusts again. So instead of one-clumsy form, one-not we see in example A, we have two clumsy Tonks in example B. So yes, I would lean towards A being an explaination, over B. Now, I don't bring up these theories of Tonks in a sense that she's ESE!Tonks hiding this from the Order. I don't doubt Tonks's loyalties, but that clumbsiness has been nagging me greatly. And these are all far-out guesses as to WHY Tonks is "really" male, with no real canon backup, rather than her preference to her masculine surname over her first name, and her unexplained clumbsiness. Nymphadora /could/ be a fake name - she was burned from the Black Family Tree, so we can only go on the Order's word, and I don't put it past them to be...deceptive. Or Nymphadora could be her real name - male children have been named stranger things. Or...the fact that she is a male was hidden from the Wizarding World, and she was trained early on to hide it, for whatever reason. Maybe because...*shifty glance around* *whispers* Tonksisthehalfbloodprince. *whistles* Any thoughts to my Tonks-is-a-guy theory? Ignoring that last HBP-crazed bit, though. It's the summer heat, I swear! ...although she /is/ half-blood, and we can't REALLY know her gender...or her age, for that matter (she could really be OldMan!Tonks)...it could all be a lie... --Lawless From tinainfay at msn.com Mon Aug 30 12:00:08 2004 From: tinainfay at msn.com (mrs_sonofgib) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:00:08 -0000 Subject: Lupin visiting Sirius at Azkaban In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111601 > sad1199 here: > If one of my very best freinds supposedly betrayed one of my other > very best friends and the other best friend ended up dying... I > think I would find that former best friend and confront them. I > would beg and cry and yell and plead to find out what had happened. > Now, it says in the books that Fudge visited Sirius in Azkaban and > Crouch and his wife visited their son and did the big switcheroo. > WHY DIDN'T LUPIN GO ASK SIRIUS WHAT HAPPENED? > Tina here: Fudge wasn't visiting Sirius, he was inspecting and Sirius asked for his newspaper. He was there in an official capacity. POA Am PB 209 "Yet I met Black on my last inspection of Azkaban.... He spoke quite rationally to me." As far as the Crouch family goes, Crouch was allowed a visit to his son because he was a higher up Ministry official. GOF Am PB 529 Sirius notes "Crouch being an important Ministry member, he and his wife were allowed a deathbed visit." So, this makes me wonder if visitors are allowed at all? We do not know what was going on with Lupin either way - would he have liked to confront Sirius (but was unable to) or is he just more a head-in- the-sand type? ~tina From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk Mon Aug 30 12:39:45 2004 From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Hans=20Andr=E9a?=) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:39:45 +0100 (BST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] A Conspiracy Theory to Beat them All In-Reply-To: <41331DED.5090301@tds.net> Message-ID: <20040830123945.79473.qmail@web25107.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111602 Hans wrote: > The world governments and religious leaders > are also reinforcing the belief that this is the real > world. --- squeakinby wrote: Um...and who started the indoctrination? The Illuminati? The Jesuits? The Reptilians from Niburu? The Philadelphs? The Black Hand? --------------------- Voldemort did. Hans (Seriously - I assume from the tone of the question that the answer is not obvious to you. Well, whom does Voldemort symbolise on a cosmic level?) ===== Hans Rieuwers see you at Harry Potter for Seekers http://groups.yahoo.com/group/harrypotterforseekers/ Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies. http://au.movies.yahoo.com From tinainfay at msn.com Mon Aug 30 12:12:02 2004 From: tinainfay at msn.com (mrs_sonofgib) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:12:02 -0000 Subject: Is time changing or are people changing in time? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111603 > > Snow: > > How did Dumbledore eat a vomit flavored Bernie Bott Bean in his > youth when the company was established well after Dumbledore's > considered youth? > > Potioncat: > When was Bertie Botts founded? > Tina here: I've wondered about the Bertie Bott's 'flint' (IMHO) before. On JKR's site, Bertie Bott was wizard of the month and he was born in 1935 (or possibly the company was founded in 1935 - not certain but 1935 is correct). DD, if using linear time, would definitely not qualify as a youth at that point. As this info appears in the first book, I'll give JKR a break. She may not have had every detail perfectly aligned at that point. Or she may have DD moving through time etc, etc. ~tina, who doesn't claim to have it all figured out! From tinainfay at msn.com Mon Aug 30 12:19:25 2004 From: tinainfay at msn.com (mrs_sonofgib) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:19:25 -0000 Subject: Lupin visiting Sirius in Azkaban In-Reply-To: <083020041209.9183.4133190100064BCD000023DF22007511509C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111604 sad1199: > WHY DIDN'T LUPIN GO ASK SIRIUS WHAT HAPPENED? > > > > Lissa: > So maybe Lupin DID try, but simply wasn't allowed. (Perhaps Dumbledore wouldn't pull strings for it. If you had a student that you cared for deeply who had just undergone the loss that Lupin had, would you let him into a place swarming with Dementors?) Tina here again: A better question might be - why didn't DD visit Sirius? He was the one to initiate the Secret Keeper set up. If it went badly wrong, wasn't he obligated to figure out what happened? He has the clout to go to Azkaban if anyone does, I would think. I guess we're back to DD the puppetmaster. ~tina From terpnurse at qwest.net Mon Aug 30 12:40:49 2004 From: terpnurse at qwest.net (Steven Spencer) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 05:40:49 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Book Two Discoveries! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111605 spandexmonkeyssmell wrote: > I think that Tom Riddle may have let some clue slip unwittingly > during his speech to Harry. Were I less lazy I'd read it. Perhaps > something to do with Voldemort's (im)mortality, which is another > theme J.K. tells us to look into. > Terpnurse: Ya know, something else Harry learned in CoS (both in the book and in the Forbidden Media - where it might easily have been cut) is the fact the Lucius has other things hidden away at his house that once belonged to Tom Riddle. That's such a vague clue - and one repeated by three characters; DD, Draco, and Arthur Weasley - that we're forced to wonder just *what* else the Malfoys have in their own secret chamber. From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com Mon Aug 30 12:53:42 2004 From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:53:42 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?FILK:_Look_Out,_You=92re_Melding_With_Vold?= Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111606 Look Out, You're Melding With Vold To the tune of Look Out, You're Rocking The Boat, from Frank Loesser's Guys and Dolls http://www.hamienet.com/cat1712.html HARRY: I dreamed last night I that I spoke to Cho of Frog Cards But soon it changed - I had turned into a snake And then I hissed, and I'm plunging Fangs in someone But the OOP, they knew what's at stake For the Order all said, "Look out, look out, you're meldin' with Vold." THE ORDER: The Order said, "Look out, look out, you're meldin' with Vold." HARRY: "As the Dark Lord divides your essence With a smoky snake in a formless mold Look out, look out, look out, look out, HARRY & THE ORDER: Look out, you're meldin' with Vold." HARRY: I trailed THE ORDER: Ooohh... HARRY: .away on a little trip to dreamland And by some chance found my fists clenched to a chair, And there I sat, I'm harassing poor old Rookwood, But the OOP soon learned of this lair For the Aurors all said, "Beware!" THE ORDER: Aurors all said, "beware, beware!" HARRY: You're trapped and may not escape." Aurors all said, "beware!" THE ORDER: Aurors all said, "beware!" HARRY: "Please do your lessons with Snape; For the Dark Lord now gives you visions So he may be sure that you'll be controlled Look out, HARRY & THE ORDER: Look out, look out, look out, Look out, you're meldin' with Vold." HARRY: And as THE ORDER: Ooohh.. HARRY: I reached the row that's numbered ninety-seven Ah, ah, ah, ah! A great dark shape moved and then with pain it roared And as Black sank, and he hollered, "Someone save me," At that moment I became the Dark Lord! THE ORDER: The Dark Lord, The Dark Lord! HARRY: And I said to myself, "Look out," THE ORDER: Said to himself, "Look out, look out," HARRY: "Look out, you've melded with Vold." Said to myself, "Look out," THE ORDER: Said to himself, "Look out," HARRY: "Look out, you've melded with Vold." And my godfather will be tortured THE ORDER: And his godfather will be tortured HARRY: With a piercing pain till he's dead and cold Look out, HARRY & THE ORDER: Look out, look out, look out, look out, "Look out, you've melded with Vold." THE ORDER Look out, you've melded Melded with Vold Look out, you've melded Melded with Vold Look out, you've melded Melded with Vold Look out, you've melded Melded with Vold... Look out, you've melded with Vold - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm (updated today with 65 new filks) From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Aug 30 13:00:30 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:00:30 -0000 Subject: Where is our Prince? (was Re: My very own personal HBP theory) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111607 > Meidbh: > Our prince is a Halfblood so his title could come from either the WW > or Muggleworld. As I said in my previous post, I'm really not > convinced that JKR would bring RW royalty into her world (though > ancient royalty in the form of King Arthur does get a mention). So > far she has been careful to keep references to the Muggle world very > general. > > And as far as we know none of the old families, the purebloods, > appear to be titled. Now. In fact other than our self proclaimed > Lord VM there we've seen no contemporary titled WWfolk at all. > > So where is our prince? > > Well, there appear to have been stronger links and similarities > between Muggle society and the WW in the past, at least before the > International Statute of Wizarding Secrecy of 1692. And we do have > evidence of titled magical folk in the past. We have Sir Cadogan, a > portrait knight in armour and the ghost Sir Patrick Delaney-Podmore > of the Headless Hunt. Morgana le Fey, King Arthurs sorceress half > sister, was Queen of Avalon. And of course, my personal favourite > (), Queen Maeve was a mediaeval Irish witch (ref: JKRs chocolate > frog cards). > > So our Prince may well be a blast from the WW past. Finwitch: How about _Merlin_? Like Sirius (the another person-title), Merlin has been mentioned by name before his appearance. After all, Merlin was a halfling 'half-human', half-magic (does that mean: half-Muggle, a.ka half blood in present terms?). In one story, Merlin was imprisoned (like Sirius, again!) by someone he once trusted (in Merlin's case, a woman he loved, and taught all his skills to her). What if this prison kept him alive trough all these centuries, unaware of the World - now escapes his prison? Merlin would Not Know of any International Statute of Secrecy or any other wiz. law.... Indeed... Merlin. All wizards would be pleased to notice his escape as much as they were displeased to notice Sirius' escape (which goes with the pattern - in the titles: Object, Properties known, but location secreted by the goodies (propable bait to get Voldemort out). Secret opened again, revealed by goodies. Person, first believed a very bad person by *everyone*, but turns out to be innocent in the end. Four: Object, properties (portkey-address, fourth participant) made unknown by the baddies, Location known to all. Fifth: Secret of the goods, long since discovered, but secreted/opened again) So good the next one mean a person everyone believes is good, but turns out not to be? I think _Merlin_ is the only one who'd get universal support... but what if he's a baddie? Finwitch From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk Mon Aug 30 13:00:32 2004 From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:00:32 -0000 Subject: Lupin visiting Sirius at Azkaban/Crookshanks/Fudge In-Reply-To: <000e01c48e72$62998260$27c2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111608 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > sad1199 here > "If one of my very best freinds supposedly betrayed one of my other > very best friends and the other best friend ended up dying... I > think I would find that former best friend and confront them. I > would beg and cry and yell and plead to find out what had happened. > Now, it says in the books that Fudge visited Sirius in Azkaban and > Crouch and his wife visited their son and did the big switcheroo. > WHY DIDN'T LUPIN GO ASK SIRIUS WHAT HAPPENED?" > > DuffyPoo: > I have this same problem with why Dumbledore didn't see Sirius and find out what happened. Since EVERYBODY knows Dumbledore (according to Mrs. Figg) and he's supposed to be the second most powerful wizard in the world, and he was begged to take the MoM job, knowing what he knew about the situation I just can't see that he couldn't have gotten a visit with Sirius in Azkaban and got the truth of the story from him. Even if Lupin couldn't have gotten in, being just a common wizard, there's no reason DD couldn't have coerced is way in there. Alshain: If it hadn't been for the Secret-Keeper business, I think Dumbledore and Lupin might have been more likely to distrust the evidence against Sirius. But since only four persons had known that Peter, not Sirius, was the Secret-Keeper, two of them being dead, Peter missing and presumed dead, with Sirius left on the scene of crime looking like the obvious suspect caught red-handed, I think the Sherlock Holmes principle applies: "When you have excluded the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." As far as Dumbledore and Lupin knew, Sirius had been the Secret-Keeper, and only the Secret-Keeper could have betrayed the Potters. Peter's Animagus abilities were a well-kept secret - if WPP had registered it's possible that the Ministry would have looked into it. What if a Muggle witness saw Peter turn into a rat and either refused to believe it or wasn't believed by the Ministry? I don't know if Lupin had suspected Sirius of being the spy before (I have an unfounded belief that Peter was working behind the scenes there), but if he had, his suspicions would have been verified. What if Sirius's betrayal of the Potters disgusted him so much that he washed his hands of him? > sad1199 here > "And! Crookshanks is part Kneazle and part what? Why is the cat so > protective and friendly to Sirius? I'm thinking Crookshanks is > someone that Sirius knows well. Anyone?" > > DuffyPoo: > Crookshanks is half Kneezle and half cat. He is protective and friendly to Sirius, IMO, because they got to know and trust each other over the school year. Crookshanks knew Scabbers was no rat the second he saw him in the Magical Menagerie (the Kneazle part of Crookshanks) and tried to get rid of him. Then he met Snuffles in the school yard and Snuffles spent some time convincing him of what he was after, so they worked together to get Scabbers. Built quite a bond since they both where after the same thing. > Alshain agrees and adds: According to Fanastic Beasts, Kneazles are supposed to have an inborn "uncanny ability to detect unsavoury or suspicious characters..." and I suppose it might work in the opposite direction as well to make them recognise loyalty and trustworthiness. If you take the story-external view, Crookshanks's protective behaviour is of course a clue that things aren't what they appear to be, even though no one knew the first thing of Kneazles back then. Here's a thought, by the way: What if Hagrid had held a lesson on Kneazles and mentioned their abilities during PoA? Do you think that kind of clue would have been too obvious? (It would have given Ron and Hermione a new subject to bicker about: "I'm telling you, Ron, my clever Crookshanks's got Kneazle heritage!" "No, he hasn't! He's just a stupid mad cat!") Re: Fudge: Fudge's *personality* is unchanged, as I see it. Throughout the books he's a self-serving politician with a position and a love for power above his abilities, dependent on advice from others, with a weakness for flattery and notions about pure-blood supremacy. The great change is in Fudge's *perception of Harry*. In the beginning of PoA he sees Harry as the innocent baby hero of the Wizarding World, a child who has to be pampered and protected and someone who can one day turn into a valuable ally. It doesn't cost him a thing to show himself fond of Harry Potter. In the end of GoF and in OotP Harry has developed into a threat against his legitimacy and his power, and Rita Skeeter has alerted him to facts he can use against Harry. Fudge uses every contemptible technique there is to brush Harry aside and vilify him, because taking Harry seriously is going to cost him a great deal. Alshain From tinainfay at msn.com Mon Aug 30 13:00:45 2004 From: tinainfay at msn.com (mrs_sonofgib) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:00:45 -0000 Subject: Why is Tonks clumbsy? In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040830004025.01eaaec0@pop.west.cox.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111609 Lawless wrote: > She's "really" a he and has a hard time adjusting to the female center > of balance. > And these are all far-out guesses as to WHY Tonks is "really" male, with no > real canon backup, rather than her preference to her masculine surname over > her first name, and her unexplained clumbsiness. > Tina says: A lot to think about... Would explain why she hates her name - nymph by definition points to a female spirit. I definitely think there is something to her clumsiness and your explanation of being off balance makes sense.... Thanks for giving me something new to ponder! ~tina From alina at distantplace.net Mon Aug 30 13:19:29 2004 From: alina at distantplace.net (Alina) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 09:19:29 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why is Tonks clumbsy? References: Message-ID: <002501c48e93$fbe71a60$6500a8c0@Pandemonium> No: HPFGUIDX 111610 > Lawless wrote: > > > She's "really" a he and has a hard time adjusting to the female > center > > of balance. > > > And these are all far-out guesses as to WHY Tonks is "really" > male, with no > > real canon backup, rather than her preference to her masculine > surname over > > her first name, and her unexplained clumbsiness. > > > Actually, your theory gives new light to Tonks' words to Lupin, "You'd go by your last name too if your mother named you Nymphadora." Sorry, that's paraphrased. If Tonks is indeed a man, then those words make even more sense, don't they? It's not really canon evidence, but it's something. Alina. From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Aug 30 13:19:57 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:19:57 -0000 Subject: FILK: Whatever Became of Norbert? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111611 Whatever Became of Norbert A Filk by Pippin To the tune of "Whatever Became of Hubert" by Tom Lehrer Original lyrics at http://members.aol.com/quentncree/lehrer/hubert.htm Dedicated to CMC -- and everyone who's old enough to remember when Hubert Humphrey was VP Whatever became of Norbert? Has anyone heard a thing? He was big in Book One But with his part done We've seen not a scale or wing Hagrid's miniature Norwegian dragon Harry's saga without him is saggin' We've got Grawp in Phoenix, I know, Still I get out the Kleenex and blow. "We must protest this treatment, Norbert," says each Potterverse reader. As Rita wrote, dishing more dirt, "Hagrid's a skrewt breeder." (Sorry about that) Whatever became of Norbert We miss you, so tell us please. Are you wild? Are you tame? Are you still just the same? Shooting flame in a fiery sneeze? Does Hagrid recalling when you were his own Say, "Poor baby Norbert, now where do you roam?" Do you dream you came back in Book Two? Norbert, what happened to you? From snow15145 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 30 14:28:13 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 14:28:13 -0000 Subject: Is time changing or are people changing in time? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111612 Snow wrote previously: > I guess the reason I thought of this is because of dear old Albus and his crazy watch along with the dreaded time-turner situations: > How could Dumbledore have worked with Flamel in alchemy when Flamel is significantly older? Potioncat: We don't know how old Flammel was when they worked togeter...Look at this group. Some of us could be parents (dare I say grandparents?) or other members. Snow: The sorcerers stone was to ensure Flammel eternal life. If Flammel worked with Dumbledore in the making of the stone, Flammel would have already been over 500 years old at the time Dumbledore was born, what use was the stone to him if he could live that long before making it. Flammel was 665 years old in 1991 and Dumbledore was said, by JKR in an interview, to be 150. Snow previously: > How did Dumbledore eat a vomit flavored Bernie Bott Bean in his youth when the company was established well after Dumbledore's considered youth? Potioncat: When was Bertie Botts founded? Snow: The Lexicon states that Bertie Bott Beans were created by mistake in 1935. This information was found on a Famous Wizard Card. This would have made Dumbledore somewhere around 94 years old when the beans were first invented, a bit old even by wizarding standards to call it his youth. Snow previously: > Could Dumbledore time travel by altering his appearance so that no > one, including his former self, would recognize him? Is it possible that Albus is like Tonks, a metamorphagus? If Albus is a > metamorphagus, is he really as old as he appears? How would you know how old a metamorphagus is, really, unless you knew when exactly they were born? Potioncat: I would not be surprised to discover that DD was moving about in time. It fits in a modern sort of way with the Merlin stories (Merlin aged backwards.) But, unless he was only going back a short time, he wouldn't need to change his appearance. Trust me. You will not recognise your older self. You will look in the mirror one day in 10 or 20 years and say "Who is that old person?" If that same person greeted you on the street today, you would not think "Whoa! That's my older me!" Snow: LOL! I always say what's my mother doing in that mirror! I wrote a fairly good poem about this subject once called in the blink of an eye because that's how fast it happens. As far as Dumbledore changing to go back in time, I would think it would be a safety measure to ensure that he could move around without being noticed by himself or anyone else, which would make it less likely that he would alter time. Snow previously: > And now the watch! Could Dumbledore be checking his watch to see > where else he is at another time in space? > Potioncat: That's one of the best ideas about the watch I've ever read! Snow: Thanks! It's just that one statement by Dumbledore that haunts me, where he says to Fudge as he looks at his watch "I'll give you one hour of my time tonight". I realize it could simply be a way of talking but I don't think so it sounds like something more than that. From u3232865 at student.anu.edu.au Mon Aug 30 13:17:02 2004 From: u3232865 at student.anu.edu.au (colbernays) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:17:02 -0000 Subject: Owls to hidden places/people In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111613 > Deb in NJ wrote: > 1. If an owl can find a man on the run from dementors and part of a > huge manhunt (CoS), why did no-one in the ministry think to send > a "Dear Sirius, hope you are well" letter and just track the owl?? Given that JKR said this couldn't be done, I found Umbridge being able to intercept Hedwig in OotP interesting, as owls generally go where they want, straight to their recipient. I mean it would be a lot harder to trap each owl, than simply checking all the mail when it passes through the office, as would be done in the muggle world. Colin From lszydlowski at hotmail.com Mon Aug 30 15:18:30 2004 From: lszydlowski at hotmail.com (mizstorge) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 15:18:30 -0000 Subject: Why is Tonks clumsy? In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040830004025.01eaaec0@pop.west.cox.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111614 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lindsay W." (akaLawless) wrote: - WHY is she in the Aurory if she's liable to fall over all the time? Do her spying abilities so outweigh the risks of her tripping over something and blowing an operation by the out-of-characterness of it? I couldn't justify "she's just that good" when faced with the risks. But as I revisited this connuudrum later on, an interesting question came to mind - WHY is Tonks clumsy? -snippets of post- Her clumsiness is one reason I wouldn't be surprised if she turns out to be ESE!Tonks. On the other hand, I've wondered about where Dumbledore could get a Care of Magical Creatures teacher on the spur of the moment. Nymphadora Tonks = Professor Grubbly-Plank, anyone? From ellydan at yahoo.com Mon Aug 30 15:44:49 2004 From: ellydan at yahoo.com (Melete) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 08:44:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Theory of theme & Jung's Archetypes & Love --long In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040830154449.12157.qmail@web40809.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111615 --- zendemort wrote: > > Laurasia: > > > > And I'm afraid I disagree with you on how we > should evaluate an > > author's brilliance. I don't think its fair to > evaluate a > > *work* on what the author's intentions were- the > work should > > stand by itself. HOWEVER, I *do* think it's fair > to evaluate an > > author on what their intentions were. > > Melete: I find this a very complex and strange idea. Generally speaking as a literture student, its quite difficult to evaluate author's intentions without having the author to pick over yourself. I've always felt biographical and authorial studies to be very faulty. We are making suppositions without hard evidence. We can really only draw conclusions from the text as to what is being said, what archetypes could be employed. Even then it is a sticky business to talk about author's intentions. We know Lewis wrote allegory because he freely admits to it. Outside of that it is reader inference. > > > Laurasia: > > For example: If George Orwell just wrote a book > about a farm and > > pigs taking over (Animal Farm) then I would still > allow the books > > itself to be an allegory of Communism, but I would > give Orwell no > > credit for it as an author. If C.S. Lewis just > wrote a series of > > books about a magic wardrobe (The Chronicle of > Narnia) I would > still > > appreciate the book as an allegory of > Christianity, but give no > > credit to Lewis as an accomplished writer. > Melete: But why not give credit to Lewis or Orwell. Yes allegory is an old device but the fact that other author's have employed such devices does not detract from the author's own skilled use of it. If you are so hard on author's but love the work of their labor I would hate to see what you make of Shakespeare and Chaucer. > > > Laurasia: > > This point also goes back to my first impression > that you > considered > > JKR "brilliant, skilled and clever." I don't. I > think she's > written > > a few fun books. And I think the context she chose > to put Harry > into > > had theme type of themes inbuilt into it. > Melete: Ah the old fantasy as unoriginal idea. I wonder why more readers aren't harder on 'mainstream fiction/literature'. We seem to find obvious uses of archetypes trying only in fantasy and science fiction. *can you tell this is a bit of a bugaboo for me?* Perhaps I might find Harry Potter unoriginal if it was blatantly ripping ideas from other authors without any good plot development, characterization etc. It is not the staid epic fantasy with mage, knight, thief, princess warrior with unpronounceable names made up by sound perhaps. And even if it was, if the book was employing said character types and genre in an interesting or beautiful way then I should not mind it. If we think back to oh say Early Modern English (Shakespeare), the idea behind a good writer then was not how original the idea or character types were. Instead it was how successfully the author handled them: the characters, the language, the plot devices. Let it not be said that Shakespeare was original (as far as plot and character go..he filched those as it was acceptable to do) or Chaucer for that matter. *Only 2 examples but earlier literature (pre 20th century) is rife with this idea. Authors and audience accepted the idea that not everything is new under the sun, but a new handling a new way of turning a phrase and recreating an old idea are still to be respected. Look how Shakespeare took Petrarchan sonnets and turned them on their head (by working with the conventions and then turning them back on themselves.) The fair maiden whom the sonneteer is wasting away in love for becomes the dark lady who destroys and the fair young man who is the muse. I'm only using Shakespeare because he is something I'm sure everyone has studied. > > > Laurasia: > > I still stand by my opinion that *all* Fantasy > literature has > > conventions, themes and meanings inbuilt into it > simply because > > Fantasy literature is about the scientifically > unexplainable. I > > think that any story which works on a level where > The Age of > Reason > > cannot explain it, it refers (however poorly or > unimaginatively) > to > > the notion that there is a higher plane of > existence above the > > rational. > I can agree that fantasy points to some difference in how we perceive the world. But with the many subgenres, I can hardly say they follow all the conventions. I think fantasy works very well in a way that regular fiction cannot. It can deal with issues to hard to swallow perhaps when presented in prosaic circumstances. Look at how Tolkien perhaps dealt with some of his own confusion over how the world was changing around him during the two Great Wars. The way his characters deal with the same situations presents some of the most lyrical representations of bravery and humanity I have read. And as far as using archetypes at a concious or subconsious level, I do not think this is necessarily a sign of regurgitation and mediocrity in writing. Even if it is at subconcious level it shows a depth of thought and a connection to themes that are deeper and more intrinsic that most humanity can recognize. This is the reason fairy tales, myths and great pieces of literature still exist. They deal with the archetypes, the hero's quest our deepest values and reveal truths to us that perhaps on our own we might not have recognized. (Certainly notice just how many fairies are actually in fairy tales and what issues they are dealing with...abandonment, abuse, survival). These themes are recurrent in HP as well. Just think of the way the books are cyclic (they always begin and end in the same place.) Harry is staying the summer at the Dursleys where he is abused, neglected and powerless. Then he returns to Hogwarts where he is loved, cared for and very powerful. At the end of the year having defeated the obstacle presented to him, he returns to the muggle world. I do think the planning and execution of such a pattern was deliberate on JK's part but whether or not she recognizes the depth to such a journey does not lessen her skill. She is certainly attuned to these deeper parts of the collective subconcious. Her worldwide popularity attests to that. I just think it is important to recognize this as also a sign of a particularly adept author. She certainly did a lot of research in naming her characters, drawing connections, carefully planning her plot. I think it does her a great disservice to not recognize her when recognizing the books she has written. You may be able to separate them when studying but ultimately she is the author and the person that put pen to page. Just giving her some of her dues in my own convoluted way... Melete ---rather longwinded and rambling again. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Aug 30 16:10:36 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:10:36 -0000 Subject: Theory of theme & Jung's Archetypes & Love In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111616 Laurasia: > I don't agree that JKR acts on a purely technical level. I think she acts on an intuitive level- the reason she inserted Dumbledore wasn't because she was unoriginal and couldn't think of any ideas. I think it was because he 'felt' right- as a subconscious level, right where Jung's archetypes operate. So, I agree with what you've said about universal themes. However, that to me only reinforces my opinion that JKR is not "brilliant, skilled and clever" but merely responding to a human need which only operates on a subconscious level. Pippin: Let me see if I understand what you're saying here. Since we, unlike, for example, the ancient Egyptians, value artists for their originality, JKR as an artist must consciously strive for originality. Since fantasy draws on the collective unconscious, it cannot be original, therefore no author who is trying to produce an original work will choose the medium of fantasy. In so far as JKR has incorporated fantasy, she must therefore have done so because of the promptings of her own subconscious. Is that right? It's true that JKR has said that she didn't set out deliberately to write fantasy, and didn't realize she was doing it until she found herself writing about unicorns. Nonetheless, when she discovered she was writing fantasy, she kept on doing it, so at that point it became a conscious artistic choice. It is indeed hard to see how an author who is drawing on the collective unconscious and produces a work so in tune with the zeitgeist that it sells millions and millions of copies could possibly be clever or brilliant, since we associate these attributes with originality. And if these works are indeed all alike, it is hard to understand why some achieve lasting success and are eventually recognized for their artistic merit, while others are soon forgotten. It could be marketing, except that in Rowling's case, the books have found a market their publishers never intended. It could be that Rowling succeeded because she was more in tune with the collective unconscious than other authors who tried to tap it deliberately--is that what you're saying, Laurasia? Because I disagree. I think what distinguishes powerful fantasy from the other kind is Truth. The reason you can't sit down in a cafe and scribble out a best-seller according to the formula is that the formula tells a lie. It's the lie of the golden fountain, the lie of the emperor's new clothes. It makes everybody feel good. It's no accident that the proceeds from the MoM's fountain go to St. Mungo's. And yet, we know that the reality doesn't quite fit what we're being told. This produces what the sociologists call cognitive dissonance. Underneath it all, we're filled with anxiety and doubt. What if everybody else does see the emperor's clothes? What if they don't? Should we say something? IMO, the great fantasies, the ones that last, say something. They seem to follow the formula, the archetypal tale, but they take some aspect of it and reveal it as a lie. Why is the story of King Arthur constantly retold, when a thousand of its contemporaries lie moldering in medieval studies departments? Because in King Arthur, the prince and princess *don't* live happily ever after. What happens in Order of the Phoenix? It seems to follow the formula. Unlikely heroes face the darkness to save the world from a weapon of mass destruction. But then it turns out there never was a weapon in the first place! There's no Ring to throw into Mount Doom, no Death Star to blast into a million pieces. Was that some deliberate political allegory? I doubt it. But it's not entirely unconscious either. As an observer of human nature, Rowling knows the ways that people deceive themselves, and she puts it into her books. Pippin From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org Mon Aug 30 16:19:36 2004 From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS)) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 11:19:36 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: My very own personal HBP theory - for wha t it's worth Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111617 Tonks_op But there is something about the eyes. This person has yellow eyes.. very rare. Harry's are green. and this point is mentioned a lot... that he has his mothers eyes. Somehow I think this eye color thing mean something, but I don't know what. Yellow eyes... hum... Do only cats and lions have yellow eyes? Gina : what color eyes did James have? Don't deer have yellowish eyes - stags? If so then we would definitely have more to go on as Lily obviously had green. Talk about a red herring! Maybe the key is not that Lily's eyes were green, but that James had eyes that were YELLOW! If there is a passage contradicting this let me know. * Gina [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org Mon Aug 30 16:35:28 2004 From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS)) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 11:35:28 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Petunia -- More fuel for the fire Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111618 Rachel: I know that common thought on Petunia being a witch Gina: I have a strange feeling that maybe Petunia is a hag or at the very least an animagus that she is completely embarrassed of! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org Mon Aug 30 16:40:29 2004 From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS)) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 11:40:29 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Fabian & Gideon's namesakes Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111619 Amy Z It just occurred to me that Fred & George's initials are the same as those of Fabian and Gideon Prewett, who were, most likely, Molly's brothers. Coincidence, or were they named (initialled) for their recently-killed uncles? I lean toward the latter. Gina: My mother and I discuss this a lot. I think Fred and George may have been Molly's nephews that she and Arthur adopted. Think of P/S when she gets there names wrong and when in OOTP she finds that Ron is prefect she says something to the affect of being so proud and that he makes everyone in the family where either Fred or George then remarks something like "Well then who are we" but in a joking manner. Maybe they are not really the immediate family. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Aug 30 16:39:04 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:39:04 -0000 Subject: Lupin visiting Sirius in Azkaban In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111620 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mrs_sonofgib" wrote: > Tina here again: > A better question might be - why didn't DD visit Sirius? He was the one to initiate the Secret Keeper set up. If it went badly wrong, wasn't he obligated to figure out what happened? He has the clout to go to Azkaban if anyone does, I would think. I guess we're back to DD the puppetmaster. < DD had been trying for some time to figure out which of the Potter's friends was the spy. It was because he hadn't been able to do it that he volunteered to be Secret Keeper himself. He did not approve of the choice of Sirius as SK. DD told us himself -- Sirius didn't act like an innocent man. In truth, none of the Marauders were innocent. Three of them were illegal animagi, and all of them had risked exposing innocent people to a werewolf. As Elkins pointed out in one of her brilliant posts long ago, the ex-Marauders were all keeping secrets from Dumbledore. It was easy for the spy, or spies, to take advantage of their old habits of secrecy and covering up for one another. After his escape, why did Sirius go after Peter himself instead of sending an Owl to Dumbledore telling him everything? Apparently he never thought of it. The old habit of secrecy was too much engrained. He never really outgrew his schoolboy ethic--loyalty to your chums above all else. He couldn't speak without giving Lupin away, too. Pippin From n_longbottom01 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 30 16:41:41 2004 From: n_longbottom01 at yahoo.com (n_longbottom01) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:41:41 -0000 Subject: Why is Tonks clumbsy? In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040830004025.01eaaec0@pop.west.cox.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111621 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lindsay W." wrote: > Tonks. She's clumsy, we know this. In practically every scene where we see Tonks, she's clumsy. It's overly exagerrated, to a point. Why? > --Lawless n_longbottom01: I think, in book 6 or 7, someone, perhaps the new Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher, will spill a plate of food on Snape's lap, or trip over a garbage can on their way to their desk, or something like that. And when that happens, I will shout "AH HA! That person is clumsy! It must be Tonks in disguise!" And then probably a few chapters and few clumsy insidents later Hermoine will recoginize the clumsiness and come to the same conclusion. So, my answer to the question "Why is Tonks clumsy?" is: so that the reader, and then Harry and his friends will be able to see through her disguise. If she weren't clumsy, Tonks would easily be able to pull a Barty Jr. on me, and fool me through a whole school year while posing as another person. Since Tonks clumsiness was emphasized so heavily in OotP, I think we (and Harry) will spot Tonks in disguise fairly early on. She isn't meant to fool us long, like Fake Moody was. Maybe it won't play out like this, but I'm keeping my eyes peeled for any clumsy goings on. Hey--just a though: Tonks could disguise herself as Neville, and I wouldn't suspect a thing. Neville and Tonks are equally accident prone. Anyway, interesting post, Lawless; I enjoyed reading your ideas. -- n_longbottom01 From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Aug 30 16:48:11 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:48:11 -0000 Subject: Fabian & Gideon's namesakes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111622 > > Gina: > My mother and I discuss this a lot. I think Fred and George may have been > Molly's nephews that she and Arthur adopted. Think of P/S when she gets > there names wrong and when in OOTP she finds that Ron is prefect she says > something to the affect of being so proud and that he makes everyone in the > family where either Fred or George then remarks something like "Well then who are we" but in a joking manner. Maybe they are not really the immediate family. Potioncat: > Well, it's the sort of thing an author who doesn't really understand adoption might do, but it isn't the way adoption is. The child you adopt is just as much your child as the one you give birth to. (Speaking from experience) Now, perhaps if you had fostered a child and it was upfront from day one "We are foster parents..." but even then, I don't think so. Potioncat > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Aug 30 16:50:51 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:50:51 -0000 Subject: Why is Tonks clumbsy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111623 > n_longbottom01: > > I think, in book 6 or 7, someone, perhaps the new Defense Against the > Dark Arts teacher, will spill a plate of food on Snape's lap, ... snip Potioncat: Oh! That's when we'll see the Hogwarts Graveyard! Potioncat...going off to iron her hands for this one-liner. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Aug 30 16:54:24 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 09:54:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry... Tsk Tsk (Re: Snape's DE past) In-Reply-To: <004501c48e58$2d895e20$6500a8c0@Pandemonium> Message-ID: <20040830165424.98525.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111624 --- Alina wrote: > Finally, Harry's nose > got rubbed in something he couldn't ignore, I bet more than > anything he > wanted to not sympathize with Snape, but he couldn't help it. > Actually,empathize is the right word. > > What I want to know is, did Snape have similar thoughts when he > peeked into > Harry's memories and saw that Harry's childhood wasn't all peaches > and cream? I think Snape did and that's why he made that passionate little speech about "foolish" people being easy meat for the Dark Lord. That was quite a little bit of autobiography he came out with there and we should ask - why? Why at that time? Because he saw that Harry's life was NOT what he'd expected and he assumed (as he always assumes) that Harry will understand what he means. But Harry was so angry that the moment of epiphany slipped past. Just as Snape is so angry when Harry has his moment of epiphany that he throws Harry out of the office. These two came so close - twice - and still missed each other. Prats. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From cruthw at earthlink.net Mon Aug 30 16:54:17 2004 From: cruthw at earthlink.net (caspenzoe) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:54:17 -0000 Subject: A Conspiracy Theory to Beat them All In-Reply-To: <20040830075503.98761.qmail@web25103.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111625 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Hans Andr?a Snip! > The theory runs like this: humanity thinks it's living > in the real world but is actually living in hell. For > thousands of years it's been indoctrinated to believe > that this IS the real world. This indoctrination is so > successful there's hardly any one who knows that this > is hell. The world governments and religious leaders > are also reinforcing the belief that this is the real > world. People have stood up in the past and proclaimed > that the real world is somewhere else, but they've > either been cruelly suppressed or their assertions > made to look ridiculous. > > One of the ways to make us think we're not in hell is > to tell us that hell is full of fire and brimstone > whereas hell is actually quite a pretty world, > especially in summer. The hellish characteristic is > not in its superficial appearance but its laws of > endless reincarnation and of evil always balancing > good. > > Harry Potter is an attempt by people, who have escaped > to the real world, to tell us that we're all in hell > and to give us a guide book on how to escape. Snip! > The way of escape is something like this. I'm > oversimplifying. > > The human being who wants to escape has to have a > strong motivation to do it, obviously. James Potter, > the stag, symbolises that. The person also has to have > pure motives, symbolised by Lilly. They give birth to > Harry, a new soul, which is the real soul, belonging > to the real world. He's immortal and quite alien to > this world, which rejects him, symbolised by the > Dursleys. > > The force in the human being which imprisons him > through all his incarnations is symbolised by > Voldemort. He knows that the new soul will liberate > the human being and take him into the real world, > where Voldemort can't exist, and so Voldemort has no > choice but to kill the new soul. However he can't if > the person is willing to sacrifice his temporary life > in hell for the real life in the real world. Snip! > The new soul has two companions who will enter the > real world with him: the old, mortal soul, symbolised > by Ron, and the intellectual consciousness, symbolised > by Hermione. Snip! > The old mortal soul (Ron) and the intellect > (Hermione) know that the only way Harry can enter the > real world is for them to sacrifice themselves. They > die for him, knowing that they will live on in him > when he enters the real world. > > Harry at the end enters the real world, where Sirius > is the Sun shining in Harry's eternal life. Voldemort > and Scabbers have dissipated like smoke. > > But wait! Harry looks back at us who are still > imprisoned and deluded. His heart burns with > indescribable compassion and he returns to the prison, > where he keeps the keys to the real world for those > who want to escape. > > OK that's my theory. Tell me I'm insane; I can take > it. But let me tell you this: the same story is told > in the Bible, the Alchemical Wedding of Christian > Rosycross, and many other books. > > Hans O.K. Hans (glad to see you here again, by the way!) - have it your way: you're insane! Then again, so, perhaps, am I, because I agree with the first portion of your conspiracy theory, i.e.: we are indeed in hell. But I don't understand some of your finer points - which don't, it seems to me, entirely add up. Why is it that the self-sacrifice of the immortal soul as hypothesized in your theory (paragraph 8) "He [Voldemort] knows that the new soul [Harry, the immortal soul] will liberate the human being and take him into the real world, where Voldemort can't exist, and so Voldemort has no choice but to kill the new soul. However he can't if the person [Harry, the immortal soul] is willing to sacrifice his temporary life in hell for the real life in the real world...." has somehow become (paragraph 19, step? you seem to have lost track of the steps at this point) "The old mortal soul (Ron) and the intellect (Hermione) know that the only way Harry can enter the real world is for them to sacrifice themselves. They die for him, knowing that they will live on in him when he enters the real world?" I mean, isn't the immortal soul's sacrifice enough? It is in all of the other similar major allegories/conspiracy theories I'm aware of. Since when is it ok to sacrifice your friends, even in the cause of liberation? And what exactly becomes of the "old mortal soul" and the intellect when our heroe travels to the "real world?" Do they go with him? Do they come back with him when he returns? And a few other things are bothering me: since when was fear ever overcome by "longing?" (Your paragraph 14) Why does the immortal soul's (Harry's) mental plan for development (Sirius) get sent on ahead? Seems to me it'd be smarter for the immortal soul (Harry) to keep the plan (Sirius) handy on the journey. And how does a plan (Sirius) become a life-giving sun? (Your paragraph 15) Isn't it basically just a set of directions? Does the plan/sun (Sirius) direct or guide the immortal soul (Harry) back to hell? Does the plan/sun (Sirius) get to accompany the immortal soul (Harry) back to hell? And if not, in what sense does the plan/sun (Sirius) remain a "sun?" And isn't that "sun" (Sirius) going to end up lonely, once again, in the "real" world? That really bites Hans! Fascinating, but at the point where your analogy begins to fall apart, seems it would be smarter to accept that the finely chisled peg you're trying so hard to drive, doesn't quite fit this hole. Rather than insist on such a fundamentalist approach (one size fits all, and if it doesn't, I'll make it fit), maybe you should consider that JKR's work has it's own unique shape afterall? Caspen From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 30 14:35:59 2004 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 14:35:59 -0000 Subject: Book Two Discoveries! In-Reply-To: <20040830022153.58051.qmail@web53502.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111626 abadgerfan2 wrote: > > On her site, Rowling's answer to a FAQ discloses that one of Harry's Book Two discoveries "foreshadows" something that he finds out in Book Six. Has anyone made an inventory, in chronological order, of Harry's Book Two discoveries? One could then methodically go through and consider (with a chance of more accurately predicting) what is to come in Book Six! Thanks! > brandy wrote: > She also specifically states that whatever it was, she made sure that it was left in the movie or else it would create a plot hole later in the series. ******* Important scenes in CoS movie that remained with no change from the book. 1)Harry learned that Riddle was already 'twisted' and evil by the age of 15, had killed Myrtle, framed Hagrid to get him expelled AND 'designed' his deadly Diary. 2) He learned that DD suspected Riddle since then. 3) He learned that having 'Faith' in someone or just begging for help pays out = he got Fawkes' and the Hat's help, also the Ford Anglia came to the rescue just when they needed it most, weird isn't it? I highly believe that DD enchanted the car to act like that, same as he did with the statues in the fountain in OoTP. 4) He learned he 'received' powers from Voldy on that Halloween night (Parseltongue, and what else?) 5) He learned about Lily's ancient magic protection. 6) He learned he is a true Griffindor = the Sword, I believe, might play a bigger role in the future (either because he or James are Godric's heir or as a fighting tool). 7) He learned about Knockturn Alley. 8) He learned that House Elves can speak against their masters if they are very compelled to, AND that they can have powerful magic themselves. 9) He learned about Fawkes and its magical capabilities. 10) He learned about the origins of the 'pureblood' idea. 11) He learned about the 'obliviation' curse and its terrible effect. 12) He learned that adult wizards can be fooled by the likes of Lockhart. Can't think of others that were in the movie AND book. Someone mentioned the hidden entrance to a family vault in the Malfoy's manor... I don't remember if that was mentioned in the movie, though. Marcela From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Mon Aug 30 17:30:16 2004 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:30:16 -0000 Subject: Why is Tonks clumbsy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111627 > wrote: > > > Tonks. She's clumsy, we know this. In practically every scene > where we see Tonks, she's clumsy. It's overly exagerrated, to a > point. Why? > > > --Lawless > > n_longbottom01: > > I think, in book 6 or 7, someone, perhaps the new Defense Against the > Dark Arts teacher, will spill a plate of food on Snape's lap, or trip > over a garbage can on their way to their desk, or something like > that. And when that happens, I will shout "AH HA! That person is > clumsy! It must be Tonks in disguise!" And then probably a few > chapters and few clumsy insidents later Hermoine will recoginize the > clumsiness and come to the same conclusion. > > So, my answer to the question "Why is Tonks clumsy?" is: so that the > reader, and then Harry and his friends will be able to see through > her disguise. If she weren't clumsy, Tonks would easily be able to > pull a Barty Jr. on me, and fool me through a whole school year while > posing as another person. > > Since Tonks clumsiness was emphasized so heavily in OotP, I think we > (and Harry) will spot Tonks in disguise fairly early on. She isn't > meant to fool us long, like Fake Moody was. > > Maybe it won't play out like this, but I'm keeping my eyes peeled for > any clumsy goings on. Hey--just a though: Tonks could disguise > herself as Neville, and I wouldn't suspect a thing. Neville and > Tonks are equally accident prone. > > Anyway, interesting post, Lawless; I enjoyed reading your ideas. > > -- n_longbottom01 Antosha: Hmmm... Interesting thoughts, which give us much to consider. Personally? I think Ms. Tonks was in danger of becoming a Mary Sue--too perfect to live. She's funny, she's cool, she can turn her nose into a pig's snout. So JKR made her a klutz, just to balance things out--and to give her a distinguishing characteristic that doesn't rely on our being able to recognize her visually. Still, you *know* the metamorphmagus thing is going to appear as a major plot point some time in the next book or two, so I would be at all surprised if Tonks gives her/(or less likely, him)self away by dropping the proverbial soup in the proverbial potionmaster's lap. (Know the difference between a schlemiel and a shlamazel? A schlemiel is the person who drops the soup; the shlamazel is the person it gets dropped on.... ) From tinainfay at msn.com Mon Aug 30 16:47:41 2004 From: tinainfay at msn.com (mrs_sonofgib) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:47:41 -0000 Subject: Fabian & Gideon's namesakes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111628 > Amy Z > It just occurred to me that Fred & George's initials are the same as > those of Fabian and Gideon Prewett, who were, most likely, Molly's > brothers. Coincidence, or were they named (initialled) for their > recently-killed uncles? I lean toward the latter. > Gina: > My mother and I discuss this a lot. I think Fred and George may have been > Molly's nephews that she and Arthur adopted. Maybe they are not really the immediate > family. > Tina says: I also like the idea of Fred and George named (sort of) after their OotP uncles, killed in the line of duty. Maybe they were born soon after their murders... I do think however that they are Molly's and Arthur's natural children. In GoF Ch5 Harry notes "Charlie was built like the twins, shorter and stockier than Percy and Ron, who were both long and lanky." Not definitive but points to their being brothers. ~tina From manawydan at ntlworld.com Mon Aug 30 18:04:51 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 19:04:51 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Digest Number 5161 References: <1093849837.3614.45712.m4@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <003401c48ebb$d9018300$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 111629 Meidbh wrote: > Our prince is a Halfblood so his title could come from either the WW > or Muggleworld. As I said in my previous post, I'm really not > convinced that JKR would bring RW royalty into her world (though "Arise, Sir Harold, said the Queen, her eyes lingering for a moment on his scar" No, I can't see it myself as an ending. I suspect that would be the day my books were consigned to the charity shop! > And as far as we know none of the old families, the purebloods, > appear to be titled. Now. In fact other than our self proclaimed > Lord VM there we've seen no contemporary titled WWfolk at all. And I think that if there were any "titled" wizards around (who would have given them those titles, I still wonder?), we would have seen them at Hogwarts. The Hon. Draco Malfoy perhaps... > Well, there appear to have been stronger links and similarities > between Muggle society and the WW in the past, at least before the > International Statute of Wizarding Secrecy of 1692. And we do have > evidence of titled magical folk in the past. We have Sir Cadogan, a > portrait knight in armour and the ghost Sir Patrick Delaney-Podmore > of the Headless Hunt. Morgana le Fey, King Arthurs sorceress half > sister, was Queen of Avalon. And of course, my personal favourite > (), Queen Maeve was a mediaeval Irish witch (ref: JKRs chocolate > frog cards). I would once again agree with you on that. All of the references are mediaeval, (you could add the Bloody Baron to them) which could quite easily mean that they were Muggleborns of the time. I think that before the seperation of the two worlds was so strictly enforced, that there were far more Muggleborn wizards and intermarriages, just because there was more opportunity for them. Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From vidarfe at start.no Mon Aug 30 17:38:03 2004 From: vidarfe at start.no (vidar_fe) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:38:03 -0000 Subject: Why is Tonks clumsy? In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040830004025.01eaaec0@pop.west.cox.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111631 Lawless wrote: > Maybe Tonks as we know her...is a disguise. OR...Tonks spends so > much time in disguise that she can't easily adjust to her "original" > body. > > Bear with me, here, because I go out on a limb. Men and women have > different centers of balance. If you suddenly turned a man into a > woman, he would, theoretically, have to get used to the lower center > of balance, and vice-versa. vidar_fe: This is a very good theory. It's so simple, and yet explains everything. However, I don't think she necessarily has to change her gender. If Tonk just changes the general shape of her body, could that possibly be enough to put her off balance? Let's say, for instance, a significant increase / decrease of weight? Look out for the fat lady! :-) From meriaugust at yahoo.com Mon Aug 30 20:58:46 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 20:58:46 -0000 Subject: Fabian & Gideon's namesakes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111632 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Miller, Gina (JIS)" wrote: > Amy Z > It just occurred to me that Fred & George's initials are the same as > those of Fabian and Gideon Prewett, who were, most likely, Molly's > brothers. Coincidence, or were they named (initialled) for their > recently-killed uncles? I lean toward the latter. > > > Gina: > My mother and I discuss this a lot. I think Fred and George may have been > Molly's nephews that she and Arthur adopted. Think of P/S when she gets > there names wrong Snip Actually, in SS she gets their names right: "Fred, you next," the plump woman said. "I'm not Fred, I'm George," said the boy. "Honestly, woman and you call yourself our mother?" Then later... "Only joking, I am Fred." She got the name right the first time round, he was just messing with her in typical F&G fashion. Meri From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org Mon Aug 30 21:05:48 2004 From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS)) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:05:48 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Fabian & Gideon's namesakes Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111633 Meri She got the name right the first time round, he was just messing with her in typical F&G fashion. Gina: Yeah true, but when he said she was wrong she believed him. You didn't hear her say, "Well, I think after all these years I should know above all which of my sons are which!" :-) It is a unlikely theory, but still could be argued. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org Mon Aug 30 21:18:03 2004 From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS)) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:18:03 -0500 Subject: audiobooks us vs. uk - dale vs fry Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111635 I am going to re-read the series. I live in the US so I have previously only listened to the Jim Dale versions. Could someone tell me if they think one is better than the other and what the differences are? I am sure the wording is different but what about accents and general mood of the book? I would love both UK and US opinions from people that have heard both! Or if you are from somewhere else and read listened to both sets. Private emails are welcome if you do not want to post! Gina A. Miller [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Aug 30 21:25:11 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:25:11 -0000 Subject: A Conspiracy Theory to Beat them All In-Reply-To: <20040830075503.98761.qmail@web25103.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111636 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Hans Andr?a wrote: Hans: > OK that's my theory. Tell me I'm insane; I can take > it. But let me tell you this: the same story is told > in the Bible, the Alchemical Wedding of Christian > Rosycross, and many other books. Geoff: With respect, the basis of Christian belief is much less complicated than that and can be summed up in two quotes from Jesus: God so loved the world that He gave his only Son so that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. Very simple to understand but very difficult to accept and commit to. We are also told in the Bible that the fruit of the Holy Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. I have said in the past, probably to the the point of boredom to fellow posters, that Harry is representative of a Christian on life's journey. He shows many of the aspects fo the fruit of the Spirit in his life, but not all; some need to develop. That is true of us all. Harry, like a true Christian or someone aspiring to follow Christ's teaching, wants deep down to help people around him. He has been told that the choices he makes will determine the sort of guy he will grow up to be (JKR permitting!). We have our own personal battle with the devil to deal with our shortcomings and failures. He has his own personal battle with Voldemort which differs only in that the outcome will be crucial not only for him but for all the Wizarding World, whether they are friends and supporters or obstructors. Geoff who invites group members to visit his website showing photographs etc of Exmoor http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From pt4ever at yahoo.com Mon Aug 30 21:53:19 2004 From: pt4ever at yahoo.com (JoAnna) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:53:19 -0000 Subject: My very own personal HBP theory - for wha t it's worth In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111637 In the "Snape's Worst Memory" chapter of OotP, I believe that Harry observes young James Potter as having hazel eyes. Can anyone confirm with the exact passage? I'm at work and I don't have my books handy. - JoAnna --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Miller, Gina (JIS)" > > Gina : what color eyes did James have? Don't deer have yellowish eyes - > stags? If so then we would definitely have more to go on as Lily obviously > had green. Talk about a red herring! Maybe the key is not that Lily's eyes > were green, but that James had eyes that were YELLOW! If there is a passage > contradicting this let me know. > * Gina > From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Aug 30 21:58:50 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:58:50 -0000 Subject: Why is Tonks clumbsy? In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040830004025.01eaaec0@pop.west.cox.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111638 Lawless wrote: Now, I /want/ to strike out B because she mentioned that she was clumsy in her Auror tests. But that could always be a cover-up. B still has a problem, though, because she would still be clumsy in her male "spy" body for a while as she readjusts again. So instead of one- clumsy form, one-not we see in example A, we have two clumsy Tonks in example B. So yes, I would lean towards A being an explaination, over B. Now, I don't bring up these theories of Tonks in a sense that she's ESE!Tonks hiding this from the Order. I don't doubt Tonks's loyalties, but that clumbsiness has been nagging me greatly. vmonte responds: You make some good observations. Thought that the reason why JKR made Tonks so clumsy was because in either book 6 or 7 someone else was going to take her form and impersonate her (someone who moves elegantly--and Harry would notice), or that Tonks would take the form of Harry or another character and be found out because she is such a klutz. vivian From meidbh at yahoo.com Mon Aug 30 21:59:52 2004 From: meidbh at yahoo.com (meidbh) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:59:52 -0000 Subject: Where is our Prince? (was Re: My very own personal HBP theory) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111639 Meidbh: "Our prince is a Halfblood so his title could come from either the WW or Muggleworld." Finwitch writes: "How about _Merlin_? ... "After all, Merlin was a halfling 'half-human', half-magic (does that mean: half-Muggle, a.ka half blood in present terms?)" Meidbh again: Sorry Finwitch I'm a bit puzzled by your reply... Merlin is a wizard who features in the Potterverse but he is NOT Prince Merlin. So not really in the running for Half Blood Prince. As for Halfblood, in the Potterverse this is pretty well defined. The progeny of a "pureblood" witch/wizard and a Muggle (or a Muggle born witch/wizard). And so far JKR hasn't commented on 'her' Merlin's parentage. But to be honest, Halfblood or not I don't see Merlin as HBP. I don't see why JKR would need to use someone elses character (Geoffrey of Monmouth's Merlin) in such a key role when she has such a gift for creating original characters. Meidbh From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org Mon Aug 30 22:07:29 2004 From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS)) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:07:29 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: My very own personal HBP theory - for wha t it's worth Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111640 JoAnna In the "Snape's Worst Memory" chapter of OotP, I believe that Harry observes young James Potter as having hazel eyes. Gina: yeah I think that is correct. My mother called and said she is reading OOTP now and that James has gray or hazel eyes so I do believe you are right. Darn, well it was a nice try! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From macfotuk at yahoo.com Mon Aug 30 22:26:56 2004 From: macfotuk at yahoo.com (macfotuk at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:26:56 -0000 Subject: thoughts on a phoenix Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111641 As usual, apologies if these are not new ideas: Fawkes has figured large in one way or another ever since his first appearance in CoS - maybe even before that if you consider that Harry's wand feather is from this particular pheonix and was introduced in SS/PS. Pheonixes have amazing powers but one that I hadn't considered until very recently is the ability NOT to be petrified by a basilisk (Fawkes presumably had to see the basilisk's eyes to peck them out). Not even ghosts are immune, or cats or wizards/witches. Of course basilisks are killed by the rooster's crowing so perhaps pheonixes may have fowl-like/related anti-basilisk magic. This could relate to bird-like magic generally (owls seeming to have super powers of finding people!). Riddle had no problem btw identifying Fawkes as a pheonix and Fawkes knew Harry needed him (only loyalty would have called him to you Harry said DD or words to that effect). More than this though is Fawkes' rescue (or part therein) of Harry twice so far - once obviously in CoS and then again in GoF. Fawkes is DD's FAITHFUL (DD's emphasis) companion and according to a recent interview with JKR a pheonix is the form of DD's patronus as well. DD named his anti-Voldemort gang (in both its inceptions) after the pheonix and Fawkes gave two feathers - one in Voldemort's yew (a dark wandwood as others have noted) wand and the other in its brother wand of holly - Harry's. I looked in CoS to see if Tom Riddle's diary self ever did anything with Harry's wand which of course he had hold of for a while - the brother of his own - but couldn't see anything significant. DD also uses Fawkes to help him disappear in OotP. I don't recall where, if anywhere, in cannon the link between pheonixes and Godric Gryffindor is made but I'm sure I've read proposals that Fawkes was perhaps GG's companion before he became DD's (pheonixes being immortal) and this btw suggests GG is no more. Lastly, given the death/immortality theme and what may be coming in the finale, re-birth of pheonixes may be significant? I'd be pleased to know what, if anything, these or any other pheonix- stimulated thoughts or theories of your own might set you off thinking about in relation to interpreting HP books past and/or future theoretical developments. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Mon Aug 30 22:34:51 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 23:34:51 +0100 Subject: Conspiracies and re-assessments Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111642 Regular readers of this board will be familiar with my take on the HP saga - that it's more a mystery tale in form and structure than anything else. That we are constantly being challenged with ambiguous characters performing ambiguous actions, usually in situations where we have limited or incomplete information. And that we should see it as our bounden duty to resolve the apparent inconsistencies and to present a neat and tidy explanation to what the hell is going on. Naturally, our ideas and theories change as more information becomes available; this may be from each new volume as it's published or the words of JKR herself in interview or from her website. Best of all, a fresh slant on an old problem may be provided by another member thinking outside the box. There are various factions who don't necessarily agree with this viewpoint, of course. Some see HP as a 'rites of passage' type story pure and simple - all is subordinate to the inevitable apotheosis of a maltreated Harry; that all/most of the other characters are merely subsidiary devices/obstacles on the arduous road to his ineluctable triumph. Not I. IMO the other characters and their shenanigins are much more interesting than Harry. The conflict is the thing; the conflict that started well before Harry was born, the conflict that took, among others, his parents; the conflict being waged between two small committed groups to determine the future of uncounted others. Given the circumstances and personae the conflict is limited in scope; there are no great armies assaulting strongholds, no set-piece battles. It's a low-intensity war, a war fought in the shadows, and as in all wars of this type conspiracy and betrayal are key stratagems. And make no mistake, conspiracy and betrayal is at the heart of HP; it's what makes it tick; it's the skeleton that is fleshed out with all the other bits and pieces. Godric's Hollow; Snape leaving Voldy; the plan to acquire the Stone; Tom's diary; the escape of Sirius (though some have doubts about that one); Crouch!Moody; the dismissal of DD (twice); the silence of the Ministry re: Voldy's return; Dear Dolly's attempts to nail Harry; the Dementor attack in Little Whinging - all, and more, at one level or another can be classed as the result of conspiracy and/or betrayal. I quite often get castigated for thinking along these lines - "Not everything is a conspiracy" True, but I tend to specifically target those bits that *could* be explained by such thinking. "Sometimes a cigar is only a cigar." (The latter are fine words from someone who built a career on seeing what he wanted to see and ignoring inconvenient facts.) These days I rarely bother responding to posts containing this phrase; usually (though admittedly not always) it's an indication that the poster has been challenged with an idea that they're not comfortable with but is unable find contrary canon with which to counter it. An unwillingness to even consider the merits of a theory that has an arguable canonical base (even though it may eventually turn out to be wrong) shows a deplorable lack of intellectual curiosity IMO. What's the point of entering a discussion with pre-formed, never-to-be-modified-under-any-circumstances-I-don't-care-what-can-be- derived-from-canon conclusions clutched firmly to the bosom? Posters propose theories and they expect them to be dissected, challenged, rejected or modified. Dismissal with nothing but a trite phrase is not an honest option; it's a flaunting of personal prejudices in an attempt to by-pass discussion - and discussion is what this site is supposed to be about. Consider - how often in HP have things been just what they seem to be? Always? Sometimes? Never? How often has someone/something been revealed as other than what we were first led to believe? Quirrell, Scabbers, Sirius, Lupin, Crouch!Moody, James - all have been presented as flying false colours or as having unexpected and/or unpleasant aspects. Add those whose actions can reasonably be construed as suspicious (Bagman, Fudge) and those whose actions do not comply with behaviour expected from information provided in canon (Dobby for example - why would he involve himself with Harry? House Elves are solely concerned with their families unless specifically ordered to do otherwise) and one can be forgiven for believing that we've entered one of those Halls of Mirrors you find in fairgrounds. And not only are these reassessments applicable within a single volume, they can also happen more gradually over the longer term. Recurring characters are open to new evaluations too; do you see Harry now in the same way that you saw him in PS/SS? Or Snape? Or DD? I don't think so. They've become more complex, less black and white, more equivocal. Harry is no longer the put-upon kid who gets the break he deserves; he's now a not very nice teenager who shares interesting parallels with the arch-villain. Not only that, he has undergone some sort of mental transfer from him too. First intimated in book 2, in book 5 this became the central plot device and I doubt that it'll stop there; Harry/Tom Riddle/Voldy are much more closely linked and share more similarities than the "Harry can do no wrong" fan club will feel comfortable with. Snape started as the stereotypical boo!hiss chip-on-his-shoulder nasty teacher that can be found in every school story going back to when Socrates was a lad. But he's no longer a cardboard cut-out. It's pretty obvious that he has a very interesting and plot sensitive past and an as yet unknown but probably key future role. To even consider him as no more than a vindictive Harry-hating sadist stretches credulity - as well as the definition of sadist. And DD - he first appears as the saviour/mentor/guardian figure to the putative hero. A nice, comfortable, traditional role. Slowly over the books this has been modified. He has much more important things on his plate than Harry. He has a society to save, a war to fight - and Harry has a pre-destined part to play in the outcome. And that's something DD has known for as long as Harry has been alive. So, is his interest in Harry altruistic, or is Harry a means to an end? DD's motivations are nicely complex - and to a certain extent conflicting. Given the choice which will turn out to be more important, Harry or the entire WW? That is, assuming DD is around to make the choice; my bet is that he won't be, that someone else will have to choose. Conspiracy and betrayal; people or things not being as anticipated. Nice, knotty problems. Who to trust, why did he do that, what will he/she do under those circumstances, who is hiding what and why? Expect the unexpected. That's what HP is all about. Kneasy From meidbh at yahoo.com Mon Aug 30 22:41:30 2004 From: meidbh at yahoo.com (meidbh) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:41:30 -0000 Subject: Where is our Prince? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111643 Ffred: "All of the references are mediaeval, (you could add the Bloody Baron to them) which could quite easily mean that they were Muggleborns of the time. I think that before the seperation of the two worlds was so strictly enforced, that there were far more Muggleborn wizards and intermarriages, just because there was more opportunity for them." Meidbh: Good catch on the Bloody baron. And excellent point on the Titles are for Muggles(and Muggleborns)only theme. Wish I'd thought of that first Meidbh From Kadoo96801 at aol.com Mon Aug 30 22:52:41 2004 From: Kadoo96801 at aol.com (Kadoo96801 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 18:52:41 EDT Subject: Why is Tonks' Clumsy? Message-ID: <1ed.29680091.2e6509b9@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111644 Somewhere in the depths of the "Tonks is Clumsy" Conversation, Someone said this: > (Know the difference between a schlemiel and a shlamazel? A schlemiel is > the person who > drops the soup; the shlamazel is the person it gets dropped on.... 101>) > Now, I know this is very off topic, but would "Schlemiel, Shlamazel" be the opening two words of the Laverne and Shirley TV Show Theme Song?? Haha...just think of Snape with a big cursive letter L on his black billowy robes.....ohh my, Laverne and Shirley is one good American Television timecapsule.... Just an aside for those familiar with Laverne and Shirley, PoPo [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gsanderson at cfl.rr.com Tue Aug 31 00:53:26 2004 From: gsanderson at cfl.rr.com (gsanderson at cfl.rr.com) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 00:53:26 -0000 Subject: Book Two Discoveries! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111645 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "templar1112002" wrote: > abadgerfan2 wrote: > > > On her site, Rowling's answer to a FAQ discloses that one of > Harry's Book Two discoveries "foreshadows" something that he finds > out in Book Six. Has anyone made an inventory, in chronological > order, of Harry's Book Two discoveries? One could then methodically > go through and consider (with a chance of more accurately > predicting) what is to come in Book Six! Thanks! > > > brandy wrote: > > She also specifically states that whatever it was, she made sure > that it was left in the movie or else it would create a plot hole > later in the series. > > > > ******* Important scenes in CoS movie that remained with no change > from the book. > > 1)Harry learned that Riddle was already 'twisted' and evil by the > age of 15, had killed Myrtle, framed Hagrid to get him expelled > AND 'designed' his deadly Diary. > > 2) He learned that DD suspected Riddle since then. > > 3) He learned that having 'Faith' in someone or just begging for > help pays out = he got Fawkes' and the Hat's help, also the Ford > Anglia came to the rescue just when they needed it most, weird isn't > it? I highly believe that DD enchanted the car to act like that, > same as he did with the statues in the fountain in OoTP. > > 4) He learned he 'received' powers from Voldy on that Halloween > night (Parseltongue, and what else?) > > 5) He learned about Lily's ancient magic protection. > > 6) He learned he is a true Griffindor = the Sword, I believe, might > play a bigger role in the future (either because he or James are > Godric's heir or as a fighting tool). > > 7) He learned about Knockturn Alley. > > 8) He learned that House Elves can speak against their masters if > they are very compelled to, AND that they can have powerful magic > themselves. > > 9) He learned about Fawkes and its magical capabilities. > > 10) He learned about the origins of the 'pureblood' idea. > > 11) He learned about the 'obliviation' curse and its terrible effect. > > 12) He learned that adult wizards can be fooled by the likes of > Lockhart. > 13) He learned that Tom Riddle was the last remaining descendent of Salazar Slytherin (pretty unbalanced to learn that much about Slytherin and nothing about Gryffindor :). Kristen From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 01:15:39 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 01:15:39 -0000 Subject: Lupin visiting Sirius in Azkaban In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111646 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > After his escape, why did Sirius go after Peter himself instead of > sending an Owl to Dumbledore telling him everything? > Apparently he never thought of it. The old habit of secrecy was > too much engrained. He never really outgrew his schoolboy > ethic--loyalty to your chums above all else. He couldn't speak > without giving Lupin away, too. > Alla: I think (besides plot reasons, of course) that Sirius did not go to Dumbledore precisely because Dumbledore was so easily convinced of Sirius' guilt. He testified at Sirius hearing, right? He did not even insist (as far as we know) to let Sirius tell his story. I am not surprised at all, frankly. From dontask2much at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 01:23:44 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:23:44 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Book Two Discoveries! References: Message-ID: <01c201c48ef9$2afa63b0$6501a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 111647 From: > 13) He learned that Tom Riddle was the last remaining descendent of > Salazar Slytherin (pretty unbalanced to learn that much about > Slytherin and nothing about Gryffindor :). > Charme: I would submit only one change to #13: Tom Riddle SAYS he's the last remaining descendent of Salazar Slytherin. Has JKR said specifically said somewhere that Tom Riddle is really the last remaining descendent of Slytherin? I also don't think DD has ever really confirmed this in any of the books thus far, has he? I know HE (TR) says he is, but should we believe him? Hermoine (love that logical lass) also points out in CoS that Harry could be a descendent of Slytherin; I believe she mentions to Harry after the duel/Parseltongue scene in CoS when he says he can't be a descendent of Slytherin that Sally lived "1000 years ago and for all we know, you could be." Just a thought - correct me please if I am mistaken Charme From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 01:40:54 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 01:40:54 -0000 Subject: Lupin visiting Sirius in Azkaban In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111648 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" > wrote: > > After his escape, why did Sirius go after Peter himself instead of > > sending an Owl to Dumbledore telling him everything? > > Apparently he never thought of it. The old habit of secrecy was > > too much engrained. He never really outgrew his schoolboy > > ethic--loyalty to your chums above all else. He couldn't speak > > without giving Lupin away, too. > > > > Alla: > > I think (besides plot reasons, of course) that Sirius did not go to > Dumbledore precisely because Dumbledore was so easily convinced of > Sirius' guilt. He testified at Sirius hearing, right? He did not > even insist (as far as we know) to let Sirius tell his story. > > I am not surprised at all, frankly. mhbobbin: Alla--please point me to where DD testifies at Sirius' hearing. I don't recall this--only that Sirius was sent away without trial by Barty Crouch Senior.I believe it was Old Barty who never allowed Sirius to be heard. As for Lupin: We don't know what Lupin was up to around the time of the Secret Keeper decision or the attack at GH. (We don't even know what he's up to for Order now either.) While we don't know whether Lupin could have gone to Azkaban to discuss events with Sirius, to me it seems entirely within Lupin's character not to confront Sirius. He just doesn't seem the type to be directly confrontational. Not being able to stand up to his friends is his greatest failing--per JKR interview. Yet, we do see Lupin quietly stand up to Snape in PoA, and to Sirius and Molly in OotP-- but it's a relatively quiet interpersonal style. Not something as dramatic as confronting a treacherous and imprisoned friend. Was there more to the backstory at the time of GH? Sirius admits Lupin was under suspicion. Was there any reason for this or was it just the nature of the times? And if Lupin had wanted to confront Sirius, would he have feared--during the dangerous period after LV's downfall--being implicated by association with Sirius? The question of what Lupin's thoughts were following the GH attack and whether he wanted to question Sirius are interesting questions. Lupin is such a tragic character--like something out of a Bronte novel. In one day, he loses his three best friends, and Lily. What were Lupin's sad thoughts up to the day he saw Peter Pettigrew on the Marauder's Map?And did Lupin feel some guilt over events--why I don't know--except that he was certainly keeping secrets about his friends for years. And maybe some secrets we don't even know. Yet. mhbobbin From garybec101 at comcast.net Tue Aug 31 01:52:20 2004 From: garybec101 at comcast.net (garybec) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 01:52:20 -0000 Subject: How did Tom kill his father? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111649 *Brenda now: *snip* Or, for all we know, the Muggle authorities might have learned the existence of WW during Voldemort's reign of terror. When Muggle police started wondering why there are so many unexplained death. Becki Responds: We have to remember that LV's actual rein was much later. According to SS p54 (am), Hagrid tells Harry, "...-this wizard, about 20 years ago now, started lookin' fer followers..." So, just 10 years before Harry vanquished LV, he had only just started getting his followers, so the rein of terror could have only been less than 10 years. Perhaps the muggle world was not aware of the WW until then. However, to play devils advocate, lets say that the MW had determined that something or someone in the WW was responsible for the strange deaths of the Riddles, I am sure it would not have been announced in the local newspapers. *Geoff:* Yes, but possibly the circumstances differed slightly. I suspect that Tom Riddle intended his father and grandparents to know what was coming to them; anyway, they must have known because he presumably killed them one by one; they were in the same room and so had time to be terrified. Becki Responds: That is how I pictured it in my head, that Tom had psychologically tortured them before he AK'ed them. From nrenka at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 01:52:31 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (Nora Renka) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 01:52:31 -0000 Subject: Lupin visiting Sirius in Azkaban In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111650 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mhbobbin" wrote: > mhbobbin: > > Alla--please point me to where DD testifies at Sirius' hearing. I > don't recall this--only that Sirius was sent away without trial by > Barty Crouch Senior.I believe it was Old Barty who never allowed > Sirius to be heard. PoA, American hardcover, page 392: "I myself gave evidence to the Ministry that Sirius had been the Potters' Secret Keeper." Not quite a hearing, but testimony nonetheless...interesting though, ain't it? [Now, if we're playing the game 'think like Sirius', he has some reasons to be a little wary of DD, but those have been gone into over'n'over again, so I won't.] It strikes me as one of the largest questions, and not an answered one, as to why DD wouldn't investigate this further. After all, he trusted Black enough to let him into the OotP. My current vote is, if JKR gets asked, we'll get told a story about Ministry obstruction. Visitors don't really seem to be allowed in Azakaban. DD did kind of seem to have his hands full at that time, and given the dominant mentality of the WW, they were all happy to 'get rid' of any of the troubling reminders of what they'd brought upon themselves, as quickly as possible. -Nora ain't Alla, but she's good at recalling where to find things nonetheless From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 01:53:10 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 01:53:10 -0000 Subject: Lupin visiting Sirius in Azkaban In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111651 mhbobbin: > > Alla--please point me to where DD testifies at Sirius' hearing. I > don't recall this--only that Sirius was sent away without trial by > Barty Crouch Senior.I believe it was Old Barty who never allowed > Sirius to be heard. snip. Alla: "I myself gave evidence to the Ministry that Sirius had been the Potters' Secret-Keeper" - POA, paperback, p.392. From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 02:06:58 2004 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 02:06:58 -0000 Subject: Lupin visiting Sirius in Azkaban In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111653 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Nora Renka" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mhbobbin" > wrote: > > mhbobbin: > > > > Alla--please point me to where DD testifies at Sirius' hearing. I > > don't recall this--only that Sirius was sent away without trial by > > Barty Crouch Senior.I believe it was Old Barty who never allowed > > Sirius to be heard. > > PoA, American hardcover, page 392: > > "I myself gave evidence to the Ministry that Sirius had been the > Potters' Secret Keeper." > > Not quite a hearing, but testimony nonetheless...interesting though, > ain't it? > > [Now, if we're playing the game 'think like Sirius', he has some > reasons to be a little wary of DD, but those have been gone into > over'n'over again, so I won't.] > > It strikes me as one of the largest questions, and not an answered > one, as to why DD wouldn't investigate this further. After all, he > trusted Black enough to let him into the OotP. My current vote is, > if JKR gets asked, we'll get told a story about Ministry > obstruction. Visitors don't really seem to be allowed in Azakaban. > DD did kind of seem to have his hands full at that time, and given > the dominant mentality of the WW, they were all happy to 'get rid' of > any of the troubling reminders of what they'd brought upon > themselves, as quickly as possible. > > -Nora ain't Alla, but she's good at recalling where to find things > nonetheless mhbobbin: Thank you Nora & Alla both. It IS very interesting. I had forgotten. hmmmm. Yes, it is questionable why DD didn't legiwhatzy Sirius nto to mention talk to him. Perhaps he didn't have access. Perhaps it didn't occur to him---too weird. Another apparent instance of DD's fallibility. Although there's considerable injustice presented to us in the Penseive scenes in GoF, it is interesting to see DD involved in this particular one. We certainly see Moody and DD unhappy with and unable to prevent the outcome of the way justice is served --Bagman, Karkoroff, Crouch Junion--after the downfall of LV at GH . And speaking of Leglimens ability--I have suspected Lupin of having some legilmens ability--just too many observations by Harry that Lupin seems to know what he's thinking etc. So why didn't Lupin legiwhatzy Sirius. The events surrounding GH, and the subsequent Sirius/Pettigrew blow- up are, IMO, still the central mystery of the story. Except, of course, that Harry Potter / Voldemort live/die thing. mhbobbin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 02:08:31 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 02:08:31 -0000 Subject: Lupin visiting Sirius in Azkaban In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111654 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Nora Renka" wrote: snip. My current vote is, > if JKR gets asked, we'll get told a story about Ministry > obstruction. > DD did kind of seem to have his hands full at that time, and given > the dominant mentality of the WW, they were all happy to 'get rid' of > any of the troubling reminders of what they'd brought upon > themselves, as quickly as possible. Alla: LOL! Well, yes, but then Dumbledore looks like quite an active participant in suhc obstruction, does not he? I vote for plot reasons, personally. :o) > -Nora ain't Alla, but she's good at recalling where to find things > nonetheless Alla: Who wants additional proof that Nora ain't her. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 02:39:02 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 02:39:02 -0000 Subject: Harry... Tsk Tsk (Re: Snape's DE past) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111655 > Brenda waves back to Alla and decides to go head-to-head with Alla, > only friendly :o) Alla: OK. :) > Bren butting in, yet again: > On the second thought, we don't know if Snape was even aware of this > possibility of sending false visions. His use of Occlumency in spying > Voldemort doesn't involve making up memories, just "to shut down > those feelings and memories that contradict the life, and so can > utter falsehoods in his presence without detection". [OoP, 469. UK] Alla: Oh, you mean it is possible that Dumbledore DID NOT tell Snape everything? Is it possible that Dumbledore does NOT trust Snape as much as he claims? :) I mean, whatever Snape told Harry in the beginning of the lessons surely was approved by Dumbledore, right? So, if Snape is not aware of the fact that Voldemort is sending false visions, what does it mean? I mean it will sure diminish his culpability in my mind, but it will raise many other questions. Brenda: > Hmm, I wonder if Voldemort *did* attempt Imperio Harry throughout > OoP, when Harry was feeling strongly outrageous... Alla: Could be. Brenda: > Now, now, easy on the oldie, we don't want to upset him, it's not > good for his health ya know *wink* > > I for one feel sympathy towards DD for having to arrange this. I > mean, if Snape couldn't teach Harry, then who could? You mentioned in > later post Dumbledore should have taught Harry himself, but uhh... So > you want DD to be attacked and (possibly) murdered by Harry?!?! He > felt intense impulse to attack DD the second he made eyecontact with > DD! Any longer than that, we don't know what would have happened. > > Besides, Umbridge would have gone any length to prevent Harry's > private lesson from DD once she found out about it. > > Speaking of the devil, I suppose she was part of reasons Snape was > chosen to teach Harry, not other Occlumens. Snape had good references > from Malfoy and co, Umbridge trusted him to be on her side. And the > hatred between Harry and Snape was well publicized, no one would have > suspected Snape to be actually *helping* Harry. Alla: Don't get me wrong. Story-wise, plot -wise Snape and Harry spending more time together was a perfect idea, but looking within the story, I want to smack Dumbledore. Sure, he probably acted with good intentions. (as always :o)), but he is supposed to be SMART. Forget omnicient, just smart. So, why, why would he think that Voldemort, had he been given a choice, would rather go after him than Harry? What sense does it make, especially in light that Dumbledore knows that Voldie is aware of the Prophecy? Dumbledore should have guessed that Voldemort does not care about killing him, but about killing Harry. From snow15145 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 03:06:35 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 03:06:35 -0000 Subject: Conspiracies and re-assessments In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111656 Kneasy (snipped) I quite often get castigated for thinking along these lines - "Not everything is a conspiracy" True, but I tend to specifically target those bits that *could* be explained by such thinking. "Sometimes a cigar is only a cigar." (The latter are fine words from someone who built a career on seeing what he wanted to see and ignoring inconvenient facts.) These days I rarely bother responding to posts containing this phrase; usually (though admittedly not always) it's an indication that the poster has been challenged with an idea that they're not comfortable with but is unable find contrary canon with which to counter it. An unwillingness to even consider the merits of a theory that has an arguable canonical base (even though it may eventually turn out to be wrong) shows a deplorable lack of intellectual curiosity IMO. What's the point of entering a discussion with pre-formed, never-to-be-modified-under-any-circumstances-I-don't-care-what-can-be- derived-from-canon conclusions clutched firmly to the bosom? Posters propose theories and they expect them to be dissected, challenged, rejected or modified. Dismissal with nothing but a trite phrase is not an honest option; it's a flaunting of personal prejudices in an attempt to by-pass discussion - and discussion is what this site is supposed to be about. Snow: I really hate to agree with you when you obviously are willing, wanting and waiting for a very good disagreeing rival to ruffle your feathers. I am anything but a worthy opponent especially when I agree with you that some posters refuse to bend to a theory or proposal that their character could possibly be someone different than what they have convinced themselves they definitely are. It's not as much a "lack of intellectual curiosity" but a refusal to accept an inevitability that could be JKR's, not mine. If you become so transfixed to an ideal that you are not willing to see another possibility, you are cheating yourself out of the enjoyment of the amazing puzzlement of the whole scope. These books are not about one specific character but a host of characters, that good, bad or indifferent have their own part in the master plan. Kneasy (again snipped) And DD - he first appears as the saviour/mentor/guardian figure to the putative hero. A nice, comfortable, traditional role. Slowly over the books this has been modified. He has much more important things on his plate than Harry. He has a society to save, a war to fight - and Harry has a pre-destined part to play in the outcome. And that's something DD has known for as long as Harry has been alive. So, is his interest in Harry altruistic, or is Harry a means to an end? DD's motivations are nicely complex - and to a certain extent conflicting. Given the choice which will turn out to be more important, Harry or the entire WW? That is, assuming DD is around to make the choice; my bet is that he won't be, that someone else will have to choose. Snow: I don't know about the Dumbledore appearing as the holier than thou scenario from the get-go concerning Harry. Dumbledore from the first encounter in the first book appears to be aloof to what had just transpired to close friends less than 24 hours before, let alone his self appointed guardianship to their child who was placed in the hands of in-laws who had to be bribed in some manner to even take him. Also the bit too celebrating attitude for what had just happened to the very people he asked to be secret keeper for. (This so reminds me of Dumbledore's unusual behavior of Pettigrew's escape, an almost identical response to what should have been anything but the relaxed, calm attitude that was displayed by him) It seems Dumbledore was celebrating something different than everyone else that night after Godric's Hollow. This was the very first instance that alerted me to the possibility that Dumbledore has a "for the greater good" idealism that is not Harry but involves Harry. This pre-destined Harry is just a part of a pre-destined overall plan. Everyone had a choice but Dumbledore was ready and prepared for the inevitable choice they made. Just take a look at the wands created for not only Tom Riddle/Voldemort but also the eventuality of Harry. The wand chooses the wizard, how clever of Dumbledore! The wizard does not in this case have a choice does he, but I think Dumbledore does. Too curious indeed that Harry's wand chose to choose him after the many that he had tried unsuccessfully. Not really that curious since the prophecy pre-empted the decision of who should be destined for that wand. Dumbledore supplied Olivander with not one but two feathers from his own phoenix Fawkes with a preordained destiny in mind. Whether this plan that was devised, most likely since the birth of Tom Riddle, will succeed is in the choices made by Harry but very closely watched and nurtured in a positive direction by Dumbledore and company in order to proceed to the plan that had been created long before the prophecy. Of course this is all in my opinion but I think that is what this site is all about take it or leave, claim it or use it for the actual outcome is not up to me but JKR who I am open hearted to whatever destiny awaits any character to her ultimate climatic ending. Kneasy: Conspiracy and betrayal; people or things not being as anticipated. Nice, knotty problems. Who to trust, why did he do that, what will he/she do under those circumstances, who is hiding what and why? Expect the unexpected. That's what HP is all about. Snow: Yes! Isn't it lovely! I particularly like the self-satisfaction to go head-to-head with the magnificence of JKR and possibly beat her to the punch, so-to-speak, it can be very exhilarating considering the lack of information given in over a half a million words. From navarro198 at hotmail.com Tue Aug 31 03:11:17 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 03:11:17 -0000 Subject: Fabian & Gideon's namesakes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111657 > Meri wrote: > She got the name right the first time round, he was just messing > with her in typical F&G fashion. > > Gina: > Yeah true, but when he said she was wrong she believed him. You didn't > hear her say, "Well, I think after all these years I should know above all > which of my sons are which!" :-) It is a unlikely theory, but still could be > argued. Bookworm: I agree with Meri on this one. Molly was out among Muggles, likely feeling rushed, trying to get four boys onto the train, and putting up with Ginny fussing because she can't go. Then there's this strange boy who needs help too. She is probably used to the twins switching on her so just accepts the comment without thinking about it. Ravenclaw Bookworm From navarro198 at hotmail.com Tue Aug 31 03:21:16 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 03:21:16 -0000 Subject: Book Two Discoveries! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111658 Terpnurse: Ya know, something else Harry learned in CoS (both in the book and in the Forbidden Media - where it might easily have been cut) is the fact the Lucius has other things hidden away at his house that once belonged to Tom Riddle. That's such a vague clue - and one repeated by three characters; DD, Draco, and Arthur Weasley - that we're forced to wonder just *what* else the Malfoys have in their own secret chamber. Bookworm: Same scene, different POV ? The Hand of Glory. It doesn't add anything to the plot. The deleted version of the scene is much longer and includes Draco almost finding Harry. IIRC, the part with the Malfoys coming into the store was deleted, but the Hand was left in. I might be willing to stake a couple of knuts on it ? any takers? Ravenclaw Bookworm From tonks_op at yahoo.com Mon Aug 30 21:56:02 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (tonks_op) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:56:02 -0000 Subject: Why is Tonks clumsy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111659 Lawless wrote: > > Maybe Tonks as we know her...is a disguise. OR...Tonks spends > > so much time in disguise that she can't easily adjust to her > > "original" body. > > > > Men and women have different centers of balance. If you suddenly > > turned a man into a woman, he would, theoretically, have to get > > used to the lower center of balance, and vice-versa. vidar_fe: > This is a very good theory. It's so simple, and yet explains > everything. However, I don't think she necessarily has to change > her gender. If Tonk just changes the general shape of her body, > could that possibly be enough to put her off balance? Let's say, > for instance, a significant increase / decrease of weight? > > Look out for the fat lady! :-) Tonks here: Ok folks, I couldn't let this one pass now could I? I am a little off balance because I am not using my cane. (Some of you will know what I mean.) And who are you calling a fat lady!! As to my character in the books. I am not a male. If you were a young lady with a name like Nymphadora, for God sakes, would you want anyone to know that!!! Think of what it would be like in school, the teasing oh, I don't want to remember those days!! I got enough teasing at Hogwarts because I am a half-blood with out the name too. WHAT WAS MY MOTHER THINKING?! (well maybe we know what my mother was thinking!!... but we won't go there ) The author probably made me a klutz because is adds to my charm.;-) Also as some of you have said, it may well be a clue in book 6 and 7 when someone is a klutz you might know who it is really is but there might be a bit more to it than that. Someone could pretend to be Tonks while not being her so that you will think it is Tonks .. er I mean me. And it is very difficult to balance when you are always changing around. Kinda like trying to balance on one foot all of the time. Tonks_op From restlesspoetry at yahoo.com Mon Aug 30 22:23:33 2004 From: restlesspoetry at yahoo.com (restlesspoetry) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:23:33 -0000 Subject: Why is Tonks clumbsy? In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040830004025.01eaaec0@pop.west.cox.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111660 lawless: Men and women have different centers of balance. If you suddenly turned a man into a woman, he would, theoretically, have to get used to the lower center of balance, and vice-versa. Perhaps the reason for her clumbsiness is: A) She's "really" a he and has a hard time adjusting to the female center of balance. or B) She is a she, but spends a majority of her time as a he, so that when she finally becomes a female again, she has an extremely hard time getting used to it, again. karyn: Hm. It's a really interesting point, but I *do* doubt that she's the half-blood prince. I'm sure her ability to transform will have a point in the coming books, as will her clumsiness, but a shift of gender doesn't have to equal clumsiness. I don't believe that you balance much differently according to gender. True, if you transform from a tiny skinny little guy to a big overweight woman, you have different balance. But it would be different still if you stayed in your gender but changed body type. As for her being called by her last name: so would I if I was named Nymphadora! --Karyn... who knows this will come back and bite her in the ass, but says it anyway. :P From Pouncevil at Att.Net Tue Aug 31 03:39:19 2004 From: Pouncevil at Att.Net (Pouncevil at Att.Net) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 03:39:19 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] audiobooks us vs. uk - dale vs fry Message-ID: <083120040339.9547.4133F2E70003CEA00000254B21602807410B070AADD2BBD20201AD@att.net> No: HPFGUIDX 111661 -------------- Original message from "Miller, Gina (JIS)" : -------------- >I live in the US so I have previously only listened to the Jim Dale versions. Could someone tell me if they think one is better than the other and what the differences are? I am sure the wording is different but what about accents and general mood of the book? I would love both UK and US opinions from people that have heard both! Or if you are from somewhere else and read listened to both sets. > > Gina A. Miller I have both the US & UK audio versions of all 5 books. The US is version is more entertaining but the UK version is more true to the original wording. I especially like the UK version due to the differences in slang and language were the most interesting. Both are great and entertaining. -- Ronald D. Reid [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From adragh at bcpl.net Tue Aug 31 00:25:44 2004 From: adragh at bcpl.net (adragh) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 00:25:44 -0000 Subject: audiobooks us vs. uk - dale vs fry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111662 Gina wrote: > I live in the US so I have previously only listened to the Jim > Dale versions. Could someone tell me if they think one is better > than the other and what the differences are? I am sure the wording > is different but what about accents and general mood of the book? My brother, who is blind, is a big fan of Jim Dale's readings. He says that he gets a very good sense of the characters by the way Dale speaks for them. Adragh From snow15145 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 03:47:35 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 03:47:35 -0000 Subject: Fabian & Gideon's namesakes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111663 Meri wrote: > She got the name right the first time round, he was just messing > with her in typical F&G fashion. > > Gina: > Yeah true, but when he said she was wrong she believed him. You didn't > hear her say, "Well, I think after all these years I should know above all > which of my sons are which!" :-) It is a unlikely theory, but still could be > argued. Bookworm: I agree with Meri on this one. Molly was out among Muggles, likely feeling rushed, trying to get four boys onto the train, and putting up with Ginny fussing because she can't go. Then there's this strange boy who needs help too. She is probably used to the twins switching on her so just accepts the comment without thinking about it. Ravenclaw Bookworm Snow: So other than this instance in the first book, which could be accepted, how do you explain Molly's behavior in OOP when she says that's everyone in the family? How can you possibly explain this blurted-out, caught-off-guard exclamation by Molly? Except that she was caught off guard and merely blurted out "that's everyone in the family". Doesn't Molly treat Harry like a surrogate son? Molly truthfully cares for Harry; this isn't a fake response on Molly's part. Molly is very companionate and mothering to those who are not her own, even to the point of fighting Harry's true caretaker (Sirius). I can see the possibility of Fred and George being adopted at a young age by Molly (see post # 101911) I can also appreciate her spontaneous response to Ron becoming a prefect. Slip of the tongue under high pressure, sleepless, worrying over all her family (including Harry) that they may die. You see how she worried about Harry dieing along with her own family and he is not her son. Molly is good but she is not flawless. I can defiantly see her making this enormous mistake under the pressures she had been enduring. From sherriola at earthlink.net Tue Aug 31 03:54:36 2004 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:54:36 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: audiobooks us vs. uk - dale vs fry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <015301c48f0e$3c7bffd0$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 111664 My brother, who is blind, is a big fan of Jim Dale's readings. He says that he gets a very good sense of the characters by the way Dale speaks for them. Adragh Sherry now Yes, I am blind, and I love Jim Dale's readings. He does different voices for every character, and he is consistent. So, his voice for Harry is the same in all the books. His Dumbledore voice sort of grew over time, changing a little by the end of the first book, but after that it was the same in all. He seems to be able to give the characters life, and they come to my imagination as I picture them from the text. No matter if the dialog is attributed or not, you can always tell who's speaking the lines. i've heard great things about the UK versions, and I'd like to hear them as well. Sherry G From sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com Tue Aug 31 04:20:36 2004 From: sherlockholme_ac at rediffmail.com (Amey Chinchorkar) Date: 31 Aug 2004 04:20:36 -0000 Subject: HBP - who is he? Message-ID: <20040831042036.30506.qmail@webmail7.rediffmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111665 Hi all, De-lurking after a looong time So, as we have a lot of time before we get our hands on HBP, I was thinking who that might be (as all of us are bound to, since we can't get the books to prove and disprove any old theories), and started thinking about P part of it. (Sorry if it is mentioned earlier). So what is royalty associated with? Knights? And what knights we have on ground till now? Nick, Bloody Baron (OK, not exactly a knight), and others of Headless Hunt. And then I came across one thing I missed on first count. *Knights of Walpurgis*. They were an ancient order, and now they are renamed and with a new leader, so I didn?t count them first. But then, is it possible that HBP is the actual leader of *Knights* whom Voldemort defeated, and who has come ahead now to claim his clan back? Whose side can he be now? But then I thought that his description (assuming the description given by JKR is his) is too much *lionasque* to be a leader of a Dark Force. So what if he is the leader of the other side? I mean, there must be somebody who is resisting the Knights in all the ages they were there? (Or am I watching too much of The Mummy series?) The *Order* is too much younger considering the age of the Knights. Because we know Dumbledore created the Order, he did not take it over (from somebody else who owned Fawkes and the Sword etc). So there must be another Order to balance the *Knights*. What if the HBP is the leader of this new (I mean Old) *Order* something like Knights of Anti-Walpurgis (Window-purgis anyone)? Comments welcome Amey [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From slgazit at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 31 05:35:55 2004 From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 05:35:55 -0000 Subject: Book Two Discoveries! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111666 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "scoutmom21113" wrote: > Same scene, different POV ? The Hand of Glory. It doesn't > add anything to the plot. > > The deleted version of the scene is much longer and includes Draco > almost finding Harry. IIRC, the part with the Malfoys coming into > the store was deleted, but the Hand was left in. I might be willing > to stake a couple of knuts on it ? any takers? I agree. Knockturn Alley seems to be an unnecessary plot twist both in the book and the movie. That is appears in both indicates that it will feature once again - now with the rise of LV places like Knockturn Alley and especially the kind of vendors we saw there are probably thriving. Two other things that showed up in book 2 but not since: the Chamber of Secrets itself - I find it hard to believe that the only secret there was the hidden basilisk and entrance - and Harry's parceltongue talent. I am sure both will feature again, perhaps together, as entering the chamber requires use of parceltongue. Salit From elfundeb at comcast.net Tue Aug 31 05:38:14 2004 From: elfundeb at comcast.net (elfundeb2) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 05:38:14 -0000 Subject: Where is our Prince? (And Where Did Those Wizards Get Their Titles?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111667 Magda Grantwich wrote: > I don't believe the HBP is a living person. [snip] > The HBP is a legend about a descendent of Godric Gryffindor, just > like Riddle's Heir of Slytherin claim. [snip] When yet another GG descendent (Harry) was born at > the end of July, thus making him eligible to be the subject of the > prophecy, Voldemort probably saw it as absolute proof that Harry was > THE child. But we know Harry cannot be the child, because JKR has already put the kibosh on that. So does that mean the title of Book 6 refers to . . . nobody? Seriously, I have been pondering for quite some time (ever since I posted the HBP poll and decided I didn't like any of the choices, including a new character) that the HBP may not refer to a person at all, but instead is solely an idea or myth. The word "prince" is not to be taken literally, but refers to a kind of messianic figure -- either in the form of a prophecy (not an odd thing to occur in a society under persecution), or an Arthurian-type legend about great deeds, which few people credit as the truth (in the same way that few believed the Basilisk legend). While Harry cannot be the HBP (since JKR said so), he may believe that he must live up to the legend, giving him a source of angst in Book Six to rival his worry in CoS that he was the Heir of Slytherin. The one problem I haven't been able to resolve with this theory is what it could add to the plot, since all that angst has already fallen on Harry now that he knows the prophecy and Dumbledore's interpretation of it. Meidbh wrote: > >If the > >WW reflects our world (which it does to some extent) I think it is > >fair to assume that people with the resources to become great > >wizards and construct a castle would have been nobility in their > >world. And Ffred asked: > And I think that if there were any "titled" wizards around (who would have > given them those titles, I still wonder?), we would have seen them at > Hogwarts. The Hon. Draco Malfoy perhaps... I've got an answer for your question. I think all those titled wizards were members of the muggle English nobility. My sense is that witches and wizards lived amongst the muggles as part of their society. According to the Lexicon, the WW didn't withdraw from the muggle world until 1692. In any event, every generation seems to produce a fair number of muggle-born wizards, so it's logical to conclude that some of those muggle-borns would have been of noble birth. And since their children would likely be wizards, the ranks of the nobility likely were populated with wizarding families as well as muggle families. I believe the WW had no monarchy of its own partly because it would have been treason to create one: they were subjects of the crown. Certainly the WW was sufficiently aware of the monarchy and nobility to recognize and use its language in its own myths. Presumably, the Wizard's Council evolved (perhaps with knowledge and/or consent of the crown) to deal with magical issues that would not be a priority for the muggle government. Though I have not found the date when the Wizards Council was succeeded by the MoM, I believe it most likely occurred after wizards went into hiding. Meidbh again: > And as far as we know none of the old families, the purebloods, > appear to be titled. Now. In fact other than our self proclaimed > Lord VM there we've seen no contemporary titled WWfolk at all. > > So where is our prince? > > Well, there appear to have been stronger links and similarities > between Muggle society and the WW in the past, at least before the > International Statute of Wizarding Secrecy of 1692. And we do have > evidence of titled magical folk in the past. We have Sir Cadogan, a > portrait knight in armour and the ghost Sir Patrick Delaney- Podmore > of the Headless Hunt. Morgana le Fey, King Arthurs sorceress half > sister, was Queen of Avalon. And of course, my personal favourite > (), Queen Maeve was a mediaeval Irish witch (ref: JKRs chocolate > frog cards). Don't forget the nearly headless Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington! And given JKR's talent for co-opting existing legends for her own use, the fact that the Arthurian world was littered with titled wizarding folk seems to support my theory that magical folk had accepted muggle titles from muggle monarchs. Ffred: But that the WW was dominated by its ancient families, whose > stability and lineage had also given them the opportunity to become > sufficiently wealthy to be independent. > > So that the Founders (and indeed the other wizarding aristocrats) would have > regarded titles from nasty little Muggle barbarian monarchs as very much > beneath their contempt: they just didn't need them. I don't know about that. I think that at least some wizarding aristocrats liked muggle titles just fine, since they didn't hesitate to use them notwithstanding their muggle origin. (And the old-fashioned ones, like Nearly Headless Nick, still do like to use their titles. NHN had his title on his Deathday cake.) Certainly referring to one's family as the "Noble and Most Ancient House of Black" implies that some wizards left their titles -- at least insofar as they represented notions of superiority -- behind with some regret. Debbie From camilla at vaughan3.fsnet.co.uk Mon Aug 30 19:52:24 2004 From: camilla at vaughan3.fsnet.co.uk (millimagus) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 19:52:24 -0000 Subject: Fabian & Gideon's namesakes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111668 > Tina says: > I also like the idea of Fred and George named (sort of) after their > OotP uncles, killed in the line of duty. Maybe they were born soon > after their murders... > I do think however that they are Molly's and Arthur's natural > children. In GoF Ch5 Harry notes "Charlie was built like the twins, > shorter and stockier than Percy and Ron, who were both long and > lanky." Not definitive but points to their being brothers. Although, when Molly finds out that Ron's made prefect, she does say 'that's everyone in the family!' (to which Fred and George object). That's definitely an interesting theory. Milli. From lupinesque at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 06:37:16 2004 From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 06:37:16 -0000 Subject: Fabian & Gideon's namesakes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111669 Gina wrote: > My mother and I discuss this a lot. I think Fred and George may have been > Molly's nephews that she and Arthur adopted. Hm . . . you mean Fred and George are the sons of either Fabian or Gideon? That kind of does away with the symmetry that caught my eye, though. Gideon had no particular reason to give his kids the initials F & G; nor did Fabian; but Molly did, if her brothers had those initials. I realize my background is showing (Jewish, where one names children after dead relatives, not living ones), but it seems to me that a pair of brothers fallen in war are likely to be honored with namesakes, whereas a man is not terribly likely to name his twin sons after himself and his brother. I also realize we're in the realm of total speculation, here, and that the repeated initials could be another Mark Evans. Amy Z --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Whomping Willow was a very violent tree which stood alone in the middle of the grounds. From ameliagoldfeesh at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 07:01:02 2004 From: ameliagoldfeesh at yahoo.com (A. Delavan) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 00:01:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry... Tsk Tsk (Re: Snape's DE past) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040831070102.66855.qmail@web21125.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111670 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, dumbledore11214 wrote:> Alla: > So, why, > why would he (Dumbledore) think that Voldemort, had >he been given a choice, would rather go after him >than Harry? A Goldfeesh: I must ask you, Alla, don't you think that LV, if given a chance, would kill Dumbledore? If LV could either kill AD or HP through the Occulemency lessons he would, I believe. It would be like killing two birds with one stone. If HP were controlled and forced to kill AD, what do you think the result would be? Would Fudge, Umbridge, and the Ministry say, "Oops, we can see that you were being controlled by LV (whom we don't want to admit has returned), it was a terrible accident, have a nice day."? Or would Harry get thrown into Azkaban or at the very least, out of Hogwarts, where he is a sitting duck for both the Ministry (remember Umbridge tried to have him killed) and for LV. The Order would try to protect him, but DD is a very, very important component. Not to mention the fact that if Dumbledore were killed by HP, The-Boy-Who-Lived, the uproar and turmoil the Wizarding World would be thrown into? Dumbledore isn't just anybody after all- he was the one wizard that LV feared. Alla: > > Dumbledore should have guessed that Voldemort does > not care about > killing him, but about killing Harry. > Killing Dumbledore would make it that much easier to kill Harry- that is why Dumbledore is so concerned. A Goldfeesh __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 07:04:15 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 07:04:15 -0000 Subject: Fabian & Gideon's namesakes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111671 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "snow15145" wrote: > > Bookworm: > I agree with Meri on this one. Molly was out among Muggles, likely > feeling rushed, trying to get four boys onto the train, and putting > up with Ginny fussing because she can't go. Then there's this > strange boy who needs help too. She is probably used to the twins > switching on her so just accepts the comment without thinking about > it. Finwitch: And anyway, I can see a mother messing the names of two of her sons - my own mother did that with me and my sister, and we aren't even twins; I was around 5 when my sister was born... So mixing the names of *identical twins* would be an _easy_ mistake. People mix even with two of that different age. > Snow: > > So other than this instance in the first book, which could be > accepted, how do you explain Molly's behavior in OOP when she says > that's everyone in the family? How can you possibly explain this > blurted-out, caught-off-guard exclamation by Molly? Except that she > was caught off guard and merely blurted out "that's everyone in the > family".--snip-- I can defiantly see her making this > enormous mistake under the pressures she had been enduring. Finwitch: I think she wasn't talking about being made prefect, exactly. Success, more like. They're all - brilliant, great etc. and I can see Fred&George reject that comment from her. After all, most they get from her is scolding. (then again, that's success to them! Yay, we got Mom yell again - now lets make her laugh...) We didn't get to see, but getting Apparation License possibly counts for greatness in her books for F&G... But what of Ginny? She's too young to have been made a prefect! (She might be in the next book, though) Or is she _great_ just to be the one girl after six boys, getting to the ball during her third year by invitation? Or maybe she got great grades or something... Poor Molly, think how the officious Percy treats her now! Finwitch From susanadacunha at gmx.net Tue Aug 31 02:19:30 2004 From: susanadacunha at gmx.net (Susana da Cunha) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 03:19:30 +0100 Subject: Is time changing or are people changing in time? References: Message-ID: <009f01c48f01$0f97c380$3c280dd4@taxi> No: HPFGUIDX 111672 Snow previously: > And now the watch! Could Dumbledore be checking his watch to see > where else he is at another time in space? > Potioncat: That's one of the best ideas about the watch I've ever read! Snow: "Thanks! It's just that one statement by Dumbledore that haunts me, where he says to Fudge as he looks at his watch "I'll give you one hour of my time tonight". I realize it could simply be a way of talking but I don't think so it sounds like something more than that." ---------- I have to eco Potioncat here: That's one of the best ideas about the watch I've ever read! And I've search through 20,000 posts looking for ideas about the watch (Yes. Clicking "next" over and over and over and over again!). The watch has been my pet wonder for quite some time. I can figure out the planets. If there are 12 (I don't think the number is mentioned in canon) they can tell time (sideral time that is - as in an astrological chart). And that made me wonder: why would anyone need the "complete" sideral time? That is minute, hour, day, month, year, age and era. You only need a watch that can tell years if you're traveling in time - a lot! And if you are, sideral time is more reliable (no extra days every four years). And what about the hands? 12 of them. Another astrological chart? For his other "self" somewhere in time? Good. But he tells normal time (not sideral) with his watch. That means he needs at least two hands for that. My guess so far goes as fallows: 2 hands to tell normal time; 1 hand pointing year, which would be the degree in the age house (2,200 years) - not easy to tell just by looking at the planets, so I've read; 1 hand for the moon fase (good for potions and stuff); 1 hand that fallows the sun except when the watch travels back in time - when that happens the planets freeze and the hand goes back the amount of time traveled (sideral time). The hand then marks the time remaining to "catch up" with the point where you left (time of the day); 1 hand that follows the sun but jumps forward when you go forward in time - that way, if you go forward and then back again you don't loose track of your other "selves"; 4 hands point month and year for the two previous situations; 2 extra hands - no idea. (Anyone?) The problem I have with this so far is: One: I have no idea what I'm talking about! I'm not an astronomy fan and even less of an astrology fan. I'm probably proving real ignorance by posting this. Two: you can't have more than three "selves" running around in time. Three: way too complicated! Anxious to read your thoughts, Susana From adesah at juno.com Tue Aug 31 03:02:55 2004 From: adesah at juno.com (Adesa) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 03:02:55 -0000 Subject: Book Two Discoveries! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111673 > Terpnurse: > Ya know, something else Harry learned in CoS (both in the book and in > the Forbidden Media - where it might easily have been cut) is the fact > the Lucius has other things hidden away at his house that once belonged > to Tom Riddle. That's such a vague clue - and one repeated by three > characters; DD, Draco, and Arthur Weasley - that we're forced to > wonder just *what* else the Malfoys have in their own secret chamber. Adesa: Yes! Yes! Yes! I've wondered since I first read that passage when JKR would be bringing us back to the remaining contraband. Harry later passes the info on to Ron (thereby sending the message to Arthur), and we assume he's able to bust Malfoy on it. But there's more to it, I'm sure. What *else* is hidden at the Malfoy mansion? What other hidden chambers might Lucius have? And what about Knockturn Alley? That whole incident could *easily* been cut from the m-word, yet it remained. If you watch the deleted scenes, what information actually *was* cut, and what remained? Knockturn Alley is still there, but how much revelation about the Malfoy's stash remains? Adesa~who's been lurking quite awhile and ignoring her responsibilities just trying to keep up with all of you! "A crackdown on innocent homeschooling families to cure the incompetence of government child welfare agencies is like a smoker lopping off his ear to treat metastatic lung cancer. It's a bloody wrong cure conceived by a fool who caused his own disease." ~Michelle Malkin From dr1ft81 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 03:06:20 2004 From: dr1ft81 at yahoo.com (dr1ft81) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 03:06:20 -0000 Subject: audiobooks us vs. uk - dale vs fry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111674 Gina: > I live in the US so I have previously only listened to the Jim > Dale versions. Could someone tell me if they think one is better > than the other and what the differences are? I am sure the wording > is different but what about accents and general mood of the book? I've heard, and have, both audio sets and here is how I would describe the difference: Dale bores me. When listening to Dale, my attention always wavers. But Fry keeps my attention and does the voices well. His Hagrid is brilliant (think Robbie Coltrane). I can't make a similar judgement on Dale because I can't stand to listen long enough. I've seen a discussion on the HP newsgroup where most people liked Dale, though, and said something like "Fry gives you a relaxing reading; Dale gives you an all out performance." Check out http://www.bbcshop.com/invt/1855496801 for a clip of Fry reading. "dr1ft81" From zendemort at yahoo.co.uk Tue Aug 31 05:54:02 2004 From: zendemort at yahoo.co.uk (zendemort) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 05:54:02 -0000 Subject: Master of This School Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111675 I found something very intringuing while reading PoA for the second time. It is minute, but interesting nonetheless. When Snape comes across the Marauder's Map, he tells the map "Professor Severus Snape, master of this school, demands that you reveal the secrets you hide" (quote is not exact but along the same lines, although the "master of this school" part is exact). But there is a little problem here. You see, Snape is not the master of Hogwarts!!!! DD is the "master of this school"!!!! So why does Snape call himself master of the school? I wonder what he is after? Does he wish to become the Headmaster of Hogwarts at one point? hmmm....... This could provide clues into his personality... and his private thoughts (possibly, he considers himself greater than Dumbledore, the true master?)... But can it also tell us anything yet to come? "zendemort" From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 06:21:13 2004 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 06:21:13 -0000 Subject: thoughts on a phoenix In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111676 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, macfotuk at y... wrote: > As usual, apologies if these are not new ideas: > > Fawkes has figured large in one way or another ever since his > first appearance in CoS - maybe even before that if you consider > that Harry's wand feather is from this particular pheonix and was > introduced in SS/PS. > snip< Doddiemoemoe here: First off, I believe if there is a phoenix connection here it would have to be Harry...who has survive LV and cronies numerous times....there is a real connection here... I agree with you that the phoenix has even greater properties than what we are led to believe in that..I believe harry is also a leguimens and a great one at that... I believe this because of what occurred in the COS.. (u.s. version COS pg.319) ""Help me,help me, "Harry muttered wildly,"soeone--anyone" The snake's tail whipped across the floor again. Harry ducked. Something soft hit his face." I think that Harry could in fact speak to the basilisk. And if there was a mystery to be solved it would be LV realizing this fact. However LV is a nimrod and this episode falls by the way side. My point is, if Harry's "words" in the COS ring true and the basilisk flug the hat in Harry's direction, then I cannot wait until he decides to utter something to Nagini... Also, I think that if Ron or Hermione "die" then they will be saved beforehand by becoming a phoenix animagus. Doddie (who is currently wondering why on earth he urged Harry to take divination) From susanadacunha at gmx.net Tue Aug 31 06:27:03 2004 From: susanadacunha at gmx.net (Susana da Cunha) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 07:27:03 +0100 Subject: Lupin visiting Sirius in Azkaban References: Message-ID: <002b01c48f23$8bb92310$462f0dd4@taxi> No: HPFGUIDX 111677 > > mhbobbin wrote: > > > > Alla--please point me to where DD testifies at Sirius' hearing. I don't recall this--only that Sirius was sent away without trial by Barty Crouch Senior.I believe it was Old Barty who never allowed > > Sirius to be heard. > Nora wrote: > PoA, American hardcover, page 392: > "I myself gave evidence to the Ministry that Sirius had been the > Potters' Secret Keeper." > Not quite a hearing, but testimony nonetheless...interesting though, ain't it? mhbobbin: "Yes, it is questionable why DD didn't legiwhatzy Sirius nto to mention talk to him. Perhaps he didn't have access. Perhaps it didn't occur to him---too weird. Another apparent instance of DD's fallibility. Although there's considerable injustice presented to us in the Penseive scenes in GoF, it is interesting to see DD involved in this particular one. We certainly see Moody and DD unhappy with and unable to prevent the outcome of the way justice is served --Bagman, Karkoroff, Crouch Junion--after the downfall of LV at GH . And speaking of Leglimens ability--I have suspected Lupin of having some legilmens ability--just too many observations by Harry that Lupin seems to know what he's thinking etc. So why didn't Lupin legiwhatzy Sirius." --------------- I don't think is proper to legiwhatzy your friends: "Not that I suspect you, Sirius, but do you mind if I rape your brain just in case you're a traitorous son of a #\#?" As for DD, I might have dreamt this, but I have a faint recollection of DD saying he tried to get Sirius a fair trial (maybe in GoF? I don't have that one with me.). But if he did, I think it was out of ethics. IMO, the evidence was conclusive enough, but there could be attenuating factors that would only come out in a fair trial. Sirius could have been tortured or under the impirius curse. But, of course, that was what the ministry was afraid of! With all the DEs getting away with that excuse, they were NOT letting the most hated DE of all escape on 'reasonable doubt'! Solution: he's so guilty there's no need for a trial. Lock him up, throw away the key. Ministry saves face. But back to DD, if he thought Sirius was guilty there was no point visiting him in askaban. And Lupin? Oh, well, would you really go to a place full of dementors to say "how could you" to someone that doesn't deserve the air he breads? It's not that Lupin is not the confrontational sort; he's just too reasonable to need that. Susana From susanadacunha at gmx.net Tue Aug 31 07:54:56 2004 From: susanadacunha at gmx.net (Susana da Cunha) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 08:54:56 +0100 Subject: Is time changing or are people changing in time? References: <009f01c48f01$0f97c380$3c280dd4@taxi> Message-ID: <003101c48f2f$d65becc0$462f0dd4@taxi> No: HPFGUIDX 111678 I woke up this morning with an epiphany so I'm replying to my own post! The time meter (DD's pocket watch) works like this: The planets tell sideral time. 2 hands tell time of day (hours and minutes). 2 hands point year and month in the Gregorian calendar (our current). 2 hands point year and month in the Gregorian calendar before the reform (VIIIX). 2 hands point year and month in the Julian calendar. 4 hands are adjustable to travel in time (It's a time turner! It's a time turner!): adjust to time of day, day, month and year (in sideral time) and it takes you there... I mean... then! The planets and other hands then adjust, allowing you to tell time whenever you are! By the way, It's not just the vomit flavored Bernie Bott Bean. Did anyone else notice that one of the examiners in OotP had examined DD in his transfiguration NEWT? If DD is 150, how old is the examiner? 200? If DD had been born in the 1920's he could have tasted the vomit flavored Bernie Bott Bean in the 1930's, then been examined by a 50 years old examiner (now 110) in the early 1940's. After that he went back (or forward) in time because I don't believe he was around 18 when he defeated Wizard-Hitler in 1945. If he was born in the 1920's he had 80 extra years to travel through time. Which brings another question to my mind: where was Tom/Voldy between leaving school and returning so changed that very few recognized him? Or should I ask *when* was he? (Salazar's ancestor anyone?) Susana (I can't help myself. I just love the time issue!) From zendemort at yahoo.co.uk Tue Aug 31 06:34:08 2004 From: zendemort at yahoo.co.uk (zendemort) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 06:34:08 -0000 Subject: Harry... Tsk Tsk (Re: Snape's DE past) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111679 > Alla: > Don't get me wrong. Story-wise, plot-wise Snape and Harry > spending more time together was a perfect idea, but looking > within the story, I want to smack Dumbledore. > > Sure, he probably acted with good intentions. (as always :o)), > but he is supposed to be SMART. Forget omnicient, just smart. > So, why, why would he think that Voldemort, had he been given > a choice, would rather go after him than Harry? > > What sense does it make, especially in light that Dumbledore > knows that Voldie is aware of the Prophecy? > > Dumbledore should have guessed that Voldemort does not care > about killing him, but about killing Harry. Zendemort: Ok, so it is my turn to butt in. I don't think Dumbledore was afraid that Voldemort was after himself. Dumbledore thought that Voldemort would use Harry to provoke Dumbledore in possibly injuring Harry, much like what happened at the end, where Harry became Voldemort, and told DD to kill him. A possessed Harry could be dangerous to anyone, including the whole school, and if Voldemort knew that getting into Harry would somehow distrupt Dumbledore in anyway, that's exactly what he would have done. But, nonetheless, I don't think Dumbledore is telling us everything. Pairing up Snape and Harry might be a good idea, especially since they would see into each other's thoughts, each other's past. This relationship is being built up for a reason yet to come. From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 08:23:20 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 08:23:20 -0000 Subject: Master of This School In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111680 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "zendemort" wrote: > I found something very intringuing while reading PoA for the second > time. It is minute, but interesting nonetheless. > > When Snape comes across the Marauder's Map, he tells the > map "Professor Severus Snape, master of this school, demands that > you reveal the secrets you hide" (quote is not exact but along the > same lines, although the "master of this school" part is exact). But > there is a little problem here. You see, Snape is not the master of > Hogwarts!!!! DD is the "master of this school"!!!! So why does Snape > call himself master of the school? I wonder what he is after? Does > he wish to become the Headmaster of Hogwarts at one point? > hmmm....... > This could provide clues into his personality... and his private > thoughts (possibly, he considers himself greater than Dumbledore, > the true master?)... But can it also tell us anything yet to come? Finwitch: Not so sure... Dumbledore is the Headmaster. (and Snape tends to say Headmaster when addressing him). Noting that they ALSO have Head Boy and Head Girl among loads of boys and girls - well, I think that any *adult* working at Hogwarts - including Madams Pince and Hooch, as well as Argus Filch - are masters and mistresses of Hogwarts - the HEADmaster is their leader. (I think the house-elves call ANY adult employ their master/mistress). Got to make some use of the HEAD- prefix, I think. Secondly, Snape is also Potions Master - is it referring to skill and tested by Potions Guild - or just his teaching job? But about Snape being ambitious... Ambition is a Slytherin charasteric, set so by the Sorting Hat - and Snape was Slytherin as a Hogwarts boy, and is Head of Slytherin House. (Another reason to make him Master of Hogwarts, hmm?) Of course he IS! Finwitch From trinity31405 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 30 22:41:32 2004 From: trinity31405 at yahoo.com (Trinity) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:41:32 -0000 Subject: HarryMort (was many other things) long In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111681 CRobo wrote: > Let's say that Harry receives some fraction or part of Voldie at > GH. >snip > However, when Voldie uses Harry's blood to restore his body, he > has now altered the percentages > > snip > > Perhaps, since Voldie believes that Harry is more powerful from the > portion of the prophecy that he knows, he thinks he'll just > assimilate (too much Star Trek, I know!) Harry and become more > powerful than he (Voldie) already is. But Lily's charm prevents > the assimilation of Harry, and instead Voldie's curse backfires and > put into motion the backup plan, that when Voldie is about to be > killed, he escapes his body and lodges in another. Harry, the only > living person around, is the target. But only a portion of Voldie > gets in because of the charm, and the rest is left to sulk in Albania. > > Fast forward to the cemetery near the Riddle's manor and the dark > magic that Voldie uses to get a/his body back. So does Harry lose > any of himself when his blood is used in the spell or does there > become 'more' of Harry? I suppose that depends on what this dark > magic does. I'm proposing first that taking Harry's blood or > Wormtail's hand, does not lessen their own percentages of being, > but just adds to Voldie. And let's assume that he has to be 100% of > whatever combination he can come up with to have a body. > Now there isn't enough of Harry on his own to exist. Hello all, I must come out of lurking for this thread. CRobo, I have been thinking along the same lines, not necessarily the math part but you are on to something. I have been thinking about Voldemort "possessing" or something like that to ensure his mortality. Voldemort really does like possessing people. What if this was Voldemort's plan and it went wrong due to Lily's sacrifice. The curse rebounds on Voldemort, separating him and creating the connection of the two. Perhaps Lily's love stopped anything evil from invading Harry, so that Harry received the non- evil portion of Voldemort (i.e. powers), therefore we have essence divided. I believe Harry is more than 100% (more than just Harry), because he is now carrying a part of Voldemort in him. I offer the following to back my reasoning: "D'you-d' you know why my scar's hurting me?" Dumbledore looked very intently at Harry for a moment, and then said, "I have a theory, no more than that...It is my belief that your scar hurts both when Lord Voldemort is near you and when he is feeling a particularly strong surge of hatred." "But...why?" "Because you and he are connected by the curse that failed" said Dumbledore. "That is no ordinary scar." pg. 600 GOF US Dumbledore also seems to be able to look at (into) Harry and gage Voldemort's power and strength. Another quote... "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. pg 601 GOF US Perhaps by Voldemort taking Harry's blood to obtain "Lily's" protection, he has also made himself vulnerable to Harry. I would love to hear more thoughts on this. Ok, I have to think more about this, going back to lurking now. "Trinity" From bd88ns at blueyonder.co.uk Tue Aug 31 00:42:11 2004 From: bd88ns at blueyonder.co.uk (linda) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 00:42:11 -0000 Subject: Half Blood Prince Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111682 I've read the description behind the dartboard too and its annoyingly familiar. Incidentally, Madame Hooch has yellow eyes. My first thought was werewolf but I can't find a description of Lupin's eyes to back it up. Now to the half-blood prince. I still have a theory that it is Voldemort. Remember in book 2 when Dobby came with a warning. In the British paperback version on page 18 Dobby is very clear that the danger facing Harry back at Hogwarts has nothing whatsoever to do with Voldemort/He who must not be named. Now turn to page 249,in the eyes of Dobby the present incarnation of Voldemort is a seperate entity from the young Tom Marvolo Riddle. If he could leave an echo of himself in the diary, how many other impressions of Tom Riddle are lying around the place. My suspicion is that we have been fed a useful bit of info from the book but not the description of the prince. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 31 09:13:58 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 05:13:58 -0400 Subject: Lupin visiting Sirius in Azkaban Message-ID: <003d01c48f3a$da1d6090$0cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 111683 Alla: "I think (besides plot reasons, of course) that Sirius did not go to Dumbledore precisely because Dumbledore was so easily convinced of Sirius' guilt. He testified at Sirius hearing, right? He did not even insist (as far as we know) to let Sirius tell his story. I am not surprised at all, frankly." DuffyPoo: My problem with it is this: "We entered your third year. I watched from afar as you struggled to repel Dementors, *as you found Sirius, learned what he was* and rescued him." [DD OotP The Lost Prophecy] DD by the beginning of third year believes that Sirius is innocent or why would he let HP get near him, as he clearly did, when others thought Sirius wanted to kill HP? While DD may have been suspicious of everyone but himself at the time of the S-K charm, what was it that caused him to believe Sirius capable of giving up his friends to LV and blowing up a street full of Muggles? Not a schoolboy prank, surely! And just when did DD realize Sirius was not the Secret-Keeper and had not blown up the street full of Muggles? What happened in those twelve years to change his mind about Sirius? Sirius didn't have time to go to DD after the attack at GH he was too busy going after Wormtail. Wrong decision maybe but one made in grief and anger. I still don't understand why DD didn't try to talk to Sirius once he was in Azkaban (if anyone could have gotten a visit, DD would have). He may not have been able to overrule the ministry's decision, but he would have 'known' Peter Petigrew was the Secret-Keeper, and Sirius was innocent, and possibly Sirius' speculation that PP had turned into a rat and ran down the sewer. It is interesting that DD says, in PoA, "I myself gave evidence to the Ministry that Sirius had been the Potters' Secret-Keeper" (why does he say Potters' here instead of 'your parents'?) yet, in GoF, Sirius says "Oh, I know Crouch all right. He was the one who gave the order for me to be sent to Azkaban -- without a trial." Charme said: "I also don't think DD has ever really confirmed this in any of the books thus far, has he? " DuffyPoo: "You can speak Parseltongue, Harry," said Dumbledore calmly, "because Lord Voldemort -- who is the last remaining descendant of Salazar Slytherin -- can speak Parseltongue." [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 31 09:14:22 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 05:14:22 -0400 Subject: Book Two Discoveries! Message-ID: <004101c48f3a$e7962b30$0cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 111684 Kristen "13) He learned that Tom Riddle was the last remaining descendent of Salazar Slytherin (pretty unbalanced to learn that much about Slytherin and nothing about Gryffindor :)." DuffyPoo: I've had this thought myself. During Binns' lecture in the book (McGonnagal in the movie) we learn about Gryffindor and Slytherin but learn throughout the book so much more about Slytherin, and nothing of significance about Gryffindor, not even the reason for the big final blow-up that sent Slytherin packing. Possibly because Gryffindor was Muggle-born? He and SS were best friends, SS overlooking the Muggle connection, until GG wouldn't side with him in which kids to take into the school? GG and the others would also be well aware of the persecution of common people toward magical and have reasons to keep the school hidden, etc. However, if GG were Muggle-born (he'd be in line for the HBP bit as well) and suddenly SS is spouting his "Pure-bloods rule" business, wanted Muggle-borns out of the school because they were untrustworthy, turns against GG because he won't support SS's theory and after years of friendship is calling GG an 'untrustworthy' Muggle, etc. Good cause for a nice big rift, I'd think, and it might play in to why SS went from a simple 'distrust' of Muggles/Muggleborns to a hatred so strong he left a basilisk in a secret chamber to be released onto the school to remove the Muggle-borns once his true heir arrived on the spot and let it loose. After all, it only took Tom Riddle having a Muggle father who deserted his witch mother for him to hate, not only TR Sr, but all Muggles/Muggle-borns as well. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 03:57:59 2004 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 03:57:59 -0000 Subject: Conspiracies and re-assessments In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111685 Snow: > Dumbledore from the first encounter in the first book appears to > be aloof to what had just transpired to close friends less than > 24 hours before, let alone his self-appointed guardianship to > their child who was placed in the hands of in-laws who had to be > bribed in some manner to even take him. Also the bit too celebrating > attitude for what had just happened to the very people he asked to > be secret keeper for. (This so reminds me of Dumbledore's unusual > behavior of Pettigrew's escape, an almost identical response to what > should have been anything but the relaxed, calm attitude that was > displayed by him.) It seems Dumbledore was celebrating something > different than everyone else that night after Godric's Hollow. This > was the very first instance that alerted me to the possibility that > Dumbledore has a "for the greater good" idealism that is not Harry > but involves Harry. > > This pre-destined Harry is just a part of a pre-destined overall > plan. Everyone had a choice but Dumbledore was ready and prepared > for the inevitable choice they made. Just take a look at the wands > created for not only Tom Riddle/Voldemort but also the eventuality > of Harry. The wand chooses the wizard, how clever of Dumbledore! > The wizard does not in this case have a choice does he, but I think > Dumbledore does. Dumbledore supplied Olivander with not one > but two feathers from his own phoenix Fawkes with a preordained > destiny in mind. > > Whether this plan that was devised, most likely since the birth of > Tom Riddle, will succeed is in the choices made by Harry but very > closely watched and nurtured in a positive direction by Dumbledore > and company in order to proceed to the plan that had been created > long before the prophecy. Marcela: You know, I have always thought that even though DD is a very powerful wizard (sorcerer?), he knew way too much about what was going on, had a too calm attitude in front of shocking events... Even after reading some theories about DD using time-turners (sort of explaining why he knows so much), they still didn't convince me totally. But after reading your thoughts quoted above, I remembered DD mentioning S. Trelawney being the great-great-grand-daughter of a very famous and gifted Seer (Cassandra)... maybe DD was given a prophecy by this Cassandra, which helped him get organized against Voldy, get the Order started, prepare the two wands, 'set the scene' for Harry to face vapor-mort in PS (I strongly believe that DD orchestrated that event, even Harry thinks so), etc., etc. Who knows, maybe DD's prophecy says that Harry will have to 'defy' the Dark Lord 7 times to finally defeat him (so far it's been 5, with two more books coming) in the same manner as Harry's prophecy says that his parents had to have defied Voldy thrice. DD might not have the complete knowledge of 'how' things are going to happen, but he somehow (with his own prophecy) knows the 'outcome' of certain key events. All he has to do is connect the dots or provide the means for those events to happen, and maybe that's another reason why he didn't tell Harry of his prophecy before his 5th year, because he knows what a burden its knowledge is AND because he *knows* that Harry will defeat Voldy. Appologies if this has been debated already. Marcela From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 31 09:15:39 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 05:15:39 -0400 Subject: Fabian & Gideon's namesakes Message-ID: <004501c48f3b$159400c0$0cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 111686 Amy Z "It just occurred to me that Fred & George's initials are the same as those of Fabian and Gideon Prewett, who were, most likely, Molly's brothers. Coincidence, or were they named (initialled) for their recently-killed uncles? I lean toward the latter." DuffyPoo: Where does it say that Gideon and Fabian are Molly's brothers? They could have been her first cousins, or her father and uncle, or two uncles. JKR, as far as I can see, only named 'the Prewetts' as close family members (and in my PS it is not in chapter 1, as it states on the website, it is later when Hagrid is telling Harry what happened to his parents). When Mad-Eye was showing HP the picture of the orginal OotP he says Gideon and Fabian are brothers but not that they are brothers to Molly. Gina: "My mother and I discuss this a lot. I think Fred and George may have been Molly's nephews that she and Arthur adopted. Think of P/S when she gets there names wrong " DuffyPoo: Molly didn't get the names wrong in PS. Fred and George tried to make her think she got their names wrong. She actually had it right and they were teasing her. On the other hand, Arthur did get their names wrong in GoF when he was introducing them to Ludo Bagman. My mother called me by my sister's names numerous times and we're nowhere near twins! Gina: "when in OOTP she finds that Ron is prefect she says something to the affect of being so proud and that he makes everyone in the family where either Fred or George then remarks something like "Well then who are we" but in a joking manner. Maybe they are not really the immediate family." DuffyPoo: Everyone in the family that she ever 'believed' would become a Prefect. She knew DD would never make Fred or George a Prefect. He couldn't make both, two boys in the same house? And he wouldn't set one against the other. Besides, they get in trouble too much - what was it Molly said, she gets more owls about the twins that she got about the rest put together? Tina says: "I also like the idea of Fred and George named (sort of) after their OotP uncles, killed in the line of duty. Maybe they were born soon after their murders... I do think however that they are Molly's and Arthur's natural children. In GoF Ch5 Harry notes "Charlie was built like the twins, shorter and stockier than Percy and Ron, who were both long and lanky." Not definitive but points to their being brothers." DuffyPoo: I agree. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 31 09:16:41 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 05:16:41 -0400 Subject: Why is Tonks clumbsy? Message-ID: <004901c48f3b$3bb9eee0$0cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 111687 Lawless said: "Tonks. She's clumsy, we know this. In practically every scene where we see Tonks, she's clumsy. It's overly exagerrated, to a point. Why? Yes, she may be a great spy with her Metamorphagus abilities, but she can't walk down the hall without tripping over something. When I first read OotP, my questions regarding Tonks were - WHY is she in the Aurory if she's liable to fall over all the time? Do her spying abilities so outweigh the risks of her tripping over something and blowing an operation by the out-of-characterness of it?" DuffyPoo: I know JKR has made it a point for us to re-think every single thing in her books. However, I find it odd how many people have a problem with Tonks being clumsy. Don't you know anyone who is? I do. My nephew is at least as clumsy as Tonks is. When you knew he was coming for a visit you moved/hid every breakable thing you owned and anything likely to be tripped over. The kid could trip and stumble over a dust bunny. Maybe JKR knows somebody like this and wrote that bit of him/her into Tonks. That said, I think they overlooked her clumsiness in her Auror training because she is a Metamorphmagus. They are, Tonks said, very rare and born, not made, so having one on the side of the good guys would be a great advantage. What we don't really know yet, is if she can change into someone specific - as if she were using Polyjuice Potion - or if she can just change into random forms. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From susanadacunha at gmx.net Tue Aug 31 08:30:48 2004 From: susanadacunha at gmx.net (Susana da Cunha) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 09:30:48 +0100 Subject: Master of This School References: Message-ID: <004b01c48f34$dcc44c60$462f0dd4@taxi> No: HPFGUIDX 111688 "zendemort" wrote: "When Snape comes across the Marauder's Map, he tells the map "Professor Severus Snape, master of this school, demands that you reveal the secrets you hide" . But there is a little problem here. You see, Snape is not the master of Hogwarts! DD is the "master of this school"! So why does Snape call himself master of the school? Does he wish to become the Headmaster of Hogwarts at one point? This could provide clues into his personality... and his private thoughts (possibly, he considers himself greater than Dumbledore, the true master?)... But can it also tell us anything yet to come?" ----------------------------- He is the potions *Master*. Have you notice how other teachers at Hogwarts are not referred as *Master*? Snape is extremely proud of this. Remember how offended he was at Lockhart when he suggests he would do the unpetrifying potion: "Excuse me. I am still the potions master at this school!" (paraphrased) He's not just a guy who knows potions. I believe he has a *Master's Degree* in potions! If you were pulling ranks would you leave that out? Susana (the kill joy) From neil.zoe.collishaw at ntlworld.com Tue Aug 31 08:35:48 2004 From: neil.zoe.collishaw at ntlworld.com (zoe0coll) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 08:35:48 -0000 Subject: Master of This School In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111689 "zendemort" wrote: > When Snape comes across the Marauder's Map, he tells the map > "Professor Severus Snape, master of this school, demands that > you reveal the secrets you hide" (snip). But there is a little > problem here. You see, Snape is not the master of Hogwarts! DD > is the "master of this school"! So why does Snape call himself > master of the school? In English public school, (private & fee paying) teachers are referred to in the old fashioned way as a school master or mistress, which is where the title head master or head mistress comes from (now overtaken by the phrase head teacher). So Snape is just using his proper title of school master or potions master, which is just an older term for potions teacher or school teacher. This doesn't mean however that he hasn't got designs on DD's job! Zoe C From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 10:15:17 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 10:15:17 -0000 Subject: Is time changing or are people changing in time? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111690 Snow wrote: Could Dumbledore time travel by altering his appearance so that no one, including his former self, would recognize him? Is it possible that Albus is like Tonks, a metamorphagus? If Albus is a metamorphagus, is he really as old as he appears? How would you know how old a metamorphagus is, really, unless you knew when exactly they were born? And now the watch! Could Dumbledore be checking his watch to see where else he is at another time in space? vmonte responds: Yes! I've mentioned before that the best way to time travel would be to alter your appearance so that there would be no need to worry about whether you where going to bump into yourself or not (or bump into someone else that might recognize you). I really like your idea about the watch!!!! That thought is original, and something no one else has thought of. I think you might be right!!! :) vivian From naama_gat at hotmail.com Tue Aug 31 10:26:29 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 10:26:29 -0000 Subject: Snape helping Voldemort in his quest for immortatlity? (was Re: What Drives You In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111691 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dungrollin" wrote: > I suspect that the immortality-quest is a much greater part of the > story than we have so far seen, and plus JKR's hint that we > should > be wondering what he did to make sure he didn't die adds up > to > Yet another speculative theory probably involving Snape. > I have recently sent a couple of posts regarding Voldemort's quest for immortality (use "snake immortality" to find them). However, I'd like to address the issue of Snape involved in Voldemort's quest. I've seen several references to it before, and raised my eyebrows at them, but now I've realized why it seems so unlikely to me: When Tom Riddle resurfaced as Voldemort it was when Snape was at school, so how could Snape be involved in Riddle becoming the quasi-immortal Voldemort? And how unlikely is it for the (second) most powerful wizard in the world, after having spent thirty years on this project, to seek the help of an immature Snape? Naama From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 10:42:24 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 10:42:24 -0000 Subject: Watch. In-Reply-To: <009f01c48f01$0f97c380$3c280dd4@taxi> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111692 Just my theory: 1 hand for seconds 1 hand for minutes 1 hand for hours (ordinary watch, 3 hands) 1 hand for Day 1 hand for Month 1 hand for Year (another 3 to tell the date) That's six to tell his present time. He'll have another six for timetravel... Planets: they tell the phases of 'planets', (moon phase is important, and not necessarily for potion ingredients - that's Snape's job - but to know whether Lupin is about to transform... dunno what other planets mean, but I believe Dumbledore does :-) Oh, and he _can_ turn himself invisible. We don't need methamorphmagi for that - after all, Hogwarts Library has an Invisibility Section (and that means there's LOTS of books about invisibility, one devoted to Cloaks and their making, one to invisible beings, one for invisible ink, one for invisibility charms, setting invisibility (like the invisibility booster in the Ford Anglia?)...) Finwitch From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk Tue Aug 31 11:00:21 2004 From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Hans=20Andr=E9a?=) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 12:00:21 +0100 (BST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: A Conspiracy Theory to Beat them All In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040831110021.46635.qmail@web25109.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111693 --- Geoff Bannister wrote: Geoff: With respect, the basis of Christian belief is much less complicated than that and can be summed up in two quotes from Jesus: God so loved the world that He gave his only Son so that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. ----------------------- Hans now (please put IMHO in front of every sentence): Thank you Geoff. I agree absolutely with those two quotes. How do they pertain to Harry Potter? I hold to my theory (well, actually conviction) that Harry Potter is a new road map to liberation. This road map takes us on a journey of transformation through an alchemical process. The alchemy changes the human being from a mortal, faulty, very limited human being, to an immortal, perfect and unlimited Son of God. I'm talking about recognition: I recognise the alchemy in Harry Potter from my life-long study of alchemy. That's why JK Rowling said in an interview in Canada that Harry Potter is about resurrection. It's about the resurrection of the original divine human being asleep in the heart of every seeker! There are two simple choices available: EITHER you interpret the New Testament literally and see the manifestation of the Christ as a one-time historical event OR you see the New Testament as a road map to the liberation of the INNER Christ. And by the same token you can see Harry Potter: EITHER as the journey of the Christian to become a good citizen, OR you can see it as a road map to the liberation of the INNER Christ, this time called Harry Potter. It is up to every one to make their own choice. But let me once again quote Angelus Silesius (Johannes Scheffler 1624-1677): "Though Christ a thousand times in Bethlehem be born but not in thee, thou shalt be yet forlorn." What is happening in the world today is a reflection of what is happening inside the hearts and minds of the great collective of all human beings. The world, friends, is very, very SICK, and humanity as a whole is responsible. There is only one hope for humanity: the birth of the Christ in the hearts of men. This is why Harry Potter is the most wonderful, the most effulgent, the most intensely radiant present of hope and love that humanity has had for centuries. It tells us, by means of hidden symbols, what happens when the inner Christ is born. Yes, Geoff, the Inner Christ can say: "I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." Only when the inner Christ is born, only when Harry Potter is born in the human heart, can we return to the Father. We have two choices: EITHER we believe the Son of God came 2000 years ago, OR we believe God can send his Son into our heart the moment we open our heart to him. Each seeker can have God's only begotten Son living in their heart. How can many people have ONE being in their hearts? Because in God's prefect creation (in which we DO NOT live right now) there is no separation. Your Inner Christ is my Inner Christ. There is only one Christ, but He can live in everyone's heart. Indeed: "God so loved the world that He gave his only Son so that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life." YES! Absolutely. If Harry Potter is born in our heart, he will lead us to God, to perfection, to union with absolute Good. As you will see in book 7, Harry will die, but will be reborn to everlasting life. I know I'm a lonely voice in the wilderness, but I'll continue to announce my recognition of Harry Potter as the way to liberation until I'm kicked out of this group. Warm regards to all, Hans ===== Hans Rieuwers see you at Harry Potter for Seekers http://groups.yahoo.com/group/harrypotterforseekers/ Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies. http://au.movies.yahoo.com From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Aug 31 11:06:29 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 11:06:29 -0000 Subject: Conspiracies and re-assessments In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111694 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "snow15145" wrote: > Snow: > I don't know about the Dumbledore appearing as the holier than thou > scenario from the get-go concerning Harry. Dumbledore from the first > encounter in the first book appears to be aloof to what had just > transpired to close friends less than 24 hours before, let alone his > self appointed guardianship to their child who was placed in the > hands of in-laws who had to be bribed in some manner to even take > him. Also the bit too celebrating attitude for what had just happened > to the very people he asked to be secret keeper for. (This so reminds > me of Dumbledore's unusual behavior of Pettigrew's escape, an almost > identical response to what should have been anything but the relaxed, > calm attitude that was displayed by him) It seems Dumbledore was > celebrating something different than everyone else that night after > Godric's Hollow. This was the very first instance that alerted me to > the possibility that Dumbledore has a "for the greater good" idealism > that is not Harry but involves Harry. > Kneasy: It's difficult to get a grip on DD, though I've tried a time or two. His reactions do seem inappropriate at certain times. I've posted before about the possibility that somehow he's already aware of how things are going to/should develop, which is why he rarely seems surprised or unready. You're right; his reaction after Godric' Hollow is not what one would expect. I have tried to explain it with reference to the Prophecy, though making sense out of that is like banging your head against a brick wall. Briefly, I wondered if James and Lily were referred to more than once in that little conundrum. The first is obvious - "..born to those.." OK, they get one mention; why not another? "..neither can live while the other survives.." "Neither" is James and Lily, "the other" is Harry. Seems fine at first sight, but it starts to unravel a bit when the Prophecy is taken as a whole. Mind you, it would resolve a few mysteries - DD would know beforehand that the Potters *must* die for Harry to live and that he had made preparations for the event. That "old magic" that protected Harry is much more likely to be familiar to DD than to Lily. And having expected and planned for the event, his lack of reaction would be understandable. I truly hope that this isn't leading up to a Time Travel scenario - something you wouldn't object to, judging by your posts - but I have expectations that it won't, because there are a couple of occasions when he does seem to be caught on the hop - not what you'd expect from someone who'd seen it all before. The first being the TWT Portkey Cup - that was entirely unexpected, I think. His 'plan' had come off the rails; but I also get the impression that it was back on track again when Harry told him of his involuntary blood donation - the famous "Dumbledore gleam'. The second was the failure to foresee the failure of the Occlumency lessons. (Or was it? I'm still not entirely sure; for someone as reputedly omniscient as DD is reputed to be the well-known antipathy between Harry and Snape seems a fairly obvious potential stumbling block.) Snow: > Just take a look at the wands created for not only Tom > Riddle/Voldemort but also the eventuality of Harry. The wand chooses > the wizard, how clever of Dumbledore! The wizard does not in this > case have a choice does he, but I think Dumbledore does. Too curious > indeed that Harry's wand chose to choose him after the many that he > had tried unsuccessfully. Not really that curious since the prophecy > pre-empted the decision of who should be destined for that wand. > Dumbledore supplied Olivander with not one but two feathers from his > own phoenix Fawkes with a preordained destiny in mind. Whether this > plan that was devised, most likely since the birth of Tom Riddle, > will succeed is in the choices made by Harry but very closely watched > and nurtured in a positive direction by Dumbledore and company in > order to proceed to the plan that had been created long before the > prophecy. Kneasy: Ah! Those wands. I'm surprised that more questions haven't been asked about those. It was brought up a long, long time ago but nobody seemed to have any answers. Obvious questions: Two feathers were 'given'. Who by? DD says Fawkes, but I can't see Fawkes flitting into Ollivanders shop and dropping them on the counter. Does Fawkes belong to DD personally, or does he go with the job of Headmaster of Hogwarts? It matters, you see - the Head around the time of Tom was Professor Dippet, not DD. And we don't know much about Dippet. But if Fawkes belongs to DD it seems very odd that a feather coming from that combination is turned to evil uses. Unless in the beginning Tom was nowhere near as bitter and twisted as he has been presented. Could he have been much more like Harry to start with? Hmm. Intriguing. Were both feathers given at the same time? Or was the second provided as an "antidote" to the first after Tom turned bad? Were the feathers given with the specific personal and magical characteristics of the eventual owners already implanted? Probably yes, from what Ollivander says. Yet more blank spots on the map. We'll get the answers one day - I hope. From naama_gat at hotmail.com Tue Aug 31 11:13:23 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 11:13:23 -0000 Subject: Savior complex? (was "Harry and Tom") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111695 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > That's true. But he also acts, as the Sorting Hat told him, out of a > powerful thirst to prove himself, and this, IMO, is what Hermione > calls the "saving people thing." > > I am not saying that Harry only wants acclaim, or only wants to > be worthy of acclaim. It is by no means wrong or inappropriate > for Harry to want to prove himself worthy of the terrible sacrifices > which others have made for him, nor do I think he is crazy > because he feels a powerful need to do so. > I don't think that Harry's "saving people thing" is connected to his "thirst to prove himself." For example, in the second task of the tournament, his savior complex was *at odds* with his ambition. He wanted to win, but he was more concerned about the others' safety, so he sacrificed (as he thought at the time) his ambition. And when he realized that the hostages were never at risk, he felt angry at himself and embarassed that he had been so stupid. There wasn't a sense of his feeling proud of himself for his bravery, etc. That shows, IMO, that Harry isn't saving people in order to show (to others or to himself) that he is brave or good or self-sacrificing. He does it because he cares. Naama From mauranen at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 11:35:36 2004 From: mauranen at yahoo.com (jekatiska) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 11:35:36 -0000 Subject: What Pettigrew did at Godric's Hollow - new info from JKR chat In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111696 > Note that Pettigrew has been linked to nice big explosions. XD > > - Kizor Has anyone else noticed how Pettigrew is always described as "talentless" and "weak", yet he has managed some quite impressive magic? He succeeded in becoming an animagus for example. Ok, his friends helped him, but he did eventually master the spell himself. He also killed twelve people with a single curse, which must be very advanced dark magic, judging by the way it is mentioned in PoA. "Black killed thrteen people witn a single curse" is always emphasising how extremely dangerous Sirius is supposed to be. And we haven't heard of any other incident where so many people would have been killed by one curse. Is there more to Peter than meets the eye? Or is it just that he was using Voldemort's wand? Somehow I don't think it was the wand. As Mr Ollivander says in PS (p.64,UK paperback edition) "Of course, you can never get such good results with another wizard's wand." Jekatiska From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Aug 31 11:48:50 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 11:48:50 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111697 Kneasy wrote: > Perhaps he's confusing him with someone else entirely - Voldemort. > There is canon evidence that Harry has been on the receiving end of > Voldy's powers and there is heavy speculation that there may be > even more to it than that. As an ex-DE who shows extreme reactions > to just the mention of Voldy's name Snape would be hyper-sensitive > to any Voldy connection. As an Occlumens/Legilimens perhaps Snape > sees more of Harry's mind than we give him credit for. Potioncat: I think you may be on to something. In GoF Pensieve scene, DD sees a connection between Harry's scar hurting and Snape's Dark Mark burning. There's been a discussion wheter the word burning indicated an actual sensation. I'm going to presume it does. And while I'm not sure there is canon for it, I wonder if Snape gets more of a jolt when Harry is around. Imagine Snape's reaction if Harry was something of an antena or amplifier for LV's energy/awarness/power. Something along the line of Harry's reaction in SS/PS when LV was near. Or along the line of Snape's mark hurting in GoF near Moody. Kneasy: > > An email from Lyn Mangiameli reminded me that it was Snape who > almost certainly got Malfoy to provoke Harry into revealing that > he's a Parselmouth - a Salazar/Voldy/Tom Riddle attribute. What > else has Snape seen in Harry's head? snip > >> They ignore the fact that he could turn into something much, much > worse. He could be Voldy Mk II. Doesn't the Prophecy say "..his equal.."? Nothing in there about being his opposite, or is my copy of OoP faulty? Potioncat: So now we have Snape not wanting Harry to be another James or Tom in behavior. Or maybe James is a red herring. It's Tom. What else does Snape see? A tendency, a latent skill? A shadow of Tom/LV? Not only does he have bits of LV, but his own natural tendencies are similar. I'm sure Harry's disreguard for the rules came from James. Kneasy: >snip > Harry has not yet proved that he is 'good'. snip > > Harry is in the 'good' corner by default - he's had little or no choice in the matter. Maybe Snape can see what Harry could turn into if he did have a free choice and that is what he's reacting to. > Potioncat: Some of the decisions Harry has made have had nothing to do with being good, but they look like "good" decisions. The big one that comes to mind is "not Slytherin." I still think that the main reason for that was that he didn't want Malfoy for a dorm mate. Heck, Nott and Zabini probably aren't too thrilled either. But I disagree. Harry has shown goodness...preventing Black and Lupin from killing Pettigrew is the big one. Who really would have thought ill of any of them if Pettigrew had died? On the other hand, he did give in to the temptation of using the Cruiatus Curse. So I would argue against your comment of his not yet demonstrating "good." But I would agree that the potential for something else is still there. Particulary since JKR characters have very deep shades of gray. And Snape is very familiar with gray. Potioncat From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 12:16:38 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 12:16:38 -0000 Subject: Snape's DE past/Harry's goodness In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111698 > > Potioncat: > Some of the decisions Harry has made have had nothing to do with > being good, but they look like "good" decisions. The big one that > comes to mind is "not Slytherin." I still think that the main > reason for that was that he didn't want Malfoy for a dorm mate. > Heck, Nott and Zabini probably aren't too thrilled either. > > Harry has shown goodness...preventing Black and > Lupin from killing Pettigrew is the big one. Who really would have > thought ill of any of them if Pettigrew had died? On the other > hand, he did give in to the temptation of using the Cruiatus Curse. > Finwitch: Harry's good decisions: He stood up for Neville when Malfoy took the remembrall. Against the rules (disobeying a teacher who forbade them to move), perhaps, but a GOOD one. Harry was the one who decided to stay and help Neville out of that trap stair. And it was Harry who noticed that Hermione was not at the Hall, and thus did not know about the Troll. And his decision to share the Cup, as well as to give away his winnings... AND he bravely told the truth Dolores Umbridge didn't want to hear, even when all the adults seemed to be against him... But, if you want the one person who ALWAYS chooses the good and the right - it's Neville, not Harry. And Snape - with his DE-past, is a traitor. (And Dante put traitors to the lowest hell, so...)It is qustionable who he's betraying, but he IS betraying someone. Sirius then - dog is the very symbol of loyalty! So a loyal dog can merely tolerate a traitor(Peter, Snape), at the command of the master... (Harry, Dumbledore) and wolves have that same trait. Finwitch From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 12:25:36 2004 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 12:25:36 -0000 Subject: Conspiracies & re-assessments - Dumbledore In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111699 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "snow15145" wrote: > > Kneasy (again snipped) > > And DD - he first appears as the saviour/mentor/guardian figure to > the putative hero. A nice, comfortable, traditional role. Slowly > over the books this has been modified. He has much more important > things on his plate than Harry. He has a society to save, a war to > fight - and Harry has a pre-destined part to play in the outcome. > And that's something DD has known for as long as Harry has been > alive. So, is his interest in Harry altruistic, or is Harry a means > to an end? DD's motivations are nicely complex - and to a certain > extent conflicting. Given the choice which will turn out to be more > important, Harry or the entire WW? That is, assuming DD is around to > make the choice; my bet is thathe won't be, that someone else will > have to choose. > Snow: > I don't know about the Dumbledore appearing as the holier than thou > scenario from the get-go concerning Harry. Dumbledore from the first > encounter in the first book appears to be aloof to what had just > transpired to close friends less than 24 hours before, let alone his > self appointed guardianship to their child who was placed in the > hands of in-laws who had to be bribed in some manner to even take > him. Also the bit too celebrating attitude for what had just > happened to the very people he asked to be secret keeper for. ... > This was the very first instance that alerted me to the possibility > that Dumbledore has a "for the greater good" idealism that is not > Harry but involves Harry. > Asian_lovr2: I really don't think people are giving enough weight to the fact that Dumbledore is over 150 years old. In his lifetime, he has seen the folly of man again and again. New Dark Wizad on the scene; ho-hum, been there, done that, more than once. New war breaks out; ho-hum, seen it all before. This is perhaps man's greatest folly as it is an irrational act perpetrated by irrational men. Hence, they are not to be reasoned with. So, you get on with what must be done. People like Fudge and Umbridge are not new characters to Dumbledore, he has seen their type come and go. Malfoy ...nothing new. Crouch (both) ...same old same old. Schoolboy tricks, pranks, mischief and ample amounts of self-declared cleverness; seen it all before, nothing to get excited about, just sit back and enjoy the show. Dumbledore knows that effort wasted in fretting over many of these things and people is just wasted effort. Given time, these people and events will self-destruct, leaving the bulk of the world behind to carry on; to carry on and engage in the same folly again. To Kneasy, while I find myself occassionaly at odds with your ideas, I must say, that was one very fine essay. Steve/asian_lovr2 From naama_gat at hotmail.com Tue Aug 31 12:47:58 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 12:47:58 -0000 Subject: How did Tom kill his father? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111700 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jekatiska" wrote: > I came accross an old thread about Tom Riddle's path to evil. It > struck me that we donn't actually know how he killed his father and > his grandparents. So far I have assumed that he used Avada Kedavra, > but as Moody said in GoF, it requires powerful dark magic. Tom was > only a teenager when he killed his father, and don't think he could > have used such a powerful curse at such a young age. By the age of sixteen, Tom Riddle had accomplished the incredibly complex and advanced magic of the diary, containing his memories and self. I've no doubt he had mastered by that time all the Unforgivables, including AK. I'd always thought that Tom had done this murder as a kind of rite of passage on graduating from Hogwarts. Is there any cannon evidence against this? Naama From phil_hp7 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Aug 31 13:25:22 2004 From: phil_hp7 at yahoo.co.uk (Phil Boswell) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 13:25:22 -0000 Subject: What Pettigrew did at Godric's Hollow - new info from JKR chat In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111701 "pippin_999" wrote: [snip] > Missed AK's seem capable of doing a lot of damge though. > Interesting that the rebounding spell destroyed Voldemort's body > but not his clothes or wand. Of course, it could have blown them > right off (sorry for the image ) Thanks a lot. I'm now going to spend the rest of the day with a picture in my head of Cartman^W Wormtail standing next to a pile of robes saying "They've killed Voldie! You bastards!" -- Phil From sali-ii at lycos.com Tue Aug 31 13:06:35 2004 From: sali-ii at lycos.com (Sali Morris) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 13:06:35 +0000 Subject: Dumbledore/Ron and Bertie Botts Message-ID: <20040831130640.6910D86AEA@ws7-1.us4.outblaze.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111702 With all the discussion lately about whether Dumbledore could have eaten a vomit flavoured Every Flavour Bean in his youth and losing his taste for them it got me thinking on whether that might need to be factored into the Dumbledore=Ron theory. I suppose it all depends on whether you take Dumbledore to mean that he encountered the vomit flavour early in his career of bean eating or after several years experience. Personally, I assumed that it would be early on as otherwise he would have a significant number of good flavour experiences to weigh against one vomit flavour. I don't have my books with me but if I'm remembering correctly, Harry and Ron were both eating the beans on the train in PS (confirmation either way welcomed) and Ron warned Harry to be careful because they really do mean Every flavour. So Ron had learned enough to be cautious but not to be put off. If I'm right about this it can cast a small shadow of doubt on the Dumbledore=Ron theory. If Ron knows enough to be cautious, then it is unlikely that a vomit flavoured bean would be shock enough to put him off them for life and it hasn't happened so far (although we are still well within the time frame for a 150 year old to consider "in my youth"). What does everyone think (apart from the fact that it's inconclusive evidence :) )? Sali, who has finally caught up with reading the posts. Hooray! -- From jmmears at comcast.net Tue Aug 31 14:25:28 2004 From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 14:25:28 -0000 Subject: audiobooks us vs. uk - dale vs fry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111703 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Miller, Gina (JIS)" wrote: > I am going to re-read the series. I live in the US so I have previously only > listened to the Jim Dale versions. Could someone tell me if they think one > is better than the other and what the differences are? I am sure the wording > is different but what about accents and general mood of the book? I would > love both UK and US opinions from people that have heard both! Or if you are > from somewhere else and read listened to both sets. I'm American but I have both versions. I had enjoyed the Jim Dale recordings well enough, but was bothered enough by some of his readings (specifically the final scene between Harry and the Dursleys in POA) to order some of the Stephen Fry cds. Once I heard the Fry versions, I found that I just didn't want to listen to the Dale recordings anymore. I think that Dale's version is more "colorful", and may well appeal to children more, thanks to his very exaggerated characterizations. However for me, Mr. Fry really captures the flavor and dry humor of the books in a way that seems more in the spirit of the stories, and he never overplays. It's probably mostly a matter of personal taste, though. I must admit that I am partially influenced by having read somewhere that Fry was JKR's first choice when the matter of recording the books arose. IMO, she really knew exactly what approach would reflect the tone of her work, and I think that Fry gets it just right. Jo Serenadust From lupinesque at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 14:28:46 2004 From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 14:28:46 -0000 Subject: Fabian & Gideon's namesakes In-Reply-To: <004501c48f3b$159400c0$0cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111704 I wrote: > "It just occurred to me that Fred & George's initials are the same as > those of Fabian and Gideon Prewett, who were, most likely, Molly's > brothers. Coincidence, or were they named (initialled) for their > recently-killed uncles? I lean toward the latter." DuffyPoo: > Where does it say that Gideon and Fabian are Molly's brothers? > They could have been her first cousins, or her father and uncle, or > two uncles. You're correct, it doesn't. It's just a likely, by no means definitive, interpretation of "close family members" (jkrowling.com, extra stuff-->characters). Amy Z ---------------------------------------------------- Dudley thought a moment. It looked like hard work. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Aug 31 16:39:14 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:39:14 -0000 Subject: Conspiracies and re-assessments In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111705 Kneasy (snipped) > An unwillingness to even consider the merits of a theory that has > an arguable canonical base (even though it may eventually turn out > to be wrong) shows a deplorable lack of intellectual curiosity > IMO. What's the point of entering a discussion with pre-formed, > never-to-be-modified-under-any-circumstances-I-don't-care-what-can- > be-derived-from-canon conclusions clutched firmly to the bosom? > Posters propose theories and they expect them to be dissected, > challenged, rejected or modified. Dismissal with nothing but a trite > phrase is not an honest option; it's a flaunting of personal > prejudices > in an attempt to by-pass discussion - and discussion is what this site > is supposed to be about. Jen: Aren't we all guilty of having at least one opinion about the characters or plot that no one can convince us of otherwise? It wouldn't be very enjoyable to constantly see-saw back and forth over every little detail or characterization, to the point you can't determine what the story is about. Kneasy, you obviously firmly believe, as said in your essay, that these books are a mystery at heart, full of betrayl and conspiracy. I don't view that idea as the primary theme of the book, even though it's certainly a writing tool that JKR employs with good results. Me, I tend more toward the Hero's journey view of things, with lots of twists and turns to keep the reader involved and surprised. I can still consider other interpretations and even modify my own somewhat, without giving up one of my steadfast beliefs. For instance, I reject Guilty!Dumbledore or Puppetmaster!Dumbledore, but reading posts about DD's motives has forced me to think about his true role in the story, see his failings & manipulations. Same with Sirius. OTOH, I had little interest in Snape prior to joining this group. Even though I'm still not fascinated by the character, I've developed an interest in Snape as a pivotal character to the series rather than just Tormentor!Snape (I just noticed 'tormentor' has the base word of 'mentor'--that fits how I see Snape now, as a terrible mentor but a mentor nonetheless ). > Snow: > I really hate to agree with you when you obviously are willing, > wanting and waiting for a very good disagreeing rival to ruffle your > feathers. I am anything but a worthy opponent especially when I agree > with you that some posters refuse to bend to a theory or proposal > that their character could possibly be someone different than what > they have convinced themselves they definitely are. It's not as much > a "lack of intellectual curiosity" but a refusal to accept an > inevitability that could be JKR's, not mine. If you become so > transfixed to an ideal that you are not willing to see another > possibility, you are cheating yourself out of the enjoyment of the > amazing puzzlement of the whole scope. Jen: The downside of feeling so attached to a story is the outcome may be other than you hoped for. That's just the risk you take, like with any other relationship. I can't avoid attachment to characters and theories without losing some of the enjoyment of the story as *I* read it. But at the exact same time I can still prepare for the worst, so to speak, something that seems unimaginable to me know but could still happen. I never considered Sirius would die in Book 5 until Bam! it was all over. Now I don't really believe we'll see Guilty!Dumbledore or ESE!Lupin..... > Kneasy (again snipped) > And DD - he first appears as the saviour/mentor/guardian figure to > the putative hero. A nice, comfortable, traditional role. Slowly > over the books this has been modified. He has much more > important .things on his plate than Harry. He has a society to > save, a war to fight - and Harry has a pre-destined part to play > in the outcome. And that's something DD has known for as long as > Harry has been alive. So, is his interest in Harry altruistic, or > is Harry a means to an end? DD's motivations are nicely complex - > and to a certain extent conflicting. > Snow: > This pre-destined Harry is just a part of a pre-destined overall > plan. Everyone had a choice but Dumbledore was ready and prepared for > the inevitable choice they made. > Just take a look at the wands created for not only Tom > Riddle/Voldemort but also the eventuality of Harry. The wand chooses > the wizard, how clever of Dumbledore! The wizard does not in this > case have a choice does he, but I think Dumbledore does. Too curious > indeed that Harry's wand chose to choose him after the many that he > had tried unsuccessfully. Not really that curious since the prophecy > pre-empted the decision of who should be destined for that wand. Jen: Dumbledore didn't exactly get a choice about hearing the prophecy though, did he? Things were set in motion at that point, but it doesn't appear Dumbeldore in any way predicted the prophecy or what that would mean for the WW and Harry. To me, there are so many times DD *didn't* have control of the situation: someone overhearing the prophecy, the Potters choosing Sirius as Secret Keeper, Sirius switching with Peter, the Diary in COS, the Dementors at Privet Drive, Umbridge and Fudge taking over Hogwarts..... Personally, I don't think the prophecy is predestination. Harry still has a choice. Harry chose to fight Voldemort long before he heard about the Prophecy, way back in Book 1 when he assessed the ramifications of Voldemort returning for himself and chose to go after him: "Don't you understand? If Snape gets hold of the Stone, Voldemort's coming back! Haven't you heard what it's like when he was trying to take over? There won't be any Hogwarts to get expelled from...Do you think he'll leave you and your families alone if Gryffindor wins the house cup?" (SS, chap. 16, p. 270). Dumbledore definitely helped him along the way, gave him a wide berth with the rules, but Harry decided that night what he wanted to do. Jen Reese From zanelupin at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 17:01:58 2004 From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:01:58 -0000 Subject: Lupin visiting Sirius in Azkaban In-Reply-To: <003d01c48f3a$da1d6090$0cc2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111706 Hi All! Why wouldn't Lupin visit Sirius in Azkaban? My answer tends to fall in line with most of the other answers. The first being to ask why Lupin would want to visit Sirius at all? Sirius betrayed them all. What else was there to say? In the Shrieking Shack, Lupin discovers that Sirius didn't tell him about the SK switch because Sirius suspected Lupin of being the Spy in thier midst. What if Sirius' suspicion all those years ago had already created somewhat of a rift between them? What if Lupin perceived this distancing as further evidence Sirius did in fact betray them? The other answer has to do with the Ministry. Even if Lupin wanted to, even with Dumbledore's backing, there's no way he's getting into Azkaban to see Sirius. Crouch tossed Black into Azkaban without a trial. We do have Sirius telling the kids in GoF that he wasn't the only one Crouch did this to. I'll bet it was standard practice to keep *everyone* away from prisoners they locked up without a hearing. And even if this pure speculation were not the case, we still have the fact that Sirius was such a dangerous Death Eater. Susana said in 111677: >But, of course, that was what the ministry was afraid of! With all the DEs getting away with that excuse, they were NOT letting the most hated DE of all escape on 'reasonable doubt'! Solution: he's so guilty there's no need for a trial. Lock him up, throw away the key. Ministry saves face.< KathyK: That's interesting. It's pretty much in line with what I was thinking. My thought is that it wasn't so much about the Ministry saving face (although I'm sure that's part of it) but that Black betrayed those fighting against LV and then killed thirteen people with a single curse. He was dangerous not only to those who fought against LV but to innocent people who happened to be in his way. By the time Sirius escapes in PoA he is considered to have been LV's strongest supporter. Whether this was something that grew from the stories or something that people believed immediately is difficult to say. It's my belief that Ministry officials were too afraid of Sirius to try and get any information out of him. Why go near such a clearly disturbed, dangerous, and guilty man if they could help it? So what about Dumbledore? If anyone could get the truth it would be him. Did he visit Sirius? He doesn't say he never saw him. He only says he gave evidence Sirius was Secret-Keeper. Is this a case of Dumbledore knowing the truth but keeping it under wraps for his own purposes? I think Dumbledore usually knows more than the rest of us and the WW as to what's going on. But right now I'm not inclined to believe he'd let an innocent man go to Azkaban without a fight. (This doesn't mean I haven't thought he was a cold and calculating man and doesn't stop me from changing my mind again in the future!) Even if Dumbledore got in to see Sirius in Azkaban, what good would have come of it? According to Fudge and whatever account Stan Shunpike heard of the events, after Sirius blew up the street, he stood there laughing. Laughing! Stan says he went quietly with the Ministry after that. (PoA Chs 3 & 10, US ed. pgs. 39, 208) We also have Sirius multiple times in the Shrieking Shack: ********** PoA Ch 17, US ed pgs 341-342: "You killed my parents," said Harry, his voice shaking slightly, but his wand hand quite steady. Black stared up at him out of those sunken eyes. "I don't deny it," he said very quietly. "But if you knew the whole story." PoA Ch 19, US ed p 365: "Harry...I as good as killed them," he croaked. "I persuaded Lily and James to change to Peter at the last moment, persuaded them to use him as Secret-Keeper instead of me...I'm to blame, I know it..." and in that same paragraph: "And when I saw their house, destroyed, and their bodies...I realized what Peter must've done...what I'd done..." ********** Clearly Sirius blames himself for what happened. And this feeling of being the guilty one was likely much stronger when the events of Godric's Hollow were so fresh in his mind. After the man directly responsible, the 'weak, talentless thing,' outsmarted him and performed some outright scary magic, what else was there to say? It was Sirius' fault he underestimated Peter's ability and overestimated Peter's loyalty to his friends. I also think it's safe that at this point Sirius also became a bit unhinged. Okay, what if Dumbledore did visit him? Even questioned him? What are the chances Sirius was responsive? Yes, he could have explained his story and that Pettigrew was still on the loose...maybe after some time had passed. But I picture Sirius at the moment to be so full of guilt and self-loathing that even if he had the chance to clear his name it's likely he wouldn't have taken it. And then there is this, from Pippin in 111620: >As Elkins pointed out in one of her brilliant posts long ago, the ex-Marauders were all keeping secrets from Dumbledore. It was easy for the spy, or spies, to take advantage of their old habits of secrecy and covering up for one another. After his escape, why did Sirius go after Peter himself instead of sending an Owl to Dumbledore telling him everything? Apparently he never thought of it. The old habit of secrecy was too much engrained. He never really outgrew his schoolboy ethic--loyalty to your chums above all else. He couldn't speak without giving Lupin away, too.< KathyK: *If* Dumbledore (or anyone else) had questioned Sirius at some point, Sirius might not have told him what happened, anyway, if he viewed it as his own responsibility to go after Peter or to rot in jail because he failed his friends. Pettigrew betrayed the "loyalty to your chums above all else" thing and if Sirius still abides by that code even all those years later (going after Peter rather than telling Dumbledore what's going on) it's likely what he was thinking is that it's not anyone's business but his own that Peter did what he did. KathyK, who was reading some of Elkins' posts on Peter just yesterday From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 31 17:04:51 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:04:51 -0000 Subject: Troll's leg umbrella stand Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111707 Recent discussion of Tonks' clumsiness reminded me of the BIG DEAL that Galadriel Waters made of the troll's leg umbrella stand at 12 Grimmauld Place (which Tonks tripped over) in her New Clues to HP 5 book. I kept racking my brain, racking my brain.... WHAT could be significant about Tonks stumbling over a severed troll's leg umbrella stand? WHY did GW go nuts about this thing being mentioned a couple of times in the OotP chapter on GP? Have y'all discussed this to death? In the year+ I've been here, I can't recall any discussion of it. So here's my question. Is **this** what GW was going off about? Severed troll's leg umbrella stand = *SEVER*ed troll's leg *U*mbrella *S*tand = SEVERUS. Is there supposed to be some clue about Severus Snape in the troll's leg US? Siriusly Snapey Susan, curious if anyone things there is something to this or whether I'm just nuts. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 31 17:28:51 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:28:51 -0000 Subject: Conspiracies and re-assessments In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111708 Kneasy (snipped) > > An unwillingness to even consider the merits of a theory that has > > an arguable canonical base (even though it may eventually turn > > out to be wrong) shows a deplorable lack of intellectual > > curiosity IMO. What's the point of entering a discussion with pre- > > formed,never-to-be-modified-under-any-circumstances-I-don't-care- > > what-can-be-derived-from-canon conclusions clutched firmly to the > > bosom? > > > > Posters propose theories and they expect them to be dissected, > > challenged, rejected or modified. Dismissal with nothing but a > > trite phrase is not an honest option; it's a flaunting of > > personal prejudices in an attempt to by-pass discussion - and > > discussion is what this site is supposed to be about. Jen: > Aren't we all guilty of having at least one opinion about the > characters or plot that no one can convince us of otherwise? It > wouldn't be very enjoyable to constantly see-saw back and forth > over every little detail or characterization, to the point you > can't determine what the story is about. Kneasy, you obviously > firmly believe, as said in your essay, that these books are a > mystery at heart, full of betrayl and conspiracy. I don't view that > idea as the primary theme of the book, even though it's certainly a > writing tool that JKR employs with good results. Me, I tend more > toward the Hero's journey view of things, with lots of twists and > turns to keep the reader involved and surprised. > > I can still consider other interpretations and even modify my own > somewhat, without giving up one of my steadfast beliefs. For > instance, I reject Guilty!Dumbledore or Puppetmaster!Dumbledore, > but reading posts about DD's motives has forced me to think about > his true role in the story, see his failings & manipulations. Same > with Sirius. OTOH, I had little interest in Snape prior to joining > this group. Even though I'm still not fascinated by the character, > I've developed an interest in Snape as a pivotal character to the > series rather than just Tormentor!Snape (I just noticed 'tormentor' > has the base word of 'mentor'--that fits how I see Snape now, as a > terrible mentor but a mentor nonetheless ). SSSusan: [chanting, "Must NOT just write, 'Me, too, Jen!' MUST NOT just write, 'Me, too, Jen!'"] I must preface my remarks by saying that I agree pretty much with every comment Jen made in her post. That said, my points here are two-fold. One, I agree with Jen that being unwilling to waver on a position or two is understandable. Where would we all be if Pippin threw up her hands and said, "I give!" re: ESE!Lupin and vampire!Snape? I doubt--pending new info in book 6--I'll EVER believe ESE!Lupin, but it's fun to read her posts anyway. And that's part of the fun when somebody puts forth evidence that seems to contradict Pippin--I ask myself, "Aha! How will she deal with THIS?" And by golly, she always does seem to find a *logical* way of doing so. Amazes me every time. I still don't agree with her, but she joins in the intellectual exercise. [I hope I'm not embarrassing you, Pippin.] And I think that IS part of your point, Kneasy--that it's much more fun when someone WILL put thought into his/her position and argue it based on canon and reason, not just "because I think so" (or worse, "because I 'KNOW' so."). That said, some of us will probably just remain QUIET during some discussions because we really DON'T want to have to argue what's just a strong feeling about a character or storyline. We can listen & learn and still not be swayed. And sometimes we might be swayed, sometimes we might at least question our opinion or the motivations of a character--and all that's fun! My second, related point is that it *is* frustrating when there are people who seem unwilling to continue a debate once canon alternatives or canon refutation has been offered. Do you know what I mean? When someone does choose to put forth an idea, theory, hypothesis or stance, and you've got canon to argue against it, but the person doesn't seem interested in further debate. Now, this *never* happens with Del--she'll argue with you 'til the cows come home [right, Del? :-)]--but (and not to toot my own horn or anything, but) I have offered canon refutation or differing interpretations based on canon to people and have had the "discussion" just end. I'll grant you that that can be frustrating. My, this is probably really jumbled, because I've rushed through it. My apologies if it doesn't make much sense. I guess here's the crux of it for me: people may well have a few opinions that they just want to hold to and don't want to debate or discuss them. BUT if a person is willing to put his/her idea out there, it sure would be nice if s/he would stick around for the debate! Siriusly Snapey Susan From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Aug 31 17:36:07 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:36:07 -0000 Subject: Troll's leg umbrella stand In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111709 SSSusan wrote: > Recent discussion of Tonks' clumsiness reminded me of the BIG DEAL > that Galadriel Waters made of the troll's leg umbrella stand at 12 > Grimmauld Place (which Tonks tripped over) in her New Clues to HP 5 book. I kept racking my brain, racking my brain.... WHAT could be significant about Tonks stumbling over a severed troll's leg umbrella stand? WHY did GW go nuts about this thing being mentioned a couple of times in the OotP chapter on GP? > > Have y'all discussed this to death? In the year+ I've been here, I > can't recall any discussion of it. Potioncat: Come to think of it, I've never seen discussion of any of the Waters' books on this list. I remember once wondering about it, but the discussions that did come up were so interesting I never brought it up and had forgotten about it. So? What gives? Potioncat From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 31 17:50:43 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:50:43 -0000 Subject: A Conspiracy Theory to Beat them All In-Reply-To: <20040831110021.46635.qmail@web25109.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111710 Hans now > I'm talking about recognition: I recognise the alchemy in Harry > Potter from my life-long study of alchemy. That's why JK Rowling > said in an interview in Canada that Harry Potter is about > resurrection. It's about the resurrection of the original divine > human being asleep in the heart of every seeker! SSSusan: With all due respect, Hans, can you provide more info on this interview? I've *never* heard/read JKR use the term "resurrection." In a quick search at Quick Quotes, I tried searching the terms "resurrection", "resurrected" and "resurrect". The only match I got was this from The Guardian, July 8, 2000: 'She gets quite exercised if people tell her they think Harry's dead parents are going to come back to life at the end of book seven. "We've had petrified people, and we've had what would have been fatal injuries, but once you're dead you're dead. No magic power can resurrect a truly dead person."' I would be thrilled if you could provide a link or portion of a transcript in which JKR talks about resurrection in the way you've mentioned here. Siriusly Snapey Susan From manawydan at ntlworld.com Tue Aug 31 18:07:49 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:07:49 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Is time changing or are people changing in time? References: <1093947411.20914.50080.m14@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <002801c48f85$6d4b72e0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 111711 Susana wrote: >By the way, It's not just the vomit flavored Bernie Bott Bean. Did anyone >else notice that one of the examiners in OotP had examined DD in his >transfiguration NEWT? If DD is 150, how old is the examiner? 200? We know, 'cos we've been told, that Dumbledore is around 150. This matches the age that he appears to be in CoS, without any real need for any time travelling. Note (also in CoS) the description of Armando Dippet though. He appears to be a _lot_ older there than Dumbledore is now. So maybe Dippet and Marchbanks are evidence that the wizarding lifespan isn't twice the Muggle one, but three times'. Suppose Dumbledore was born around 1840. Therefore he's 18 in the late 1850s. We don't know whether the same method of moderating candidates happened then, perhaps it didn't. Perhaps Marchbanks was Deputy Head then (Dippet could well have been head) and moderated the exams herself at around MacGonagall's age of 70. That would mean she was born around 1790, and is indeed now over 200. There are of course _enormous_ cultural implications to that. People in the WW obviously work a lot later in life, and I'm sure there is no concept of things like a retirement age or old age pensions! Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 18:16:04 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 11:16:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Where is our Prince? (And Where Did Those Wizards Get Their Titles?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040831181604.90361.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111712 --- elfundeb2 wrote: >>Magda Grantwich wrote: >>When yet another GG descendent (Harry) was born at the end of July, >>thus making him eligible to be the subject of the >>prophecy, Voldemort probably saw it as absolute proof that Harry >>was THE child. > > But we know Harry cannot be the child, because JKR has already put > the kibosh on that. So does that mean the title of Book 6 refers > to . . . nobody? > Debbie Well, yes, WE know that but presumably Voldemort could believe otherwise. He's been wrong about things before. The HBP is a legend, not a person. Voldemort thinks (THINKS) the legend applies to GG's descendents, just like the whole Heir of Slytherin riff applied to the last descendent of Salazar Slytherin. Voldemort lives partly in a world of myth and dreams that are very real to him but not to everyone else. Magda _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush From manawydan at ntlworld.com Tue Aug 31 18:21:09 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:21:09 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Where is our Prince? (And Where Did Those Wizards Get Their Titles?) References: <1093947411.20914.50080.m14@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <002c01c48f87$4ae07f00$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 111713 Debbie wrote: >Presumably, the Wizard's Council evolved (perhaps with knowledge >and/or consent of the crown) to deal with magical issues that would >not be a priority for the muggle government. Though I have not >found the date when the Wizards Council was succeeded by the MoM, I >believe it most likely occurred after wizards went into hiding. I've always assumed that the foundation of the Ministry and the Statute of Secrecy came about at the same time, the MoM supplanted the Council to ensure that secrecy was enforced. I would surmise (on very little canon evidence) that the Council was a loose body of wizards, mostly from the Houses with a few eminent scholars, who kept a fairly loose hand on things, whereas the changeover the the Ministry was the defining political moment in the WW, the change from an oligarchy to a bureaucracy. In turn, the new Ministry enforced the Statute of Secrecy in draconian terms and needed a large staff to do this: suddenly there were opportunities for able young wizards and witches of no lineage at all to get on and become powerful while the Houses were no longer so important. Given the length of wizarding generations, a number of the "purista" (love that word) conspirators could well have had grandparents who used to grumble about how things are now and how wizards of lineage used to be respected in the world. Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From eeyore6771 at comcast.net Tue Aug 31 19:03:19 2004 From: eeyore6771 at comcast.net (Pat) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:03:19 -0000 Subject: Book Two Discoveries! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111714 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "abadgerfan2" wrote: > On her site, Rowling's answer to a FAQ discloses that one of Harry's > Book Two discoveries "foreshadows" something that he finds out in > Book Six. snip Pat here: The Hand of Glory, as someone mentioned, is in both the book and movie, but the explanation for what it does is only in the book-- when Draco looks at it and wants it. Also in that scene, Malfoy says something about having poisons that he doesn't want the ministry to find. Poisons? So is that why he is so friendly with Snape--or perhaps why Snape tries to stay on Malfoy's good side. Perhaps Snape is aware of some dreadful thing that Malfoy has and is trying to keep him from using it. (I prefer to think that Snape really is on DD's side.) The conversation that Tom Riddle has with Harry in the chamber that has always intrigued me is the bit where he tells Harry that Lord Voldemort is his past, present and future. I'm sure that is something that is going to be important, but can't quite figure out if it has to do with more time travel or family relationships, or something else entirely (which would be my guess). And then there is also the issue (discussed elsewhere on the what does Tom want from Ginny topic) that Ginny poured out her soul to him in the diary and that's just what he needed. I do agree that the connection to Godric Gryffindor could easily have been left out of the movie, but is very pointedly included. And also the part with Dobby having some very strong wandless magic-- after all, he knocks Lucius down at the end when Lucius threatens Harry (after Harry has managed to get a sock to Dobby). That's the problem--there are a lot of little things that still seem like little things--so it's hard to choose which will be the one BIG thing. Pat From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Aug 31 19:12:14 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:12:14 -0000 Subject: Master of This School In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111715 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "zendemort" wrote: zendemort; > I found something very intringuing while reading PoA for the second > time. It is minute, but interesting nonetheless. > > When Snape comes across the Marauder's Map, he tells the > map "Professor Severus Snape, master of this school, demands that > you reveal the secrets you hide" (quote is not exact but along the > same lines, although the "master of this school" part is exact). But > there is a little problem here. You see, Snape is not the master of > Hogwarts!!!! DD is the "master of this school"!!!! So why does Snape > call himself master of the school? I wonder what he is after? Does > he wish to become the Headmaster of Hogwarts at one point? > hmmm....... > This could provide clues into his personality... and his private > thoughts (possibly, he considers himself greater than Dumbledore, > the true master?)... But can it also tell us anything yet to come? Geoff: I would have considered it more suspicious had he said "The" master of this school. It smacks a little of the archaic to me, such as when you see references to "Jean Smith, spinster of this parish" in a church record. In my teaching days, I might have referred formally to myself as "Geoff Bannister, /a/ teacher (or master) at this school" though heaven knows what circumstances woudl have provoked it! It also reminds me of the scene in LOTR when Gandalf is trying to open the doors of Moria and he starts running through a string of spells to achieve it initially without success. Perhaps this form of words is one which Snape was using as a first attempt to get the map to divulge information and he hit the jackpot first time. He possibly had other modes of address up his sleeve if this one failed.... Geoff who invites group members to enjoy photographs of Exmoor scenery and our heritage railway at: http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Aug 31 19:44:23 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:44:23 -0000 Subject: A Conspiracy Theory to Beat them All In-Reply-To: <20040831110021.46635.qmail@web25109.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111716 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Hans Andr?a wrote: Hans: > We have two choices: > > EITHER we believe the Son of God came 2000 years ago, > > OR we believe God can send his Son into our heart the moment we open our > heart to him. Geoff: No. It's not either/or, it's AND. We believe the Son of God came 2000 years ago AND we believe that God can send his Son into our heart the moment we open our hearts to Him. Jesus of 2000 years ago was God incarnate who, through his resurrection, provided a way for the Holy Spirit to enter our hearts at ourr equest. Harry is /not/ a Saviour figure. He, like us, is on a journey of discovery. He has to discover who he is because it was hidden from him by the Dursleys. He discovers that he is special in the sense that Voldemort lost his power because of him. He discovers that his fate and that of Voldemort are interlinked but he is not working to overcome the Devil as Jesus did. He is working as a person supported by friends and allies finding out how to use any power he has to defeat Voldemort, as a human being within the limitations of humanity; the analogy is that we, if we are Christians, are working, supported by friends, allies and God himself to defeat the hold of evil on our lives. Geoff See my views of Exmoor and the heritage West Somerset Railway at: http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk Tue Aug 31 21:49:42 2004 From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Hans=20Andr=E9a?=) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:49:42 +0100 (BST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: A Conspiracy Theory to Beat them All In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040831214942.77212.qmail@web25101.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111717 --- Geoff Bannister wrote: No. It's not either/or, it's AND. We believe the Son of God came 2000 years ago AND we believe that God can send his Son into our heart the moment we open our hearts to Him. Hans now: You're quite right Geoff! I agree with you. Of course you can believe both. Thanks for pointing that out. Warm regards, Hans ===== Hans Rieuwers see you at Harry Potter for Seekers http://groups.yahoo.com/group/harrypotterforseekers/ Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies. http://au.movies.yahoo.com From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk Tue Aug 31 22:03:28 2004 From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Hans=20Andr=E9a?=) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 23:03:28 +0100 (BST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Help! (was: Conspiracy Theory) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040831220328.13286.qmail@web25104.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111718 Hans wrote: JK Rowling said in an interview in Canada that Harry Potter is about resurrection. cubfanbudwoman wrote: SSSusan: With all due respect, Hans, can you provide more info on this interview? I've *never* heard/read JKR use the term "resurrection." I would be thrilled if you could provide a link or portion of a transcript in which JKR talks about resurrection in the way you've mentioned here. Hans now: Oh help! I saw this statement in a post to one of my three HP groups only a few weeks ago. I can't remember which group, but the member has a well-known name and I accepted the statement without question. Can someone help please? The statement the member made was something like, "JK Rowling said in an interview in 2000 in Canada, 'If you understand the resurrection you understand Harry Potter'". In fact I vaguely remember JK Rowling saying something like that, and that's why I accepted it without question. Can the member who said that save me from a fate worse than death? Or can anyone else remember the post? Otherwise SSSusan will have my guts for garters! Please help! ===== Hans Rieuwers see you at Harry Potter for Seekers http://groups.yahoo.com/group/harrypotterforseekers/ Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies. http://au.movies.yahoo.com From tookishgirl_111 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 22:11:24 2004 From: tookishgirl_111 at yahoo.com (tookishgirl_111) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:11:24 -0000 Subject: Book Two Discoveries! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111719 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Pat" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "abadgerfan2" > wrote: > > On her site, Rowling's answer to a FAQ discloses that one of > Harry's > > Book Two discoveries "foreshadows" something that he finds out in > > Book Six. > > snip > > Pat here: That's the problem--there are a lot of little things that still seem > like little things--so it's hard to choose which will be the one BIG > thing. Tooks time: I agree, so much so that I often feel that we all run the risk of missing the big picture for fear of the details. But, that's neither here nor there. Now, onto the Book 2 discoveries... I always thought that the Malfoy's other possible contraband should have lead somewhere. What is it that he could possibly have - more of TR's things? If so, how did he get a hold of them? Did he receive them directly from LV - being so high up on the DE chain - or perhaps Lucius went to school with TR? Maybe Lucius's father did and was given the diary, who he then passed on to his son? And those are just a few questions swimming in my head on that topic. In reference to the "Lord Voldemort is my past, present, and future" comment by TR, I don't believe it's just an off-hand comment. If you consider what JKR said about how we should question what LV did to stay alive and add to that the "misprint" of DD telling Harry that TR was, indeed, the last remaining ancestor of SS it seemed a rather harmless. But, although I fail to remember where the quote came from, JKR explained that despite it was a misprint it was not technically untrue. There is an interesting prospect - what if TR/LV uses a time-turner (cliched, I know). Doing this TR/LV could remain alive for ever, in one sense or another, and all the other remaining facts could remain true. Okay...that's all I got. Hope it all made sense and wasn't too out there. Tooks From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Tue Aug 31 14:44:32 2004 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 14:44:32 -0000 Subject: HarryMort (was many other things) long In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111720 "Trinity" wrote: > I have been thinking about Voldemort "possessing" or something like > that to ensure his mortality. Voldemort really does like possessing > people. > > What if this was Voldemort's plan and it went wrong due to Lily's > sacrifice. The curse rebounds on Voldemort, separating him and > creating the connection of the two. Perhaps Lily's love stopped > anything evil from invading Harry, so that Harry received the non- > evil portion of Voldemort (i.e. powers), therefore we have essence > divided. > > I believe Harry is more than 100% (more than just Harry), because > he is now carrying a part of Voldemort in him. > > > > Perhaps by Voldemort taking Harry's blood to obtain "Lily's" > protection, he has also made himself vulnerable to Harry. I like your evidence, Trinity! I think the use of Harry's blood has merely strengthened the link between Voldemort and Harry. Clearly the books are building to a final confrontation between Harry & Voldemort. DD has been preparing Harry for this from the moment he entered the school - which suggests that DD knows that Harry will be beyond his help when this confrontation occurs. How is this possible? Is it because the final confrontation is mental? Why does DD and the whole of the OOTP think it is important for Harry to learn Occlumency? So Harry can block out Voldemort, until that time when he is ready to face him. Then it comes down to Harry's love vs Voldemort's malice! "esmith222002" From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 31 22:25:57 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:25:57 -0000 Subject: Help! (was: Conspiracy Theory) In-Reply-To: <20040831220328.13286.qmail@web25104.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111721 Hans now: > Oh help! I saw this statement in a post to one of my three HP groups only a > few weeks ago. I can't remember which group, but the member has a well-known > name and I accepted the statement without question. Can someone help please? > The statement the member made was something like, "JK Rowling said in an > interview in 2000 in Canada, 'If you understand the resurrection you > understand Harry Potter'". In fact I vaguely remember JK Rowling saying > something like that, and that's why I accepted it without question. Can the > member who said that save me from a fate worse than death? Or can anyone > else remember the post? Otherwise SSSusan will have my guts for garters! SSSusan: LOL! As I told Hans, I'd never have his guts for garters! But I *would* like to see the content of JKR's statement if it really exists. :-) So, yes, help from any source would be appreciated. Siriusly Snapey Susan From theotokos_8679 at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 31 16:04:08 2004 From: theotokos_8679 at sbcglobal.net (theotokos) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 09:04:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Book Two Discoveries! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040831160408.64271.qmail@web80810.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111722 Marcela wrote: > ******* Important scenes in CoS movie that remained with no change > from the book. > > 3) He learned that having 'Faith' in someone or just begging for > help pays out = he got Fawkes' and the Hat's help, also the Ford > Anglia came to the rescue just when they needed it most, weird > isn't it? I highly believe that DD enchanted the car to act like > that, same as he did with the statues in the fountain in OoTP. I don't recall DD enchanting the fountain. Yes, the fountain is enchanted, but I had the impression it was enchanted before to not allow subversive attacks or any form of evil ruckus in the halls of the Ministry. I am currently listening to OotP in my car back and forth to work. I will pay close attention when I get to that part. All my books are still in storage from a recent move or I would check. Now, I am off to audio-books thread. theotokos From zendemort at yahoo.co.uk Tue Aug 31 16:09:02 2004 From: zendemort at yahoo.co.uk (zendemort) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:09:02 -0000 Subject: Master of This School In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111723 > Zoe C: > In English public school, (private & fee paying) teachers are > referred to in the old fashioned way as a school master or > mistress, which is where the title head master or head mistress > comes from (now overtaken by the phrase head teacher). So Snape > is just using his proper title of school master or potions master, > which is just an older term for potions teacher or school teacher. > > This doesn't mean however that he hasn't got designs on DD's job! Zendemort: Thank you for informing me of that, I did not know. But I don't know if this completely explains it. If all the other teachers are to be called "master" and "mistress", then why aren't they? Don't get me wrong. I definitely believe that "master" can be used in that form. But I just would like to comment on how Snape wishes to make himself a "master". I have not heard another teacher wish to be called "master", or refer to him/herself as "master", except Snape. I do understand about the "Headmaster," but still, this shows something about Snape. "Master" might be an old fashion way of addressing a "school teacher", but why would he wish to be addressed in this way? All of the other teachers call themselves "Professors." Why did he call himself "Master of this school" as opposed to "Professor of this school"? It's the emphasis on the word "master" which shows dominance and power. But regardless of that quote, I still believe he might be after Dumbledore's job. He loves power over people just too much... What might this mean for his future actions??? From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Tue Aug 31 16:35:01 2004 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:35:01 -0000 Subject: The 'Profound' Answer Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111724 One thing that has deeply confused me about OOTP is the scene where Voldemort possesses Harry. It seems that Voldemort is indicating to DD that if he kills Harry, whilst Voldemort is resident within him, he will kill them both. He is taunting DD, because he thinks that whilst DD could finish him once and for all, DD's love of Harry will prevent him making such a sacrifice. But in PS, Voldemort was resident in Quirrell, and when Quirrell died, Voldemort's spirit lived on. Perhaps, the link between Harry and Voldemort is so strong that if you kill one of them, the other will die. This may be the more 'profound' answer JKR is referring to. This is further supported by the prophecy and DDs confirmation to Harry that in the end one of them must kill the other. THis may be the only way to break the link between them. Chris From theotokos_8679 at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 31 16:53:39 2004 From: theotokos_8679 at sbcglobal.net (theotokos) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 09:53:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: "Weak" Pettigrew (Re: What Pettigrew did at Godric's Hollow) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040831165339.99677.qmail@web80808.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111725 Jekatiska: > Has anyone else noticed how Pettigrew is always described as "talentless" > and "weak", yet he has managed some quite impressive magic? [snip] He also > killed twelve people with a single curse, which must be very advanced dark > magic, judging by the way it is mentioned in PoA. "Black killed thirteen > people with a single curse" is always emphasizing how extremely dangerous > Sirius is supposed to be. And we haven't heard of any other incident where > so many people would have been killed by one curse. Is there more to Peter > than meets the eye? > > Or is it just that he was using Voldemort's wand? Somehow I don't think it > was the wand. Maybe it wasn't a curse to kill 12 people but a spell to blow up the street giving Wormtail access to the sewers? The concrete and blown gas lines killed the pedestrians as a result. As the MOM originally thought the fault lay with Sirius, it wouldn't have occurred to them the street was the focus of the spell, especially since Sirius was just standing there laughing instead of trying to escape. theotokos From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 22:42:22 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:42:22 -0000 Subject: The 'Profound' Answer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111726 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "esmith222002" wrote: > Perhaps, the link between Harry and Voldemort is so strong that if > you kill one of them, the other will die. This may be the > more 'profound' answer JKR is referring to. This is further supported > by the prophecy and DDs confirmation to Harry that in the end one of > them must kill the other. THis may be the only way to break the link > between them. > Alla: I like the speculation that Harry will be ready to endure death to break the link between them, but then somehow emerge (it will not be a proper death). It could be thanks to stopper in death, it could be that his loved ones from behind the veil will tell him that its not his time yet, etc. From lynnie5kaps at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 19:50:36 2004 From: lynnie5kaps at yahoo.com (lynnie5kaps) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:50:36 -0000 Subject: Conspiracies & re-assessments - Dumbledore In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111727 "Steve" wrote: > I really don't think people are giving enough weight to the fact > that Dumbledore is over 150 years old. In his lifetime, he has > seen the folly of man again and again. New Dark Wizad on the > scene; ho-hum, been there, done that, more than once. New war > breaks out; ho-hum, seen it all before. This is perhaps man's > greatest folly as it is an irrational act perpetrated by > irrational men. Hence, they are not to be reasoned with. So, you > get on with what must be done. > > > > Dumbledore knows that effort wasted in fretting over many of these > things and people is just wasted effort. Given time, these people > and events will self-destruct, leaving the bulk of the world behind > to carry on; to carry on and engage in the same folly again. I've often wondered whether or not Dumbledore has not only seen things like this happen before, but he's seen THIS exact thing happen before. His oft-debated "gleam of triumph" makes me wonder if whatever that's referring to has had it's chance to be triumphant before, but failed. Whatever happened in that graveyard ... this time it succeeded. And I wonder if that's the role time is or has had in this series. I do think in some ways Harry is a pawn in Dumbledore's game. Yes, the story is about Harry, but Harry seems to be a key to something greater than himself. And I believe Dumbledore knows it. --S From susanadacunha at gmx.net Tue Aug 31 20:42:02 2004 From: susanadacunha at gmx.net (Susana da Cunha) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 21:42:02 +0100 Subject: Is time changing or are people changing in time? References: <1093947411.20914.50080.m14@yahoogroups.com> <002801c48f85$6d4b72e0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: <007a01c48f9b$5ad68e90$2f280dd4@taxi> No: HPFGUIDX 111728 Ffred wrote: "Suppose Dumbledore was born around 1840. Therefore he's 18 in the late 1850s. We don't know whether the same method of moderating candidates happened then, perhaps it didn't. Perhaps Marchbanks was Deputy Head then (Dippet could well have been head) and moderated the exams herself at around MacGonagall's age of 70. That would mean she was born around 1790, and is indeed now over 200. There are of course _enormous_ cultural implications to that. People in the WW obviously work a lot later in life, and I'm sure there is no concept of things like a retirement age or old age pensions!" ------------ Yes, I thought of that. I think the idea first came to my mind when I read something (I think it was one of the lexicon's essays, can't really remember) about the use of quills. The use of quills was explained by a very traditional society that resists change (as the British society still uses their traditional metric system). But strangely, the fact that wizards live twice as much as muggles wasn't given as the obvious reason. In a society were half the population is over 90, tradition doesn't change at the rhythm we are accustom to. It's quite easy to imagine a 110 year old looking at a roller pen with disgust. And remember that old wizard in the Quiddish Cup (GoF): "I'm not wearing that!" (Pants) I also read something (sorry, I really can't remember where) about the WW being organized like middle age society: those with more magical power (and money to pay for school books and stuff) go to school and get to be "fully qualified wizards" whereas the others (like Stan Sputnik the buss driver) learn enough magic to have a profession and nothing more. No old age pensions. I'm paraphrasing someone and I apologise for not mentioning the names, but I think these ideas are from lexicon essays (check them out - it's worth the trouble). By the way, I did notice the examiner looked a lot older than DD. But I just can't help myself when the time travel issue comes up :) Susana From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Tue Aug 31 22:07:41 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:07:41 -0000 Subject: Hagrid in Knockturn Alley Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111729 I suspect this has been done to death, so could a kind and friendly person point me to the appropriate posts? When Hagrid was acting suspiciously in Knockturn alley he said Flesh- eating slugs were ruining the school cabbages. I can't even bring myself to spell it out, it's so obvious, (and you clever people must have seen it sooner than I,) but I didn't even notice it the first few times I read the book. As a biologist I know that these things happen, creatures get given ridiculous common names that are based on ignorance of what they actually do for a living, (e.g. bird-eating spiders do no such thing) but still... Dungrollin. There was a young death eater spy, Who's apparently terribly sly, Though riddled with flaws, He joined the good cause, Let us pray JKR tells us why. Amen From vidarfe at start.no Tue Aug 31 22:20:14 2004 From: vidarfe at start.no (vidar_fe) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:20:14 -0000 Subject: Why is Tonks clumsy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111730 vidar_fe: > If Tonk just changes the general shape of her body, could that > possibly be enough to put her off balance? Let's say, for instance, > a significant increase / decrease of weight? > > Look out for the fat lady! :-) Tonks here: > Ok folks, I couldn't let this one pass now could I? I am a little > off balance because I am not using my cane. (Some of you will know > what I mean.) And who are you calling a fat lady!! vidar_fe: Sorry, didn?t mean to offend you! *Begs forgivnes* I was not talking about your real self there. Only the form you use when you spy for the order, when you need to be unrecognizable. So, no hard feelings, right? ;-) From krussell98 at comcast.net Tue Aug 31 22:23:54 2004 From: krussell98 at comcast.net (Kathi Russell) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:23:54 -0400 Subject: Lupin visiting Sirius in Azkaban References: Message-ID: <005201c48fa9$33bc25f0$3f8f3f44@Dude> No: HPFGUIDX 111731 Pippin wrote: > After his escape, why did Sirius go after Peter himself instead of > sending an Owl to Dumbledore telling him everything? > Apparently he never thought of it. The old habit of secrecy was > too much engrained. He never really outgrew his schoolboy > ethic--loyalty to your chums above all else. He couldn't speak > without giving Lupin away, too. Alla: > I think (besides plot reasons, of course) that Sirius did not go > to Dumbledore precisely because Dumbledore was so easily convinced > of Sirius' guilt. He testified at Sirius' hearing, right? He did not > even insist (as far as we know) to let Sirius tell his story. > > I am not surprised at all, frankly. LadyKat now: *waves hello* Hi Everyone! I rarely post, but avidly read all the discussion. However, I had a thought while reading this thread - and no, it is not a well thought-out idea - just a spur of the moment idea). It does seem, on the surface, to make NO sense whatsoever, for DD to not have investigated the events at GH more thouroughly and to be more certain of Sirius' guilt. Knowing DD as we _think_ we do, it in no way adds up to a logical chain of events. _However_, if DD is/was traveling through time, or had knowledge of the future as some have speculated, then he would have known that this series of events _had_ to unfold in the way they have (so far) to get Harry to the point where he is ready to do whatever it is he has to do. If we accept that time travel is involved (and I'm not convinced it is - it's just a possiblity at this point), than it is possible that DD has seen _many_ possible futures, and this is just the one that JKR is telling us about. Any ideas? I just cannot accept the idea that DD NEVER looked into the GH/Sirius betrayal/PP murder more thouroughly. The idea that he just blindly accepted the party line is almost sacriligious (in my mind) :)) Maybe he felt that the safest place for Sirius to be was in Azkaban? We know that he (DD) was willing to have Harry grow up in a place that was quite unpleasant, just to ensure his survival. So why not extend the same logic to Sirius? DD may have felt that in order to keep Sirius alive (maybe to protect him from himself - he is well-known for acting first and thinking second), he needed to be locked up. Yes - it stinks - but Sirius will survive. Thanks for not laughing too hard at my idea! LOL! LadyKat PS - I think I clipped this correctly. If the above quotes are not attributed as they should be, my apologies to any offended parties..... From mckinley1eaa at yahoo.com Tue Aug 31 22:45:29 2004 From: mckinley1eaa at yahoo.com (elaine adamski) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 15:45:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Where is our Prince? (And Where Did Those Wizards Get Their Titles?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040831224529.66996.qmail@web11303.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 111732 Debbie wrote: > I think that at least some wizarding aristocrats liked > muggle titles just fine, since they didn't hesitate to > use them notwithstanding their muggle origin. (And the > old-fashioned ones, like Nearly Headless Nick, still do > like to use their titles. NHN had his title on his > Deathday cake.) Certainly referring to one's family as > the "Noble and Most Ancient House of Black" implies that > some wizards left their titles -- at least insofar as > they represented notions of superiority -- behind with > some regret. Forgive me, but you have contradicted the string in the last sentence. If your belief is that the wizards were titled via a muggle interbreeding, then how could the House of Black - a pureblood house - be noble? "elaine adamski" From krussell98 at comcast.net Tue Aug 31 22:35:59 2004 From: krussell98 at comcast.net (Kathi Russell) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:35:59 -0400 Subject: Book Two Discoveries! References: <01c201c48ef9$2afa63b0$6501a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: <005a01c48faa$e3a2dc10$3f8f3f44@Dude> No: HPFGUIDX 111733 Kristen : > 13) He learned that Tom Riddle was the last remaining descendent of > Salazar Slytherin (pretty unbalanced to learn that much about > Slytherin and nothing about Gryffindor :). Charme: > I would submit only one change to #13: Tom Riddle SAYS he's the last > remaining descendent of Salazar Slytherin. > > Has JKR said specifically said somewhere that Tom Riddle is really the > last remaining descendent of Slytherin? I also don't think DD has ever > really confirmed this in any of the books thus far, has he? I know HE > (TR) says he is, but should we believe him? Hermione (love that logical > lass) also points out in CoS that Harry could be a descendent of > Slytherin; I believe she mentions to Harry after the duel/Parseltongue > scene in CoS when he says he can't be a descendent of Slytherin that > Sally lived "1000 years ago and for all we know, you could be." Ladykat now: Is it possible that Harry could be a descedent of BOTH SS and GG? It seems to me that there is every possibility that the two lines could have merged at some point in the last 1000 years, with Harry being the final descendant of BOTH lines - which would also include muggle-blood. He could be the unifying factor in the schism in the WW - the "war" of rascism between the pure-bloods and those who are not totally pure. Hmmmm - and this *just* occured to me as I was writing this post. Maybe all three of our main characters are hybrids of the houses. For example - Hermione _could_ have just as easily been in Ravenclaw (for intelligence). But she was equally suited for Gryffindor - so that's where the SH put her. We never heard whether or not there was any debate over Ron when he was being sorted, but I would argue that he could have just as easily have gone to Hufflepuff - he is _incredibly_ loyal - even when he's mad at Harry or Hermione - his loyalty in the end can not be doubted. Is is possible that the unification of Hogwarts (and by extension - the WW) is in our three hero's? This idea is surely not well thought out - but maybe someone can take it to the next level? Any ideas? Might I be on a possibly track? LadyKat From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Aug 31 23:24:21 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 23:24:21 -0000 Subject: Help! (was: Conspiracy Theory) In-Reply-To: <20040831220328.13286.qmail@web25104.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111734 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Hans Andr?a wrote: > Hans wrote: > JK Rowling said in an interview in Canada that Harry Potter is about resurrection. > Hans now: > Oh help! I saw this statement in a post to one of my three HP groups only a few weeks ago. I can't remember which group, but the member has a well-known name and I accepted the statement without question. Can someone help please? > The statement the member made was something like, "JK Rowling said in an interview in 2000 in Canada, 'If you understand the resurrection you understand Harry Potter'".< The closest thing I could find is this: '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.' Vancouver Sun, Thursday Oct. 26, 2000. The article is available online but not for free. http://www.fpinfomart.ca Pippin From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Aug 31 23:43:25 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 23:43:25 -0000 Subject: Help! (was: Conspiracy Theory) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 111735 > Hans now: > > > The statement the member made was something like, "JK Rowling said in an interview in 2000 in Canada, 'If you understand the resurrection you understand Harry Potter'". ... snip > SSSusan: > snipping garters... But I *would* like to see the content of JKR's statement if it really exists. :-) Potioncat: A long while back I saw something along that line. Could it have been redemption instead of resurrection? (I tried that on Quick Quotes with no luck.) Or could it have been something similar? Potioncat From sherriola at earthlink.net Tue Aug 31 12:59:41 2004 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 06:59:41 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Master of This School In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <001c01c48f5a$7c166e90$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 111738 zendemort [mailto:zendemort at yahoo.co.uk] I found something very intringuing while reading PoA for the second time. It is minute, but interesting nonetheless. When Snape comes across the Marauder's Map, he tells the map "Professor Severus Snape, master of this school, demands that you reveal the secrets you hide" (quote is not exact but along the same lines, although the "master of this school" part is exact). But there is a little problem here. You see, Snape is not the master of Hogwarts!!!! DD is the "master of this school"!!!! So why does Snape call himself master of the school? I wonder what he is after? Does he wish to become the Headmaster of Hogwarts at one point? hmmm....... This could provide clues into his personality... and his private thoughts (possibly, he considers himself greater than Dumbledore, the true master?)... But can it also tell us anything yet to come? "zendemort" Sherry says Actually, I believe that in England, it used to be common to call a teacher master. Even in the New Testament, when the disciples of Jesus refer to him as master, it means teacher. I don't know if it was ever done the same way in the US. I can't think of any literature right now with a teacher called Master. Sherry G From sherriola at earthlink.net Tue Aug 31 12:57:14 2004 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 06:57:14 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Master of This School In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <001b01c48f5a$2ab944f0$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 111742 zendemort [mailto:zendemort at yahoo.co.uk] I found something very intringuing while reading PoA for the second time. It is minute, but interesting nonetheless. When Snape comes across the Marauder's Map, he tells the map "Professor Severus Snape, master of this school, demands that you reveal the secrets you hide" (quote is not exact but along the same lines, although the "master of this school" part is exact). But there is a little problem here. You see, Snape is not the master of Hogwarts!!!! DD is the "master of this school"!!!! So why does Snape call himself master of the school? I wonder what he is after? Does he wish to become the Headmaster of Hogwarts at one point? hmmm....... This could provide clues into his personality... and his private thoughts (possibly, he considers himself greater than Dumbledore, the true master?)... But can it also tell us anything yet to come? "zendemort" Sherry says Actually, I believe that in England, it used to be common to call a teacher master. Even in the New Testament, when the disciples of Jesus refer to him as master, it means teacher. I don't know if it was ever done the same way in the US. I can't think of any literature right now with a teacher called Master. Sherry G From susanadacunha at gmx.net Tue Aug 31 20:41:10 2004 From: susanadacunha at gmx.net (Susana da Cunha) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 21:41:10 +0100 Subject: A Conspiracy Theory to Beat them All References: <20040831110021.46635.qmail@web25109.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <007901c48f9b$59fc0d10$2f280dd4@taxi> No: HPFGUIDX 111761 Hans wrote: "I know I'm a lonely voice in the wilderness, but I'll continue to announce my recognition of Harry Potter as the way to liberation until I'm kicked out of this group." ------------ Not at all, Hans. I thought your post was wonderful - and I'm an atheist. There will never be a wonderful story that doesn't raise our spirits on to liberation. We need that. We want that. That's why the New Testament is such a popular story. Symbolism is a funny thing. When one sets out to be symbolic, one usually fails. JKR realized that - she said something quite similar in an interview (sorry, can't quote). But when one sets out to tell a story that takes you to a special place, the symbols appear from the collective unconscious and assault the story whether one wishes it or not. Though I hate to pick up a scalpel and slice literature looking for symbols (as you did in your post #111636) I'm expecting, just as you are, to be liberated by the story's outcome. And because our collective unconscious is probably similar, I'm expecting, just as you are, to see Harry die and be reborn either literally or symbolically. Maybe not the company you'd expect in the lonely wilderness, but it's what you attracted - your fault. Susana